robust international trade can help us do it. we can start our ratifying longstanding free-trade agreements with south korea, colombia, and panama. all of these agreements have been languishing for years, but with the 9.1% unemployment rate and a spiraling deficit, the president can no longer hold these agreements back. currently he is holding them taa can be addressed separately in the context of trade promotional 30 as at july has been in the past, since 1974. for the good of our economy and our country, he needs to send these free trade agreements to the united states senate for approval now so that u.s. workers and businesses can begin to realize their benefits. i recently had an opportunity to travel to south korea with senate minority leader mitch mcconnell and a group of

senators to lead -- to meet with president lee yung, as a prominent business leaders about the free-trade agreement. president lee said he believes that korean lawmakers will approve the free-trade agreement, but they're waiting for america to lead the way. they want and expect us to lead the way because, to south korea and nations around the world, america has always been a beacon of liberty and opportunity. nearly everyone we spoke with in korea, on the street or the meeting room, expressed their deep appreciation to the united states and especially to our military and our veterans. they are keenly aware that u.s. service members sacrifice so much to give them a free society and a free-market economy where they can pursue their dreams. south korea is now a prosperous modern nation with a $1 trillion economy and 49 million consumers

in large part because american service members one and now help preserve the peace. korea is the 15th largest economy in the world and our country's seventh largest trading partner. per capita income in south korea today is more than $20,000 annually. in communist north korea, just over $1,000 annually. a free and open economy made the difference. today, again, america needs to lead the way, starting with the president. the u.s.-south korea free trade agreement will eliminate or reduce more than 85% of the tariffs between the united states and korea, including the eventual elimination of a 40% korean tariffs on american beef. that is one project that we have been working on in my state. it could mean a $100 million investment in our economy and 500 new jobs. in north dakota, that is a big deal.

but these free trade agreements are an even greater deal for america. the south korean free-trade agreement alone will increase our nation's exports to that country by more than $10 billion and create two hundred 80,000 american jobs. for every 4% increase in american exports, we can create 1 million new american jobs. the reality is that nearly 80% of the world purchasing power lies outside the united states. if we do not have those markets, others will. free and fair to agreements can help us create the kind of pro- jobs, pro-growth economy that will lift up our nation. good fiscal control and a little tax and regulatory environment that promotes private investment and business innovation can help us to create jobs, grow our economy, and reduce our deficit. we need to build all legacy of

president roosevelt great white fleet by ratifying these free trade agreements. instead of a debt, we can leave our children a bright dynamic future. thank you and god bless. >> a look ahead on c-span, next, former national security advisor brent scowcroft during the ford administration. then highlights from today's republican leadership conference, including texas gov. rick perry. u.s. senate candidate in fatah mike mcalester, and former retired lieutenant colonel steve russell who commanded the u.s. army unit that captured some hussain. -- some who same -- saddam hussain. >> andrew rossi looks at the changing newspaper industry and takes an inside look at the "new york times" from the eyes of the staff. >> i came into it with a grand sort of sense of what the

solutions are for traditional media. i came in with a desire, really, just to observe. >> you will talk about his new documentary sunday night on c- span a "q&a. well -- "q&a." >> brent scowcroft gave a speech john u.s. foreign policy of the national press club here in his remarks followed a presentation of the 24th journalism awards. this is an hour. >> it just so happens that our club has enjoyed a close association with the 34th president of united states and his legacy print general ford

spoke at this podium a record 18 times. he appeared before, during, and after his presidency. this is one example of how he enjoyed cordial but a corporate relationship with the press. it is a tribute to president ford that many of you at this luncheon today have personal recollections of his brief but historic presidency and his long public service. he has many loyal friends and associates, which says a great deal of the kind of person he was. we also send a special ring set out to former first lady betty ford who is viewing this event via c-span in rancho mirage, california. even though the press was always kind to him, the late hugh study said that ford was the only president he knew who genuinely liked reporters.

apparently, the others just faked it. [laughter] former secretary of state henry kissinger, a member of the ford presidential foundation board of trustees, has known a few presidents of the years. he once told us that gerald ford was probably the only normal person ever to assume the office, perhaps because he did not seek that office in the first place. the words being presented today were established to further president for its support for a free press, a vital role it plays in informing our citizens reach -- our citizenry and preserving our democracy. [applause] >> it is an honor to be here. i want to thank the national press club and the ford

presidential foundation. we have some of our trusty's you today. carla hill, jim cannon, john hill -- a fine group of trustees at. i want to thank the panel of judges that selected are winners. i had a chance to read all the articles and we have some great winners here today. general, i want to thank you. thank you for coming and being your speaker. i was a young kid when dad was president. i was 18 years old. i used to go back and forth between the main residence and the oval office. i always told that we got pretty good government housing. [laughter] i remember going back that there was a lot of business going known -- going on in the corridors of that office. but one of the friendliest people to the kids and the families, general scowcroft, u.s. stock and talk and ask how our do is going and we appreciate that -- you always

stopped and talked and asked how we were doing and we appreciated that. we had -- that had a special relationship with the press. he told all the so that you should not go into politics if you have a thin skin. he listened to what was about him. he appreciated the job that he performed. i can remember him sitting at the dinner table, talking about why it a good democracy works so well. because it had uneducated public. and the press played such a role -- because it had an educated public. and the press played such a move big role in that. i had to laugh because one of the articles written talk about the bubble around the presidency and obama today. ours was back in 1974. it was a different world.

there is no doubt about it. the relationship with the press was different, too. when dad was vice president, we would go to vail, colorado in the wintertime. mom and dad had bought a small condominium there. we skied when he was a congressman and when he became vice president, and dad still wanted to do that. our first christmas in vail, colorado after he became vice president, there was a young photographer who work for "time magazine," and he showed up in vail, colorado at christmas without a hotel reservation. [laughter] that is something david would do, thinking he would find a hotel room at christmas in vail, colorado. that found out that he did not have a bed to sleep in. but about this. this was 1973. that invited david to come and

sit with us for the holidays. his luck on your couch, literally, in our condominium in vail, colorado. i remember waking up and say, dad, who is the guy on the couch? >> he is at -- and he said that was a pulitzer prize-winning photographer sleeping on her couch. [laughter] we were talking about the recession and i was saying that dad encouraged us kids to be readers and readers of newspapers. our breakfast every morning, growing up as a kid in high school, he came down and was very quiet. everyone grabbing section of the newspaper. you study. you read the newspaper in the morning. but breakfast was very quiet because you wanted to absorber your facts and figures and you could have a good debate that night and you could defender positions. that is how dad looked at it. even before he passed away, 93

years old, the image of him walking over to his office -- he always had up to seven newspapers under his arm that he would read that day. he read 45 journals. he always had the new york times and the wall street journal and the washington post. the last paper he read every day i think spoke great volumes about who he was. he you read "the grand rapids press," his home newspaper were he had been a congressman. policy of laws at the federal level are made in washington. but you have to read your local newspaper to find out if they get down to the people and really work on the local level. that was the importance, he thought, the local press. he could find out if whether the policies they were gone, whether

the capital, the white house, the executive branch, congress, got down to the local level in michigan and serve the people. newspapers and the press were very important to him. we need to get on here. i just want to have the judging panel -- we have some of the judging panel here today. i want to thank them for being judges for us. we have two categories, for the presidency and the defense. our defense panel, we have devereaux than most, erik peterson, david olive, karen scowcroft, rob holzer, and michael chetniks. we could give them a round of applause. [applause] for the presidency, our fine trusty jim cannon, who is a great public servant himself. teachers this committee and these awards and he is for the presidency awards -- we have john mcconnell, prof. kenyon

also come up professor mark rizo, and hal bruno who could not be with us today. give a round of applause to them. we will hand out the awards in just a second. i am reading the stories in the global around the presidency. again, it reminds you how different it was. when dad became president, he had been vice president. we live in a small house across the river here in alexandria, virginia. there was no vice president's mansion. we live in the suburbs. dad committed to the office every day. when he assumed the presidency on that day in august 1974, the helicopter left with nixon and we went in and dad that's one into office and took the picture in the oval office. we did not get to move into the white house. i thought we had a chance to move into the white house. nixon had left so quickly and an expense believe that, when he resigned, they were not able to pack up all their belongings.

so it took six days or seven days. that night, after dad took the oath of office, we went back to our little three-bedroom house in alexandria, va. i will never forget my mother standing over the stove that night cooking. [laughter] and thinking -- she said you know, jerry, something is wrong here. [laughter] you just became president of the united states and i am still cooking. [laughter] so the bubble around the president's let back in 1974 is a little different than it is today. let me hand at citations and awards and we will get to our keynote speaker general scowcroft. our first award is reporting on the presidency. this is the gerald ford prize distinguished award for reporting on the presidency 2010. the judges for the presidency

of pet -- have selected steve, as the winner of the 24th annual gerald r. ford prize for distinguished reporting on the presidency. in his reporting, steve demonstrates a clear understanding that not the first year but the second year in office for new president is more accurate measure of his leadership, his management, of the complexities of the federal executive office, his exercise of constitutional powers, his ways of communicating to the american people, and his standing in the public mind. he not only met the important criteria with timeliness, cleric, and presentation, insight and concise writing, but he also made excellent use of expert sources to provide a layer of analysis that stood out among his competition. his writing is clear, based on solid facts, and lined with engaging and inventiveness. in every respect, the judges found his reporting on the

presidency in 2010 outstanding. we have a citation year that i would like to give you. we also have the check. >> thank you. >> congratulations. >> thank you. >> would you like to say a few words? >> i would. [applause] >> they give. 's for an hour talking a lot about how much things have changed -- steve ford and i were talking a little about how much things have changed. as he points out, his father had a far different with the white house press corps that president or politicians have had. what we see today is the white

house increasingly -- this is not just through this incumbent, but everyone since, who is trying to bypass us, using all the new technology at their disposal -- digital media, their own video, they're all photographers, trying to tell their own story to the people and trying to bypass the press. at the same time, technology is changing what we do. we see these short bursts of information, just a quick internet hits. it i think the presidency is worth a lot more explanation than that and continues to be a vital and important thing for is to do, to tell what the insiders are doing and thinking, but also to run that by outside experts, but the people who study the presidency and then put it through the critical eye of a journalist. for that and on behalf of all of us to cover the white house, i think the ford foundation for honoring this kind of work and especially for me and my colleagues. thank you for honoring us this year. thank you. [applause]

>> our second award is the gerald r. ford journalism prize for reporting on national defense 2010. our winner is shane harris. the judges were national -- the him forewjudges selected distinguished reporting on national defense. the judges felt the the body of work submitted by mr. harris showcase some of the most important crosscutting challenges of our times. often writing about issues with which the nation is still coming to grips. his story on the laws of war raised important questions about standards of warfare and the age of new technology. the judges noted that his article anticipated issues that are being raised today in the conflict in libya. in hacking the bad guys, he highlighted america's struggle to cope with a new type of

warfare that will impact the nation's security as well as its economic competitiveness. his gripping tale of waste and delay highlighted a decades-long struggle to purchase a new generation of fuel tanker. noting that today's tanker pilots are flying airplanes first flown by their grandfathers' and the pilots who will fly the next generation of tanker have not been born yet. his article on the national counter-terrorism center described the nation's struggle to manage the information needed to prevent future terrorist attacks. the judges were particularly impressed by his ability to eliminate complex policy issues while maintaining -- to illuminate complex policy issues while maintaining

clarity. shane, will you please, and except this award? >> thank you very much. [applause] thank you very much for this honor. this is truly, in our profession, one of the highest honors we can receive. it is a thrill to be standing up here and be included with such a terrific company of previous winners, many of which i have had the great pleasure to work with over the years. i did not get to this point alone and i want to take a moment to really think the editors and the publisher that i have had the benefit of working with for the past 10 years. i have had the rare and opportunity in this day and age to work at magazines the continue to devote tremendous resources and support -- to the kinds of stories that sometimes

take weeks and months to really bring to life. if it were not for that kind of support, i would not have the resources and the time to do this work and i would not be standing here. at national journal, i want to thank david bradley, john sullivan, charlie greene, and my former editor patrick paxton and his now over at "the washington post." he was a partner with me for five years in reporting so many of the stories. he was a constant companion and advocate. so thank you. at "washingtonian," i want to thank the president and editor. and i want to thank my boss who has started an ambitious task. thank you very much for setting a high standard for all of us to

follow and for being there to support me. i share this award with all of you. thank you very much. [no audio[applause] >> this is a new thing we're doing this year. our panel on defense asked that we do this. it is kind of like an honorable mention for a group that really stood out. this year, we just want to recognize them and ask them to stand up. gerald r. ford, is special mention -- the judges for the national defence have selected and atonement and brendan mcenry, staff writers for the military * as -- 4 "the military military times."

if you'll stand up, we will give you a round of applause. [applause] thank you very much. >> congratulations again to this year's winners. our guest speaker today served president ford as national security adviser, former lieutenant general in the u.s. effort shoulair force. he is a graduate of west point and earned his ph.d. at columbia university. rezko cough is willing to publicly oppose presidential policies with which he strongly disagrees. although he served as chairman of the foreign intelligence advisor board for president george w. bush, he openly opposed the president's plans to invade iraq in 2003. he predicted the u.s. would be seen as an occupying power in a hostile environment. he served as military assistant to president nixon, deputy assistant for national security affairs for presidents nixon and

ford, and national security adviser for ford and george h.w. bush. during his long association with the republicans administrations, he was also tapped by president- elect president obama to head his national security team. as an academic as well as an international business consultant. he has served on numerous advisory councils involving military and national security issues. we look forward to hearing his unique perspective and ability to provide us with a timely overview of the difficult form policy jaundice facing our nation today. ladies and jonah, please give a warm national press club welcome to general brent scowcroft. [applause] >> thank you very much. it is nice to be with you today.

it is written see this great turnout. i'm a little surprised since i have said everything i know last year. [laughter] on the other hand, since my remarks were first listed as brent scowcroft to criticize obama foreign-policy challenges at the national press club, maybe that's why you're all here. [laughter] no red meat. i hesitate to say. i would like to congratulate steven toma and shane harris. my daughter was one of the judge's for shane -- one of the shane.fror i am well aware of how distinguished their writing really is. despite what the press club building my remarks, i want to

follow steve, just a few about president ford before talk about foreign policy challenges. a few of the things that president ford felt strongly about relative to our current situation -- it is not being dramatic to say that the current political debate, especially here in washington, is acrimonious. it has been acrimonious before. as a matter of fact, when president ford came to office, he not only had around his neck a bitter debate about vietnam, but also the first resignation of a president. so he really understood that sort of thing. but his personality was such that little over two years later we had largely forgotten

what he did for us in the short time he was president. to heal the wounds of the country. one other thing. president ford was the apostle of cooperation and compromise. those two words, some in washington now, refused to even use as being denigrating from what they're supposed to do. president ford would have been shocked by that. he knew that those characteristics, cooperation and compromise, is what made this country work. indeed, what it was based on -- our constitution is not a model

for efficient government. it is a model to protect the individual against a government that tries to overstep itself. and it does that by setting up checks and balances everywhere. so it is easy to keep something from happening. to make it happen, you have to compromise. you have to cooperate. you have to work together. and gerald ford knew that. i used to watch him when confronted with a new and complex problem. he would sit there and he would dissect the problem. water the elements that absolutely crucial to making it a success? where the elements that we can -- what are the elements that we can offer to shift perspective so that we end up all moving forward -- maybe no 100%, but 60% or 70%?

and the last thing i would like to talk about is ford and his pride in the federal civil service or federal bureaucracy. we have had a number presence in recent years throw rocks at washington and the bureaucracy as a bunch of self-serving diplomats who could not get a job anywhere -- or bureaucrats who could not get a job anywhere else. our government is only as good as the people who work there. and i think we ought to be cheering rather than pretending that they are people who could i get a job in your roles. anyway, following on what steve said, president ford was somebody we could certainly use

right now. now let me turn to my assigned task. let me say one other thing, in terms of compromise. the constitution itself as the and they our system, our fun are fundamentally compromise. how did we do with giant states like new york and virginia and 80 beatty states like rome island and delaware? bitty up -- and indeed thitty states like rhode island and elsewhere? son of a house -- we set up a house based on compromise.

let me focus -- how my doing? [laughter] for a few minutes, on some of the security johnses we face -- a few minutes -- on some of the security challenges we face. let me begin with a backdrop about what is going on in the world, a backdrop against which these challenges are being played out. we are sort of living through what i would call a discontinuity of history. a change in historical patterns from one sort of system to another. our present system, the nation state system, was really formalized in the treaty of westphalia and in 1453. it is set up -- it said of the

nation state as the independent sovereign unit of which the international community would be made. and that replaced the fuel. when there were some -- the eriod when there were some monarchies and others. the was failing and system -- probably its apogee -- the westphalian system probably reached its apogee of around the two world wars. now we are in the era of globalization. that is an overworked word in many respects. but it is true and it is happening. what globalization is doing is

reducing the freedom of action of the nation's state and eroding the borders of the nation state. more and more of the problems that we ought to do with, whether in his financial movements, whether it is held, whether it is climate change, whether is affirmation technology -- all of these things require region across borders to cooperate in order to solve problems. that is changing the nation know what -- the nature of what our system is. i like to compared with industrialization, which really created the modern nation state. to harness these great corporations that were building all this economic power, the nation's state had to be more powerful. globalization is having the same effect, but in the opposite direction as industrialization empowered the nation's state,

globalization is eroding the power of the nation state. two points about this -- the financial crisis of 2008, it certainly demonstrated to us that we have a single world economy. the reaction to the crisis also demonstrated we do not have a single way to solve the problem. we fell back on the nation's state system and a half-hearted g-20 to do with it. the other thing which illustrates -- which gets me into the current situation -- is what we endearingly call the error of spring. -- the arab spring. this is an explosion of people, popular sentiment, which sprang relief from the south

immolation -- the self demolition of a fruit peddler in indonesia who had been humiliated by the police. this is something new. it goes to the heart of globalization. for most of mankind's existence, the average person did not know much about anything that was going on beyond his village or maybe the next village. he led like his father did. he expected his children to live like him. history was timeless, seamless continuity. now, virtually everyone in the world is within earshot of radio and i side of television. and they are politicized by it. they see what is happening outside. and they say, why am i not like that? how can they say this about my country?

and they are energized by it. that is what happened throughout the region. not only the region, but around the world. look at the chinese reaction, one of acute concern. that is the first thing. the second thing is that, when you do have discontent, one of the hardest things traditionally to do is to register that discontent by going out and demonstrating in the street. to organize the demonstration, you had to go around and get people and tell them what to do and this and the that and the other so you would be a target to the police. not anymore. you push a button on twitter, pushing a button on -- whatever the others are -- and the million people turnoutely yohear you say

to tahrir square at 3:00 in the morning. this presents enormous complications for policy-making. first of all, it is a challenge them since it covers a whole region of the world of killing ourteebetween what i would call interests and our values. our interests are in what value we have in a relationship that helps the united states and its problems. our values are innate sympathy for democracy, for modernization, for those kinds of things. but fundamentally democracy. and those are under challenge. how you decide which ones we

should pursue? we have done a little bit of both. it makes it very difficult -- not that foreign policy always has to be consistent, but it creates problems forced almost no matter what we do. in addition, each one of the countries affected by the arabs spring has its own individual some problems. they're not all the same. some of what we call semi- repressive dictatorships in the region, partly what they are is to suppress the internal struggles and divisions that otherwise would tear the country apart. it has been a very difficult time force. -- time for us. the president has been criticized from both sides about doing too much, about doing too little.

and the outcome is not yet in sight. but i think we should be cautious about interpreting what is going on in these countries as the upsurge of an innate instincts for democracy. i think the urge is more basically, as it was for the republic, for dignity -- as it was for the first public, for dignity than democracy. democracy is a very complicated notion. to feel that that filled two hundred thousand people suppressed in tahrir square in cairo is probably an exaggeration. the more difficult job is probably ahead of us. how you take what is happened

and model it so that it moves in a productive rather than a destructive direction? we have taken for steps in what i would call the cornerstone country of the middle east, which is egypt, the most populous country and certainly at the epicenter of what happened. we are now pushing hard for an economic program for egypt because, if we cannot rescue egypt from the chaos that it has fallen into economically, tourism will be nonexistent in egypt now. remittances from egyptians working abroad are down to virtually zero. foreign direct investment has just about zero out. egypt is in desperate economic shape. what you think what will happen if the economy collapses to any

hope for a system which will broaden participation? different countries have different problems. libby is a case of almost entirely our values. what interest we have in libya? 1 million and a half barrels of oil per day easily compensated for. did duffy is a guy that everybody loves to hate. -- gaddafi is a guy that everybody loves to hate. there's definitely a split in libya. east libya and was libya have a history of tribal antagonism. take another strain, syria. syria is a very complicated country. the syrian relationship to

israel, to lebanon, to iran, hezbollah, hamas. syriana is run by a tiny minority -- syria is run by a tiny minority of a shiite run islam. so is the leader gets overthrown, who replaces him? is it a step forward or backward? it is hard to say. yemen is a very different case. yemen is a very tribal society. before president saleh managed to consolidate, there was a

-- i and south lebanon' mean yemen. each one of these situations is different and complicated. let me move on just very quickly. i have already talked 15 minutes. a little bit about afghanistan and pakistan -- i think you can not discuss them separately. we have a huge dilemma with growing pressure. osama bin laden is dead. we have terrible budget pressures on defense and so on. it is time to cut our losses. it may be. but we should also worry about cutting regains. it has been a difficult struggle in afghanistan.

we have changed strategy is at least once. we now are in a telling your where the surge in troops is beginning to show. we are beginning to reach out to afghanistan's neighbors, the chinese, the russians, the iranians, to see if there is some help here. we do not need in afghanistan. this is a highly decentralized efficient state. we need in afghanistan that is not a breeding ground for tax on outside civilization. it is a very difficult issue for the president who, i think, very

skillfully maneuvered his first declaration that we would start drawing down in july this year to pushing its gradually off the 2014. so i am mildly optimistic there. other things i would have talked about if i were not to be dragged offstage would be a little bit about china, north korea, russia, iran -- but i've understand that we have a few moments for questions and i would be happy to deal with any of those that the questioners are interested in. thank you very much for your attention. [applause] >> people are eager to tap your vast intellectual resources and

give you a chance to hydrate. [laughter] >> i like that. >> we're glad for that opportunity. there are several questions that sees immediately upon some of the topics you're talking about. on the issue of the nation's debt, whether we should be in the business of helping to -- of the nation state, whether we should be in the business of helping to do that. >> that has been one of the president's real problems. there are few countries where our interest are stronger than in saudi arabia. yet, saudi arabia is its own -- has its own uniqueness. it is an alliance between the saudi family and the tribal wars of the arab peninsula with

the wahhabi religious brand of islam. the wahhabi religious would bless the saudis to be the region for of the which the monarchy would support wahhabiism. when king abdullah was crown prince, he had a reputation of being a modernizer. when he came in, he started a council to of council which could easily have been the birthplace of a legislature. he did note -- he did a lot of education. and he made some changes in the succession from being the prerogative of the monarch to a royal family sort of counsel.

that has not gone very far recently. but what do we do? or, the other monarchies? they did not suffer so much in the arab spring, partly because of their wealth. there is not economic deprivation and that added to some of the others, like in libya or in tunisia and egypt. these are the kinds of problems we need to deal with. it is not just saudi arabia. is bahrain. bahrain is run by a sunni sunni monarchy.a suny monarch each of these nations has there

particular problems. we're not trying to impose an american solution. what we want is to help all of these countries to the extent we can, work their way through their problems to the benefit of everyone. >> what do you think of the expanded use of predator drums to attack suspected terrorists and what restrictions should apply to those? >> i mentioned strategy changes in afghanistan. what we have is a debate going back and forth between a strategy of counter-terrorism and counterinsurgency. the counter terrorism strategy is that you find a bad guy and you take him out. if you happen to kill some civilians, it is too bad, but it is collateral damage. in counterinsurgency, you say, no, you have to build confidence in your security

mission and in the local security around you this so that you develop stability. if you see the bad guy and he is surrounded by civilians, you do not take him out because you do more damage to your strategy by taking out the civilians. we have gone back and forth a little bit on that. some people said, we have gone too far in one direction or another. i think right now, we have it about right. but that is a judgment. >> that is what we're here for. how would you define victory in afghanistan have sharp you think the drawdown of troops should be? >> if you look back at the days of afghanistan, that a key in

his order presided and everybody -- they had a king and he sort of presided over everybody. that is the kind of afghanistan we could be comfortable with. so could most of afghanistan's neighbors. it is putative change of afghanistan into the training plans for al qaeda to attack the trade towers, which transformed the whole thing. we do not need to recreate afghanistan. all we need is some assurance that the old, very informal structure can sustain itself. >> you said you would like to talk about china. you referenced china's concern about the arab uprising. what is the risk facing beijing

and, by extension, the u.s. relationship with it? >> i would venture to say that the most successful american foreign policy in the last 50 years or so has been the china policy. starting with richard nixon from a position of total hostility between the two powers, we have gone through eight presidents now of both parties, some of them starting out was some pretty harsh views about china. and they'll have come to the conclusion -- and they have all come to the conclusion that broadening our relationship with china is in the interest of united states and they have made enormous progress. there have been some rough spots. and for understandable reasons.

the chinese have tended to defer to the united states as being the world's experts. who was it that screwed up in 2008? it was the united states. the chinese think, we do not have to pay any attention to you anymore. there was a certain amount of hubris that went with that. and they began to make some changes which were at the very least irritating. i think what we have to remember is that we and the chinese are about as different as any two people could be. that is in terms of our history, our culture, our religion, everything. we, for example, live in a world of the nation state system. the chinese still mentally lives in the world of a central kingdom. we think anybody can be an american. anybody.

if you are not chinese, you cannot become chinese. the central kingdom is not just one sovereign state. it is the center of everything. until 200 years ago, when the nation state system came and and raped china in the eyes of the chinese, we have very different outlooks. but there's not anything that i see that face us to become enemies -- fates us to become enemies. we have differences in perspective and the chinese are grappling with an economic system that has been very, very successful and a political system which has not evolved very significantly. so they have a lot of problems. we need to help them to the extent we can to solve them. >> we will bring it back home for the next question.

the getting to the fact that it seems that there is a presidential campaign season upon us, given the fact that debates are now being held -- the questioner asks what are your thoughts on the state of the republican party? any predictions on the nomination so far? and then the the questioner says that with the current roster of republican candidates having very little national security experience, how do you see the state and national security should one of them be elected? >> i am not politically sophisticated, but i am not stupid. [laughter] [applause] >> i guess the folks were hoping that you might take the bait. [laughter] which u.s. president best anticipated his -- or rather

best articulated his foreign policy to the american people? >> that is a tough one. that is a tough one. i do not know. our presidents have done pretty well, but it gets harder as our reason for some of the things we do get more complex and obscure. harry truman had a pretty easy job with the korean war because it was pretty obvious. but of course, so did bush 43 in going into iraq, which was, in retrospect, not so obvious. i think that we, in this country, have sometimes a tendency to get frustrated with

the complexities of diplomacy and think, "why do we not just cut through all this trouble with a little force and then does cleanup?" one of the problems of that is that, when you use force, it inevitably changes the whole context of the world in which you use it. and it creates its own imperative. when you have used force, you are no longer facing the world where you fought force was the thing to use. and i think we need to be more aware of that. if we were not in afghanistan right now, we certainly would not be talking about going in. these are the kinds of things we need to be more thoughtful of. >> we're almost at a time. before we ask the last question, a couple of housekeeping matters. i would like to thank you --

remind you of some of our upcoming speakers. on june 24, sheila bair will reflect on her tenure during a tumultuous time of the nation's financial sector. after garrett -- actor gary sinise will announce the formation of his own foundation to raise funds supporting military. on the first of july, charles bolden will speak a week before the final scheduled space launch. separately, but not least important, we would like to present to the token of our appreciation, the traditional npc ug. >> i love it. thank you. [applause] >> and now i would like to ask the final question. if you could still appear for a moment, general. [laughter] >> i tried. >> unlike to end on something