. in 1978 the state department's legal advisor advised congress of his conclusion that israel's government program establishing civilian settlements in the occupied territory was inconsistent with international law. and we see no change since then to affect that fundamental conclusion. that someve heard criticize this resolution for calling east jerusalem occupied territory. but to be clear, there was absolutely nothing new in last week's resolution on that issue. it was one of a long line of security council resolutions that included east jerusalem as part of the territories occupied by israel in 1967. that includes resolutions passed by the security council under president reagan and president .eorge h w bush

remember, every u.s. administration since 1967, along with the entire international community, has recognized east jerusalem as among the territories that israel occupied in the sixth a war. i want to stress this point. we fully respect israel's profound historic and religious ties to the city and to its holy sites. don't question that. this resolution in no manner prejudge is the outcome of permanent status the negotiation's. which must reflect those historic ties and the realities on the ground. that is our position. we still support it. we also strongly reject the notion that somehow the united states was the driving force behind this resolution. the egyptians and palestinians have long made clear to all of us, all the international community, their intentions to

bring the resolution to a vote before the end of the year. we communicated that with the israelis and they knew it anyway. the united states did not draft or originate this resolution, nor did we put it forward. it was drafted by egypt and it -- introduced by egypt, which is one of our closest friends in the region and in coordination with the palestinians and others. and during the time of the others, we made clear to including those on the security council that it was possible that if the resolution were to be balanced and include that ites to terrorism was possible the united states would then not block it, if it was balanced and fair. that is a standard practice with resolutions in the security council. the attention understood that if

the text were more balanced it was possible we would block it. and we also made crystal clear that the president of the united states would not make a final decision about our own position until we saw the final text. in the end, we did not agree with every word in this resolution. there are important issues that are not sufficiently addressed or even addressed at all. in goodould not, conscience, veto a resolution that condemns violence and reiterates what has been for a long time the overwhelming consensus and international view on settlements. for constructive steps to advance the two state solution on the ground. ultimately, it will be up to the israeli people to decide whether the unusually heated attacks

israeli officials have directed towards this administration best serve israel's national interests. and its relationship with an ally that has been steadfast in its support as i have just described. those attacks alongside allegations of a u.s. led conspiracy and other manufactured claims distract attention from what the substance of this vote was really all about. but we all understand israel faces serious threats in a tough neighborhood. israelis are rightfully concerned about making sure that there is not a new terrorist haven right next door to them, often referencing what has happened with gaza. we believe there are ways to meet those needs and israel ease are fully justified in decrying attempts to legitimize -- to delegitimize its state. that this vote was not about that. actions that

israelis and palestinians are taking that are increasingly rendering the two state solution impossible. it is not about making peace with the palestinians now, it was about making sure that peace with the palestinians will be possible in the future. we all understand that israel faces extraordinarily serious threats in a very tough neighborhood. the israelis are correct in making sure that there is not a terrorist haven. but i can't emphasize enough, this is not about the possibility of arriving at an agreement that is going to resolve that overnight over one year or two years, this is about a longer process. how we make peace with the palestinians in the future but preserve the capacity to do so. so how do we get there? ?ow do we get to that place

since the parties have not yet been able to resume talks, the u.s. and the released have repeatedly called on both sides to independently demonstrate a genuine commitment to the two state solution. not just with words but with real actions and policies to create the conditions for meaningful negotiations. to takefor both sides significant steps on the ground to reverse current trends and send a different message, a clearer message that they are prepared to fundamentally change the equation without waiting for the other side to act. basice pushed their commitments under their own prior agreements in order to advance a two state reality on the ground. we have called for the palestinians to do everything in our power to stop violence and incitement, including publicly

and consistently condemning acts of terrorism and stopping violence. we have called on them to continue efforts to strengthen their own institutions and to improve governance, transparency, and accountability. armsve stressed that hamas buildup and activities in gaza must stop. quartet partners, we have called on israel to end the policies of expansion, of taking land for exclusive israeli use, denying palestinian development. to reverse the process, the u.s. and our partners have encouraged israel to resume the transfer of greater civil authority to palestinians, consistent with the transition called for by oslo. we have made clear that significant progress across a range of sectors including housing, agriculture and natural resources that can be made impactinggatively

security needs. thealled for easing movement and access restrictions to and from gaza, with due consideration for israel's need to protect the citizens from terrorist attacks. , none of stress again the steps that i just talked about would negatively impact israel's security. emphasize this is not about offering limited economic measures that perpetuate the status quo. we are talking about significant steps that would signal real progress towards creating two states. that is the bottom line. if we're serious about the two state solution it is time to start implementing it now.

advancing the process of separation, now, in a serious way, to make a significant difference in saving the solution and building confidence in the citizens of both sides. that is indeed possible. much progress can be made in the advance of negotiations and laying foundation for the negotiations as contemplated by the oslo process. in fact, these steps will help create the conditions for successful talks. , we all understand that the final status agreement can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties. we have said that again and again and we cannot compose the piece. other countries believe it is our job to dictate the terms of the solution. others want us to recognize the but i want toate

make clear today these are not the choices that we will make. we choose, instead, to draw on the experiences of the last eight years to provide a way forward when the parties are ready for serious negotiation. in a place where the narratives from the past probably inform and mold the present. it is important to understand the history. we mark this year and next as a series of milestones that i believe both illustrate the two sides of the conflict can form the basis for its resolution. it is worth touching on them. 120 years ago the first zionist congress was convened by a group of jewish visionaries who decided the only effective waves ofto the ways -- anti-somatic horrors sweeping across europe was to create a state in the historic home of the jewish people.

with her ties to the land went back centuries. could defend its borders, protect its people and live in peace with its neighbors. that was the modern beginning and it remains the dream of israel today. the unitedears ago nations general assembly resolution 181 finally paved the way to making the state of israel a reality. the concept was simple. to create two states for two peoples. one jewish and one arab. to realize the national aspirations of both jews and palestinians. revolution --d resolution 181 in their declarations of independence. the united states recognized israel seven minutes after its creation. but the palestinians in the arab world did not.

and from its birth, israel had to fight for its life. palestinians also suffered terribly in the 1948 war including many who would live for generations in a land that has long been their home too. when israel celebrates its 70th anniversary in 2018, the palestinians will mark a very different anniversary. 70 years is what they call the "catastrophe." next year will mark 50 years since the end of the six-day war when israel fought for its survival. the palestinians will mark the opposite, 50 years of military occupation. both sides have accepted un security council resolution 242 which called for the withdrawal of israel's territory that it occupied in 1967 in return for peace and security orders as the

basis for ending the conflict. it has been more than 20 years. since israel and the plo signed their first agreement. the oslo accords. and the plo formally recognized israel. both sides committed to a plan to transition of much of the west bank to palestinian control during permanent status negotiations that would put an end to their conflict. unfortunately, neither the transition more the final agreement came about. been a response believe for that. some 15 years ago, king abdullah of saudi arabia came up with a historic peace initiative which offered fully normalized relations with israel when it made peace, and enormous opportunity then and now which has never been fully embraced. that history was critical to our

approach to find a way to resolve the conflict. based on my experience with both sides over the last four years, including the nine months of formal negotiations, the core issues can be resolved. if there is leadership on both sides committed to finding the solution. in the end, i believe the negotiations did not fail because the gaps were too wide. but because the level of trust was too low. both sides were concerned that any concessions would not be reciprocated and would come at too great a political cost. the deep public skepticism only made it more difficult to take risks. in the countless hours we spent working on a detailed framework, we worked through numerous formulations and developed specific bridging proposals and we came away with a clear

understanding of the fundamental needs of both sides. in the past two and a half years, i have tested ideas with regional and international stakeholders including our quartet partners. i believe what has emerged from all of that is a broad consensus on balanced principles that would satisfy the court needs of both sides. president clinton deserves great credit for laying out extensive parameters designed to bridge gaps in advanced final status negotiations 16 years ago. today, with mistrust too high to even start, we are at the opposite end of the spectrum. neither side is willing to even risk acknowledging the others bottom line. that do nottions produce progress will only bring the worst fears. i understand negotiations would be complex and difficult and

nobody could be expected to agree on the final results in advance. but if the parties could at least demonstrate that they understand the other side's most a sick needs -- most basic needs and are potentially willing to meet them if there is are also met at the comprehensive negotiations, perhaps enough trust could be established to enable a meaningful progress to begin. it is in that spirit that we offer the following principles. not to prejudge or impose an outcome but to provide a possible basis for serious negotiations when the parties are ready. countries may have more detailed policies on these issues as we do but i believe there is a broad consensus that a final status agreement could meet the needs of both sides and do the following. secureone -- provide or

and recognized international borders between israel and a viable and continuous palestine negotiated based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed equivalent swaps. resolution 242, which has been enshrined for 50 years, provides for the withdrawal of israel the territory it occupied in 1967 in return for peace with its neighbors and secure and recognized borders. it has long been accepted by both sides and it remains the basis for an agreement today. as secretary one of the first issues i worked out was there agreement that the reference in the arab peace initiative in the 1957 lines would from now on include the concept of land swaps. which the palestinians have acknowledged.

this is necessary to reflect practical realities on the ground. and mutually agreed equivalent would insure the agreement is fair to both sides. also broad recognition of israel's need that borders or secure indefensible. and that the territory and palestine is viable. virtually everyone i have spoken to has been clear on this as well. no changes by israel to the 1967 lines will be recognized by the international community unless agreed to by both sides. -- fulfill the vision of the u.n. generalists and we resolution 181 of two states for two peoples. one jewish and one arab. in mutual recognition and full equal rights for all their respective citizens.

this has been the fundamental foundation's principal of the two state solution, creating a state for the jewish people and the palestinian people where each can achieve their national aspirations. resolution 181 is incorporated into the foundational documents of both the israelis and palestinians. recognition of israel as a jewish state has been the u.s. position for years and based on my conversations in these last months, i am absolutely convinced that many others are now prepared to accept it as well, provided the need for palestinian state is also addressed. someso know that there is 1.7 million arab citizens who and mustel their home, now and always be willing to live -- be able to live as equal citizens which makes this issue

one of palestinians and others in the arab world. by recognizing each other's homeland, israel for the jewish people and palestine for the palestinian people, both sides affirmed their commitment to upholding equal rights for all of their respective citizens. -- provideumber 3 for a just, fair and realistic solution to the palestinian refugee issue. with international assistance ,hat includes compensation options and assistance in finding permanent homes, acknowledgment of suffering and other measures necessary for copperheads of resolutions consistent for -- consistent with two states for two peoples. all agree that there needs have to be addressed. as part of a comprehensive resolution, they must be provided with compensation, their suffering must be

acknowledged and there must be a need to have options and assistance in finding permanent homes. the international community can provide significant support and assistance. we are prepared to do that to help ensure the compensation and other needs are met. many have expressed a willingness to contribute, particularly if it brings peace. but there is a general recognition that the solution must be consistent with two states for two peoples and cannot affect fundamental character of israel. -- provide ar resolution for jerusalem as the internationally recognized capital of the two states and protect and ensure freedom of access to the holy sites consistent with the established status quo. jerusalem is the most sensitive issue for both sides. the solution will have to meet

the needs, not only of the parties but of all three monotheistic faiths. thatis why the holy sites are sacred to billions of people around the world must be protected and remain accessible and the established status quo maintained. most acknowledge that jerusalem should not be divided again like it was in 1967 and we believe that. at the same time there is broad recognition that there will be no peace agreement without reconciling the basic aspirations of both sides that have capitals there. -- satisfy israel's security needs and bring a full and, ultimately, to the occupation. israel can defend itself and palestine can provide security for its people in a

non-militarized state. security is the fundamental issue for israel. together with a couple of others i mentioned. but security is critical. everyone understands that no israeli government can ever accept an agreement that does or satisfy security needs risk creating an enduring threat like gaza transferring to the west bank. israel must be able to defend itself effectively including against terrorism and other regional threats. there is a real willingness by egypt, jordan and others to work together with israel on meeting key security challenges. i believe with those collective efforts, including close coordination on border security and intelligence sharing, joint cooperations, joint operation, can all play a critical role in securing the peace. at the same time, fully ending

the occupation is the fundamental issue for the palestinians. the need to know that military occupation will really and after an agreed transitional process. they need to know they can live with freedom and dignity in a sovereign state while providing security to their population even without a military of their own. this is widely accepted as well. it is important to understand there are many different ways without occupation for israel and palestine and jordan and egypt and the united states and others to cooperate in providing that security. wasncing those requirements among the most important challenges that we faced in the negotiations. but it was one where the united states had the ability to provide the most assistance. led by why a team general, to whom i am grateful for his efforts, -- he is one

of our foremost military minds -- all have engaged extensively with the israeli defense force and tried to find solutions that could help israel address its legitimate security needs. they developed innovative approaches to creating unprecedented multilayered border security, enhancing palestinian capacity, enabling israel to maintain the ability to address threats by itself even when the occupation had ended. general alan and his team were not suggesting what particular outcome, one particular timeline, work technology alone would resolve these problems, they were simply working on ways to support whatever the negotiators agreed to. and they did some very impressive work that gives me total cotton pants -- total confidence that the security measures can be met.

the conflict- end and all outstanding claims, enabling normalized relations and enhanced regional security for all as envisioned by the arab peace initiative. sidesessential for both that the final status agreement resolves all the outstanding issues and finally brings closure to this conflict. so that everyone can move ahead to a new era of peaceful coexistence and cooperation. for israel this must bring broader peace to all of our neighbors. that is the fundamental promise of the initiative, which key arab leaders have affirmed in these most recent days. arab peace initiative also envisions enhanced security for all of the region. it envisages israel being a partner in those efforts when peace is made.

this is the area where israel and the arab world are looking at perhaps the greatest moment of potential transformation in the middle east since israel's creation in 1948. the arab world creates -- faces its own set of security challenges. israel and the united states, jordan and egypt together with the gcc countries would be ready and willing to find new security partnerships for the region that would be absolutely groundbreaking. so, ladies and gentlemen, that is why it is vital that we all work towards the possibility of peace. that we not lose hope in the two state solution matter how difficult it may seem. because there really is no viable alternative. we all know that a speech alone won't produce peace. but based on over 30 years of experience and the lessons from

the past four years, i have suggested i believe and president obama has signed on to , believes in, a path that the parties could take. realistic steps on the ground now, consistent with the parties that willcommitments begin the process of separating into two states. a political horizon to work towards to create the conditions for a successful final status talk and the basis for negotiations that the parties could accept and demonstrate that they are serious about making peace. we can only encourage them to take this path. we cannot walk down it for them. but if they take these steps, peace would bring extraordinary benefits in enhancing the security and stability and prosperity for israelis, palestinians, all the nations of the region. the palestinian economy has

amazing potential in the context of independence. with major private sector investment possibilities. and they are talented, hungry, .ager to work israel has enjoyed unprecedented growth because it is a regional economic powerhouse taking advantage of innovation and trading opportunities. meanwhile, security challenges could be addressed by an entirely new security arrangement in which israel .ooperates with key arab states that is the future that everybody should be working towards. president obama and i know that the incoming administration has signaled they may take a different path. and even suggested breaking with a long-standing u.s. policy on the possibility of a two state solution.

that is for them to decide. that is how we work. but we cannot, in good conscience, do nothing. and say nothing. when we see the hope of peace slipping away. this is a time to stand up for what is right. we have long known long known what two states living side by side in peace and security look like. we should not be afraid to say so. i really began to reflect on what we have learned and the way ahead when i recently joined president obama in jerusalem at the funeral. one of the founding fathers of israel, he became one of the world's great elder statesman. a beautiful man and i was proud to call him my friend. i know president obama was as well. i remember the first time i saw in person comes than in the white house lawn, for the signing of the historic -- i

thought about the last time, at an intimate one-on-one dinner, a few months before he died, when we toasted to gather the future the futurend the pc of israel and the pc still -- so passionately believed in for his people. he summed it up simply and eloquently as only he could. mandate gave the palestinians 48%. it is down to 22%. i think 78% is enough for us. to rest that day, many could not help but wonder if peace between israelis and palestinians might also be buried along with one of his most eloquent champions. we cannot let it happen. too much atply stake for future generations of his rate -- israelis and palestinians to given to

pessimism, when peace is in fact still possible. and thenot lose hope possibility of peace and must not given to those who say what is now must always be, that there is no chance for a better future. it is up to israelis and palestinians to make the choices for peace. help. all for the sake of future generations of israelis and palestinians, for all the people of the region, for the united states, all those around the world who have prayed for and worked for peace for generations, let's hope we are all prepared, particularly toaelis and palestinians, make those choices now. thank you very much.

[applause] >> secretary of state john kerry live at the state department a couple of hours before the speech on israel, president-elect donald trump sent out a couple of related tweets and said we cannot continue to let israel between -- treated with total disdain

and disrespect. we used to have a great friend in the u.s. but not anymore. the beginning of the end was the horrible iran deal and now this. stay strong, israel. january 20 is fast approaching. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. 1970 nine, c-span was created as a public service by american take cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. this week on c-span in prime eastern, aht at 8:00 review of house and senate theings on topics including flint michigan water crisis and the wells fargo unauthorized account scandal. seriously, you found out one of your divisions had created 2

million figure counts, fired thousands of employees for improper behavior, and cheated thousands of your own customers, and you did not once consider firing her ahead of her retirement? we remember some political figures who passed away in 2016, including former first lady nancy reagan, and justice and salon -- antonin scalia. our program continues with mohammed ali and astronaut john glenn. this week in prime time on c-span. >> president obama and japanese hawaiiinister aid met in . restingplace of 1100 soldiers -- sailors and marines killed at pearl harbor. it was the first visit by a

japanese prime minister to the site of the 1941 attack on the u.s. pacific fleet. after the wreathlaying, the two leaders spoke at the pro-harbor naval base. [camera shutters]

[applause] >> president obama, ladies and -- lemen

-- abe:nister e president obama, commander harris, ladies and gentlemen, and all american citizens -- i stand here at pearl harbor as the prime minister of japan. if you listen closely, we can make out the sound of restless waves breaking and retreating again. the calm inlet is sparkling in the warm sun. behind me, a striking white form atop is the uss arizona memorial. together with president obama, i paid a visit to that memorial, the resting place for many souls. it was a place which brought

utter silence to me. inscribed there are the names of the servicemen who lost their lives. sailors and marines hailing from california and new york, michigan and texas, and various other places, serving to uphold the noble duty of protecting the homeland they loved, lost their lives amidst searing flames when aerial bombing tore the uss arizona in two. even 75 years later, the uss

arizona now at rest atop the seabed is the final resting place for a tremendous number of sailors and marines. listening again as i focus my senses -- alongside the song of the breeze and the rumble of the rolling waves, i can almost discern the voices of those crewmen. voices of lively conversation, upbeat and at ease on that day on a sunday morning. voices of young servicemen talking to each other about their futures and dreams. voices calling out the names of loved ones in their final moments.

voices praying for the happiness of children still unborn. each and every one of those servicemen had a mother and a father anxious about his safety. many had wives and girlfriends they loved.

and many must have had children they would have loved to watch grow up. all of that was brought to an end. when i contemplate that solemn reality, i am rendered entirely speechless. rest in peace, precious souls of the fallen. with that overwhelming sentiment, i cast flowers on behalf of the japanese people upon the waters where those sailors and marines sleep. president obama, the people of

the united states of america, and the people around the world, as the prime minister of japan, i offer my sincere and everlasting condolences to the souls of those who lost their lives here. as well as to the spirits of all the brave men and women whose lives were taken by war that commenced in this place, and also to the souls of the countless innocent people who became innocent victims of the war. we must never repeat the horrors of war again. this is the solemn vow we the people of japan have taken. since the war, we have created a this is the solemn vow we the free and democratic country that values the rule of law and we have resolutely upheld our vow never again to wage war. we, the people of japan, will

continue to uphold this unwavering principle while harboring quiet pride in the path we have walked as a peaceloving nation since the war ended. to the souls of the servicemen -- to the souls of the servicemen who lie in eternal rest aboard the uss arizona, to the american people, and to all of the people around the world, i pledge that unwavering vow here as the prime minister of japan. yesterday at the marine corps

base in hawaii, i visited the memorial marker for an imperial japanese navy officer. he was a fighter pilot who was hit during the attack on pearl harbor and gave up on returning to this aircraft carrier, he went back instead and died. it was not japanese who erected a marker at the site where his fighter plane crashed.

it was u.s. servicemen who had been on the receiving end of his attack. they applauded the bravery of the dead pilot and they erected this stone marker. on the marker, his rank at that time is inscribed -- lieutenant, imperial japanese navy, showing respect toward a servicemen who gave his life for his country. the brave respect the brave. so wrote ambrose bierce wrote in -- ambrose bierce in a famous poem. showing respect even to an enemy they fought against, trying to understand even an enemy that they hated. therein lies the spirit of tolerance embraced by the american people. when the war ended and japan was a nation in burnt out ruins, as far as the eye could see, suffering under abject poverty,

it was the united states and its good people that instinctively sent food to eat and clothes to wear. the japanese people managed to survive and make their way toward the future, thanks to the sweaters and milk from the american people. it was the united states who opened up the path for japan to return to the international community once more after the war. under the leadership of the united states, japan as a member of the free world was able to enjoy peace and prosperity.

the goodwill and the assistance that you sent to the japanese, the enemy you had fought so fiercely, together with the tremendous spirit of tolerance were etched deeply into the hearts and the minds of our grandfathers and mothers. we also remember them, our children and grandchildren, will

continue to pass these memories down and never forget what you did for us. the words pass through my mind, those words inscribed in the wall at the lincoln memorial in washington, d.c., where i visited with president obama. with malice toward none, with charity for all, let us strive on to do all to achieve and cherish a lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations. these are the words of president abraham lincoln.

on behalf of the japanese people, i hereby wish to express once again my heartfelt gratitude to the united states and to the world for the tolerance extended to japan. it has now been 75 years since pearl harbor. japan and the united states, which fought a fierce war that will go down in the annals of human history have become allies with deep and strong ties rarely found anywhere in history.

we are allies that will tackle together to an even greater degree than ever before the many challenges covering the globe. ours is an alliance of hope that will lead us to the future. what has bonded us together is the power of reconciliation made possible through the spirit of tolerance. what i want to appeal to the people of the world here at pearl harbor, together with president obama, is this power of reconciliation. even today, the horrors of war have not been eradicated from the surface of the world.

there is no end to the spiral where hatred creates hatred. the world needs the spirit of tolerance and the power of reconciliation now, and especially now. japan and the united states, which have eradicated hatred and cultivated friendship and trust on the basis of common values, are now and especially now taking responsibility for appealing to the world about the importance of tolerance and the power of reconciliation. that is precisely why the japan-u.s. alliance is an alliance of hope.

the inlet gazing at us is tranquil as far as the eye can see. pearl harbor -- it is beautiful, shimmering like pearls, that is a symbol of tolerance and reconciliation. it is my wish that our japanese children and, president obama, your american children and indeed their children and

grandchildren and people all around the world will continue to remember pearl harbor as a symbol of reconciliation. we will spare no efforts to continue our endeavors to make that wish a reality. together with president obama, i hereby make my steadfast pledge. thank you very much. [applause] president obama: prime minister abe, on behalf of the american people, thank you for your gracious words, thank you for your presence here today.

it is a historic gesture that speaks to the power of reconciliation and the alliance between the american and japanese peoples. a reminder that even the deepest wounds of war can give way to friendship and lasting peace. distinguished guests, members of him the armed forces, and most of all, survivors of pearl harbor and their loved ones, aloha. >> aloha. pres. obama: to americans, especially those who call hawaii home, this harbor is a sacred place.

as we lay a wreath or toss flowers into waters that still weep, we think of the more than 2400 american patriots, the fathers and husbands, wives and daughters, manning heaven's rails for all the trinity. we salute the defenders who pull themselves a little straighter every december 7, and we reflect on the heroism that was shown here 75 years ago. as the dawn broke on that december day, paradise never seemed so sweet. the water was warm and impossibly blue. the sailors ate in the mess hall or ready themselves for church, dressed in crisp white shorts and t-shirts.

at anchor, the ships in the harbor floated in neat rows. the california, the maryland, and the oklahoma. the tennessee, the west virginia, and the nevada. on the deck of the arizona, the navy band was tuning up. that morning, the ranks on men's shoulders defined them less than the courage in their hearts. across the island, americans defended themselves however they could, firing training shells, working old bolt-action rifles. an african-american mess stewart, who would typically be confined to cleaning duties, carried his commander to safety and then fired an antiaircraft gun until he ran out of ammo.

we honor americans like jim downing, first-class on the west virginia. before he raced to the harbor, his new bride pressed into his hand a verse of scripture. the eternal god is my refuge, and underneath our the -- underneath are the everlasting arms. as jim fought to save his ship, he simultaneously gather the names of the fallen so that he could give closure to their families. we remember americans like harry payne, a fireman from honolulu, who, in the face of withering fire, worked to douse burning

planes until he gave his last full measure of devotion, one of the only civilian firefighters ever to receive the purple heart. we salute americans like chief petty officer john finn, who manned a .50 caliber machine gun for more than two hours and was wounded more than 20 times, earning him our nation's highest military declaration, the medal of honor. and it is here that we reflect on how war tests our most enduring values. how, even as japanese-americans were deprived of their own liberty during the war, one of the most decorated military units in the history of the united states, 442nd infantry

regiment and its 100th infantry battalion, the japanese-american in that 442nd served my friend and proud hawaiian, daniel inoye, a man who was the senator from hawaii for most of my life and with whom i would find myself proud to serve in the senate chamber. a man who was not only the recipient of the medal of honor and the presidential medal of freedom but was one of the most distinguished statesman of his generation as well. here at pearl harbor, america's first battle of the second world war roused the nation. here, in so many ways, america came of age.

a generation of americans, including my grandparents, the greatest generation -- they did not seek war, but they refused to shrink from it. they all did their part on fronts and in factories, and while 75 years later, the proud ranks of pearl harbor survivors have thinned with time, the bravery we recall here is forever etched in our national heart. i would ask all our pearl harbor and world war ii veterans who are able to, to please stand or raise your hands, because a grateful nation thanks you. [applause]

pres. obama: the character of nations is tested in war, but it is defined in peace. after one of the most horrific chapters in human history, one that took not tens of thousands, but tens of millions of lives with ferocious fighting across this ocean, the united states and japan chose friendship and they chose peace. over the decades, our alliance has made both of our nations more successful. it has helped underwrite an international order that has

prevented another world war and that has lifted more than a billion people out of extreme poverty. today, the alliance between the united states and japan, bound not only by shared interests but also rooted in common values, stands as the cornerstone of peace and stability in the asia-pacific and a force for progress around the globe. our alliance has never been stronger. in good times and bad, we are there for each other. recall five years ago when a wall of water bore down on japan and the reactors in fukushima melted. america's men and women in uniform were there to help our japanese friends. across the globe, the united states and japan worked shoulder to shoulder to strengthen the security of the asia-pacific and

the world, turning back piracy, combating disease, slowing the spread of nuclear weapons, keeping the peace in war-torn lands. earlier this year near pearl harbor, japan joined with two dozen nations in the world's largest maritime military exercise. that included our forces from u.s. pacific command, led by admiral harry harris, the son of an american naval officer and a japanese mother. harry was born in yokoska. but you wouldn't know it from his tennessee twang. thank you, harry, for your outstanding leadership. [applause]

pres. obama: in this sense, our presence here today, the connections not just between our governments but between our people. the presence of prime minister abe here today reminds us of what is possible between nations and peoples. wars can end. the most bitter of adversaries can become the strongest of allies. the fruits of peace always outweigh the plunder of war. this is the enduring truth of this hallowed harbor. it is here that we remember that even when hatred burns hottest, even when the the tug of

tribalism is at its most primal, we must resist the urge to turn inward, we must resist the urge to demonize those who are different. the sacrifice made here, the anguish of war, it reminds us to seek that divine spark that is common to all humanity. it insists that we strive to be what our japanese friends called [speaking japanese] "with and for each other." that is the lesson of captain william callahan of the missouri. even after an attack on his ship, he ordered that the japanese pilot be laid to rest

with military honors, wrapped in a japanese flag sewn by the american sailors. it is the lesson in turn of the japanese pilot who, years later, returned to this harbor, befriended an old marine bugler and asked him to play taps and lay two roses at this memorial every month, one for america's fallen and one for japan's. it is the lesson our two peoples learn every day in the most ordinary of ways, whether it is an american studying in tokyo, a young japanese studying across america, scientists from our two nations together unraveling the mysteries of cancer or combating climate change, exploring the stars. it's a baseball player like ichiro lighting up a stadium in

miami, buoyed by the shared pride of two peoples, both american and japanese, united in peace and friendship. as nations and as people, we cannot choose the history that we inherit. but we can choose what lessons to draw from it. and use those lessons to chart our own futures. prime minister abe, i welcome you here in the spirit of friendship that the people of japan have always welcomed me. i hope that together we send a message to the world that there is more to be won in peace than in war, that reconciliation carries more rewards than retribution. here in this quiet harbor, we

honor those we lost, and we give thanks for all that our two nations have won together as friends. may god hold the fallen in his everlasting arms, may he watch over our veterans and all those who stand guard on our behalf. may god bless us all. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[applause] [inaudible conversations]

[applause] [inaudible conversations] [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain in your seats until the japanese delegation departs. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> sunday, a live discussion on the presidency of barack obama. we are taking your phone calls, tweets, emails, and facebook

questions. we include author of the presidency, black and white, my up close view of three presidents and race in america. the author of democracy and black, how race still enslaves the american soul. and associated editor of the washington post, author of barack obama the story. from noon toh live 3:00 p.m. eastern on sunday on c-span2. join us on tuesday for live coverage of the opening day of the new congress. watch the official swearing in of the new and really elected members of the house and senate and the elections of the speaker of the house. our live coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org. you can listen to it on the free c-span radio app.

ahead of the new congress, republicans have proposed a new rules package that would punish house members for live streaming or other disruptions on the house floor. the proposal is in response to this summer's 25 hour sit in that democrats staged on the house floor to demand a vote on gun control legislation. members of congress could face a $500 deduction from their paychecks for shooting video on the house floor. subsequent violations would be $2500 under the rules. politico reports the new rules could be unconstitutional. article one states that each house may punish its members for disorderly behavior. for more than 200 years, that has been interpreted to mean sanctions against lawmakers must be approved by the full house with a floor vote. the republican rules do not require a floor vote, instead the fines would be automatically

deducted from lawmaker's paychecks. ♪ >> the presidential and operation of donald friday, january 20. c-span will have live coverage of the days events and ceremonies. watch live on c-span and c-span.org, and listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> up next on c-span, a form from the george w. bush stay tuned on u.s. policy toward north korea. the former talks about human rights in north korea and the countries nuclear weapons program. after his remarks, a discussion on the foreign policy arteries of the incoming donald trump

administration. >> good morning. i am the director of global initiatives here at the bush institute. thank you for taking time to join us for this forum on freedom in north korea, and welcome to the bush institute, where we focus on developing leaders, advancing policy, and taking action to solve today's most pressing challenges. on the screen behind me is the satellite image of the korean peninsula. it shows a startling contrast between north and south. while south korea is alive with light, north korea is shrouded in darkness. more than 24 million people live under the tyranny of communism in the kim regime. in recent years, free societies have focused attention on the plight of the north korean people, but more must be done. since 2014, the bush institute has held consensusbuilding meetings, commissioning additional research and

inped break new ground understanding one of the worst human tragedies of our time. the result has been a call for action for governments, the private sector, and societies to work together in a bipartisan way to improve the human condition in north korea. we believe this includes advocating for a new u.s. policy that integrates the cry for human freedom with denuclearization. we also believe that means supporting the north korean escapees who are building new lives and freedom here in the united states. all of you can be a part of this call to action. if you visit bushcenter.org/nk, you will find several concrete ways you can help. learn more about the human rights security nexus by downloading original infographics, videos, and research, including what will be discussed today. help expose the suffering of the north korean people and why it matters to american security by

sharing this content on social media. let members of congress know how you feel. we know the national leaders like those in the audience today care deeply about these issues. find ways to support north korean escapees and other refugees in your community, and support the ongoing work of the bush institute to advance human freedom, including our north korea work, with your contributions. the will for human freedom cannot be tamped down forever. north korean society is changing and growing more independent. since the late 1990's, more than 30,000 north koreans, men, women, and children, have managed to escape. most live in south korea today. some have made the long journey to the united states. one of those brave souls is joseph kim. in 2006, joseph escaped north korea into china and eventually made his way here with the help of an organization called liberty in north korea. today he is a hard-working college student and a voice for north koreans who still do not

know freedom. joseph visited the bush institute in 2014, and we are thrilled to welcome him back. ladies and gentlemen, joseph kim. [applause] joseph: hello, everyone. my name is joseph kim. today is my second time meeting president bush. when i was offered an opportunity to meet him three years ago, i thought about it and i decided to accept the invitation. as a student, i thought it would be a good thing to meet the president because how many college students can say i actually met president bush? someone suggested that i should thank him because he signed the north korean human rights act which allowed the north korean refugees to have an opportunity

to come to the u.s., including myself. that day when i met him, i thanked him with my brain, the best i could, but not with a -- not with my heart. during the meeting, president bush asked me how i escaped from north korea, and what it was like living in china, and what my dream was. i struggled so much answering his questions, partially because i was nervous, and mostly because i was not sure what my dream was. i talked on and on without really answering his questions. everyone in the room was probably wondering when this kid was going to stop talking. [laughter] joseph: except president bush. he listened so patiently and

tried his best to understand. i think that really touched me, that his interest and care that really moved me. later on as i learned more about the bills he signed into law, i started to realize how significantly it affected life of so many north korean refugees including myself. as a result of the act, over 200 north korean refugees have had the opportunity to come to the u.s. today, some of these individuals are running their own small businesses, and some are studying in college with the hope of helping to change their motherland. it may sound silly but some are -- to impress their friends.

[laughter] joseph: they are not weird people though. to north korean people, the inconsequential lives they have in the u.s. are the lives they have dreamed of for so long. that is not to say that everything is fine living in the perfect u.s. we definitely have and continue to face new challenges, and i believe that is why we are here in this room together. we are still in the process of moving forward and making an impact that comes from our words today. in the small but collective ways in which we are able to. this is why i would like to take a moment to thank president bush

sincerely, and with all my heart this time. not only for making this reality possible, but also for his ongoing care and commitment to the north korean people. ladies and gentlemen, it is my honor to introduce president george w. bush. [applause] pres. bush: thank you all. thank you all for coming. we at the bush center think this is an important conversation to have. after all, we are focusing our attention on freedom, freedom for the people of north korea and south korea. first of all, it brings great

joy to my heart to be introduced by joseph kim. this guy is one incredibly courageous person. he has seen the full horrors of oppression in north korea. he was orphaned during the famine. he scrounged for food on the streets of north korea. he eventually escaped to china and came to america. he attends bard college. he has written a book. if you are interested, it is called "under the same sky." i am thrilled that joseph came back to the bush center, and i want to thank him for keeping the promise that someday korea will be whole and free. you are about to hear from grace joe as well. she too is a north korean

refugee. she goes to montgomery college. she is a sweet soul, and we are honored you are here grace. thank you for coming. there are other north korean refugees here. we thank you for coming. we appreciate your courage, and we look forward to your input on how best the bush institute and those who are with us can help you. i know there are some distinct people here. laura. [laughter] pres. bush: joe lieberman, the great senator from connecticut who is one courageous person when it comes to doing what is right for freedom in the world, and we are thrilled you are here, joe. retirement ain't all that bad a deal, is it? you look refreshed being outside of washington.

someone who is not so refreshed, but is doing a fabulous job as senator of colorado, cory gardner. we appreciate your service, and i want to thank you for being one of the architects of tougher sanctions on north korean officials for human rights violations. ambassador robert king, special envoy for north korean human rights, has joined us. robert, we appreciate you coming. you will hear from robert and the other two i introduced soon. we've got members of the korean-american community. part of the purpose here is to encourage all americans, but the best leaders will be korean americans who have benefited from living in america to help those who have sought freedom. we have some notables with us, the great kj choi, golfer, dallas area resident, cocaptain of the presidents cup international team that came in second to the americans. [laughter]

pres. bush: anyway, a really good guy, as is chan ho park. had a great major league baseball career, actually played for the rangers for a while. he lives with three young girls in los angeles. we thank him for coming. and my great friend roy ru, south korean citizen. cares deeply about the people of north korea. after all he married a woman that was born in north korea. he is a great friend of mine and 41's. we appreciate you being here. ken is a smart guy who has really brought a lot of energy to this building. we appreciate it. holly, operating officer, is with us. my friend tom bernstein is the chairman of the freedom human advisory council. we thank you for helping a lot. amanda snitzer, who you heard

from. lindsay lloyd is the deputy director. and the moderator of today's conversation is mike gerson, columnist former speechwriter , for president bush and a advocate for human freedom. people ask, we can do a lot of things here. and we do. we think they are very important. for those of you who don't know what we do, please look it up, and i think you will think it is important. people ask, why north korea? of all the places, why should the bush center be thinking about north korea? there are several reasons. one, north korea is a remnant of the last century. it is one of the last cold war conflicts. it is the last gasp of totalitarianism, the last fortress of a kind of tyranny that is beginning to leave the earth.

one such tyrant that left the earth happened last week, fidel castro. like the north korean leaders, he imprisoned his own people. like the north korean leaders, he ruined his country's economy. like the north korean people, the cuban people deserve better. north korea represents a grave security threat. it shows how proliferation of a deadly technology can allow small leaders, failed, cruel, and criminal leaders, to threaten and disrupt the world on a grand scale. but every successful missile test advances, from seoul to tokyo to across the pacific. there is no easy policy solutions. but any serious response must begin by accepting reality. there is no way to detach

ourselves from events in east asia. our future and the future of that region are closely linked. eventually, there is no isolation from proliferation, no safety in distance. north korea also presents the greatest sustained humanitarian challenge of our time. the whole country is a prison run by a sadistic warden. the north korean people have suffered decades of oppression and famine and violence. by controlling access to the broader world, the north korean government has tried to make this nightmare seem normal to its victims. some argue that the spirit of the north korean people has been beaten into submission so that,

-- so total that opposition is unthinkable. we don't believe that here. the desire for freedom, like the dignity of the person, is universal. a place in human hearts by god cannot be removed by kim jong-un. the regime attempts to control every mind, every tongue, every life, but the refugees with us today demonstrate that no oppressor can control the soul. the north korean people are pleading in their silence for freedom, and the world needs to listen, and the world needs to respond. these two elements, the security challenge and the humanitarian challenge, are closely linked. the threat we face arises out of the nature of the north korean regime itself.

the lesson of history is clear. a country that does not respect the rights of its people will not respect the rights of its neighbors. this is one of the main arguments of an excellent report that victor and bob have put together. thank you for coming. these men are two of the foremost experts on north korea. one is a democrat, and one is a republican. they make a strong case that security and human rights are inseparable. they make a strong case that the promotion of human dignity is not a distraction from security policy. it is a distinct advantage in pursuing that policy. that was the theory of the north korea human rights act of 2004, which i was honored to sign. we sent out help to expand north korean refugees, and to expose

the horrible conditions faced by their countrymen. tighteningars, the of sanctions has complicated the work of what is essentially a criminal enterprise. and the groundbreaking united nations commission of inquiry report has further isolated the north korean government by focusing global attention on its brutal and aggressive nature. victor and bob's report sent out a range of options for a renewed north korean policy, reassuring important allies in the region, integrating nonproliferation and human rights sanctions, going after slave labor exports that fund weapons development, encouraging information flows into the north, and expanding diplomatic pressure. they put together a good roadmap. this is a timely moment, and our

country is about to have a new administration which has every right to choose its own direction. they can take advice or not, but there is one option that can't be chosen, the option of drifting, because that would lead to disaster. denial provides only the shallow and temporary illusion of security, and leadership on this matter cannot be delegated to others. a successful response will require unprecedented global cooperation, but it can only be led by one country, the united states. there is another way to show our commitment to human rights for the north korean people, by supporting the refugees in our midst. the bush institute's human freedom initiative is issuing a second report today, based on a

survey of north korean refugees who live in our country. it shows a small but highly motivated community of exceptional people. it also reveals real need in the areas of education and employment. this is a set of problems where the private sector, including the korean-american community -- by the way, we have young korean americans from new york city who helped fund the project laura will announce and have flown down to be with us. coming to the aid of the men and women who have fled the worst tyranny in the world is in our national interest. it is in the interest of the korean-american community. it is in the interest of those who have got hearts for those who suffer in our country. the warm welcome of refugees is one of the truest expressions of our national character. it shows a broad reach of

american ideals and the good heart of our people. refugees often risk everything, including their life, to come to america. whatever their background, they deserve our sympathy. not our contempt. the threat from north korea and the cruel oppression of their people are urgent problems. free nations cannot accept a future on terms set by this brutal and unstable regime. technology is bringing closer the threats of a dangerous world. technology can also carry a message of god given rights and dignity in the other direction. that is a form of power as well. the untamed power of freedom to reach the darkest corners of the world. it is not foreign-policy realism to ignore the deepest aspirations of humanity. yes, we defend ourselves in a

demilitarized zone and we are grateful to american and korean troops who stand guard on the last rampart of the cold war. but we also defend ourselves by taking the side of the north korean people. they deserve better than brutality and tyranny. they deserve to determine their own future. that would bring real peace to the korean peninsula. the only true and lasting peace, a peace founded on human freedom. thank you all for coming. god bless. [applause] >> please welcome the human rights and security nexus panel, moderated by michael gerson, columnist for "the washington

post." michael: good morning. i'm honored to be with you at this forum on freedom in north korea and to be with this distinguished panel. there is a portion of president bush's second reads, we arethat led by common sense to one conclusion. the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. the best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world. america's vital interests and deepest beliefs are now one. north korea is really the test of this assertion, and could be its demonstration under the

right circumstances. can freedom really grow in the rocky soil of north korea? but what long-term solutions to the problems of a peninsula can even exist without that freedom? these are some of the questions we are going to explore today. by way of background, historically there have been two groups of north korea watchers, those that focus more on human rights, and those who focus more on security issues. the bush center has been a force working to bring these groups together, and the paper authored by victor and bob is a milestone in that effort. it outlines a new approach for a new administration, which will face the north korean challenge

from its first day in office. it brings together human rights and security concerns and argues that day cannot be separated. -- argues that they cannot be separated. this is a notoriously difficult and high-stakes policy matter, but our national discussion begins with an advantage. it is a rare foreign-policy issue in which there is broad bipartisan agreement represented on this panel today. but turning consensus into policy will require leadership, and much of that leadership will come from the u.s. congress. let me start the introductions, which i will keep brief to allow a maximum time for our discussion. senator cory gardner has spent just a few years in the senate, but he has already become a recognized and respected leader on north korean policy. as chairman of the subcommittee on east asia, the pacific and international cyber security, he

has pursued strong sanctions and focused parallel passions of the north korean human rights abuses. senator joe lieberman served 24 years in the u.s. senate and was the vice presidential nominee of the democratic party in 2000, which did not turn out quite as planned. [laughter] michael: over the years, he has strongly and sometimes single-handedly defended the great internationalist tradition of franklin roosevelt and john kennedy. the four freedoms of the new frontier. he is defending those ideals at aei as cochair of the american international's project. victor cha has a long legacy of service. he was asian director at the nsc.

he is the author of several books, including the impossible state. he now serves simultaneously as the director of asian studies at georgetown university, the korean chair at the center for strategic and international studies, and the human freedom fellow at the bush institute, which sounds exhausting just saying those. [laughter] michael: and ambassador robert gallucci is perhaps the most experienced and respected diplomat in this area, going back to his work as chief u.s. negotiator during the north korean nuclear crisis of 1994. he is the former dean of the school of foreign service at georgetown. now he is a professor at georgetown and a consultant to the bush institute on this project. welcome to all of you. let me start with the authors of the paper released today. victor, you are making the claim in this paper that "freedom and security are indivisible." why is that true?

victor: thank you, michael. first, i think president bush actually put it best. our thinking going into this is that, as a security problem, this has been really unsolvable for the united states for the past quarter-century, despite the best efforts of numerous administrations on both sides of the aisle. part of the reason it has been unsolvable is because we have not acknowledged that at the core of the security threat is the nature of the regime. a regime that treats its people as poorly as it does cannot be trusted to keep agreements, cannot be trusted to treat its neighbors fairly and respectfully. in a sense any new , administration looking at this cannot look at this in one dimension. there is more than one dimension to the security problem, and at the core we think of the

security problem is the question of human liberty in north korea. michael: bob, as a basic matter, what do you see is the nature of the security threat to the united states and our allies today, and where is it headed? bob: i think we would all start with the nuclear weapons issues and say that north korea has been a problem for u.s. national security experts for decades, going back to the korean war, but that situation materially changed when north korea acquired nuclear weapons and then went about methodically to acquire ballistic missiles to be able to attack not only our allies in northeast asia, japan, and the republic of korea, but also is now on its way to reach the continental united states.

if we are talking about a security threat, that is the first and principal one, but let me just quickly add that we worry everyday that the regime in north korea which has a history of doing provocative things off the coast will do something, maybe because it believes it now has nuclear weapons and can determine a response, even by the united states, will do something that would spark another conflict on the peninsula. that is the second concern. a third, which is, for me personally one that rises to the top of the list, is the north korean propensity to transfer to other countries both ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons capability. people know in the business that pakistani missiles, iranian , what they may not have

recalled is that in 2007, the israelis were executing their own version of the nonproliferation policy and flattened a facility that was really a plutonium production reactor being built in syria, which you recall was a country wants, and that was being built by the north koreans. the idea that they would transfer this technology to syria, that opens up our own vulnerability to the possibility of terrorism.

the source for that would be north korea. we have a range of concerns here, from conventional war to attack by a ballistic missile to a transfer issue, and there are more, but that's of my list. michael: senator gardner, we have seen strong consensus between republicans and democrats on capitol hill on this issue, and strong leadership in the congress. what are the most important priorities on north korea for the new congress? sen. gardner: thank you for that question, and thank you for the institute for putting this together today. i think the new congress has to first of all make sure not one of those forgotten issues during the transition. we have seen over the past several years, as issues in the middle east have rightly taken a leading place and role in our foreign policy, but that does not mean that we can turn away from what is happening in north korea and what has happened on the korean peninsula. i think the new congress has to make sure that the new administration focuses and

resurfaces policy north korea as one of its most important foreign-policy priorities. to understand that right now incerns and -- concerns south korea are significant about what the new administration is going to the continuing policies that we have to make sure the new congress reiterates our commitment to defense security of south korea that are deterrent in all of its various means and ways, continues to extend stronger than ever to south korea. that our strength through show of force operations continues. and to make sure that, as provocations from north korea will undoubtedly service, we have a cohesive and well thought plan in place to address them. i think the new congress has to address what is coming out of the united nations tomorrow, it looks like, in terms of a resolution. make sure that is enforced,

continue to reiterate the commitment that we have been enforcing strong sanctions against north korea and other nations that may facilitate their nuclear programs, working with china to ensure they are enforced. and then making sure that we have a policy of strength, something the senate has focused on particularly over the past year when it comes to strengthening and reinforcing the trilateral alliance between japan, korea, and the united states, which is absolutely critical to any change in north korea. michael: senator lieberman, can you explain why it is important for this to be a bipartisan issue? what does that add to north korean policy? mr. lieberman: i am glad to. thanks, michael. thank you for convening this group, particularly through the bush center. their principle of public service, which in my opinion is

based on the centrality of the american ideal of freedom, which is what our founders gave us in the declaration of independence, about all those self-evident rights, the truths we have life, , liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which clearly were not just given by our creator to americans. that is a declaration of universal human rights. we forget that sometimes that that's our mission as americans, but it also happens to relate to our security in a very real way, and that can be lost. why is it important that support for human rights in north korea and for a change of regime in north korea and the unification of korea? it is because that comes from

our basic values. this ought not to be a partisan matter in any sense. the discussion we have had, when you think about it, it is easy enough for somebody to say, oh, north korea, that's too bad. kim jong-un is really crazy. people suffer there. that is far away from us. well, in this slave state, he has taken whatever resources he has and focused on nuclear missile capacity and now he is showing it to the iranians, the pakistanis, to the syrians, and inevitably to terrorists, and he is also developing now literally the capacity to hit the western part of the united states. so what may seem like a kind of idealistic pursuit of human rights for people far away from

us is really not only directly related to our heart as americans, but it is also related to our security. i think that's why we have achieved bipartisanship on this matter and why it is so important we go for it. i just have one word. all of us have said and no we are at the change of an administration in washington. i don't mean this derogatorily. this is an administration whose foreign policy in detail really has not been sketched out, so that unsettles people including our allies in korea and places all around the world, but it also creates an opportunity, to put it that way, for groups like this. they really broadly bipartisan group brought together by the bush institute to speak the

truth about north korea to those who will exercise power in the next administration, because the reality is that north korea will be in the face of the next administration, whether it chooses to look at it or not. michael: victor, you are recommending a new approach to your security strategy and human rights. how will it be different from what we are doing now, and what will the objectives be? victor: first of all, one of the big differences is we are making a statement about how security and human rights are linked. this is not something that has been done in the past. i think we have seen the sanctions regime moving in a direction where there is more targeting of some things that might be related to human rights, but i think it is very

important for the president-elect to come out very clearly and say -- to make a very strong statement about the north korean threat and a link with human rights, and about the need for a policy that is not just focused on one dimension, but is focused on several dimensions. we have bob king here, the ambassador for human rights for the obama administration, and he and the administration have done a good job in trying to target some of the areas where north korea revenues from human rights violations may go to fund the proliferation and obama of some of their nuclear programs. but there is a lot more that can be done. we go through some of the areas where a new administration or sanctions regime can target additional businesses, additional activities by both companies, state run companies, front companies, and others that provide funding for proliferation in north korea.

and of course, with the new administration we will also have , the opportunity to renew the north korean human rights act that president bush signed, the first version of that. there is a lot of opportunity there in terms of modernizing the act, particularly when it comes to technology and flows of information. there is a really rich menu of things that could make, as senator lieberman said, an opportunity for new policy to really cover new ground. michael: bob, what should china's role be in influencing the situation? those of have the will to do this? how does this relate to our broader relationship with china? robert: it would seem to me than t any durable relationship in

northeast asia, you've got to have china aboard. that is a minimum. others have suggested that maybe this should be china's responsibility. it is right in their backyard, and they have influence in pyongyang where nobody else does, so much economic leverage. they should take this on. but the political reality here is that the chinese do not have congruent interests with us. they fear more than the north korean human rights situation or nuclear weapons issues or ballistic missiles, they fear instability and american military and naval presence in northeast asia. as long as that is true, they will be what they have been over the last 20 years, moderating sanctions so that they can't have that impact that some people have in mind for sanctions.

iran model like. what i am saying here is there is a role for china. as we write, we are to be -- we should be pressing the chinese to bear some of the responsibility and do heavy lifting in pyongyang. but at the end of the day, they will be limited because of how they define their interests. second, i should say from my perspective, i don't think we should be subcontracting arguably the most important security issue in the asia-pacific region to our principal competitor in that region, and i am not shrinking from saying competitor. that being true, this is not a china problem. as the president said before, there is only one country that can lead in this situation, and that is the united states of america. michael: senator gardner, i'd actually like to hear your view on that topic. how does this relate to our broader chinese relationship?