d it's for that reas i think we, that's why we care about the south china sea or east china sea and the challenge that we face just goes to house point of the changing regional balance, that some of the rising regional powers or in some cases declining regional powers that are exerting themselves more completely dominating their own region, they found they can take certain actions that fall below the threshold that normally elicit a military response from us. they can, through a series of salami slices begin to take away the foundations of this order. so we are faced with a very challenging question. >> as china militarize his the land reclamation project, the am far they are building starts to put airstrips, but what point you respond? when you put hq nine antiaircraft missiles, do you take them out then? maybe not, it doesn't seem like a small objective, a massive us military response that would put us in conflict but maybe wait until late, is that enough? what about three, what about 10, what about 100? what about when you wake up one day and find that you created an air defense info

and it's for that reason i think we -- it's why we care about the south china sea or the east china sea. and the challenge that we face, this goes to hall's point of the changing regional balances -- is that some of the rising regional powers or some cases declining regional powers exerting themselves to more completely dominate their own regions, has found that they can -- if they can take certain actions that fall below the threshold that would normally elicit a military response from us, they can through a series of slices begin to chip away the foundations of this order, and so we're faced with a very challenging question. as china militarizes these land reclaimation projects, sand bars they're building, starts to put air strips on them. a what point do you respond' when the put hq9 antiaircraft missiles on do you take them out then? maybe not. that would seem like a small step that warranted a massive u.s. military response that would put is in a conflict with china. so maybe you wait until they've didn't on two islands. is that enough? it what about three, ten, 100? what about whe

south china sea and back off in the east china sea. [ applause ] we should not tolerate china making a province out of the south china sea. we should not see them interfere in free navigation of international waters or pressuring our friends in the region and endangering the economies of key allies like south korea and japan and ta taiwan. we should make it clear that there will be no reunify occasion of taiwan is never going to happen. we talk about a one khchina policy. if you're henry kissinger you can handle constructive ambiguity. i think it's time for constructive clarity. we support the people of taiwan. we support their continued self government independent of china. now, on the subject of russia, the media loves to comment about what president trump has said about vladimir putin and about a variety of other things in that relationship. what they leave out, typical of the political mainstream press because they can't handle substance, they leave out substance. so let's look at what president trump has already said about our relations with russia when it comes to the disastrous arms treaty. he said this is a badly negotiated one-sided treaty that gives russia a decided advantage that we didn'

it is for that reason why we care about the south chiney sea or the southeast china see. and the challenge we -- -- east china sea -- is some of the declining powers that are exurting themselves to dominate their region have found if they can take certain actions that fall below the threshold that would normally elicit a military response they can begin to chip away at the foundations of this order. we are faced with a challenging problem. as china builds the sandbar and start to put airstrips on them at what point do you respond? hq-9 anti missile aircraft on the first time and do you take them out then? maybe not. that seems like military response would be needed and a conflict with china. maybe until they have done it on two islands. is that not? what about three? 10? 100? what about when you wake up and find they created an air defense information zone over the area and you can no longer fly over? this is the challenge. >> i am not sure what pulling back means in the geographic content of the western pacific where the united states has territories in the western pacific. pulling back to u.s. territory mea