Cochair of our organization, Condoleezza Rice. [applause]er you will be hearing from secretary rice in half an hour she is one of the conversationalists. The other chair could not be here but he is very much a part of this effort perk i want to pay tribute to former secretary of defense mr. Bill and janet cohen. Welcome secretary. [applause] and i also want to paid tribute who embodies bipartisanship every effort across partisan lines is a National Security advisor as well. My close friend as one of the people doing the interviews the subject is china. All of us agree our relationship is the greatest challenge that we face as a country in the next several decades. It is an important moment in that relationship jimmy carter and deng xiaoping. For most of that time republican and democratic administrations. We all felt that we felt we wereth seeking cooperation with chinese and they felt the same way. In recent years there is no question that both countries have swung from cooperation to a strategy of competition. That gets to the heart of our Vital National interest overseas. We arehe competing for Strategic Military predominance in indo pacific where the United States has been the dominant power for 75 years but the chinese are making a concerted effort to cut into the americante alliance and military power. We are competing to see who will dominate the next military technology into your and we spent todays talking about that subject ai will be militarized biotechnology, quantum computing will be militarized. Which country will get their first in the new generation of thats meant to find power in the world over the next several decades . As the number one and number two economic powers to see President Trump with his trade negotiations announced last week. Certainly competing with respect to the United States and i respect what President Trump is trying to do to get to the heart of difficulties. With japan, europe and the european t union. Finally think of strategic dominance in the indo pacific and military technology and trade it is an important battle. The battle of ideas. President xi is brimming with selfconfidence about the authoritarian model of how that country is organized he thinks it should be exported another country should adopt itho. And Vladimir Putin thinks the same way. And others think the same way americans disagree. The europeans disagree. The japanese disagree. It isnt a cataclysmic battle of armies but ideals of house we think society should be organized. The one cautionary note we spent three days together debating this issue we produced a volume that i hope you all have a copy of the egos of our organization we are americans and believe in our Country First we do not believe that partisanshipth should interfere with our analysis of the strategic challenges. The big cautionary note is this are we overestimating china strength and underestimatingg their weaknesses are even underestimating the ability of the United States and its allies in Europe Andes Asia to cope with this threat peacefully and successfully . He has someone here Condoleezza Rice spent her early career thinking of the empire thatve crashed and when we were working together will be overestimated the strength of the soviet union to have the confidence to think United States and its allies have a way forward for success in the t century republicans and democrats and today we will hear from more people my colleague will interview mike , and advisor to President Trump. He is really smart and it was a pleasure to spend three days earlier this year. Then i will interview my close friend and former boss and the third interview Kathleen Hicks is one the smartest young strategists we have in the United States on our ability to respond to these threats and forth you will interview a force of nature ambassador Kurt Campbell who was the assistant secretary of state for east asia and to make those to the indo pacific a compelling thinker on these issues we hope it will be useful to you and without further ado. [applause] thank you for being here today. When we were in aspen last august, i thought we had one of the best discussions we ever had in a Strategy Group with substance and diversity of opinion but to be respectful and you will sleep with the slightly different format than that we would normally do we want to highlight a couple authors to give them an opportunity to dig deep and what they are trying to say of course yineeding no introduction but i will do it anyway. [laughter] a fellow at the Hudson Institute former senior official you are always modest to back channel you took six trips. So i want to start broad red ask you to speak for the administration but you know what they think with respect to china is it to level the obPlaying Field . Is it pushing back like the soviet union . What are we driving for quick. The first point to make about the Trump Administration is the multiple voices within it from the point of view of the standards established by the previous administrationsm leak the debates on the front pages of the wall street journal like yesterday in the oval office. This is the administration its very difficult for outsiders to understand who speaks for the administration. In myio view it is the president alone and what we learned from the ukrainian impeachment discussion is the bureaucracy up to and including the cabinet secretaries is not what the president is concerned with. I was not a Trump Campaign supporter. My candidate lost but i was still invited to the Transition Team and i heard from the beginning the president elect was deeply and personally interested in china. Which surprised me a thought during the campaign he said china is raping our country it is clearly rhetoric and that is the end of it. But in fact to act as the desk officer himself and people in the room we should all be thrilled the president himself is taking china very seriously. But the hazard to that is him wants tound influence his view and find out what that is. So what i have come to understand about the president s approach to china , he thinks of himself as a dealmaker and he wants to make a deal with another company which happens to be run by another ceo president xi. So his focus from the transition and one of the early developments in my view unfortunately she took a phone call from the taiwan president or the chinese say the socalled president. And the chinese began to punish the Trump Administration from for the phone call and would not have aul summit anywhere and tell the president clarified his views. But the way he did that set the tone for the next three years and said at the requestst of president xi and the phone call, i will abide by our one china policy to remove the obstacle for the maralago summit im not sure where you want to go on that. But it is possible there are multiple goals but watching as a total outside observer i sometimes hear from the administrations pronouncement we are looking for china to fail. And sometimes i hear no we just try to create a fair Playing Field so the companies can compete f and we can have our own sphere of influence if we can all gete along. I have been advocating the president should give a speech on chinaou himself and answer these questions you are raising spirit the Vice President has given two speeches in great detail that theyde too have raised questions about what he is saying. But soon thereafter People Associated with the administration with steve bannon in particular which im not a member of began talking about that is our goal. If the president were to give us on china himself you and others in the room would be well advised to suggest what should be cleared up with that ambiguity and for some reason i dont understand if he invites me into the oval office to witness these debates and there they are. He uses me as a foil and it doesnt take long before you realize who in the room likes me there and who doesnt. T. So that bait on debate continues so as a businessman when i joined the Transition Team i was placed at amazon. Com for all 14 books the president has coauthored in several have china sections where he lays out his thinking. I recommend you read all those books before you go to the first meeting. They are tough he has a point of good china bad china and lays out a good china he would like to see and then demonizes bad china that they have said the whole course of us china relations to a large degree and the steve nguyen and that debate is what im supposed to be following because of these former officialsea. You have obviously wrote the book the 100 year marathon is an excellent book if you go to china i see the hardliners winning its harder and harder for the reformers for their own purpose much less political reform and the worry is the hardliners on both sides are winning is that what you see quick. Also what Henry Kissinger worry one warned about each with the unfathomable war between us and china if they got into power. With 100 year marathon thats where i got and doctor kissinger spent a whole page on that hardliner and we had a Cocktail Party and a took them over to the pentagon but doctor kissinger said this will never happen like an extreme thinking this will never happen but it did. So the hardliners by the way the china field for the hardlinersha all along but that general estimate is they were not that powerful and in many ways we fell victim to the Foreign Ministry telling us they have no power. But you raise kissinger who famously said where in the foothills of the cold war with china. That doesnt mean we need to go all the way i we pushing to the cold war or pushing back quick. Many voices are inside the administration i dont think the president wants a cold war with china at all. I think he is quite aware of chinas military improvements but you will notice the micro indicators to what degree of the patrols to observe innocent passage rules and they dont go in circles without challenging the territorial claims as i understand it from the Navy Spokesman we have not aggressively challenge the chinese with these maneuvers. We have come close and there is a wonderful harvard study aboutlo this scene some people reference a study how we approach frequent navigation but that could change if the whole trade deal goes sour i could envision a cold war breaking out inadvertently and looking back at the details of the first cold war it is a series of blunders. But at some point to formally launch it you think we are not quite there yet. I agree with kissingers phrase about the foothills. I think it could be avoided but it takes two sides and the intricacies of the trade agreement could have laid the foundation for a cold war. Since you weree so instrumental to get it through you mentioned freedom of navigation and the South China Sea and in the us and the new cycles we have been so fixated on the trade side i want to get on the other part of the relationship diplomatically you spend a lot of time in your paper which is excellent talking about allies in asia and especially on the military side. I thought it was excellent what we are doing and what we should be doing more with our allies if we see the defense policy that in my view you see them asking japan because of south korea how do you view that cracks is that part of a Cohesive Strategy quick. This is an area where the president has strong views from his speeches 20 years earlier. The notion we are being ripped off by our allies if you want to ingratiate yourself with him. But you were there all the time. I would say sir we need to work with allies weth need to share values you say they are ripping us off again we need to go 500 percent more whos going to listen to . The outside view and this calculation goes on by other cabinet secretaries who threaten the president to go along with him not to get ousted. We had a lot of firings a lot of close advisers to President Trump have been fired in cabinet secretaries and there is a pattern if you say or do things that are yesterday that the base does not agree with its a good way to get fired and then to work with the allies i feel the crucial part of the china strategy is to bring our allies along to listen and it is absolutely crucial so my chapter for the book i try to describe with each country in asia that this is my point of view with the deep state infiltrator to think of the importance of the allies the india is the key to the overall approach to china. Thank you. You dont strike me as very deep state. [laughter] but to discuss equally if you praise me and i need to praise you as well. Does everybody have a copy of her book . This is how you get the moderator to be very nice to you. Who does not have a copy of brave new world cracks. Now perfect i will follow with a softball. [laughter] so what is the most effective part quick. The president had a signing ceremony in the white house last wednesday and had allied ceos present and singled out each one with an intimate joke including hank greenberg. So doctor kissinger was there and was praised. He got me in trouble in japan because he talked about our partnership i would not dream of having a partnership with the president of the United States. But the chinese were there. They laughed, applauded, you can see there is no acrimony or bitterness. We had a really tough two years for the phase i trade treement the chinese translation was also quite ambiguous. So it is a celebration so far so good. There is goodwill. There is a recovery the president reacted quickly to. And the number of trainees who have come, 30 chinese officials in the treaty room they run the economy and trade policy of china. At one point they had a title the special envoy of president e xi. Than they were told in september not to use that title anymore we had to ponder what that meant. So i see this is good news. The details are not so important as the cooperative attitude after a severe Emotional Experience on both sides the last two years. I read the agreement in english but i thought it was extremely novel the dispute resolution for quite you call it Something Else now it is novel to have one side with tariffs. Lets hope that it works in on the intellectual Property Side especially on the biologics. Wasnt worth the cost because when it ultimately came out of the phase i deal worth it quick. I think so but i try to put myself in the mind of those who will inherit the problem and whether they are willing to use tariffs as much as President Trump did as a voice of the inmate administration sometimes using the memo that said if the chinese dont come around from the waiver the president gave with those anomalies that will go away. The chinese talk about needing 3 trillion of capital. The Us Government would slow that down to hurt the chinese quest for a large amount of capital. Those threats may have worked not made by the president directly so they had to make the assessment last september october we could be badly hurt by the ease escalation that could have affected the decision but they did it in a ha goodwill that a chinese philosophical fatalism this is the long game that china has to make a concession but then they marketed it by saying at the white house signing ceremony with his own remarks andba that all three say its important for global peace and Global Economic growth. In another words we are taking one for the team, the rest of the world from these unreasonable pressures and tariffs and threats. I thought thatat was Brilliant Media handling and i told them so. We do know the rest of the world agrees with that. Everybody talks about the phase two strategic and economicmi dialogue but it will happen again any chances to phase two quick. As the president likes to say we will have to wait and see. [laughter] there aret some issues the president could solve if he goes to beijing now they are beyond friend now they love each other. [laughter] we are in the dark because the subsidies are secrets in china. And then to be on the fortune 500 list now there is 129 companies. So the subsidies are secret we need their cooperation to identify which are to be eliminated. That is one issue. The second is to begin the enforcement phase or the bilateral recognition phase more properly as phase two is going on. So the summit, the issue of secrecy of subsidies, the enforcement turning into a nasty quarrel and the other policies of diplomacy, there is quite a long list actually. Y optimistic and think the president is also. Now we will close at their. Thank you for taking the time and for contributing. [applause] me many things for mike to be so candid with us before introduced secretary rice i did not welcome three distinguished ambassadors in my welcoming remarks. Ambassador of ukraine. [applause] and ambassador of austria and also the ambassador of mexico is here. And that which began 36 years ago and those officials of the Reagan Administration and the intent was can people get away from washington once a year in the summer and struggle with the big issues of the cold war . And those people that brought us together we are dedicated to nonpartisanship i know its a radical concept but we are dedicated to what. Condi rice has been a big part of this group since the 1980s. We were invited through the mid eighties. Now she is the cochair i dont want to belabor her extraordinary life and career she is someone i deeply admire as our secretary of state and National Security advisor when she was special assistant to president george h. W. Bush i was her deputy and we were together at the end of the cold war. Professor a standard on stanford. Author. Speaker. Patriotic american. Want to pay tribute to our cochair. So when President Trump came in with secretary matus in 2017 and the National Security strategy 2017 they said essentially terrorism is an abiding concern with the rise of the greatest threats that we face also with secretary matus Defense Strategy report. First of all thank you for being here and thank you for setting us up i have not read the agreement in chinese either. [laughter] and nick, thank you for your leadership. Whenever you have the reemergence of a rivalry, it is a different kind of challenge. Because great power rivalry brings with it a whole array of tools on the side of the other side whether military power or economic might. So after the collapse of the soviet union we thought we were done with great power rivalry. There was a sense everybody would integrate into the washington consensus that at least what look like capitalism maybe even democratic capitalis capitalism. The russians seem to be on that path and there were those that believed by the integration of china into the International Economy we would see the liberalization of chinese politics. You said earlier the expectation of cooperation with china i think really it was integration with china. Now you see frustration with that with the russian and chinese challenges are different. Russia is a power without the full array of the assets when is the last time you bought something that was made in moscow . That was not made of petroleum . By the way you may buy it in france and look at china as a rising power but the emergence of the great rivalry is different than what i thought thong what i think we thought we would be facing. So this is probably the greatest National Security challenge that we have. Look at what the Trump Administration is facing we have to work with china eventually we have to work on Climate Change or go back or stabilize the Global Economy to resist those pandemics like we see this week. On the other hand they are the biggest strategic competitor. We have a military battle underway. Then with the secretary of state we disagree with them on hong kong, taiwan, and western china. How do you balance essential cooperation we must have and competition . The problem is this policy requires nuance and americans are not good at nuance it was ideal in many ways what was bad for the United States was good for the soviet union. In fact at no time was more than 1 percent of soviet gdp was accounted for by international trade. A completely isolated economy it didnt matter we had isolated it further through restrictions meaning that they could not participate in the Technological Progress around the world it was self isolating because going all the way back the soviet union didnt want to integrate. Fastforward to china. The expectation everybody saw a big train coming down the tracks and they said thats integrate that into the system rather than let it over run which china has admitted to the wto, they had a schedule when china had not yet conformed its laws and practices to the wto one of my jobs as secretary was to explain to the russians why they were not in the wto and russia was. The only answer you could give is there economy matters. So we have these expectations of those that have been frustrated and now what concerns me with the new ones there will be an overreaction to our disappointment that our notion of how china would integrate would not pan out. So then we have to challenge where we need to challenge we have to have a very good interview like freedom of navigation coming up to the line but not up to the South China Sea with an accident. We have to speak up when there are people in hong kong about their rights and make sure the chinese understand that we have an obligation to help taiwan defend itself should there be a unilateral provocation. We have to say to the chinese, this is where i agree completely with the Trump Administration unfair trading practices that you are developing country is not acceptable it is not acceptable to steal intellectual property its not okay to privilege National Champions were to use your joint venture of intellectual property it is not fair to have whole segments of your economy close to foreign competition. On that we will call you and i hope phase two because phase one did not get out a lot of these practices for a lot of reasons. But eventually Chinese Industrial policy has to be on the table because china is not playing by their rules. To huge economy and it does disadvantage others. We will have to call it where we have to if we call it a pandemic i hope we get the cooperation that we need or with Climate Change we cannot solve the climate problem without china being a part of that solution. Frankly on some issues like north korea, we have to continue to deal with china. This will require nuance and the visibility of the way we deal with the china challenge and that is hard, i will lack. I will ask a few questions and then we will take some questions for you and i have worked together im not trying to go back and cast judgment but no matter who gets elected in november whether trump for a second term or democrat for a first term, should we go back to some version of tpp . That was 40 percent of trade of democratic freemarket countries that had weight against China Program actually agree with President Trumps toughness on china. My own view he would have been better off aligned with the eu and japan on trade. Do we need to go back to have some weight in this fight . We certainly need to have a strategy that aligns with our strategies of china. I will give you one example. The technological decoupling taking place with china. And the technological decoupling is taking place. Whenever the United States, japan, europ states, japan, europe, india, wr differences we might have about privacy and the internet, pales in comparison to our differences with china on issues of privacy. We really do have two intranets it will have to be to they are irreconcilable hours you can say what you think or talk to who you please within limits you can see and view anything you want. That is under control in china that is irreconcilable. We need to realize we have more in common than not so think about trade policy. I would rather be aligned with others who have relatively open economies we say you have to change your industrial policy but we have to be careful how we do it. Take yahweh as the example i was a major proponent not having huawei in my network at the Chinese Company but do i really want to say you cannot sell components to huawei that they cant sell headsets . Of my now creating a situation where i ask other countries to choose between the United States and their commercial interest in china. We have to be very careful how hard we push but what do we have in common to deal with rising china . I think we will do better. As all of us travel in east asia every single neighbor of china no matter how friendly or aligned say dont make us choos choose. At least dont make us choose visibly and audibly. I think with the right incentives they will choose correctly. Let me say one other thing about raising china. There ought to be a way to look for those moments when chinas rise can be accommodated. Very specifically a few years ago chinese came up with the idea of the asia Infrastructure Investment bank. They were going around telling everybody the world bank standards, hiring people from the world bank, i think the Obama Administration i think it could have been a moment to say thats a great idea. We all need infrastructure that start in afghanistan. Lets make it transparent. It would have been a way to say we are not trying to block your rise because you are a rising power, but here is a healthy way to play into the International Economy and we said nobody should join it. It will come. One compete with Bretton Woods and then the british joined. When they joined now you are by yourself. So we need to look for those places where chinas rise could be accommodated that is use one useful with the internet. In the military sphere we worked very closely with the george w. Bush administration to build up our strategic relationship with indy on india. That we have a distinct advantage we have allies and the chinese do not. We started at the assistant secretary of state level australia, japan and india and the United States talking how we could enhance our political foreignpolicy military cooperation. And the secretary of state and at the secretary of defense level is this how we think about the Strategic Military cooperation . Not to fight but limit them. We dont have to say fight china but we are supporting the principles of freedom of navigation from what you mentioned. We have to be careful how we describe such things. Japan is a treaty ally. We dont have to force the issue of people coming to formal alliance with us. And then to meet these countries. And that no candidate in the 2016 election including the secretary of state who had negotiated, supported the tpt tpp. I personally was very pleased for the tougher things that were said. Be actually did get a usmexico Canada Agreement but to take these things on new. I think its like the tpp but will not be that. And the strategic weight and in the next decade could be what we need to unite the democratic world. We have to take this one step at a time because maybe the trilateral of mexico in canada possibly. And the big multilateral trade agreement in the shortterm. One is a question every administration from the Clinton Administration on, how do we balance these objectives . To ask your common sense approach on the Global Economy yet they are our strongest competitor. Can we keep these competing interest in this relative balance . You end up balancing every day you go to china with the human rights issues but china is a grownup country and they are quite aware to secretary of state you dont have to undermine the southern areas but i dont think we buy anything by pretending we dont care. I dont think we get anywhere pretending we dont care about social control on the internet. It is a balancing act every day and the chinese understand that. And after three and a half days and i was left with the thought and chinas prestigious string we are a strong country and the soft power. That is a softball to my friend. Interviewed secretary rice two years ago i asked her the following question. What are you worried about . I thought i was asking about putin or president xi and you said we have lost her selfconfidence. You didnt mean in a political way but as a country. But we can compete with china. I like going back with ronald regan because his acceptance whether the soviet union was always on the basis of american strength so its important that we recognize it is a rising power and you think about the demographics that they face. By the way you could get into authoritarian envy they can get things done. They build roads. You can build an airport in the time it takes to get a permit to be a hairdresser in the United States. [laughter] this is all true. But authoritarians also make bad decisions efficiently so if you years ago they decided population control was a problem now we have a one child policy it is brutally carried out now 34 million chinese men dont have mates. s if youre going to be omnipotent you better be omniscient and most human beings are not so authoritarians make a lot of mistakes. We stumble around in democracies with all kinds of voices but now we make bigger mistakes so look at our strength. I will give you three that the china challenge could cause us to undermine. First, i understand china has a National Ai Strategy and quantum computing strategy please let have a national us strategy. We have only succeeded because we have multiple places of which innovation takes place and the person that sits in a garage and comes up with nobody else has ever thought of. And pushed from the top down it will not work in the United States and not china but surely not United States. Dont try to out china, china africa i dont mind we can discuss how to put this back together but something out of washington will not work so as undersecretary for research and engineering he testified in congress of 1978 or 1979. What is the future of personal computing cracks one of the most technologically sophisticated people that i know. If the use of personal computers was driven. So lets not try to have a national strategy. So the openness of society. I have watched as pressure has grown on university not to admit Chinese Students who are the front tier laboratories like stanford or mit or harvard im sorry i meant to mention harvard that was an oversight. [laughter] but you hear this and i have said to Us Government agencies dont try to turn agency mondays universities and twin Intelligence Agency if they work with the pla dont give them the visa and do not admit them but if youre undermining the openness that is at the core of universities to have a clash between universities and the government that are at the heart of Silicon Valley and the Research Triangle in North Carolina and the final one i hope we dont undermine is we are a place where the best and brightest want to come because it doesnt matter where you are from where you were going. You could come from hard circumstances and do great things but the key to that is a high quality education. They can do nothing worse. So unless those kids have a chance to participate and that was picked up by immigrants as well add a dinner to say do you know why the United States will always lead cracks because if you are a Young Software engineer you might want to go to japan you cannot be german or japanese. You can be american on day number one and be ceo. So if we refocus on our strength theres no country in the world that can ultimately compete with us. But if we take a page from their book and try to replicate what they do and thats how they will succeed thats why i said its our confidence that is our greatest challenge. Need this to say i think the entire group is an agreement. Beautifully said in the red blue north south we dont talk enough about our strength. General matus now a single one dash and talks exactly the way that you did and said one more thing before questions United States has two powers in the world the power of intimidation of the marine corps and army and navy and inspiration and he said that is the power and the secret sauce of the United States. Absolutely it is. You go around the world people are grateful for our economy sometimes they are a little intimidated but the fact we have men and women in uniform and they are appreciated by people but really whats appreciated is the central notion of the United States that you can come from humble circumstances and do great things. We as americans no longer believe that is true. Because really it isnt. If i can look at your zip code and tell you if i get a good education i cannot tell you it doesnt matter. I wouldnt use the language the president has used, but i do think there was a lesson in the 2016 election for those of us who have been part of that globalizing elite. Step up to the plate. Those who dont share our values try to step up to the plate or nobody does and then youve got the chaos and the jungle that we saw play out in world war i and world war ii until the United States and its allies decided that there was a better way. Questions and comments for secretary rice. We will have a microphone comi coming. National Economic Security alliance. How do we counter activities that we see the chinese have onlchinese heavilyin gage did we overtaking control of dramatic materials that we need ports around the world where the military is concerned we are not going to be able to go into them because the chinesthatbecause tk of south and the latest that we saw in australia where they try to get involved in elections they are going to see more and more of that activity around the world how do we counter that . Im glad you brought up to the election issues because the chinese are as big a problem is not a bigger problem so getting our act together and doing something about it. One of the problems we have is the infrastructure is not owned by the government is owned privately, so when we learned that the russians were doing what they were doing through facebook, for instance, we needed t to the corporations between the intelligence agencies and the private sector and the level of trust isnt very high particularly where i live in Silicon Valley and the government, but we need that kind of cooperation if we are going to respond to these kind of issues. The idea that the chinese would go in and give financing for the port for an Infrastructure Project and then when the country cant pay it back but the chinese somehow own control of it i dont think this works very well for the century. I think actually it is really well known exactly what they are doing. In some african countries where the Environmental Standards where the health and Safety Standards have caused hr accidents and min and mind his e that seems to the light of day sometimes truth is your best option at propaganda and one of the most effective things we did the chinese use two essentially lie about the level of pollution in beijing and our embassy put out a barometer that measured the particulars and then pretty soon chinese citizens were getting their own act that wouldve told them what the air quality really was and the government hathat thegovernmentg about it is. Sometimes we dont use the ability to put pressure on the e countrys path to sign on to a bad deal. We dont mean to mimic it but there is a build act and it has bipartisan support democrats and republicans support it. I think it has the right strategy which would he want people to do is have systems that can and send. We cant build the infrastructure between nebraska and kansas so we are not going to build worldwide infrastructure, but what we can do is incentivize them to have high enough standards. The president of liberia told president bush wants i really want American Companies in here and he said why and she said because you have something called the foreign corrupt practices act and when ministers signed an agreement, then that is where that is going, to that project. Thank you very much for a brilliant presentation. President trump is renowned as a businessman. Hes approaching foreignpolicy in a businesslike fashion. It appears that if you pay and dont pay. Its why are we still in germany and how does that philosophy fit into what you were saying that if we are withdrawing there is no return on investment how does that keep us engaged in being the player on the global scene. The policy i do this and you do that doesnt work that way and you build larger relationships and so forth that we also know that all of us went around the world telling them to pay up. If you look at the numbers, we do pretty well do they give the speech at nato how about that 2 . So i dont really blame the president for saying into nato you want our support i probably wouldnt have threatened not to defend them, but it may be you need to get peoples attention on some of these and. If you look at the American Alliance structures, i spoke to all war colleg colleges a cof years ago for the Exchange Program and there were 49 countries represented in that room. When it comes right down to it, i think that they would rather have analyzed and not and if you are the big power you may have to put up with a little bit more than you would like. I have to say on nato a. Was cheering them on the way. I am compelled to say this. From brussels they wanted article five for the first time in history and you said to me i needed instructions to agree to it. Article five had never been invoked and because we really didnt actually have a commander of the United States we were dependent in those early hours, so. Japanese, new zealand, its been an incredible show of support. That is the difference between us and the authoritarian party. In the cold war in helping the countries of Eastern Europe finding a kind of northstar. We got the military reform and a lot of people were i think the nato relationship helped to smooth the transitions so its been an incredibly valuable alliance. It still does need more in the way of transformation and that does take money. We have time for two more questions. We have a stanford undergrad and this past summer she was a compelling speaker. It was in support of hong kong protesters while the team was in china and i think it is a response to that entire policy to stand up for rights or poor freedom of speech and things like that. I wonder what they would say about the appropriate response. With the journal manager, they basically have support for the hong kong demonstrators and the chinese badly overreacted in all kind of things and im a great fan but the initial response i probably would have said maybe quietly you are always telling us not to interfere in your internal affairs. Killing an american want to say is interfering in our internal affairs. Americans get to say what they wish and i thought that they were in a stronger position than they realized because the nba is wildly popular in china and its not just yamane, it is because they love the sport in china if they threatened to take them off the air, i would say be my guest and lets see how long it is before they are satisfied watching the National Team play. I think that it was in a stronger position and sometimes you have to force the issue. Dont be so diplomatic. [laughter] the microphone will come right up to you i to you it wile about second is. I am a big admirer of the secretary of state and i managee american citizen and originally worked in the chinese governme government. I want to mention every Chinese Government official, every business ceo, every wealthy family in china now through high school and into college and then to higher degrees that is a fact in the second is the Kennedy School alumni in china and i think in the past there is a Training Program in the school into some of them already reach this level and that they cannot say certain things within the decisionmaking categories, they are very powerful, and also there is a lot of resentment among the people and among the local government officials on the road to the policy because where does china get enough money to continue and why you dont find. Let me say a point about your students coming here. I recognize we face certain challenges with some students who may learn things here and go back home and consider a technology transfer. I understand that but i also understand that i want Chinese Students to experience. I want them to experience what its like to study in a place where you can study what you wanted when you want. When they were asked what is the thing that impressed you the most they said i could read anything i wanted to. It sometimes goes to your point we dont completely understand the power of an open society. I understand we face these challenges but i hope it doesnt take the form of cutting ourselves off from generations of students that would be better served if they had a chance. Thats an important point and i would make the prediction i agree with a College Professor as well and secretary rice i think theres going to be a big debate between those of us on the University Campus and see the power of our inspiration and some of the National Security community that want to legislate certain students from certain countries cant come here and we ought to have an open discussion but its right in front of us. Do you have any wisdom to give us some hope here. The American People are tired and couldnt wait to take the soviet union and unify germany and liberated and exceed the ale al qaeda that did 9 11 and cant somebody else do this. We were in the oval office in august of 2008 and president bush was looking at some polls that were not so kind and he said i dont believe that they are based on the popular. Its been war, terrorism, i did say im tired of them, to back. I know there is a kind of weariness with world leadership, but i also think that Americans Care he sometimes contradictory notions in their head. We are tired and we want somebody else to do that but if there is nobody else to do it, im not going to watch people beheaded on television. Im not going to watch children choking on nerve gas or as Vladimir Putin threatened the baltic states. It i think an american president can actually determine which of those impulses he or she wishes to stimulate in the American People, and given how much we have benefited from an International System that at least in the half but we were able to be more dominant really be peeve achieved in our valuesd helped us carry out our interest i hope that american president s as we talk about the problems we need to solve comes we can be Strong Enough at home but so that we dont lose sight of the extraordinary last 75 years or so of what they have achieved. Thank you for reminding us what made us great. Thank you. [applause] we will continue this conversation and my thanks to secretary rice for being with us. We will have to 15 minute discussions. We have democrats and republicans in the group, you just heard from two republicans and now you will hear from two democrats, Kathleen Hicks and Kurt Campbell. Not a household name, but Condoleezza Rice is. In my humble estimation you are going to hear more from her in the future. Right now the henry kissin sure senior Vice President at csi as a center for Strategic International studies and the Henry Kissinger chair and she was the senior official in the Obama Administration is the deputy undersecretary in charge of the strategic planning. And i think shes one of the smartest people in washington thinking how america positioned itself to 18 hour strategic predominance we have two ambassadors from europe, ukraine, austria and also around the world we have the ambassador of texaco, so it is a pleasure. There is a chapter in the book that hes written and i want to talk about the military challenges we face to remind me of a former secretary defense right in front of us but has the right on these issues. We spent the last two years on these issues. Number one, held we get singapore and alicia and especially india to make sure that there is a way to end the indo pacific of the free and democratic countries to limit chinas military ambitions. The other thing we talked about was a huge competition is on us for the future of the digital age, quantum computing, machine learning. So, just to open this up, are you confident that the engineering and the talent in the universities and the Tech Companies big dont just complete with the chinese but retain our dominance, or do you think that is a risk . First thank you for having me here and then mike walker. To answer questions, yes i am confident to weekend compete and succeed but i am not confident that we are undertaking the whole nation effort required to do that so that includes things like smart immigration policy and some of what secretary rice and you were speaking about. We are not in this workforce that we need we have to rely on immigrants perfect counter play to the way the u. S. Has approached its challenge to we have to invest the dollars even though we are not china. Avenues have approached the areas of emerging technology. People have to want to work with the Defense Department. They have to demonstrate the United States and china are not the equivalent of today. We do not spy on our citizens and we are not using facial recognition software. It. Particularly in the day and age people havent had military service or National Service of any kind there is a purpose to patriotism. In your paper in the buck if you look at the chapters, you talk about the operations and also the multiplicity of the challenges that we face. Obviously we are facing a competition from the naval supremacy in the south and East China Sea going up the chain. We are talking about the air superiority of cyber superiority and assets in space. Educate us if you will about the full realm of threats and how we can best respond. You are right the way that i would put it the chinese and russians are different but they both have a fluidity working from what you might call routine statecraft scaled up to the way they think about Strategic Nuclear for instance keep abilities and everything in between that we dont yet know how to similarly move fluidly across them. Screening of challenges, so we have a toolkit that is down to the diplomacy and although we are having trouble right now in the state department because we dont have ambassadors and people are leaving and then at the hig highend we have the military piece im going to come down to that in the middle as you point out theres all these other tactics into the toolkit right now is a little bare. We have sanctions with diplomacy basically sanctions and military power where these other actors are good about including information and cyber approaches, this in permission etc. Is the biggest challenge the United States faces, we dont currently have the concept of operations that effectively buried the way in which the theory of victory i think its how we put it, how we expect the chinese to fight and the United States could be capable all along the spectrum of achieving its strategic Interest Despite that and that requires leaving out things like space opera very relying into the military row of course but also the commercial sector that is highly reliant on these space assets and cyber as you point out where we both have military requirements and a lot of threats could face the homelanthat could taste thehomen over cyber and on and on so its the concept of operations thats building up a capability. The Defense Department one of the bigges biggest challenge isf coursofcourse is always managine top line of investment against the pressure of continuing year over year legacy system investments versus creating some room for research and development into new Technology Areas and then having the kind of effectively marrying capabilities. David was a key part of our meeting and grad School Classmate of mine also Johns Hopkins and greatest golfer. I want to bring you into this conversation. One of the things we discovered in the report two years ago on technology and the digital age, a number of experts told us following, that within ten to 20 years, the military technology that we visualize as representing power, the 35 might be outmoded and we might be in a situation of 100 years ago when the russians and poles rode into the First World War on horseback and then the tank and aircraft appeared for the first time in global history on the battlefield. Can you envision by 2035 that we are going to be in that kind of a world that the fight is going to be in space and the fight is to be in cyberspace and not really much on the land and sea. Is that where we are headed . That might be too deterministic. We dont quite know and neither did the folks in prior generations, so this is about how to manage an estimate and where you make your bed, what is behind return and low investment so that requires a continual assessment. My answer to you is throughout the hard reality o, the United States basically has fought off a little bit structure. We are building carriers. It will cost a lot of money to decommission them. Theres a lot of myth busting to be done about the speed with which you can drastically shift without a significant investment flow coming in which is Something Like a major war. I dont anticipate that. Instead i think what we need to be focused on is a rapid experimentation and prototyping and things like Unmanned Systems that have been around but only for decades that we know how we can do more of it and it can help you. You have to test those things and exercise with your allies in the pacific and then start focusing on that investment stream and what can i divest from that allows the more relevant to their bodies. Space and cyber absolutely would be essential. Space is extremely expensive as well. It takes out a big chunk of money, but these other areas i absolutely would be the last one to say that we dont have to worry about the war on the ground or the maritime challenges. Those things can continue, we just have to be ahead of the curve and the way in which they are involving. Heres a question for democrats and republicans whether President Trump has a second term or Vice President joe biden, for the political will to meet the challenge, some people have come to the meetings of serious scientists and people say we need to treat this problem of competition with china the way we treat it from sputnik on. The competition in the soviet union. Has it reached that level in your judgment . We are smart to do that now its just it isnt going to be a widget. It isnt going to be primarily military also because military elements. I think it is going to be overall about the competitiveness of the economy, the military and foreignpolicy. The Alliance Network of course it bears repeating the strategic advantage for the markets, for market share if we want to compete and obviously on the military side we have more dollars together and again if the Research Base as it already has internationalized whether you are talking about biotech or whatever area, robotics, all of that is being built in germany, certainly in the u. S. But also germany, canada, australia, japan. Lets leverage all of that and think strategically about the advantages so that we can have a way of engaging china effectively. I just got a twominute warning. I want to ask david was a major part of the liberation and has written a paper that you have in front of you, you understand china and used to be that the chinese. How do you react to the presentation at what is the ande probability for both of you if the United States either ends up taking part and what is the probability on the other side of china outpaces itself . Thank you. You kind of put me on the spot. I dont disagree with anything just said. My own contribution i would add one other dimension. Its not an elusive concept or dirty word we need to embrace it if across multiple domains and several of those are in the security sphere. The other thing i would like to add is to my mind one domain that is going to be crucial is the information domain by which i dont been cyber combining Google Public diplomacy and he goeitgoes back to what the secry and you were talking about in terms of the competition of ideas. How is it going to play out in security, economics and others. Its going to be about the values into system and what we stand for so weve got to go on offense and a against the activities worldwide. They are trying to control the global narrative about their country. This is a very complex area. It isnt exactly gray zone in military terms. We are talking about an in all f government approach. We agree our paper does include in our review of both the tactics are and adversaries in this case. On the u. S. Side, huge piece. One of the three key areas to reinvest those being information, more on Cyber Capabilities and economic incentives. Whether usia reserve this remains to the point that we have to have affirmative narrative interactions to follow the words. The position between international and domestic is very blurry and here is where you need to not look at the state and public diplomacy, you need to be thinking about what is the approach through dhs or elsewhere in the government for sharing accurate and truthful information to combat to the extent it has in the past and as the fbi director said we could be facing here in 2020 we know that is right at the heart of the core interest. We need to have a way to protect our society. You can see the competence and the death of the public service. Thank you very much. [applause] we promised that we would close by 2 00 and we have one more conversation. I want to say one word about my friend, Kurt Campbell. Weve been working together off and on and friends for 30 years. If theres anyone in the United States this authority they or interest in the pacific i dont know who that person is and someone that is a strong proponent of the power kurt has spent his life thinking about this competition and im glad hes on our side. We are down to the last of our rapidfire conversation and we couldnt have anyone better to do it with venue. Again, needing no introduction he was the assistant secretary of state for asia for obama, the author of the pivot was later renamed and we will not heckle you on that one and a slightly less well known he was the first person to get me involved in the exit Strategy Group so thank you for being so inclusive. Let me start for you the same question i asked. What is the perfect relationship with china . I want to say a word of thanks not only to nick that leads to Strategy Group. Im sure that you will have a minute to say so thanks for putting this together. It is a general acknowledgment im not sure that is exactly right. There is a general dissatisfaction across partisan lines for wome elements of the. China relationship and there are some bromides about working with allies. At the very earliest stages of thinking about a comprehensive strategy towards china and that is often obscured by relatively simple rhetoric about the complexity of the challenge part of it is a country gone on such a strategic as we have gone on. Its fundamentally for the last 20 years thats one of the reasons we are so grateful and containing the group but much of the strategic elite has been focused on afghanistan and iraq and iran and pakistan and the attitude on that would be something along the lines of you go this is so important, you focus on these issues and then in 20 years weve will sit downd talk about the way things are going. So we are in a big catching up to do. Its a recognition in the United States that will have t but wile across the board quickly. Its incredibly exciting and strategic debate about diplomacy and technology and military issues. It is more challenged than people realize the idea is we were talking about chinas arrival on the international scene. The biggest question people are careful to talk about is whether we are in the midst of a hurtling decline across the board in fact we are committed to play a strong robust role in asia and the world Going Forward your paper was called acacia navigates to the rivalry. The stereotype is, and i do this when i traveled to asia you will hear the countries say they would like to keep you as a Security Partner it is the number one trading partner of far more countries around the world is just no way that they were going to get a cold war its an accurate diagnosis and so i think that too often you will ask people about this and the residue of thinking is where there was a line that ran geographically through europe and you could define and society which side is with us they dont run across borders, they run through countries they will find ministries and groups of people much more inclined to thinking about asia and china that recognize for the country to survive they need a strong relationship in the United States and others. What i try to write in my paper is what is happening in asia right now is one of the most interesting periods of strategic orientations of the middle powers in asia, australia, india, japan are implementing an incredibly diverse strategy which is not as well understood by us so they are not saying we are with you what the other side. They are doing several things simultaneously. Any in the United States right now that understands theres enormous risks you might be slated for trade violations, you might find yourself on the crosshairs trying to develop relationships to the United States secretly hopeful that we will go back to something that is more recognizable but also be leaving that fundamentally the system has ended this is not just a phenomenon. Second, they try to work with likeminded states, since you are seeing is the kind of linkages between australia and india and japan and others. Frankly we couldnt have imagined. Every country is trying to increase their own independent capabilities and his apparent absence pending is a higher nation now than any other place of the world, that wasnt the case five or ten years ago and we are seeing dramatic increases in the budget. Some countries want more ability to shape their own futures. They are also thinking very carefully about International Organizations but at the core of the strategy its doing what you can to build a strong relationship with the you cant overreact and say no, no, we want more of number one and number five. Weve got to understand you are playing a longer game. One of the things highlighted in the conclusions you will see in so many respects the interesting thing is if you look at asia and the United States is the the consistent belief of decades that we have in decline after vietnam and after the cold war ended by Global Economic crisis and each time we have managed to recreate ourselves and to in ce forward in many cases surprising our closest friends and allies who was a deep believer for a decline in so we are going to have to do that again to make it clear that we have staying power and we welcome competition and engagement and even the dirty word, trade in asia that will keep us for the next 50 years. I think i made this point david left off because it fits right into your chapter. You wrote that u. S. Strategy is often more public and a rally to press and china is more sophisticated in its influence operations and i will give you one concrete example of fast tracking chinese goods through customs and all sorts of small things. Should we be giving more on Information Operations and how can our strategy to be more sophisticated . It isnt easy in the public debate. When i say that the strategy is more sophisticated, i think we have to be careful we did that with japan and we did it with the former soviet union and now with china so i would be the first to say they have huge quotationlimitations to their ol approach it is too early to tell but im trying to follow the debate inside of china. Its a profound group of people that believe nothing is left and they are at least a month behind. But every day appears more is coming out have questions about whether local provincial leaders took steps to alert Health Officials but to the larger questions one of the things you have to read. At the same time you cant underestimate how important these Infrastructure Projects are a and what they are bringing to the countries surrounding china. I had the good fortune to be, when he was Vice President , as the Court Officer along with several of us have spent quite a lot of time around the United States and got to see him in action. He is not very interested in economics but super interested in infrastructure. We had to take them around some airports that were not our finest and i remember him looking at one of these. They took into an airport in iowa because he wanted to reconnect with the family. The typical thing that well wel face in certain airports but he was very focused on infrastructure and many countries around asia are incredibly grateful. Yes, of course they worry about it then but fundamentally they are welcoming of this and i remember i told the story this summer they do some very good work in asia but i was on an island and the ambassador picked me up and we were excited and got in her car and we were driving on this nice road and she said how do you like the road. This is a product of the millennial challenge. I said this is great. We were incredibly excited and driving down and we get about a mile from town and then we are in this horrible rot and she said we didnt have the funds so we are going to get a second millennium challenge grant. That matters. So when it says Something Like malaysia or pakistan it isnt working they are not interested, i think that is completely wrong many others would say look, if the roads are smoother and run faster it is good for all of us and for the world economy. I agreed with that. In many respects, when you ask the question of what the strategy should be, if most of these have a solid stable relationship in the United States, it gives them more confidence and greater ability to navigate their own future and status in china so that is what they are looking for and that is a good outcome for us as well. The bottom line would be dont make people choose. That is a really western european. The key is to never ask the question. Never be in a situation where anyone would suspect you wouldnt be completely behind them. Assume that they are going to work with you and configure your relationships in such a way that you are the dominant player in the decisionmaking and understand what your limitations are. Its incredibly hard and its also as a player in asia but one thing i ask all of us it is not an arriving power, it is a dominant power in asia but most countries quietly will say that its the dominant player. Being respectful of peoples time, i want to take one or maybe two questions for the audience. Thanks very much. I write the mitchell report and want to ask a question that relates all the way through this section and that is if we were to identify it would seem to me we would develop alliances and strong alliances and that historically china has not. My question to mr. Campbell does that still hold true today and if there is a way in which you can do it, how do you rate the strength of our alliances in the year 2020 visavis a decade a ago. That is a good question and i would say that our ultimate strength is not a just and our alliance. I do not want to quibble with your point, but in fact we have created what ive describe i wos an operating system in asia it is our alliances which are strong and its our commitment to values and human rights. It is a Strong Defense commitment that is stable and understood that weve worked so consistently on in congress and as the secretary of defense was honored to be able to serve with him. Its also a strong support in concepts that seem arcane like peaceful resolution of disputes and some of the stuff we were saying Middle America poohpoo poohpoohs. That commitment that we have built is our single greatest contribution that has created the greatest experience in the cumulation of 12 and maintenance of peace and stability of any other period in history and the challenge is being challenged by two countries right now. Like all rising states into the elements of the system but want to redo it in its own image and the challenge we can meet and affect at the second challenge that is much more pernicious and if it comes from the United States. So, the greatest question about our operating system comes from the political establishment who believe that asians are chipping us and our security alliances are unbalanced and trade doesnt work and fundamentally we should be more than a lateral. At the core of the biggest challenge comes from the Unitedd States anunitedstates invited ay would say that this is a trump phenomenon. I am a democrat i can see in my own party those that are raising questions about where we doing this. So, in many respects those of us that are liberal internationalists it is like being in a room in it is like to jump countries you are not really sure who is going to support your belief, the kind of things that several of us around the room have devoted our lives to so that is a long answer to that question but that is the way that i would think about it. Lets just hope that we are not an endangered species. I will leave it on that note of bipartisanship and we can all go back to watching the impeachment proceedings. Thank you for being here first to kurt. [applause] let me close with a couple of small remarks and that is we obviously could only feature a very small number of these fantastic papers that are in the bucket on the website and on about. Please read them. People put a lot of effort into them and there is a lot of me nuance. None of this would have happened without our team so can we please get a big round of applause to jonathan and leah and john