President obama hosted a trilateral meeting in march in the hague, where he and president obama park and Prime Minister abe consulted on the north korean threat and other concerns. Those groupings are based on shared values like democracy, human rights, and respect for international law. And theyre based also on shared interests, both in the pacific and across the globe. And the group that ill be joining tomorrow, ahead to new delhi, is a periodic u. S. Japanindia trilateral consultation. So these are just a few examples that attest to the possibility of plurilateral, multilateral engagement. They attest to the utility of a flexible geometry involving northeast Asian Countries with the United States. So in that vane, we welcomed president parks call last month z resumption of the trilateral Foreign Ministers meeting among china, the republic of korea and japan. I think theres a widespread hope and expectation that after the meeting of the three Foreign Ministers, a meeting of the leaders will also resume. And that would be a very good sign for peace and stability in northeast asia. Regardless of format, i think we can all see the critical importance of communications among the Major Players in northeast asia, china, the republic of korea, japan, as well as with the United States. Because we need to build on areas where our interests converge, and manage the issues in the areas where our interests may conflict. Our collaboration to counter ebola, as i mentioned, is a good example. So is the Crisis Management mechanism that china and japan agreed to in principle last month in beijing, which we hope will become operational soon. Conversely, last year, the abrupt declaration of an air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea was an object lesson in how not to handle a sensitive issue pertaining to overlapping national interests. The coming year, 2015, presents us with a particularly sensitive set of issues. The anniversaries well mark. Its the 70 anniversary of the end of world war ii. The 50th anniversary between the normalization between seoul and tokyo. 1945 sea the creation of the u. N. It saw the dropping of the atomic bomb in hiroshima and nagasaki. The United States occupation of japan. Koreas independence and also its division. Nationalist chinas decision to recognize mongolia as an independent country, a country that next year also celebrates 25 years of democracy. Navigating all these anniversaries, working through these remembrances, this is beginning to require restraint. Its beginning to require good judgment. Its going to require political and diplomatic skill. And frankly, i welcome your advice and your counsel from this conference on not just how to handle the anniversaries, but how to build on them as well. Because the record of the past 70 years in northeast asia has been one of extraordinary progress. And as ive said before, progress in 2015, particularly in the relationship between tokyo and seoul, and the relationship between tokyo and beijing, in turn, historical millstones into historical milestones. China, south korea, japan are Major Players in the regions security and economy. All three are increasingly active and influential players on the global stage. Far from asia for the asians, its now asia for the world. We cant afford to have the three major countries in northeast asia operating in anything less than a fully cooperative manner with themselves and with us, let alone working at cross purposes. One important way to celebrate good relations among neighbors is support for the well established regional order. That includes utilizing apec. That includes using the east asia summit and other asean centers. That is built on the Strong Foundation of u. S. Alliances and security partnerships that have kept the region safe and stable. This architecture in a system that the u. S. Has championed, has fostered trade and investment. Economic and political linkages. Educational and technological exchange. And rapid development, enriching countries across the region. Its helped lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. And as each country in northeast asia has developed and found its social and economic and political footing, first japan, and then the republic of korea, it has paid back the system in spades. And worked to further strengthen that system and expand benefits. Now its chinas turn. Just look at the period from Richard Nixons historic visit to the normalization of relations 35 years ago, to china to the accomplishments of president obamas visit in beijing just last month. For decades, the United States has supported chinas peaceful rise. Weve worked to avoid strategic rivalry, and to narrow, or at a minimum, to manage our differences. But chinas rise is by no means the only Significant Development in the region. The entire asia pacific is changing. India is not just looking east, india is now acting east. Asean is becoming more integrated. Indonesias democracy is flourishing. Burmas reformers are pushing and pushing ahead. Americas rebalance continuing and our alliances are growing more capable. This is all to the good. But the shifting regional dynamics generate tensions as well. Tensions that pose potentially serious risks to stability and prosperity to all of us. Is the construction of manmade outposts and the continual encroachment of ships and planes and oil riggs, is that going to be the way that asians deal with maritime boundary disputes . Will aseans longstanding effort to negotiate a basic code of conduct in the South China Sea require another decade of diplomacy . The sharpening of tensions over the maritime boundaries in the region underscore the importance of maintaining a regional system based on adherence to rules, not adhesion to rocks. A system where claims are based on international law, not a sense of entitlement or muscle. A system based on interdependence and peaceful dispute. Management and resolution. But while changing dynamics drives some of the tensions, the greatest threat to the region is a chronic one, north korea. The dangerous outliar in asia. The good news is that north korea is an area where the u. S. And the rest of northeast asia cooperate closely. We do so because the risks posed to all of us by the dprks pursuit of Nuclear Weapons and int intercontinental ballistic missiles. We do so because of north koreas rejection of its international obligations, its broken promises, and its sudden provocations. I just gave a speech last week at an institution that will go unmentioned addressing north koreas illegal programs, its nuclear program, and its abominable human rights record. I wont reprise the whole policy laydown. Youre familiar with it. But i would mention something that happened at the event, namely the very first question i got from the audience was basically hey, chinas the problem here, right . I mean, suspect the problem that china is preventing progress on north korea . I gave an eloquent answer that can probably be boiled down to simply no. The fact is that china has sent us mistakable signals of its concern, and indeed its displeasure with north koreas policies. President xis decision to visit seoul before he had gone to pyongyang and never met with kim jong un speaks very loudly. Of course, the u. S. And some of our partners believe that theres more, much more that china can do to apply pressure, and i can attest that china believes theres a lot more that the u. S. Can do to engage diplomatically. But overall, i see a very broad alignment in strategic interests, in strategy, and a strong commitment to cooperation. Beijing, seoul, washington, tokyo are united, and russia as well on denuclearization of the korean peninsula. At the same time, we pursue a free and whole and Nuclear Weaponsfree korean peninsula, were working with our northeast asian partners in many other ways, because each of us has significant role to play in addressing the myriad and significant ongoing challenges we face in the world. In the still sluggish global economy, we are the engines of growth. Working within apec and the g20, were poised to do even more. Implementing the koreau. S. Free trade agreement. Negotiating bilateral investment treaty with china. Finishing the transPacific Partnership, the tpp with japan and others. All of these will provide a huge lift to the global economy. Chinas ftas, koreas ftas, trade proposals like rcep. These are all an important part of the conversation as well. The u. S. And china are the worlds greatest admiters of Greenhouse Gases, but a recent action on Climate Change on targets show were determined to address it. So do president obamas and Prime Minister abes pledges to the south korean host at Global Green Climate Fund of 3 billion and 1. 5 billion respectively. And our countries rnd and Manufacturing Capabilities will keep us at the forefront of the clean energy economy. We each have Public Health and Infectious Disease expertise, and tremendous experience from the bird flu and from the sars experience, and that helps ensure that our nations are key contributors to dealing with Ebola Response and its certain that well need to do more in the future. And were major providers of humanitarian assistance and Disaster Relief from syria to iraq to the philippines after super typhoon haiyan. Were also tackling the closely interrelated issues of food security, water security, energy security, challenges, for example, in the river basin, challenges in the pacific islands, challenges in africa. Our expertise, our capital, our efforts are needed to meet all of these challenges. I want to save some time for questions, so ill stop here, but my basic point is this. Whether it is plurilateral or trilateral or multilateral, the fact is we have entered the age of networks. Essentially, we have no choice but to interact and to collaborate. The major northeast asian powers and the United States need each other as much as the rest of the world needs us. It needs us to Work Together, needs us to jump start the global economy, to preserve regional stability, to enhance Global Security and protect a global environment. So if i can channel my former boss mike mansfield, the u. S. , northeast asia relations are the most important plirilateral relations in the world. Thats why youre having this conference. Keep up the good work. I very much look forward to hearing not just your questions, but in due course your conclusions. Thank you very much. [ applause ] on behalf of all of us, thank you very, very much for your really wideranging remarks. I loved your appeal for flexible geometry. Its what we know intuitively, but you have to practice it every day. Assistant secretary russell has volunteered to taking some questions, so i will recognize them as hands go up. Please keep them brief and identify yourself as well, beginning in the back. Joe bosco, formerly with the defense department. As the person who asked the question last week about chinas role in north korea, i wonder if you could elaborate on what seems to be a suggestion of moral equivalence, that china thinks we need to do more, that china thinks we need to do more. In the same speech, you said we bent over backwards to solve the north korea issue. Do you think china has bent over backwards or come anywhere near what the u. S. Has done . Well, i consider myself blessed to get two questions from you, and two consecutive speeches. Thank you very much. And its roughly the same question. I think the constructive and the useful way to look at this is in terms of common objectives. And a process to reconcile our strategies for getting there. The u. S. , with the republic of korea, is cooperating with china on the challenge of the grand peninsula. Were cooperating as well with other partners, including japan. We, the United States, have experimented with bilateral negotiations with north korea. I myself was part of the negotiating team led by bob galucci that ultimately reached an agreed framework, as is wellknown, north korea cheated on that deal. They welched on that deal. We have the distinguished bob einhorn in the room. Bob is the architect of an important agreement with the North Koreans on missiles that fell apart because the North Koreans will not honor their obligations. Weve tried quadrilateral talks. Certainly weve tried sicy eied talks. I just heard my friend and former boss and predecessor chris hill give a talk on his new book in which he describes if efforts and the frustrations of reaching an agreement with the North Koreans only to see it unravel as they start negotiating again from scratch and consider commitments the way that famously italians considered red lights, as merely a suggestion. Were not giving up. Because our objective, and id venture although diplomats arent supposed to do this, to speak for the chinese, saying this is a shared objective, is to find it peaceful path to halt, roll back, and ultimately eliminate north Koreas Nuclear and Nuclear Missile program and ambition. Of course we want to do this peacefully. The fact is, the simple and unfortunate fact is that thats not what north korea wants. North korea is laboring under the illusion that it can simultaneously pursue and solicit Economic Growth and assistance from the International Community while also preserving an ongoing program, it cant be done. And i venture to say that not only do leaders in seoul and tokyo share that view, but leaders in beijing as well. So we are embarked on a continual effort to sharpen the choice faced by north koreas leaders. The only path leaders. The only path to security and prosperity that north korea claims to seek is a path of denuclearization beginning with a freeze and that pay must run through negotiations. Now, we make on the basis of experience a distinction between talk and negotiations. Negotiations have to begin from an agreed premise that we are putting the issue of concern on the table, that we are entering into an effort to reach binding outcomes. Thats chronically been north koreas problem. The willingness to put forward significant benefits to north korea for honoring its obligations is not in question. That has not been a problem for us. Now the chinese in their recipe may use more dialogue. And less pressure. But fundamentally, we are both trying to bake the same cake. Its a peacefully denuclearized korean peninsula. Thank you. If i could follow on joes question, are we hearing a hint at least of the possibility that the u. S. Is thinking or rethinking what seems to be a policy of no bilaterals with the North Koreans unless denuclearization is agreed upon as the outcome . Just a second ago you said the talks have to agree in a sense whatever the outcomes are will be binding. Is that a nuance . Are you reading too much into that . Are we trying to look for a way to break, in a sense, the deadlock on bilaterals as long as denuclearization is the only goal well agree to talk about . Thanks. No. I dont think thats an accurate recharacterization of what i said or meant to say at least. The United States has never had or at least in most administrations we have been willing to speak directly to north korea. Certainly the Obama Administration has never hesitated to talk directly to the dprk. He believes though that given the stake that the republic of korea first and mother most has in the future of the korean peninsula, that any process with the dprk must include the republic of korea. I believe relations between washington and seoul are better than at any time certainly in my professional lifetime. I have placed tremendous importance on synchronizing and consulting with the republic of korea. We listened carefully to the thinking and initiatives coming out of president parks blue house. We also recognize that china, for a variety of reasons has a tremendous influence to bring to bear and a significant role to play. As does japan, as does russia. And so the short answer is, no. We are not of the view that the pathway to a denuclearized peninsula is through bilateral u. S. Dprk negotiations that we seek must be, i believe, based on the significant agreements already reacheded and captured in the 2005 joint statement of the sixparty talks. Thank you very much for those clarifications. I think everyone appreciates that. Yes, in the back of the room over there. Sir, let me play a little devils advocate. Nobody from peking university wants to stand up. Let me see if i can play devils advocate on that. Negotiation of the United States is often like the wild west. The gangster who goes around armed to the teeth, shoots whoever shows up to oppose him. I havent seen that movie. Yeah. I saw them a long time ago. Im amazed the United States still seems to behave like that. Isnt there a need for the United States to also reduce its war mongering that it does all over the world while saying we want peace. Yes, the military option is there, if you dont accept our proposal were going to kill you. Given that kind of situation wouldnt you want to change some of your positions . First of all. Let me make clear that i came to this event unarmed. Secondly, as the child of peaceniks brought up going on ban the bomb marches and agitating for world peace, i share your objective of a peaceful and disarming world. The good news is the hill tear presence of the United States in the asiapacific region has been an extraordinary and essential force for growth, stability and peace. Thats something for which we can all be proud. Something for which we must all continue to work. With respect to china, im also proud to point to the very significant strives that the Obama Administration has made with the p are rc particularly under xijin ping. Improving and establishing a new level of military to military engagement dialogue and even cooperation. The pla navy participated in the rimpac, the pacific rim exercise for the first time. General dempsey, the secretary of defense visiteded beijing, elsewhere in china. Very successful, very important visits. Chinese military leaderers have reciprocateded. Just last month when we were in beijing, president obama and president xi announced two very significant agreements with regard to the notification of military exercises and standards of conduct for our naval ships at sea. This is very meaningful. Because as chinas military capability continues to grow dramatically, if not exponentially, as china s interests continue to grow dramatically, if not exponentially, and as china finds itself abutting, if sometimes butting up against the interests of its neighbors and the interests of the United States throughout the endopacific region, this kind of hill tear to military communication often in the form of hotlines and codes of conduct and confidentbuilding measures represent essential ingredients to maintaining stability and maintaining security in the 21st century. I will stay away from the wild west movies. I will leave it there. Thank you. Yes. Peking university. That gentleman said he wanted to play the devils advocate. First of all, peking University Professors arent devils. [ laughter ] secondly, we dont need an advocate. I just have one question for you. You know there are many people who talk about china should support the u. S. In its efforts to fight isis. What exactly does the Administration Hope that china can play a role in this regard . Thank you. Thank you very much. I preach appreciative of the work you have personally instituteded. This was a topic of conversation between our two leaders when president obama was in beijing and certainly within the two systems. I have joined secretary kerry in meeting with mr. Wong on this topic. There are different ways of parsing it. Uh i think the issue goes inside isil or eye sit. It pertains to the common interest that both china and the United States is in preventing the spread of radical jihadism. The interest in protecting the Global Infrastructure of finance and transportation from being utilized and hijacked by terrorist groups. Its our interest in preventing violent extremists from particularly those returning from conflict zones in the middle east from conducting operations from recruiting or from attacking us or our neighbors. And it also pertains to the objective we share on the necessity of sharing information and on coordinating. So the Chinese Government has indicated more than once that its not in the business of joining somebody elses coalition. Thats fine. But in the areas where we have a common interest and specifically in the region such as afghanistan or pakistan where we share an interest in helping to maintain security and helping to create indigenous capacity to defend against the threat of terrorism, we can, should, and are expanding our cooperation. Now china is increasingly faced with the large expansion of overseas citizens throughout the middle east. That gives china a new type of stake in the affairs of regions that perhaps 10, 20 years ago were of little concern to policy makers. China in its Western Province and western borders face it is threat from organizations like east turkmenistan independence movement, etim. This is not a theoretical proposition for china. It remains an area in which we want to cooperate. So the formula in looking at the issue is not the u. S. As demander and china aiding us. The correct formula is the objective identification of common interests, the pooling of information and resources, and the identification of area where is coordinated and in some cases join the collective action will prove to be most effective. You mentioned you will go to new delhi. Would you be good enough to say a word or two about what you see as the role of a major south asian country in east asia and since you emphasized the importance of regional structures. Now that india is more participatory in the asean regional forum, do you see further opportunities for india to play a constructive role in east asia . Thank you. Without a doubt, there is abundant space for india to play a greater and constructive role in the affairs of all of east asia including and particularly southeast asia. In the five years now that the u. S. Has been participating in the east asia summit. I have worked as the senior official involved and i have participated at both the Foreign Ministers level and in the leaders meeting in those discussions that included the indian leader including in november. I can attest that india brings an important perspective, an important contribution to the discussion among and economists are notorious for being meanerer than people in political science. Well be more rigid on the time limits here. I give my comments warning on that. The first speaker is professor shay. You have ten minutes, i believe. Thank you very much. Its good to be back to brookings. My honor and privilege. I want to talk about five different points. I will start with my talk about how effective rise of asia has been and what has been called for. What is major challenges to the formula. And i will briefly talk about korea, china, and japan in this context. Second part we talk about what kind of, when the change is facing and future costs. As we know china meaning based on the investment and base pded on the key ingredients from korea and japan, china is major power house assembling a lot of stuff, ascending to major destinations. That destination, the market has been u. S. And e. U. That has been a successful recipe. Thats been so far very much a winwin formula. This is under a severe challenge. This will be here for a long time. I always respond with a provocative tone. I dont believe that will happen. Because as someone mentioned they talk about demography. I call it the silver tsunami. Japan is already a country with declining number of population. Very much a silver society. Korea will be, sooner or later joining as the silver society. It is k unprecedented. China is not that farhhe÷ behin. This country, perhaps even you are going to notice it. They will turn into a silver country. China which is based on a manufacturing power house wont be sustainable. That means not only is it going to be sustainable but unless they come up with a new recipe of creating new jobs, this person after their retirement are goingeiuz have a lot of years. It is a difficult time for defending what they are spending. nw washington. Because washington islv accusi. They talk about this country manipulating their currencies and to exporter more. The trade imbalance must be corrected. Unless this asian country is solving the this problem, i think the this factory asia will be sustainable. Its been pursuing Free Trade Agreement strategies. Korea has come a long way. It is a trading nation. In case you didnt know, the g7 made it. The ratio is 100 gdp. Korea is now connecting u. S. , the biggest market in the world] so far until coming to the scene difficulty for two decades. To the surprise of people there is an expectation. Byf tfring this he made Game Changing moves. China is playing two strategies. China is joining the order that is manifested by china. Determination to join the u. S. Network of investment. negotiations. But at the same time china is active in making a new initiative. China is presenting the asia pacific. Even the content isnt much there. China is also talking about creating some competing Organization Names aaib which has been talked about this afternoon. In the process of making this new proposal china is, in a sense washington. Against this backdrop, how this is going to lead to change. I tend to6k7p . Yt believe the change, if you will. The first line ismnn ile calle versus google. Cars. Google is showing a driverless car. They are facing sort of new normal. The productivity and increase. Thats not the case any longer. Somebody called the a race. So the google era compared to the gm era. Thats an important challenge. Washington versus beijing because irn far the community s generated greatiq benefit froe system or the coucimf, wt and sn beijingcvfn ÷yn triewqp there is a contest between politics. If so much. So oh from this, my projection about the future trajectory of socalled asia on two grounds. Number one in trade arrangement. I think a lot of rhetoric which is highlighting the conflict between washingtonbased tpp versus beijing is by a free trade asiapacific. I tend to believe it will be tpp to win the game. Tpp is more about creating the new rule. Ranging from investment protections and ipr. But on the other hand, asia pacific which will base what i said which is a combination of ten Asian Countries plus six countries coming from australia, new zealand, india. After all those talks they failed to produce any meaningful basis for the discussion. The difficulty is on tpp. At the first stage it will be tpp amongst countries. Depending on how core i cant is playing the game. After that tpp is open to all the country. Im going to see oh in the next two, three decades is tpp will expand the universe. Eventually leading to free trade area of asia pacific. Speed will be determined by effective collaboration and balancing act between beijing and washington. They will see effective tpp made and joining tpp. When you talk about asia pacific as i mentioned, we do not see any strong intellectual leader. We talk about a lot this morning about the competition between d adb and aiib. I think it is Korea Joining aiib. The u. S. Interest to see korea. At the same time, i think it is chinas interest to facilitate Korea Joining the aiib. But the problem is to the contrary of my chinese colleague saying korea are is pushed enough to join aiib. But the way it is structured is very far from common sense. Voting rights as envisioned by beijing is 50 china. It is based on so called gdp on tpp parenting. I have an economist. I have never heard of this voting right on the basis. It could be a good comparison when you went to compare livingston for people in beijing. People in tokyo. But income on tpp. Can it buy more oil . Impossible. If thats related to Voting Rights it is unconventional. Beijing is accusing western institutions on the basis of transparency, unreliabilities. If beijing wants to stand up its a new global players. I think it is in beijings interest to get korea in the aiib and show strategic flexibility. Thank you very much. Professor long . It is unwieldy for me to give a clear to the Regional Economic future. But i have to clear myself. The first one i would like to talk about the past. Then talk about the new direction to offer china for policy. Third one, try to authorize some point relating to the future of the regional 1993ment after 1993 because of the economic depression its about japan. The Second Player is the United States. United states also particularly new to this region. Their major strategy, balance of power. They put forward concerted powers. Recently put forward a new one to asia. So through this kind they tried to prevent this region. The third one is countries, through 1992. Asean countries put forward thats a very they labeled eight. That means consolidation and consensus. Apec. A sean ways will work. But because of of the rise of china especially from when china becomes the second largest economy. So its not just between china and the United States. There is a third player. The last player is china. China makes you first of all, from globalization, china faces a challenge about the china threat. So this is why china can make use of the strategies. Keeping a low profile. China, this is my personal view. Changes the policy to new directions. The first part. The second part i would like to talk about chinas Foreign Policy. When we talk about chinas Foreign Policy we have to remember one thing. That is when china makes Foreign Policy its always emphasized the balance between the political economy and Foreign Policy. So chinas Foreign Policy or the political economy. Since pings because china. First are the international changes. Global one, regional one and bilateral one. We enter into a new stage of the china Economic Growth. So china had to deal with it. Dramatic challenges. Making use of the international forces. So china put forward the new strategies. China not only cooperated with the asianpacific countries but also with asia and south Asian Countries. So we cannot stay successful. But its work. Especially this year. China first set up the silk and then aiib. So this is a new direction. I call it the twohead Foreign Policy. This one and the second one. The second point i dread here. The last point i would like to see is he is this region is economic neutral. Two points. When we talk about the future of the economy. Its very important. The Regional Economic future. The second point. That network in power. We talk about the future of the region from bottom to up. The second one from bottom up. Second bottom to up. This is why some scholars call it talk about the production network. We call it the americanization, japanzation and trainication. The economy is still there. So this is my last point. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. I think this topic of Regional Economic future is great. I thought hard about what will determine the future and came up with three things. I want to say a word about each of them. The three things that will determine the Regional Economic future are demographics, structural reform and trade and investment agreements. Let me start with demographics. Ka any moon this morning mentioned the demographics of south korea, the aging of the population. This is a much more general phenomenon behind south korea, of course. Im going to talk about japan, china, United States, south korea as the regional economy. They all face challenges of aging in the case of japan. Japan has already peakeded and started to decline. For china, the working age obviously there is uncertainty around these projections. They are projecting recent fertility trends forward. We can be pretty confident about them for the next few decades. Demographics change slowly. We public of korea was covered by kathy. Its actually young compared to japan and china. Koreas population peaks in 2035 which is later than japan or china. What about the United States . There is aging in the United States as well. Whats interesting is the United States population will not peak this century. Because of immigration the u. S. Is the only one of the economies im discussing where population and labor force will grow and the u. S. Population is project ed to reach 500 Million People by the end of the century. China is projected to be down to a billion people by the end of the century. If you take the projections seriously the difference will be two to one by the end of the century rather than four and a half to one that we see now. I start with the demographics and spend more time. This is an Important Foundation of Economic Growth for the region. For two reasons. One is its hard to have rapid gdp growth once the labor force starts to decline. If the labor force is declining you have to move workers from one to another. With population and Labor Force Growth the adjustment is a more natural process. New workers move in as old workers retire. Its leekly to continue the slow down of the regional growth rate. I think this is an intuitive point. Its easier to deal with demographic challenges if you are integrated with the global economy. This is a simple point. Japan is building up assets outside of its country as japan anyones and the population declines it will be using its income and importing from the world. Japan is declining population. Its easy to imagine in an integrated World Economy if it were isolated it would be harder to deal with the demographic trends. The second point i want to make concerns structural reform. All of the economies have some demographic trend toward slow down. You can counteract that at least to structural reform. I look around the world. Everyone has an agenda of structural reform. I dont have time to go into detail. Let me mention brief examples starting with my own economy to be fair. The u. S. Economy is now recovering well. A lot of positive things for the future. It has a lot of problems. The one i would highlight has serious infrastructure deficiencies. The u. S. May have the advantage of growing labor force but if we dont do a better job with infrastructure we wont get the potential economic benefit from that. Our problems with infrastructure are a mix of problems of regulation and political paralysis. There is finance and the investments payer for themselves. Its really a matter of how you structure the financing to move ahead with bridges and roads and airports and all of the economic infrastructure. China has a lot of Structural Reforms. Some directly address this issue. I mentioned that chinas labor force has already peaked. That would be a severe drag on growth except there is still a lot of under utilized labor in the country sidement one of the important reforms in china is huko reform. The Registration System kept the system too large. With reform you can have the urban labor force in china continue to grow for 10 or 15 years. China can grow pretty well in my view. That would be allowing rural people to move to the first tier cities where productivity is hemoglobinest. The initial plan is to let them move to third and forth tier cities. I dont know how much benefit it will be but better than stay hg the country side. Couple other reforms china is talking about. One of the important one is opening the Service Sectors. Apong the g20 countries, china is the most restricted in terms of inward foreign investment. Thats primarily because of restrictions in the Service Sectors. China is talking about opening those up. I mentioned this because at this stage of development the Service Sector will be the lead in china. If you had more productivity growth that would counteract some of the downward drag on chinas Economic Growth. Japan, i think the structural reform agenda is well known. This is premier abes third arrow. There are relatively few left in japan but they protect agriculture. Japan protects in Service Sectors. This is a general point im making here. All of the Major Economies have important Structural Reforms they could carry out that would tend to enhance the growth rates so as the demographic forces work against growth. In my view its more important to move on the structural agenda. Some of the items directly address labor market issues. Others are just good things to enhance growth. That will be good for the economy. Now the third thing i want to mention briefly is trade agreements and investment agreements. The point here is that the good trade and investment agreements can encourage Structural Reforms. In some cases lock in reforms and also lead to deeper integration in one of my initial points was its easier to deal with the demographic challenges with an integrated global economy. To me, the happy scenario, professor chay talked about the partnership. The happy scenario is president obama gets trade Promotion Authority. He moves ahead quickly to solidify a deal with japan and other partners. Hopefully south korea joins quickly and you get the deep integration of the Trans Pacific partnership which professor chay emphasized the importance of behind the border measures. At the same time i hope president obama moves ahead between the u. S. And china. I hope china takes this seriously and comes with a very realistic, negative list proposal early in 2015. This is consistent with chinas reform. China has to open up most of the service seccer tor this is the Bilateral Agreement with the United States. It would be good for the chinese economy and good for u. S. China relations. Its a steppingstone to china. Choosing to join the tpp because this deeply integrated asiapacific economy will be a very attractive way to promote Economic Growth and welfare more generally. Look ahead to the future of the regional economy. Its a big question. The demographics are cooked for the next few decades. They are going to be tending to pull down the growth rate, particularly on the asian side of the pacific. As i said, the u. S. Has an aging issue, but it will continue to have Labor Force Growth and the u. S. Through immigration policy can influence that. The u. S. Could have even more Labor Force Growth and has built into current projections. So the u. S. Has advantages. But integration across the pacific will be hugely beneficial for both sides. I hope it will encourage us to pursue the Structural Reforms which we need and are good in and of themselves. It would definitely encourage all the different economies. Thank you. The first three speakers have raised a lot of issues. Before we make it general well start with ken liebenthal. Im looking at the clock. I have been told at the end of seven minutes my Life Insurance gets cancelled. I do want to take a moment to thank the sponsors and organizerers of the conference, especially ambassador pok and k kfas which ran a wonderful conference in seoul earlier this year and has continued with brookings for really stimulating day. Let me turn to the topic herement frankly, im very uneasy about looking very far into the future. Remember, the inf which has a great deal of expertise as late as this october expressed concern about energy prices. The concern was there could be a spike in oil prices that would have a depressing effect on the global economy. So prediction is difficult, especially about the future. Let me take up some of the issues raised by each of the presenters today. Do it in terms of issue rather than who presented it. On the demographics, what i want to do here since i basically agreed with major points made. I want to add an additional layer or a footnote to a number of the yeshs raised. First on demographics. I really liked the summary of the situation with that. I would add one point. In chinas case, china will be the first country that becomes old democrat graphically before becoming wealthy in a per capita sense. That will play strains that south korea, japan and the United States dont have of that magnitude. It will be rapid in that regard. China will have a special burden. It is aware that its coming. But it is a burden with of enormous magnitude and preparation. We are in the early stages. Secondly, an issue not raised by others, but i think it warrants being on the agenda is Climate Change. I looked to the future of this region of the world. To me, the country that is most at risk in terms of oh Economic Growth from Climate Change is china. Its china because of the shortage and mal distribution in terms of where the population is of useable water. Thats in part because of a changing precipitation patterns. Its in part because of water pollution. And also the rising sea levels will threaten more of chinas gdp than i believe the gdp of any other country that we are discussing here given how much of chinas gdp is generated in the pearl river delta and the Yangtze River delta. Both are under Severe Threat from rising seas. At the same time china will also be the country under the greatest pressure to limit its emissions. Given that it is now by far the largest Greenhouse Gas emitter in the world. And those emissions, at best, will peak roughly 15 years from now. So the pressures are going to keep increasing on china. So it gets hit on both sides of the Climate Change issue. Third issue is the effect of security on Economic Growth. Here i think everyone agrees that we want to seek to not have security tensions disrupt supply chains. Disrupt the capacity to have the most efficient kind of trade agreements and trade relationships and investment relationships. No one knows how feasible it will be. We have heard a lot of views on how well changing balances of power will be in this region. It is going to be one of the factors that will affect the future Economic Growth in the region. Let me conclude with some comments on the tpp, the u. S. China bilateral treaty and investment negotiations and ftaap. On ttp, i very much agree with professor chay that this is an extremely important issue. It is important for having a balanced u. S. Rebalance toward asia, its a major we have made it a major factor on the economic and trade side of that. I would argue here that the Midterm Election in the United States in which the president s party took a drubbing. In fact, ironically, somewhat enhanced the prospects of getting first trade Promotion Authority the and ratification of the tpp agreement if thats negotiated. The republicans are much more amenable to these kinds of agreements than are the democrats. Questionable whether the democrats are with them in sufficient numbers to get the votes he needs. The snap election in japan in 2018 do i have one minute . Question then. Does the snap election in japan increase the chances that abe will be able to pursue the third arrow and make the open up the agriculture and automotive markets to the extent necessary. Will china view tpp, if it gets negotiated, as it viewed the wto, as a way to leverage domestic retomorrow in china. There are debates in china about that. On the bilateral investment treaty, simple comment. If this treaty doesnt get done in terms of getting ready to submit for ratification by this fall i would argue because of political calendars first if the u. S. And then in china it will be 2018 before this agreement can be finalized. A lot can happen between now and 2018. It will make it harder to use the b. I. T. Neg united nationss as a steppingstone to tpp. Finally on the ftaap. The bigger and longer term trade agreements. The key here is we deal with the initial tpp. I feel like im at the ent gone using nothing but acronyms. But as we deal with trance Pacific Partnership and bilateral investment treaty an important thing is to keep in mind through transparency. The importance of not building in elements that will become incompatible with later agreements that are broader than we seek to reach. Thank you. Thank you. Professor . We are right on schedule. I dont know whether you are tired of me or not. I am very tired of the fact that i havent overcome the jet lag problems. Another thing is that this is about Economic Issues which i do not know a lot. I think they have their own rules. They are lost. Discussing it from the perspective about how Asia Economic dwom develops. The demographic perspective is a very, very good perspective on me. Because i think the Chinese Development is largely determined by the big population, labor work. If you look in the future about the future of the economy in east asia. This is very important determinants. The second point is how east asian economic develops. East Asia Economic, thats export oriented. Labor intensive. This started from the early days from japan, south korea. Moving to china. To increase that currency. Important part of industry. Labor inthe tensive industry to southeast asia. This is an asian model of development. Its about the structural issue and the reform. I think in east asia i mentioned it just now is export oriented economy. Very much depending on export. If you look at the chinese structure we find, we have about 200 or more more than 200 surplus overall. Mostly we have the United States with europe. But within asia , china is having a deficit with most of the neighbors. This is in general keeping the balance. So im thinking the Chinese Government emphasized the domestic and external situation and as recently as focused on to increase domestic consumptions which will reduce the chinese treaty dependency on exports. In the long run, this will be the chinese economic development. Domestically. Extern externally chinas economic relations with outside. The next point i want to make is about the relationship between economics and politics. Since i am a political scientist im more interested in the implications of politics rather than the economics itself. I find this very interesting. There is a divorce. Earlier i mentioned the economic integration didnt push forward. Integration. There are different situations. Its one thing. Economic policy is different. For example in 1997 and 1998 when asia was hit by a financial crisis, the Chinese Government policy economic Foreign Trade and economics really won the heart of the south Asian Countries. That changed chinas relationship with its neighboring countries. Its been the best. But now we find that the interdependence of china in trade with neighbors increases very, very fast. But at the same time we find that most of the asian found thd them more close to the United States in political dimension. And they began to enhance their Economic Security alliances with asia with the United States. I found that he theres a divorce. So my question is how do you explain that situation that why theres a, you know, a divorce between economics and asia that does not exist in other parts of the world . So i will stop here. Thank you. Thank you very much, our last discussion, i forgot to mention earlier in the audience, if you have questions, write hem out on the cards and pass them up to the front and we will try to take them up. We are trying to keep time for questions. Okay, thank you, let me point out three or four points and the first one is Economic Future among three i mean the korea, jap you can japan and china i said yesterday in our meeting, i imagine the industry policies are very similar and also the developmental stages are very similar. But in 1980s, japan expected that theres should be some kind of division or division of labor in the countries. Japan is a labor intensive industry, and they move on to the knowledge intensive industrialization. But it does not exist in this day, because of the competition in the three nations and all three countries have just a very comprehensive industry. For example, we can not given any industry tuat all, so we ha the high tech and Light Industry all together. And china, just developing the high Tech Industry as well. So, interesting thing is that the r and d investment in three countries are very obvious is. Nobody mentioned in this issue, but three countries are trying to move from the Manufacturing Industry to i. T. Or b. T or high tech value added industries. So, for example, r and d investment in south korea alone since 2006, our growth rate at the moment is around 3 or 4 points, but every year, we invested 12. 5 average increase per year for r and d investment. So, the r and d investment per gdp, the ratio to gdp is number one in the world. And we just surpassed israel. Now, the r and d investment for gdp is 4. 36 . And also, 2012, total amount of r and d, because we are comparatively medium size economy. The total amount of r andskand important on. The korea surpassed United Kingdom and now the krorean r ad d investment is passing china. Number one is United States, is still the number one, 28 of the total r and d investment in the world, but china, around the 15 , japan, 11 , and all together asia itself, india has around 3 of, yeah, the proportion of the world r and d investment, but asia alone, all together 37 of the total, yeah, r and d investment, and america all together 4 points and europe, 23 of the share of the world r and d investment. Another thing is that among the Top Ten Technology area, the top five leading countries were selected and china was selected in eight areas, out of ten Different Technology areas, and japan is the same in technology areas, they are top five leading technology countries. Korea, was selected as three areas as as a leading country. Interesting thing is that all three countries are very highly competitive and in some case s they are cooperating. Now you know open innovation is a popular concept. Samsung and sony, they are doing the commercializing, they are the give and takes of the licensing, not publishing the patent and that kind of thing already starting. So, the competition and cooperation is existing between the three countries and from now on, probable not the division of labor but some kind of thely division of labor or in the Assembly Lines or the Small Medium Companies and big companies, so, even though it is a very, very tough time and a hard time in politics, Korean Federation of industry, kfi and the japanese krm, they just meet together and then, they have tried to find some kind of more close cooperation in the economic corporation. And now, between you cant man and crow i cankorea, and china. We will develop some type of cooperation. The havt one, i would like to mention the future perspective, the three countries, three countries, for example, the east coast of the main land china to seoul is 1 hour and a half, and from seoul to tokyo is 1 hour and a half. Its a Small Community and also, we have developed more than 70,000 students are coming from chie ma to crow i cant, and around the 70,000 students from korea to china and we have like the aerospace project, we have campus project, the three different areas the china, japan and korea and they took courses together and just like in europe. And probably not much in europe, you can see the signs of english signs, and japanese signs and korean and chinese signs all together. Even in seoul, our subway signs we have all four languages that are written. So, that this kind of Live Community will be possible within one or two decades later. For example, the island, a lot of investment and they want to on reside in from china to north korea. And also, travels and the plastic surgery, its a very common from Chinese People to korea. And a lot of things, just this kind of interrelations for the future generation and only the problems is the poll particular thes. But the other life itself, there are a lot of good cooperations among the three countries and i this kind of optimistic vision. Thank you, well theres a lot of issues that came up in the discussion. I thought i would start by giving the three panelists the chance to see if they wanted to respond to anything that was said before we turn to the general audience . Well, i will respond to the a question, you asking why theres divorce between politics and economy . I think political scientists using interesting language in divorce. We call it disparity or gap if you will. And the reason is very simple is, because from the theory and the historic lesson, as long as the country is it stands a higher chance to develop further. But when it comes to having a higher level of integration, i mean, sort of deep level integration, i dont even mean to tearing down the trade barriers but you are going to deregulate your writing and laws and that is mainly considered western standard or western norms, i think because of things happening in the recent course of history, i think many western have a growing suspicious of the western trade norms, we all know what happened in 1997 in asia. And also, we all mow what happened for the usa. So, when im coming to the Asian Capital and asking, no bill out, and very severe reform. But they did not something the same thing in u. S. Case, so because of the, you know, the asian power elite, they are criticizing this as a western double standard because theres a lot of suspicions and mutualal trust about this sort of deep level integration. And talking about, i like to briefly mentions about the Climate Change point. I think the negotiators between the countries and also the high level of government office, they are aware of the problem. But the thing is, again, you mow, the concept of beijing. They understand the magnitude of the problem, as recently as the beijing summet. They love to have crystal blue sky, but he they all know its temporary. And theres telling reports which i read when im many coming here in her saying because of the blue, to make it blue, the beijing forced shutdown factories in the vicinity because of that it likely the chinese are going to the lowest monthly Economic Growth in recent decades. So, in a way, that is a price you have on pay. But when you take a longer term, instead of shutting down this smoke stack industry and somehow you invest in energy savings, i think you create a socalled blue ocean. The problem is how that is going to make help happen. Thank you. First of all, i would like to yes, democrats and its a important population and labor important for chinese Economic Growth. But, we talk about the population and that would be labor that you paid that is manufacturers, if we talk about that, that is okay. I mean, if because of that time, a lot of workers flew from the west to the area. But the unSkilled Labor, not the Skilled Labor chinas economic structure fk falls structure falls, that means that they needs more skilled i object la. We are weaker in unSkilled Labor than Skilled Labor. If we look at that and examine it carefully. Its failed the Labor Movement from unSkilled Labor to Skilled Labor. So, in recent days, if we want to look, its easy. You get a degree, its easy. If you are not received the university or college training, it not very easy. That means that you can move. You can move. But you have to be a Skilled Labor. And not an unSkilled Labor. That is so, anyway, so, for china, if you now days, the economics in china, had hard debate about the middle income trap, but they taum about this about that. But they are using the this is my understanding of your comment. The second one. Its interesting. This is why i empty size my last part, i stress the two forces in the region. We can talk about the prediction of the growth from the Public Relations aspect, that is very important, but at the same time, we have to we have to recognize the, another forces that are from the bottom to up. So, this is why yesterday, when we discussed that, i said that this regional production at work plus plus local production at Work Together will shape, probable shape the future of this region. This as for the comment, china, now days in china we are patient to the idea of research, especially when we, when we feel challenges from the middle income trade. Yes, we compete with each other, our three countries, but if you are china and before people before china may make use of theres three channels for china, you take first 1980s purchase or buy production. Not spshly in 1990s. In the 1990s, we promoted Economic Growth through the oea. So later we attract a lot of is so so, this is three things for china to attract the international technology. But after china faced challenges, so, how to do that, so, this is why china now days falters or r and d research, but because china is a large country, that, what i mean, we have a different economic we develop manufacturer, yes, we compete with each other. I want to say that i. T. Industry and its a very important for the area. But its facing challenges. Lets hear from the audience. Okay. And one of the demographics that i thought was interesting, can a country with a declining population be a rising power . And the questioner points out that that is sort of contrary to history. Do you any of you have any thoughts on that particular issue . Well, i think i addressed it. I do think it is going to be hard for china to maintain the growth rate, as i said, the urban labor force can continue to grow for another 10 or 15 years. I dont see the problem as being imminent. But its hard to imagine down the road chinas economy, for example, growing more rapidly than the United States economy at that time. It will still be Lower Per Capita gdp, on the other hand, it will not take long for them to emerge as the largest economy in the world. If they grow at 16 for another 15 years and the u. S. Performs average performance of the last decade or so. China will be the largest economy in the word. You can imagine china in a sense stag nating with a Larger Population and then both of those economies, you know, continuing to mid century. So i guess then, we kind of argue about, what does it mean to be a great power. If you are about the same size as the United States economy, but not advancing beyond that, i think argue ably you still have a certain type of great power. It may take alteration of expectations on the chinese part. Sore of related to that, another question was, what do you think the term for china new normal means in terms of Economic Growth and do you have any thoughts about the recent discussion i guess, initiated by la Larry Summers and could author about a reversion to the mean pointing out that no ones growth has been very high for long periods of time . Professor wang, do you want to start with that and tell us what the new normal is . Talk about in china, i read official document everywhere, when i go everywhere. When i talk about the today when we talk about in china, we talk about the you new normal. We mainly refer to the Economic Growth. That means the shape of Economic Growth. Now days policy makers recognize that we cannot maintain Economic Life we have to promote economic structure changes. So this one, we back tot new normal way. So, that is for the Foreign Policy. To my knowledge. We never talk about it. We never talk about that. Its mainly focus or confined to the Economic Growth rate. Okay. Perhaps i can add korean perspective to chinese new normal. The way i understand new normal is as you mentioned correctly, theres no country in the world which can maintain that two digit Economic Growth when you consider the early days, you have to take off, sustain it, but as some sort of you know, transition point. Referring to Larry Summers reversion to the mean, i think that is a very familiar critique from western scholars they often may joke about rise of asia and compare to rise of soviet union. And they mention asia has been rising on the base of perspiration, and you have to create not many jobs but stable jobs. And that is the transition. Whether or not they are successful, is you how related to how Asian Countries can take advantage of the new initiative had that i mentioned. Thank you. I also had a question myself because of all the discussion both this session and earlier about tpp. I guess you should count me as a skeptic. I agree with ken leberthals comment, it will actually be settled pretty soon. If they dont get fast tracked nothing will happen. No country in its right mind would make a final offer to the United States if the United States could then reverse the second im around. The second time around. So fast track is absolutely crucial. Im not sure what will happen, i agree that republicans are somewhat more oriented toward trade at the present time,ally an issue. What we call, the tea party, the right of the Republican Party and the liberals on the left for the democrats, are opposed to the these sort of agreements. It will will be interesting to see if theres a movement to rally the middle. And i also, myself, have a lot of trouble with the notion of a major and significant trade agreement in asia that excludes china. I just think its the thing is to me, too evident by half that its an attempt by the United States to try to lockup the rules of the game and then have china come in. I would be surprised that that sort of process can be productively pursued. Ive got my doubts because china is now the Worlds Largest trader to try to exclude them from an agreement so that you can get the rules in place. And second one, i would have more comfort if i had the foggiest negotiation of what the United States government is negotiating on this herb. Its all been a secret. Theres been huge numbers of meetings but i dont know what we want. And worried me is that im afraid we want intellectual property rights. And that is dangerous, not just for other people in other countries, but for america. These sort of things are necessary evils, you try to keep them to a minimum, not promote them at the world level, im a little concerned about where its all going. I think theres a lot of barriers still as we go forward. But i recognize that im in the minority and im too pessimistic on that issue. But i could not help, given the discussion earlier about it to say something. Any final words that anybody feels they have to say . I could talk very much briefly about you question about the tpp and the focus of what is going on . But i think precisely because of the credibility is the increasing challenge. I was coming to washington to meet u. S. People in telecommunications and some of the demand and bargaining is something i found not even practiced in the u. S. Her demth demanding something they are not doing in the u. S. When they keep demanding and push comes to shove, at one point there will be a moment of truth and then growing suspicion. That is my biggest mystery why in a lot of Asian Countries are jumping to join tpp, even though trade promotions, because they believe at the end of the day, washington will deliver. Somehow, w with a cashington ca deliver. On that, optimistic note, i think we are supposed to adjourn, that correct . A very short okay. Stand up and make them. [ applause ] sit down . Yeah. Well, thank you for all of you who have remained to the very end. I wanted to make a couple of notes in conclusion, this morning it was said a that we have run out of time. But i have heard a lot of other references to time over the last day. Kathy moon and david dollar talked about demographic time. Maybe not as slow as geologic time, but its slower than what we are used to. I heard a lot of other references. One participant, i think was bob einhorn said that time is not on our sides and they said, china must do things with north korea, the sooner the better. And others say dont be in such a hurry and others talked about patience. We have a lot of conceptions of time. About but my view is that we have not run out of time, its more what we do with it. And of course, we have not run out of ideas there have been ple plenty here. I think all three of the countries share a common destiny, 57 our circumstances are different and some of our choices are different. But i away with a much heightened awareness of the shares stakes for all three countries and for other countries in the region. These are just basic facts. One last point i would like to make, you know, here in america, we talk about las vegas rules. What happens in vegas stays in vegas. I would like to turn that on its head. What happens in northeast asia does not stay in northeast asia. And a lot of the history of the coming century will be written in thissier. And i think its in this area, and i think its important to bare that in mind. Let me express my appreciation to the audience, all the participants, as well, who have remained throughout. These are deliberations that must continue in this same spirit, because to be frank, theres no alternative. You want to make comments . And then finally, ambassador park. Well, i just want to take this opportunity to thank everyone. Specially our ambassador park. And our brookings host. And of course, kevin, paul and many others who are whose efforts have made this event very successful. I have enjoyed it. I have learned a lot and thank you very much. [ applause ] first of all, i have to my thanks should go to jonathan for your and you and your staff impeccable preparation and whole hearted hospitality, and you are very well organized. Some participation, including mr. Lawson, this morning we focused on regional issues, you know, u. S. china relations and the economy issues. Maybe we have more time to start taking, you know, the session and then let try to i think we need brain storming time to find out desirable support or contents. Maybe for the time being we have to continue our, you know, our special focus on the regional issues, but as time elapsed, you know, the gravity of some global issues, including maybe todays demographic issues is one of those things, but if we think about the organization and the regional integration is another, maybe at least on top of our talk. So maybe just like in the interest of a forum, we have an advanced council meeting. So maybe let think about that possibility to make some, advanced discussion to do, in the case of selection of topics and format. And maybe we have to, i think theres very Creative Ideas on how we can have next round of, you know, discussion. On top of that, maybe the days whole activity was broadcasted cspan, had which which i di until yesterday. Basically the new trend is knowledge sharing through multimedia format. So, maybe what kind of multimedia, you know, format may be possible . That is the home work on top of our head. So, anyway, i really appreciate, you know, some kind of, you know, unusual preparation for the successful second round. So, again, thanks so much for great audience, thank you. [ applause ] the Brookings Institution discussion ran throughout the day today, find the earlier sessions at cspan. Org, and news today, former florida govern, he jeb bush said he discussed the future of the nation and a potential bid of the white house with his family over thanksgiving. He spoke to the ceo council, here is some of what he said. 16 is like any other year. So, im thinking of running for president and i will make up my mind in short order, im not that far out in the future, i dont know the exact imlitime. Its the same Decision Making process, do i have the skills to do it in a way that tries to lift peoples spirits and not get sucked in to the vortex, it sounds easier than it is to do. And i have a lot of soul searching to make that determination and perhaps more important, can i do it where the sacrifice for my family is tollerable. Any person that runs for office, at any level, its a big sacrifice, its a pretty ugly business. But theres a level under which i would never subjectate my family that is my principal. I dont know if i would be a good candidate or bad one. I kind of know how a republican can win, whether its me or somebody else. And it has to be much more up lifting and more positive and much more willing to you know, to be practical now in washington, without violating i dont really principals. This week on q a, katie p ama pavlich on the war on women. What is your opinion of ted kennedy . It goes back to, like i said, where the idea from the book cam from where they were showing a tribute video to him because he had passed away and portraying him as a womens rights champion, when he left a young woman to drown in his car and if he had not gone back for nine hours and tried to save his own behind, she probably would have survived. You cannot do an entire video in a convention claiming to be preaching and fighting about the war on women, and glorify someone like that while not including that part of his life in a video of his womens rights record. Sunday night at 8 00 and pacific, on cspans q a, to mark ten years of q a, we are airing one program this each year. The u. S. House of representatives out of session for the rest of the year, but before leaving the Committee Held a hearing about the imgragz executive order. It lasted about three hours. Thank you for the consideration. Good afternoon, this hearing of the Judiciary Committee will come to order. Without objection, the committee has authorized us to take this mornings hearing on president obamas executive overreach on immigration. Ill begin by recognizing myself for an opening statement. I also want to point out to the members and to the audience in attendance today, youre all welcome to be here, but rule 11 of the house rules provides that the chairman of the committee may punish breaches of order and