we're fortunate to have ambassador richard armitage and koreansident of the foundation here to give some opening remarks but before introduce them, i would like to say a few words about safety here at csi us. we feel very secure but we have a duty to prepare for any eventuality. i name is lisa collins and will serve as your safety officer for this event. follow my instructions should the knees arise. please also familiarize yourself with the exits in the back on the left and on the right. is the president of armitage international. it was formerly the deputy secretary of state and secretary of defense for east asia and civic affairs in the office of the secretary of defense. he has had a distinguished career in government and policy. he was south korea's ambassador from 2013-2015. he has had a long, esteemed career working in the foreign affairs. ambassador -- ambassador armitage will give statements first followed by ambassador lee. ambassador armitage: good morning everyone. quite a crowd here, something going on in the peninsula of korea? something i haven't heard about? when i was asked to speak here, to make a few remarks, appreciate it ambassador lee, hesitantly as you may prefer. was wondering what we would talk about, in the space of a couple of weeks, we had icbm shoot over al qaeda. alleged hydrogen bomb. we have icbms moving to the coast of north korea. we have a president here in the united states that is bellowing about appeasement from south korea. bellowing about the possibility of removing ourselves from course which is the rocking to do at this time. this doesn't recognize the spectacular things that we have witnessed in the republic of korea in the last several months. it wasn't very long ago that we had monday in here for a dinner. he met a wonderful presentation here in this very room and he made a wonderful presentation at dinner. here was a republic of korea that can have a beautiful, peaceful democratic election while the previous president was being put in jail and on trial. it was all done seamlessly. this is a nation that deserves support. i have a charge for all the americans in the room here today. over, or conference is should be no doubt in the minds of any of our friends from the republic of korea that united them, and100% behind military, security terms, economic terms, behind the politically, this is a charge that i give to my american friends. i have spoken my peace, what i think and now we will hear from someone who really knows what he is talking about. president lee: thank you for commitment, because me a little more time -- they for the extra time to speak. -- thank you for the extra time to speak. us.le are going to join a very good morning and welcome to the strategic form, 2017. on behalf of korea leaders, it is my great pleasure to stand incorporate with the csis. i would like to express my sincere gratitude to all of you for your commitment and participating in this form. who havehanks to those traveled here. especially those who made the long journey from saul. a couple of korean attendant arrived last night. it was the second month -- nine months ago today when i stood here, i was trying to open the first korea u.s. strategic form. at that time i remember the sound of anticipation we all had for the new president-elect, u.s. president-elect and the concerns and anxiety that we tored over then-president the republic of korea. as ambassador armitage just mentioned, many changes have ourrred, each requiring time and attention and credible analysis. i think we can all agree that another december forum was too long of a weight as we moved this one forward to september in water to address these critical issues at hand. i would like to draw your interest to several -- dry your attention to several boys of common interest. this year marks the 135th anniversary of the establishment of the korean u.s. to the many relationship in 1882. at a small port city on korean's western coast, people of the u.s. and korea had chosen an encounter each other as almost total strangers and finally signed the first agreement between our two countries. secondly, this year marks the fifth anniversary of the fta. that was after several years of negotiations. even after the deal was reached, five more deals were needed for the korean side to gain approval of the national assembly. place, thea in interdependence of our two countries, not only as an integrated market but also as even stronger security allies has become increasingly enforced. the new administration's lost in washington dc and saul respectively. americans were experiencing a different style of leadership. koreans were exercising their democratic freedoms as they changed their president and himrisingly -- and surprisingly lawful and peaceful manner. they turned a political crisis into it -- opportunity. serving as an exemplary model for immigrant. 80% approval0 to rating. he has enjoyed the since his inauguration. it affects the part of the korean people. this casts a long dark shadow on all the korean peninsula's. morning on the day before yesterday, sunday i was awoken by breaking news on my mobile phone. it was about president trump's -- by then i remarksmy opportunity slight modification. i sat there transfixed, gazing at the news. most of the text i had prepared for this moment lost its relevance. message iabout what could deliver. i decided to delete the whole report. i felt helpless watching them brag about the successful test of h bombs. what should we do? do we have any option other than another round of global condemnation? sanctions and resolutions? could they ultimately stop korea from becoming a new state? e? nuke stat i unfortunately have no answer to those questions. i am hoping some of you are most of you do. however, as an ordinary citizen of korea that was born but after the war, one thing i am sure of is that no matter how great the situation becomes, any military this can neverks be an option. the survival.ruly forget the effect beyond the north korean issue. there is another pressing issue. in addition to security cooperations, this is under the fta. it has been a foundational pillar for our relationship. when it was signed, they felt fta was the most significant trade agreement for career. also, for the united states, it was the first commercial free trade agreement since the signing of nafta. despite the trade volume that has continue to flounder, despite the rapid rise of china as a major trade partner for both three and the u.s., i would root -- stilll enjoyed the rise. i must concede that whether president trump us announcements withdraw from the fta, it was based on the assessment of the first joint meeting or not. i carefully read the article with new grid -- renewed respect and i could not agree more with ,ost of the points she made today we have the best speakers, not only on the issues of security but also on trade from both korea and the u.s.. thatis why i am confident session three will be productive and want to show the way of how to proceed the next steps for the future of the fta for the government delegations. i do not wish to take too much time from the wonderful speakers we have lined up today for today's form. orum.t -- for year, they put heavy emphasis on projects in the united states, the foundation has largest share of funding or the programs proposed by the , since thesities establishment in 19 that the one, it is -- these efforts have further strengthened the relationship between our two countries and have promoted understanding between our two peoples. invited the best ever at end of a mess to discuss the as we workof this for our countries to the medicare three. among the korean delegates, you can sign the familiar faces that you could remember from our poor master. at the same time, you can see permanent scholars together with your incumbents. as the pump should be no stranger to you. even if this is the first time for you to see them at a reform. that they'rey glad able to find his time to speak at our luncheon here today. weogether, i believe that the korean delegates are ready to share both our personal views as well as our official policy line of newly reformed mundane government. on the security front, the light is facing the greatest threat on the korean peninsula since the cease-fire was put in place since 1953. it seems we stand as the future of the five-year-old, the fta is to be decided. this is why i sincerely believe that this form will provide us place to share- our views with each other and opportunities and challenges for the alliance. as result of this form, we can offer guidance to both the u.s. and korean policymakers in now and the future of the alliance. i would like to stress my sincere appreciation for whom we are going to meet with tomorrow. thank you, thank you very much. >> thank you ambassadors. we will now introduce congresswoman stephanie murphy who will give a speech shortly. just bear with us while we introduce congressman stephanie murphy. >> good morning anyone -- everyone. behalf of investor armitage, john henry and everyone here, we want to welcome you here to what should be a very interesting day , a long series of discussions about critical issues regarding korea had a very critical time. torole this morning is introduce stephanie murphy. as many of you know, this is the first day back from recess. congresswoman murphy was kind enough to join us. we are especially grateful that she was able to join us this one. the seventhts congressional district in the u.s. house of representatives. she currently serves on the house armed services community, she serves as ranking member on the subcommittee on contracting a workforce. previously, she was a businesswoman and college instructor after serving as a national security specialists in the office of the secretary of defense where she received numerous rewards for distinguished service including the secretary of defense medal for exceptional civilian service. she worked on a variety -- a range of security issues from counterterrorism to foreign notes or relations, business strategic planning for the defense department. prior to her public service, she was a strategy consultant visited are important, she holds an ms in foreign service degrees from georgetown university. fromis the ba in economics lehman there. -- the college of william and mary. in -- join me me in welcoming congresswoman murphy. murphy: i really honored to be here this morning. especially given recent events on the korean peninsula, i don't think this event could have been more timely. thank you for that one introduction. as he mentioned, he is the director of asian studies address and university. that is where i received my masters degree. ands a terrific teacher even better public servant. i am really hopeful that he will soon have another chapter. i also hope that professor cha is not great in my performance today, if he is, i hope i did better than my d+ -- that was my +. b that was my average in grad school. i was born in vietnam and came to the united states. i am also a member of the house services committee where i serve on the subcommittee for readiness for emerging threats and capabilities. in addition, along with congressman jimmy panetta from california, i cochair the house democratic caucuses national security purposes -- caucuses. democrats in help congress to propose strong, smart and strategic national security policies. to support the current administration when it advances coliseum -- foreign policies that comport with our nation's core interests and values, also, to vigorously oppose the initiation when it brings up a polished -- policies that undermine these interests. force, we of the task don't see any value in opposing the administration. i think it is about being fair and presenting smart and strong policies that work for this country. before coming to congress, i worked in a variety of roles at the department of defense where my primary reason of oak was the asia-pacific region. although i identify as a moderate democrat, i stepped to secretaries of defense who were appointed by a republican president. rumsfeld.mp held -- believer in the old-fashioned maxim that the greatest-- to the extent possible, politics should stop at the water's edge. i cling to this principle. with a sense of determination desperation.oint, i would like to underscore the importance of the alliance between the united states and south korea. identify it i believe are the two main challenges to this alliance and to offer some personal bee is from my perspective on congress regarding how these challenges can be addressed. that meeting with a few words, it has become something of a cliche for government officials to assert that the relationship between the two nations both on common interests and common values. in the case of the u.s. and south korea, this statement -- however trite it might sound, it is true. this alliance was special because it was built in battle, forged in fire and shaped by shared sacrifice. between 1950 and 1953, the citizens of our two nations side-by-side- but to prevent north korea's invasion and south korea's existence. that requiredeaty each country to come to the others defense and attack. from a largely underdeveloped country to an economic powerhouse, the u.s. has been consistently there to lend a helping hand through the provision of economics and security support. there areurrently -- currently over 28,000 u.s. troops stationed in south korea. make the -- make no mistake about it, south korea's mistake -- the talent and rate of the suffering people and the leaders -- the remarkable rise, like summons -- like so many consumer products was made in south korea. but it's like the phones that i see many of you using to fact check my speech. because our two nations bought in a war and it never really ended, because our servicemembers continue to stand together along the most dangerous borders in the world, our relationship is further from transactional. instead, it is authentic, deeply personal and resilient. this was inevitable between any partnership between proud, sovereign and democratic nations. at the same time, i believe a warning is in order. ourproven durability of economic relationship should not read complacency. is notg alliance self-sustaining, just as my husband. upkeep,res persistent it should never ever be taken for granted. let me now turn to identify what i see as the two challenges to the u.s. and south korea alliance. the first and most obvious challenge is the one posed by the increasingly belligerent, but and dangerous regime in north korea. as everyone in this room knows painfully well, north korea has now conducted six nuclear tests since october, 2000 six. each one was a violation of international law. the last four tests were conducted under the current leader kim jong-un. both rick carried out its latest detonation of a nuclear device. one that appears to have a vastly more powerful yield than the device tested back in september of 2016. this was a profoundly dangerous defiance in destabilizing the cement. -- xpected, the task has it is too early to say whether the strong words will be followed by strong action. if so, what those actions will entail. whether or not they will make any difference in altering north korea's strategic calculus. meanwhile, north korea continued to develop and test missile increasingstems of range and sophistication, having already conducted proximally 16 different tests this year alone. tests conducted derived -- in july at the security council to tighten existing sanctions and impose strict new sanctions on pyongyang. that has certainly been caused for conscious of them is in. -- cause for cautious optimism. it also remains to be seen whether the security council will agree to strengthen the sanctions even further in light of north korea's latest nuclear test. it is unclear what precise sanctions they will have on this. in the short term, north korea responded in typical fashion, firing a missile last month that flew over japan. pursued with the nuclear test in the face of broad international opposition. the reality is that we are now in truly uncharted territories. for pursuing this capability. like to avoid the leaders saddam hussein and duffy in libya to the tour and vision -- deter invasion from outside forces. naturally the welders policymakers in the united states and other like-minded countries. we regard north korea's relentless progress in its nuclear and missile programs as the full behavior that could compel the international community to take action that will result in regime change or collapse in north korea. from this perspective, north korea seems to be making a fundamental miscalculation regarding what is in its own best interest and is provocative conduct could bring about the pyongyanglt that seeks above all to avoid. this is the conundrum that lies at the heart of the debate over what to do about north korea. how do we get kim jong-un to conclude that a negotiation is the best and indeed the only way to ensure his regime survival? he has another less obvious goal in pursuing missiles capable of reaching the united states. that is to weaken the south korean alliance that we are all gathered here today. -- talk about. to undercutseeks the united states's extended deterrence of nuclear attacks. kim jong-un may well believe that he caused u.s. policymakers to act in a more unilateral fashion. can they even believe that the u.s. would hesitate to come to south korea's defense? that kim isieve making a fundamental miscalculation. if anything, the increasing threats the u.s. homeland poses should bring the u.s. and south korea closer together, not drive a wedge between us. our fates are so closely intertwined. the u.s. policymakers must make crystal clear that the commitment to south korea and the importance that washington connects is stronger than ever. north korea is the land of wild options. that leads me to what i see as the second main challenge to the alliance, it is the changing complex political dynamic in washington and seoul with the elections of president trump and president put in. i think we have a very unconditional -- unconventional leader in the white house. my concerns fall into two categories. i am concerned about the apparent inability to nominate and secure senate confirmation of qualified individuals to fill the positions at stake defense -- states defense is possible for policies toward korea and east asia. nearly eight months into this administration, there is no nominated u.s. ambassador, there is no nominated assistant secretary of east asia and pacific affairs. there is no undersecretary for arms control and international security. there is no special envoy and over at the department of defense, no individual has been nominated and confirmed for the position of assistant secretary of defense pacific affairs. no disrespect to the individuals who may be holding these positions on an interim or acting basis, some are excellent. senate confirmation provides enhanced credibility and stability. when it comes to international affairs in general and alliance preservation in particular, personnel is policy. i am heartened that irresponsible individuals like steve bannon and sebastian gorka have departed. nevertheless, the fact remains that you need subject matter asked -- experts at every level at the national security bureaucracy to develop and is a key policy. to deter adversaries. the administration has been skewed and severely rep -- severely lacking in this respect. i second concern about the trumpet ministration is this, too many members of the administration, including the president himself do not appreciate that the rhetoric that use and actions they take to appeal to certain domestic political constituencies can cause relationships with foreign allies harm and underline -- undercut our national security. consider the initial reaction be a twitter to north korea's most recent nuclear test. if there was an event who's gravity required a response more than 100 40 characters, this was a. unfortunately, the president turned to social media. itself,was the message he accused south korea of appeasement. invoking the historical memory of neville chamberlain failed efforts to stop german aggression by agreeing to demands. using such a loaded term may play well with a certain segment of the president's base but it is hard to overstate just how false, how bullish, and how potentially -- how foolish and how potentially damaging this can be. facing a threat by a rogue nuclear state. the leader of the most powerful nation on earth chooses to twitter shame and twitter our close ally. if one of north korea's goals is to test the south korean alliance, pyongyang must be positively people over this twitter exchange. i am also worried by reports that the trump administration, again with an eye pleasing a domestic political audience intends tohat it withdraw from the fta. it was modified and finalized and approved by congress with bipartisan support under the obama administration. the united states and korea are major economic partners. the united states is korea's second-largest trading partner after china and korea is the seventh largest trading partner for the u.s.. to defend here is not every cause toward fta. i think it is a beneficial agreement for both countries. i want to the size -- emphasize that president bush and president obama saw this as more than just a trigger. vehicle to it as a expand influence with a vital ally in a key region. korea.as an fta with u.s. policymakers should want our economy and korea's economy to be tied more closely together, not less. against this backdrop, a drawteral decision would from this agreement, even if this is a tactical ploy to renegotiate aspects of the agreement will likely be seen as a betrayal of america's commitment to the broader n incrediblya precarious time. if the u.s. can't trust to do trade with south korea on this, why should korea believe our security assurances are real? i have the trumpet ministration is asking itself hard questions like this and that it will proceed with wisdom and care. two characteristics i have seen in short supply so far in this administration. but because with a thought about the importance of u.s. leadership and the role in -- of congress in making sure that congress does not retreat from its responsibilities. i understand calls to put withca first can resonate hard-working families throbbed united states who are struggling here at home who sincerely wonder wife your spending precious taxpayer dollars on defense, diplomacy and development abroad. i believe thate, the united states is safer, stronger and more prosperous when her service members, our diplomats andd our aid workers are sufficiently numbered, adequately resourced and deeply engaged with the world. whenorld is a better place we work side-by-side with our partners in asia and other regions. both to prevent conflict and prepare ourselves to prevail, should conflict occur. a little personal story to share how strongly i support this principle that the u.s. and global security flow from and depend on u.s. and global engagement. post 10 sixer to euros for my son's kindergarten class. they were visiting washington and we were walking toward the world war ii museum. one of the little boys asked me, miss stephanie, why hasn't there been a world war iii? i gave what i believe to be a truthful and perhaps not exactly age-appropriate response. i told him there were two main reasons why we had not experienced direct and devastating conflict between major powers in the last 60 years, the first is u.s. leadership around the world. j whether is institutions and alliances that the united states and partners in europe and asia established after world war ii. if this child grows up to be the commander, iific will take credit. my experience on capitol hill has led me to believe there is a strong bipartisan recognition in congress that alliances matter. the matter a great deal. this is good because i am also of the view that congress, as a coequal branch of government and the one with the primary power of the purse should not be timid about exercising considerable authority. we should use the power conferred upon us by article one of the constitution and wielded in a way that is consistent with nationalstanding interests and values. ideally without approval of the second branch but over it necessary. sees the top administration take any step toward weakening our alliance with south korea, congress should step in. i will wrap up here. i look forward to the q&a, thank you again for the invitation. [applause] >> i will let you think of a couple of questions. congress has been quite active on the north korean issue. lee: we are arming the administration, whether it is republican or democrat. in your discussion, it was a very thoughtful discussion of north korea, he mentioned that part of the solution was that they had recognize that their survival comes through some sort of negotiated settlement. , from yourn is perspective, what is -- what does the congress see in terms of that side of the equation? in terms of this question of councilwoman murphy: we have to exhaust all means possible in that. we have provided tools on sanctions. there is a level of uncertainty as to how well and permitted the sanctions have been. it is why earlier this year i introduced a bill to call for a north korean and television. they would have all of the intel agencies work together and cia has since put together their own intel. within that bill, one of the areas of focus was to gather the information we need to ascertain whether or not -- how well these actions have been implemented and whether or not they are having an effect. said,k, as you have people think sanctions don't work. being ones everybody board and executing on their piece of that. i think we need to push forward and make sure that the sanctions are implement it to the post extent possible and to see what other means we can apply to create pressure and encouraged north korea. : the other place that congress has played an important role is human rights. there was a groundswell of interest in this issue with you and commission report 50 years ago. to what extent does congress view and your policy yourself playing a role and what parts would be renewed and what is -- it seems to have dissipated. is a one area that we have expressed -- i think one area that we have expressed this, there is still an interest in seeing human rights addressed. of thelarly because connection that you have often raised. there is this connection between north korea's human rights and the way it is getting resources to fund some of the neutral development. ambassador lee: let me open the floor to questions. if you ask a question, please tell us what you are and i think for the sake of our guests in the audience, we would appreciate questions rather than questions disguised as something else. task in d.c.,ard it is like asking a politician to be brief. >> we have one from rob. rob: congresswoman, think you for a address. president trump has indicated that perhaps he is considering giving notice to a withdrawal. would it be possible that congress can override him on this? they had bipartisan was -- bipartisan support. that initiative be taken? >> in the be a huge mistake. beneficial to a lot of states for this country. i think there are members of congress who are deeply interested in seeing it continue. this is no funds shall be used to them, a referral from the fda. how will be one option on congress can intercept often like that. -- something like that. >> at yes. good morning. the microphone is coming. it in your speech many-- is yet to fill positions in the executive branch. in europe's invasion, why question -- in your observation, why? >> when it comes to the state department, there have been a number of articles written when it comes to the dismantling of that department and i really believe that if you look at your and personnel policy you will see with the priorities are. i am careful that the lack of appointments and some of the funding cuts i've seen it me diplomatic and development phase are a reflection of where this administration priorities are. that is an area where i disagree. our tools of national power andude diplomacy and intel economics, not just military. so we cannot rely solely on that. >> yes. right here. >> ken myers, tv producer. yesterday a representative of one of the member states of the u.n. said when a rogue regime icbm nuclear weapon and pointed at you, you do not take steps to lower your guard. we certainly won't do that. it a representative of the united states or north korea? of course, it was nikki haley of the u.s. couldn't the north koreans make the same statement with equal legitimacy? rep. murphy: could you repeat the last sentence? >> can at the north koreans make the same statement nikki haley did with equal legitimacy? in. murphy: i think it is korea's -- north korea's development of nuclear weapons and their missiles are in violation of international law. , in the u.s., possessions of our weapons are not. is indevelopment violation of international law. -- there development is in violation of international law. >> ok, we will go to this section. visiting fellow at the u.s.-korea institute at johns hopkins university. handling looks very interesting to me. andnormalization with cuba it may be in danger or not. what kind of implication can i find? rep. murphy: at a time when north korea is so aggressively advancing its nuclear weapons its missiles, technology in violation of international law, returnard to imagine a to normalization like with cuba. i mean, i think those are very areas.nt what north korea's doing in the area right now is aggressively destabilizing. flaunting international norms. i think moving to normalization without some sort of halt or agreement to roll back with him done illegally would be a mistake. >> yeah. i quote often, for those of us who study and bring up cuba, iran, try to drop parallels. on the surface they may look like they are parallels but if you look at it with any degree of detail, they are very different. in the cuba case there is the obvious different. you but did not have an aggressive testing campaign to threaten u.s. territory which makes the conditions very difficult for a model of discussion. let me -- >> yes, ma'am, right there. christina, i am a legislative fellow. i think in light of recent events, the big elephant in the room is this question of south korea nuclear rising south korea risingorth korea nuclear -- think >> if you could share with us the pulse of u.s. congress on .his issue of nuclearization reducing nuclear weapons around the world, i do not think necessarily we should allow what is going on here with andh korea to escalate -- nuclearize. as long as the commitment exists and is a firm commitment on the u.s. part, there should not be a need for south korea to develop nuclear capabilities. having said that, you know, there are a number of areas where it appears the administration is making some adjustments to south korea's defense of capabilities. we all understand given those weapons, those thresholds, payloads, things ake that changing, it creates bond with china and russia so we have to be very careful how we allow these actions to contribute to or take away from the region. >> you just mentioned china, could you say a little bit about your views on how you think china has been handling this? and, what do you think the administration's policy is having these secondary sanctions in their back pocket? listrectly sanction and chinese companies and entities if the chinese are cooperative? i would love to hear your views. >> you know, i think china has a very important role to play here. whether or not this exercises full range of ability to influence the situation come i think the answer to that is probably falling short of full range. although chinese government officials will tell you we are overestimating chinese power over north korea. so, you know, secondary sanctions are just too encourage china to think differently about it. i wonder if this nuclear test is not make it think differently about its role. i think you have to think in terms of caret and stick. what we have been trying to push china to do is sanction north korea, make it painful for them not to continue the game of thrones theme bank, winter is peninsula.he any oil sanctions at this time that is the stick. but what is the caret. korea no matter how many people say it? how can china provide some sort of assurances on that caret in addition to the stick in order to get some traction? thrones goes on in my head. i am not a game of thrones person but i am sure 99.9% of the people here are. no offense to hbo or anything. >> yes, over here. journalist in south korea. i have two questions to you and the first question is about the -- it is actually under this alliance. part of the alliance, i would russia know if under the and trump administration, what are the commonalities and policieses in the towards the korean peninsula question mark the second the new is as ambassador to korea, your -- val date, [laughter] >> why has it been delayed? so much has been under this trump administration that you touched on today. many conditions regarding the nation, issues. i would just like to know. that is all. murphy: i will give you a minute to accept or do position. in the alliance, you know, as with many things with this administration there is more or changehan action in policy as of yet. if we move forward, that will be a significant change in policy but right now we're just hearing a change in tone and how we are talking to a dear ally. if you look at what we have done know, thereent, you is a significant investment in asia security. withntinue to do exercises south korea. i mean, all of the things that have been cornerstones of the date.ce are continuing to to take thatnot for granted that it will continue. but i think right now we are just trying to deal with a little bit of the rhetoric and that has been the main change. >> great. well, stephanie thank you so much for taking the time. [laughter] >> i thought, i mean, your comments were extremely thoughtful. i know that you have traveled to the region and you are emerging as one of the leaders on asian policy and korea on the hill. knowing this is your first day back and the agenda you have in front of you, we really do appreciate you taking the time to be with us. so, ladies and gentlemen let's think the congressman very much.