tv Foreign Policy Experts Discuss Diplomacy with North Korea CSPAN April 2, 2021 6:03pm-7:09pm EDT
it's an important conversation on diplomacy with north korea. here to kick off a conversation is secretary of state bernard korean defense marc knapper. i'm member of the partner partners they had served as deputy assistant secretary for curry and japan. prior to assuming his position mark was in foreign affairs and deputy chief. he is served in japan vietnam and iraq and has experience working in north korea and won numerous awards for thank you for being your day and take it away. thanks so much abby. really really grateful to be here today. thank you to the center for american progress. i was asked to make her mark this morning on a very important issue. i've been asked to focus my remarks on the importance over northeast asian allies japan and
south korea and given the importance of these relationships between countries and tackling our shared challenges including the challenge of -- as all of you are where two weeks ago is secretary of state lincoln and secretary of defense austan visited them and these were the first tops on the first overseas visit of any member of president biden's cabinet. it is not a coincidence. it was a conscious decision made to underscore what president biden has time and again dispersed that diplomacy is back at the center of american foreign policy and cherishing and strengthening our alliance in relationships are at the center of american foreign policy. nowhere is this more true in origins in northeast asia where japan is public of korea represent two of our strongest and most enduring alliances and friendships and during secretary of lincoln and austan's meetings
with senior leadership in tokyo and seoul might then define the critical importance of these alliances a meeting challenges we faced in not just north east asia but in the pacific and around the world. secretary blinken lu recently said there categories of threats that we had and our allies including northeast asia face today in the region and around the world and they are military threats from other countries. and of course we see this in north korea in nuclear and missile capabilities not only in the united states but her allies one of secretary blinken's messages was it's important to closely coordinate with these two allies as the united states
undertakes north korean policy reviews for this review continues and i'm afraid i don't have news on their content or outcome but what i can say is that the outset of the biden administration we have made extremely clear or strong commitment to share coordinate loosely with seoul in tokyo as we examine north korean politics. indeed our acting assistant secretary met virtually early on with south korean and japanese counterparts. these were not one-off meetings are courtesy calls but rather these represented the beginning and details of conversations ongoing and reflect their commitment to ensure we confront the critical national security and foreign-policy guidance of north korea. as secretary blinken describe
the setting category of emerging threats that the united states and her allies face are north korea and china and others like russia and iran. these are technical economic and informational threats that can undermine our security and they include the disinformation campaigns as well as cyber attacks that target are critical in the structure entered into our banking system in steel or intellectual property. the third category of threats described iyer secretary are that of global threats, climate change in covid-19. these are global threats transnational in nature are things like higher temperatures rising sea levels and more intense storms that affect everything from military maintenance to human migration and food security and is the covid-19 pandemic has made
abundantly clear our health security worldwide is intertwined and is only as strong as our weakest link. so to adjust these threats and to strengthen our ability to address them the united states and our northeast allies in south korea are doing three things. first we are recommitting to our alliance is our shared values. as secretary blinken in austan said in tokyo and seoul our assistance to her allies is unshakable and ironclad and we recently concluded negotiations on burden sharing agreements that would help maintain health disparity in a free and in the pacific for years to come. as i said earlier we had her allies are engaged in serious and wide-ranging conversations about the north korean challenge and how best to address it. our alliances were created to defend our shared values and to
that end we renew our commitment requiring approval and the foundation of international relations that we vowed to protect for free and open rules-based order. we must confront challenges to our democracies around the world and we have to speak up in countries backslide from democracy and human rights. this is a message secretary blinken delivered in tokyo and seoul including the military tool in the violence in burma including a threat to religious freedom with china with the weaker sarin xinjiang and the erosion of hong kong's economy, i'm sorry hong kong's autonomy and the undermining of international state. the second thing these allies are doing their modernizing and this begins with improving our military capabilities to and sure we maintain strong incredible military deterrence.
this includes of course our extended deterrence ensuring our are safe and effective but this is critical keeping our commitments to run a credible as we take steps to further the role of nuclear weapons in national security. in addressing this in tokyo and seoul we pledge to work with her japanese and free and alleys to it dressed the complex security challenges in the region. these of course include threats of economics to the logical and informational realms. we enter japanese allies face. and what comes to economic collision in particular something we are facing over the years would have to respond this allies and work together to root to several mobility by ensuring our economies are more integrated with each other than her critical can predators and
ensuring our supply chains are resilient same norms and entered in emerging technology and ensuring fairer steps to impose costs on those who -- so with their japanese and korean allies we are committing ourselves to expanding our ability to address transnational threats as well especially as we mentioned earlier climate change and covid-19. these challenges are so far-reaching integrated into everything we do and must be coordinate across a wide array of order ships. as alleys where sink seeking to strengthen our bilateral coal corp. is so critical to our shared security and prosperity. secretary blinken's message is with our country's cooperation the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. together our countries have a unique capabilities to tackle
some of the regions in the world. secretary blinken speaks of the knee credibility when he served as the beauty secretary of state arce three countries met at the deputy secretary and vice minister level to discuss a wide range of shared challenges. north korea of course but also many other issues like iran and the stand the middle east peace process counterterrorism the development cancer research and the list goes on and on and it's important that we work on it together. improving the democratic allies in our countries we have unique opportunity and a unique responsibility to work together to take on some of the world's most pressing problems and to that end the united states and
the biden administration will continue to seek ways to strengthen our countries bonds modernize and recommit to our alliances and together take on security and other challenges not just in the regions but around the world. thank you very much. a spin thank you so much marc knapper for taking the time to meet with us today and for your remarks. we appreciate you joining us. thank you. next i would like to come if our panelists could turn their audience video back on it like to introduce them as we move onto the next portion of our program. excellent. today we have three esteemed panelists here to talk about the world of trilateral cooperation and diplomacy to three. we have jessica lee focusing on
the asian-pacific region with the emphasis on the lights of north korea. she. >> she's to read the counsel of korean-americans and has worked with the -- we also have professor yasuyu sakata with international studies in geneva japan. she specializes in security of alliances with u.s. south korean trilateral relations. she was a research fellow at the research institute for peace and security studies program has benefited a research fellow at the university at the center for study at george washington university and finally we have frank aum the senior expert of north korea. overseas institutes worked under three and focuses on ways to strengthen diplomacy to enhance peace and stability on the korean peninsula. he worked at the department of defense including a special counsel army general counsel to -- for asian and pacific security affairs and senior
adviser for this the day -- secretary defense. thank you for joining us today. to kick up a conversation in past half a year or so how do you see prospects for diplomacy in this evisceration what did you think of a austan blinken trip and what it means for north korean policy. >> thank you so much abby and thank you for organizing this timely discussion. thank you for being so accessible and that great overview as well. i will just say a few words and we'll get to a couple more specific questions later on abby but i would say obviously there's an eerie deal of interest in what the biden administration on north korea and policy will be and i think that will give us a good sense of how the next four years will look in terms of u.s. engagement with north korea. in general i think it's really
important to remember rather than treating the trump administration high-level engagement with north korea as an aberration the biden of should build on those efforts that were begun by the former president. i think one way to do that is to embrace the rules that were laid out and really making that the starting point. doing this is not just part of policy at think its good for politics because by retaining one of the key signature foreign-policy initiatives of the republican centric president biden would be a loose signal to congress and the country that this is not a matter of partisan bickering and partisanship and that there is a clear roadmap ahead for the united states that will entail diplomacy rather than -- [inaudible] of course we all remember the talks between the united states
and north korea broke down in sweden and there's a fear from the from mark said the president top advisers that president biden is going to be using that summit to initiate talks and that there will be clear expectations in terms of what the united states wants to negotiate. i think what's critically important to remember today is the cant just be one-sided. in the last press conference president biden stated he is prepared for some form of diplomacy with our three of that he conditioned it upon the end result of these talks what that means is president biden is saying the united states won't negotiate with north korea and anything until -- and i think
that a short-sighted. seems like a maximalist policy that will do to please drink than north korea to build more nuclear weapons and the firm. nor you about this issue. pursuing the same failed policy of maximum pressure has been a failure so the biden of -- and asia who claim otherwise about maximum pressure appeared i think asking for everything if the u.s. government can learn that important lesson how can americans be assured that u.s. policy -- in terms of japan and south korea in north korean policy the message is that the u.s. has to move towards these
and consult allies to tackle challenges like these. if this were range of specific order and the importance of building allies in the preeminence of in the pacific region and think for south korea all eyes on the elections for the mayoral races. south korean presidential elections are your way and currently the approval raiding for the president as well as the party the democratic party are the lowest in 10 years. the focus i think will be on how the administration manages domestic policies and domestic constraints along issues of forward-looking foreign-policy goals. of course japan's prime minister's approval raiding is at 40% which is a sharp decline in its december and support in general is quite low among the
public. there's disappointed after investing seven years and $12 billion no foreign visitors will be allowed to go to japan and some analysts there has been hoped that the olympics would divide the mutual ground for public diplomacy and direct communication including north korea. that was part of the hope so i would end by saying i had the great pleasure of working in a trilateral working group on business and for an national foreign-policy where we looked into this and what happened to elevate the question of the trilateral cooperation with north korea is incredibly valuable for folks like we here in washington as well as folks in the region for explaining
what is happening so i look forward to engaging with you. >> i am curious where you see biden's north korea policy going and if it looks like it's going to be going in what you consider a good direction? >> thank you abby and thank you to the center for american progress. i agree with what jessica said. i would add i'm a bit test mystic about the prospects of diplomacy and of the biden administration. outside of u.s. government controlled things like north korea going into lockdown to prevent covid exposure they are on their own timeline for when they will reemerge into international diplomacy but i also haven't been encouraged by recent signals that you may
wonder why north korea seems open to diplomacy and the biden demonstrations talks about diplomacy and why is that not reassuring? the think it's partly because both sides seem to be exerting the same type of pressure policy that is the they abused in the past and certainly north korea and their use of harsh rhetoric and missile tests with .2 byte and team officials. during the presidential debates there was one question and north korea and the waive lightning internet was by saying i'm going to talk with china and they are going to change a few things i don't like things like military ramp ups to reign in north korean that was his opening statement related to china and using pressure. that's not encouraging press secretary blinken during his confirmation hearing talks about looking at options to increase
pressure on north korea and a point about drescher in his recent testimony to the house foreign affairs committee. he made links about looking at pressure points in response to did -- so all of this seems to point to a policy very similar to one used during the obama administration which is use pressure but also engage and rely on pressure to coerce north korea back to the negotiating table but on u.s.'s preferred terms and this is a little bit disconcerting. i can't find empirical evidence that that pressure works on north korea or china piggybacked if you look at the period between 2012 and 2018 which was the longest period over the last 30 years into which we did not engage in sustained engagement with north korea north korea
bans or nuclear weapons the greatest were resolved for nuclear tests and o'brady listed missile tests including some at intercontinental range. that leads me to believe that we may be seeing a repeat of the policies of the past but of course there has been some mention about looking at diplomatic incentives but i think i'm going to lower my expectations for the moment. >> yasuyu sakata i'm curious to hear your views about tokyo and also what you see as the steps that these allies and partners can do to potentially reopen diplomatic pathways. >> thank you very much and good evening from tokyo. i did at my cherry blossoms. why not? the this season and also thank you to the center for american
progress and the great palace here as well as marc knapper for his keynote remarks. it is great timing to touch base on trilateral cooperate in and to tackle the difficult issue of north korea once again terry at so to answer your question i am supposed to give it couple of comments on number one on itunes prospect for diplomacy number one what has changed is the convention but hopefully we will be more allied and that wasn't there during the trump administration because the previous presidents personalized diplomacy so it's difficult for
the diplomats to coordinate policies. that's number one but number two on north korea as president biden said hopefully we will be more principled with more conventional diplomacy that is top-level attention under guarded by a working level preparation if diplomacy is going to start at a thing jessica and franks said the biden administration if it is going to embark on diplomacy it should take advantage of the a legacy that is the opening of the channel with kim jong-un and also the singapore agreement and the principles of it and pick up
and work from whatever happened in hanoi. but at the same time not only is pressure important in keeping diplomacy sustainable for all of us, their relationships with both up from 2016 to 2017 is one of those legacies to keep -- that the obama to mr. h. and did make and plus the trump administration with maximum pressure but if there is to be diplomacy now is the time to figure out among the allies how to utilize sanctions the ups and downs of the speak within the diplomacy with north korea.
the last point on japan with the change in leadership i think jessica mentioned it but japan remains of course wary actor in this trilateral coalition and but japan continues on the abe line of keeping the door open right from the onset of when he came into power and number when he gave talks a speech at the united nations general assembly. he said he would keep the door open for talks with kim jong-un without conditions based on the japan dprk declaration of 2002 which means in the end -- that
the comprehensive resolution. nuclear missiles but also he did mention the colonial era so it's all that it those are the conditions he started out with but as we say it's covid covid and it's the olympics and many issues domestically and frankly speaking it has been very hard for the prime minister to make any real initiatives at this point. i will just end it here with those comments. ..
mech well i think first of all, it has been on the wrong track, for too long we had basically relied on specific tools of defense and deterrence to prevent north korea objective. maintain strong robust terms. but it think as a result of the focus on these tools, peace building has played a secondary role in washington's approach. so it comes about as a result rather than being a driver.
we are so focused on human rights improvements, it's concerns about the charity. the positive north korea takes before we're willing to have any discussions about normalization. it requires north korea to assume greater risk before it has any benefits. this was not a realistic path for them to take it. i think the use of a trend u.s. has a more powerful country in a better position to take greater risk for peace. we need to elevate peace building as part of the strategy equal to the goal and security. i think these goals go hand-in-hand and are
complementary. what i would recommend is a bold peace offensive by the united states and under this approach we would preserve our deterrence, maintain denuclearization as a long-term goal. but we would also signal a comprehensive effort to strengthen our relationship and build peace. i think this announcement should include the reaffirmation of the unit rattle consulting measures up front for the unilateral moratorium with into the travel ban and north korea income more into play again sanctions are a necessary tool to force international laws. of course the need to be
maintained as a part of our policy but we have to recognize what impact sanctions hampered that a feared while appeared to be effective if you look at customs a data and bilateral trade numbers between north korea and china. that seems to be the case. but there is a difference between imposing cost and changing behavior. there is no empirical evidence that suggests they change north korea's behavior if they wanted to. i have some other ideas will say that for later. >> i'm interested here should think about the bold offensive? >> thanks abby. i apologize. not only the merits of this
argument that i agree with, with written x extensively about to pursue a political reason for more technical nuclear challenge. by no means holistic problems at hand. in thinking is a former congressional aide where food be today about this budget we have on the defense department. there in lies reimagining conveyance of u.s. interests. discussions about peace and political solution in conflict resolution just does not get enough public funding and support. i do think that is part of the problem. ny u.s. military, u.s. foreign policy excuse me toward the world has become so militarily
dominant at the expense of some is more cost-effective and durable solutions. i would just add to what frank said having trilateral died like the deputy area states to pursue these kinds of tricky, thorny issues like north korea on the trilateral basis. i think the biggest barrier to that in my mind is washington's tendency to make virtually everything about the indo pacific, about covering china. i think that bodes very badly for navigating this very sensitive to rain. especially korea. you know, anyone who will have a north korea issue will know this is 1 of the more difficult intricate problems facing the united states. it's going to require a sophisticated approach. one that realizes the vital
importance of north korea is much as we want to cooperate with allies like north korea and japan. i agree with the professor, hoping channels of diplomacy with truck to practitioners korean americans, military families and others who been looking at this issue for decades to see what they think. what is the u.s. government missing? what are its blind spots? that was the time to figure all that out. and really get the best information possible to 3 countries. i think to frank's earlier point about sanctions and an over going to talk about that more, 1 thing i want to highlight is that quincy institute recently sent a letter with 54 organizations to president biden to make public the result of a review that's currently ongoing in terms of sanctions and their impact on covid recovery. this letter highlights the fact that stigmatized general
humanitarian activities like north korea and iran. it made it much more bureaucratic and difficult for delivery of humanitarian system in these countries but i think washington, tokyo and seoul can conduct a similar assessment to see what restrictions are in place with respect to delivering north korea. figuring out how to get more vaccines come to countries in the region and other kinds of humanitarian cooperation that would certainly be low hanging. certainly within the capabilities of the 3 economies. and could generate very good will. among the countries but of course north koreans difficult case it has refused vaccines in certain countries and has made it very difficult to ascertain the level of covid pandemic spread and the country. so we know very little. it's going to be difficult. i think these gestures and the
work that quite frankly happens behind the scenes at the working level among diplomats, it may not be glorious or glamorous, but it certainly makes a think a world of difference because it allows us to ask critical questions about how we got here, what are the practical steps needed to reduce tensions in the region. in a course what are the threats that no board like pandemics that should be an urgent priority. climate change as well at the top it think these are the ways in which the 3 countries can have a more practical, pragmatic approach rather than deploying a hair on fire war with north korea imminent kind of language that does not help anyone put the american interest at risk, put our allies at risk. i think further justifies a military approach that legitimized north korea's concern about it.
i thank you so much jessica. building on frank injustices comments you think there's a political space was some boulder less nuclear station issue north korea or any political to humanitarian cooperation or cooperation in nontraditional function? >> thank you. i'll add 3 points to what has been said as a result answer your question. number 1, and looking for opening up dialogue has been mentioned using humanitarian means basically covid and vaccines and so forth, that would be a venue. it does not have to be trilateral per se. that would be a venue and opening up some channels so to
speak to reach out to the north koreans. but of course let's see, as well as u.s. >> to the grievance, the pows humanitarianism. those are venues to once again how do you say reserve. but with covid of course we have to figure out if that is the impossible. in any case responses to covid mandatory responses, the pows, would be a place to start. number 2, indo pacific. in the pacific was just china but it was mr. knapp said a
free and open international order. looking from u.s./japan alliance menu to keep the focus in china as well. especially statements and so forth. president biden will have their first summit. china is like on top of the agenda and of course north korea agenda as well. the u.s. and japan have to respond to both threats at the same time. we give example, the missile threat. now japan and the united states the ships are very, very busy because we have to
attend to north korean missile threat 24 hours -- 3 to 65 days. but the same time we also have to attend to the southwestern island. in the needed there as well. it's a matter of priority. it is not a or b either or. we need to focus on both issues at the same time. that is a big headache the u.s. alliance. live it reversal of role so to speak. this brings to my third point that frank mentioned about comprehensive the comprehensiveness of diplomacy towards north korea.
if i can make it more comprehensive diplomacy is within a set of policies that make up the whole program once again number 1, defense is important and we need to cooperate on this and number 2, nuclear and denuclearization, that word has to be there. that is where we need to cooperate. that is the biggest question right now, diplomacy and how to use sanctions. number 3, definitely peace building. because south korea needs it is about conventional threats as well. but also it's the long road which includes u.s. and japan. diplomacy with north korea has to be placed in the hole 3
pillars so to speak as we try to figure out a trilateral strategy towards north korea. i will stop my comments there, thank you. >> thank you so much. i think 1 last question before we switch to audience questions is building up this idea of getting the trilateral together on north korea internet innovative way. and also the trilateral network and focus on my note mr. knapp had mentioned some of these in his speech but are there any areas you would all like to see the biden administration, i know there other areas you really like to see trilateral cooperation start to address both whether the indo pacific or specifically in the region of northeast asia, let's start with you. >> okay. i think it has all been mentioned by jessica and mr. knapp by the way. so global threats, global
issues as well. i think 1 of the pressing issues is digital economy, rural making, and japan these overcome her expert control. the economic cooperation and economic security is 1 of the top issues. whether indo pacific context or just globally. and japan is trying to promote the digital free flow of trust. and already i think in the global talks. but those are areas we need to really see face-to-face with each other. in the united states can help facilitate the dialogue in this area. i will just mention that 1 only, thank you. >> thank you. frank or jessica do you have anything to add to that before we move to audience questions?
>> i'll just jump in really quickly. i am not going to repeat follow those diverse range of areas that japan and the united states have interest in and cooperate on, there is a lot. i do want to note there is a problem here when we try to focus so much on the common areas of cooperation that we downplay the historical issues. and it seems like it is having a negative impact on we don't address the underlying issues. it seems odd to me as a prime u.s. goal and eastern asia created regional integrating touring but we are not devoting sufficient attention to the 1 issue that seems to be keeping our 2 main allies apart. if you are facing your
european strategy on native and european immigration. it probably pretty difficult without seeing complete reconciliation between germany and france or germany and the broader jewish community in europe. i think we need to see something like this in east asia. we take the necessary steps to repair i don't think japan is there yet. i'm not as optimistic about because of the parties in power. they made progress in the political we have left-leaning political party of power were
able to seek things in the same other advances in bilateral relations. similarly we saw when there is a center-right party were able to see advances in security cooperation in advances like the 65 normalization treaty as an agreement that allows the cooperation to happen eventually. but again these agreement's were problematic because they did not address some underlying issues. and now we are seeing these agreements starting to fray a bit. that is the reason for some of my pessimism. i just wanted to point out that it can be problematic we try to sweep historical issues under the rug. swint thank you frank, jessica jim anything to add?
>> guest: sure, i'm not sure you can hear me, i am experiencing some internet issues at the moment. i will just say a few words. i think in general trilateral is not an objective in and of itself or its obviously means working collaboratively to get things done. and for the u.s. it's a means of securing our interest. and so i think we need to sort of keep that in mind. i think trilateral cooperation though be very useful in the context of climate change management to very high priority of this administration and obviously japan has made plans to tackle that challenge at an unprecedented rate. i do see some hope there will be cooperation on that issue in the future. spent awesome thank you so much with every thing assurance of our pride we have a question from the audience asking about the state of covid north korea and what is being done in addition to how humanitarianism works as part of covid if there interest and
options for united states supporting humanitarian needs in north korea. >> [laughter] stomach i will take that. north korea is the black hole of information. but we do know north korea instituted a severe lockdown on its borders. nothing is getting in and everything they do they are corn team for several weeks in advance prior to coming in and after coming in north korea is not claiming any covid cases as it has in the past. that is hard to believe. there have been reports about covid exposure and north korea among those at the border.
think the bottom line is north korea is implementing very severe measures due to covid. the question is, when it will feel comfortable enough to list these measures and reengage in the international community. the u.s. government has already offered covid assistance in the past north korea has rejected that. it is also make it more difficult to provide humanitarian assistance and north korea has been rejecting different offers for aid as well. it's a matter find the right combination of what would big north korea comfortable but it's not direct aid from the u.s. but might be 8 from international community through kovach and other facilities that provide assistance and they manner that north korea feels comfortable. suspect thank you so much frank. we have a question with radio free asia. what was recently said the u.s. and china's intersecting and north korea were to see
the trajectory cooperation on north korea going? >> could you repeat the question again? >> secretary of state blanket recently said the united states and china have intersecting interest in north korea. where you see the trajectory of u.s./china cooperation on north korea going? ischemic i mean i can jump in other people want to pass. i think it depends upon the direction of policy. because right now, there should be overlap between the united states and china on north korea. they both want to see stable. they want to see equalization of north korea. it depends how you get there, right? because china believes they
want the u.s. and north korea to resolve these issues bilaterally first. they want to make sure there is no tension on the peninsula. and they certainly want to avoid instability, right? but if the approach is to pressure north korea and to enlist chinese assistance in pressuring north korea while china does not agree with that. from that point of view there is no overlap. in fact china and russia have been advocating for sanctions relief. they propose a sanctions relief package in late 2019. i believe that's what came today. depends on the approach that the united states takes. if the united states wants to engage with north korea and wants to get china to pressure north korea to be more flexible in engaging, there are things we can work on. but it's so late sanctions based unsure if china has any interest of forcing it. >> thank you very much frank. professor going to direct this
next question to you. as united gage engage other allies in the indo pacific region and southeast asia to encourage denuclearization? >> thank you. i guess the question is meant when it says t nuclear more broadly in a global sense that is, >> i assume it's about north korea and then broader. i think denuclearization to north korea's pride the main thing. >> okay, okay, thank you. actually the u.s. is already engaging other allies and also partners on north korea. first of all in the quad statement the
u.s./australia/japan and india in that statement in your colorization of north korea was embedded into that statement. so that is number 1. number 2, i think the united states will also need to visit south east asia and engage them in the indo pacific as well as get their support actually re- support to do colorization on the peninsula of north korea. they have been doing so with statements and so forth. that is another step to take. and also, with eu and european countries and also at the united states nations security council the united nations. at an addition to that there's a question from mr. taylor
about denuclearization of north korea, which definition accurately expresses. so this jargon about the denuclearization became a little bit of issue unfortunately. in the past week. but i think to me, the united states how do you say, the court definition would be that conceits and irreversible denuclearization of north korea. which has been instated into the united nations security council resolution as well as mr. blinken's trilateral statement back in 2017, 2016 and so forth. that is japanese real intent.
[laughter] but of course diplomatically at think the whole korean peninsula itself denuclearization is used. if you read the singapore statements, and has a third pillar, denuclearization. it says, it is very well-crafted. it says north korea will pursue denuclearization of the north korean peninsula. course they have their own definition. but it was well-crafted i think. so denuclearization north korea is the court definition. because of united states policy as well as japan's. and i think south korea as well, thank you. >> thank you professor. as we approach the last couple of minutes i'm curious to know if all of you have sort of a quick final take what you would hope our audience members leave with about what is being done on north korea?
and what you think our ways were sort of a key weight folks can change in thinking about how united states and allies. lesser through jessica. >> yes think tharp sorry about the hiccups today up of the wife fight in my house. the first thing i will say is that it is really important to understand sort of i think at the highest level possible why this issue has to be taken very seriously. i want to point to 1 survey i saw at eurasia group foundation release last september in which majority of both shrum and biden supporters believe that the united states should negotiate directly with adversaries to try to avoid counter military confrontation. even if they are human rights abusers, dictators are home terrorist organizations. and i think this issue up a very rigid form policy
orthodoxy of never negotiating with dictators or this case north korea unless several aspirational goals have been met. i think it is dangerous and also not at all in line with through the american public is for the american public is not what war with north korea. there would be no winners in such a conflict. only losers. and so i think this is a clear point i want to sort of leave this conversation with. there are so many terminologies and words that are used to describe this issue. and i think there is this special sort of prejudice and special way of talking about north korea that makes it very problematic to find any productive solutions going forward. seems very maximalist. it's to our demand we dominate you, that is sort of the tone and the tenor of the language we employ the me talk about north korea.
in that is not helpful. i do not think that is where the american public what some are democrats. i like to see more serious work being done to really meet north korea in the middle as opposed to continuing to pursue positions that are giving north korea at frankly time to make more sophisticated weapons it is entirely counterproductive it's dangerous it's volatile. i would kind of leave it at that. and really strict think so jessica, frank. >> so i guess the take away point i want to leave the audience with is that there is a general consensus. this is experts in even the intelligence community, the general consensus is north korea is not going to do nuclear rise in the near or medium-term, right? this means that north korea is a defective nuclear weapon
company i'm not going by the definition of the liberation treaty just recognizing north korea now possesses nuclear weapons, right customer cathing given this reality we should be looking at everything we can do to maximize or engage with north korea. so again in terms of defense those are bedrock's of our security and we should maintain that. but we are basically trying to increase our security with 1 hand tied behind our back. that's a diplomatic engagement aspect. we need to be doing everything we can to increase our mutual understanding about north korea's interest and concern and vice versa. we need to increase understanding about how both countries think about its nuclear weapons. we want to try to build trust with different aspects of the north korean government. and to reduce the risk of this calculation and miscommunication.
also military to military engagement, parliamentary engagement, academic and scientific exchanges and humanitarian. again we are to nuclear weapon companies. concern about any pulse it tries isolate north korea like a scared animal into a corner. spoon thank you so much frank. >> thank you. i would like to second what has been said. number 1, north korea -- but china is the biggest issue but north korea is an urgent issue. and we need dialogue to reduce the nuclear threat. and that is the agenda, priority agenda of the biden administration, the biden years for trilateral corporation. and the second is back on the
history of the reconciliation issue. japan also -- we also have a resolution of the unfortunate path on the agenda. this is part of peace building as well. japan is very tough on its approach toward north korea. but at the same temperature a message to north korea that we do -- we are open to dialogue. and actually, not many people have noticed this but in prime minister speech back in 2017 at the united nations it was the most, toughest speech. but at the very end of that speech she said north korea is
innate truly fortunate location enjoying the growth region of asia and a pacific. it has 8 industrial labor force in underground resources. if they were to make use of those there could be a dramatic growing economy in improving public welfare. that's where north korea's lies. way ahead both gotta start talking speak nuclear threat but also northeast asia in general, thank you. >> thank you so much. i want to thank our great pen with frank, jessica and thank you for joining us today and all this in the audience who also showed you tuesday morning with us to learn more about this really, really important set of issues. thank you for joining us. >> the trial and the death of george floyd is underway at the hennepin county courthouse. former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin is charged in the death of
mr. floyd who died will being arrested by officers but if you missed our live coverage of the trout watch tonight at 8 eastern on cspan2. on c-span.org. be back saturday on the communicators tom wheeler former chair of the federal communications commission during the obama administration. >> the complaint that was made during our time would stifle investments. put but the reality is in the period of time when that net neutrality rules are in place the internet more on capitol investment than they spent after the trump scc remove those rules. and it was that capitol investment that has allowed us to be successful now during cold it when everybody is on
zoom and stressing out the network. and so the point of the matter is, what we tried to deal with, was to continue this concept this basic american concept of both not having gatekeepers for crucial services and encouraging competition among those using those networks. >> watch the communicators saturday 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. student listen to c-span's podcast the weekly, this week wall street journal columnist kimberly trostle on the filibusters future. and that long-term ramifications of defying senate rules will majority control changes sides. >> democrats right now are thinking of blowing up the entire senate as an institution. even with the knowledge that by next year they might be in the minority in the senate again. and for years it now from out
republicans could be in a place to put their and agenda that will be truly terrifying. this is 1 of those moments when people ought to setback have real consequences down the road. >> find the c-span weekly brigade or podcast. >> texas senator john cornyn set down for a conversation threat posed by russia, iran, and china and the need to secure america supply chain. as a member of the intelligence committee and top republican on citizenship and border safety subcommittee. >> thank you for joining us today for discussion with by the leading voices of the senate republican
congress on national security matters print senator john cornyn of texas he served the people texas for tort for decades for justice on the texas supreme court and texas attorney general. and a member