some money the status quo is eternal designs and what is america's end goal and south china region south china sea. well you know on the chinese are the ones who signed the law the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they've built i was series of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think it. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future of the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the u.s. seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period. as system and beginning in the twentieth century and af

and south china sea. well you know on the chinese are the ones who signed the law the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they built i was series of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think it. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the us seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period of system and beginning in the twentieth century and after world war two it

and south china sea. well you know on the chinese are the ones who signed the law the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they've built i was series of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think it. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future of the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the u.s. seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period. as system and beginning in the twentieth century and after world w

and south china sea. well you know on the chinese are the ones who signed the law the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they've built i was serious of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think it. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future of the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the u.s. seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period. as system and beginning in the twentieth century and after world

back then was the south china sea and the obama administration. chinese scholars talking about a new cold warthis rhetors existed. there is always been problems. however in china today, i would course everyone recognizes that the trouble administration's china policies have put china in a difficult situation, especially the trade war and the impossibility to negotiate what the chinese see there was able deal lot of recognition of that, but i think on the issue of a new cold war, i think the chinese would like to remind people that it takes two sides to fight war and yes indeed the xi jingping administration has a strategic personality but coming to the practicality of putting china on a collision course, they would still draw conclusions that this is not a war that china can win, addsven that precondition a lot of nuances to interpretation on whether or not a new cold war has begun. if the result of this interaction really depends on how china reacts to the united states and how xi jingping reacts to the trump administration, there is a good chanc

as our loyalty test in china-south korea relations. and in the subsequent retaliation by china against south korea for hosting the deployment is estimated to cost south korea as much as $7.5 billion. so what china was trying to do is to draw a line on the scope of u.s. three security cooperation of the way trying to send a message that the use korea alliance should be confided north korea only but in the process of doing so china also suggested it should have a veto over allies capability to defend against a north korean threat. the affects of china's opposition to the thaad the blood are still reverberating. the issue remains a a sticking point in the china-south korea relationship. the controversy over the default could come back into play as endocrine tensions ease, and incident appears to that and major effect and south korean perceptions of chinese intentions. i want to talk a little bit about south korean public opinion, and u.s.-china rivalry. and so what we've seen i think in 2017 really is result of the impacts of china's reta

as a loyalty test in china/south korea relations. and then the subsequent retaliation by china against south korea for hosting the deployment is estimated to have cost south korea as much as $7.5 billion. so what china was trying to do was to draw a line on the scope of u.s./korea security cooperation as a way of trying to send a message that the south korea eye liance should be confined to china only. but in doing so it suggested china should have a veto over alliance responsibilities to defend against a threat. i think the issue remains a sticking point in the china/south korea relationship. the controversy over the deployment could come back into play as inter-korean tensions ease. and the incident appears to have had a major effect on south korean perceptions of chinese intentions. and so i want to talk a little bit about south korean public opinion. and u.s./china rivalry. what we have seen i think in 2017 really as a result of the impact of china's retaliation economically against south korea is that china's popularity among so

some money the status quo is eternal designs and what is america's end goal and south china region south china sea. well the chinese are the ones who signed the law of the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they've built. of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think if. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future and the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually to leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the u.s. seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period. as system and beginning in the twentieth century and after world war two

and south china sea. well you know on the chinese are the ones who signed the law the sea treaty and then decided to interpret it kind of on our card sort of basis and you know they pledged to obama that they wouldn't alter ised the south china sea and they built i was serious of military bases building up to spirit eyelets i think it. i think the u.s. and china both have a problem that neither side has answered what i see as two basic questions i will shape the future of the chinese assumption is the u.s. is now a liar and then eventually to leave and they're positioning themselves to be a dominant power in the region the u.s. seems to think that its network of alliances and presence in the region. which is only been there for the last seventy years if you think about the last five thousand years of asian history there have been three different kinds of security systems for a long time it was chinese tributary system then we had an period. the system and beginning in the twentieth century and after world

and china. the focal pointnt back and was e south china sea with the obama administration. i would say it was narrative are almost hostile mintel has always existed. whenever there's any problem between u.s. and chinana there's always been problems. those narratives and those red recs emerge. however, in china today i would say that, that of course everybody recognize that china policy wasn't difficult position to actually the trade for an almost impossibility to negotiate, with the chinese perceive as rebuilt dealit out f this predicament. there's a lot of recognition of that but i think also the issue of a new cold war, i think the chinese would like to remind people that it takes two sides to fight a war. and yes, indeed the xi jinping administration has demonstrated certain foreign policy stealthy strategic personality but coming to practicality of really putting china in a collision course with the united states i think any practical consideration in china was to draw conclusions this is not a war china can really win. so given that precondition, i think that adds a lo

south china sea right now. sending aircraft carrier, what we send them do. i don't think there's a lot of call to lob a missile at them. same with russia. we are deterring them in a variety of ways. many of the ones you outlines are crucial by making more friends in the region but go ahead. >> acting alone, the attack on ourselves, on the streets, to see the use of a virus in a sleepy english cathedral city you would have thought it was crazy but the strength of the response is nations coming together speaking in one voice. china presents the globe with so many opportunities and presented with china and the way you best influence behavior is not to do all the running, and other nations to say a common thing, whether it south china sea, it is good the us has rights of passage. but other nations have to be doing the same and british vessels actually transiting to the south china sea for the first time in a number of years. and you have to be willing to not constantly turn the other cheek. and from our point of vi

the focal point was the south china sea. i would say that this hostile mentality has always existed. there has always been problems. those narratives and those rhetoric would emerge. in china today, i would say that of course everybody recognizes the trump administration's policy has put china in a difficult position, especially the trade war and the almost impossibility to negotiate with the chinese. it seems there's a lot of recognition of that. on the issue of a new cold war, i think the chinese would like to remind people that it takes two sides to fight a war. the xi jinping administration has demonstrated a personality, but coming to practicality of really putting china in a collision course with the united states, we still draw the conclusion that this is not a war that china can win. given that precondition, that adds a lot of nuances to the interpretation as to whether a new cold war has begun. if the result of this interaction really depends on how china reacts to the united states, i think there's a pretty good ch

there are no impediments to freedom of navigation in the south china sea. if a conflict occurs in the south china sea, it is a collapse of adequate command-and-control at the very top in both countries. i am very blunt on that issue. all the parties to the conflict out there have signed the declaration on the conduct of the south china sea, which allows from the freedom of the air, freedom of sea maneuver. we run operations there. sure, we crowd them and they crowd us, but those are not war issues. if those are permitted to turn into a conflict there should be high level court marshals in both armies. >> i want to collect another three questions, and we will try to have very brief responses, so three brief questions. gentleman, on the side there. >> richard coleman. taiwan. one of the kids can realize the parents aren't really legally wed? the united states and taiwan have this illicit relationship nod,tend, wink, wink, nod, and how inevitable since china has made it there intentions very clear talking about the buzzing and military flexing, how long do you

intellectual property but look at the south china see. where contrary to commitments they made to barack obama, express commitments they would not militarize the south china sea, that's exactly what they're doing. we talk in the middle east of the parties making facts on the ground. the chinese are making the ground in the south china sea, and they're putting naval and air bases on it. at one point i think they said to president trump these are housing projects. well qlaw, housing projects for the people's liberation army, and navy. that's not how you get peaceful negotiation and resolution of the conflicting conflicting terl disputes there. gather before we move off china we have a poll question. do we have it? >> gerard: it's a nice cheerful way to start the counsel to start the morning. will the u.s. and china find themselves at war sometime in the next 20 years. fire up your aps, and i so far 10 percent. that's -- you're 100 percent. so far. you can answer that question if you like. that's actually pretty well 50/50, some people think

the south china sea has a very large percentage of global trade and to dominate the south china sea and how do we do that? >> we would not publish that article let's just put it that way. so to save around one goes to russia and the crisis do you agree with that assessment did russia come out on top? >> it is not round one but it is around one it is a continuation of the effort to influence ukraine for sure with the tactical advantages and to occupy crimea is a huge move. and with that political agenda so tactically in crimea though had that disadvantage for those sanctions to be imposed to make the arguments by referencing the fact showing what happens in crimea. turning that tactical advantage against them and then to caution to be successful in 2014 to have those european businesses hurt so then you have to put on the table showing that you would be willing to share the pain economically. and the key to surviving and that has to have cooperation. and everyday risk at being unraveled so that is the other advocacy so if all those sanctions are what europeans have to suffer so that we d

and china. the focal point back then was on south china sea and with the obama administration. so i would say that is rather important narrative for this almost hostile mentality as always existed. whenever there's any problem between u.s. and china there's always been problems. those narratives would emerge. however, in china today i woulda say that, that of course everyone recognized trump administration china pulses pert child and it very difficult position. especially the trade war and almost impossibility to negotiate with the chinese as a reasonable deal out of this predicament. there's a lot of recognition of that but also on the issue of a new cold war, i think the chinese would like to remind people that it takes two sides to fight a war. and yes, indeed xi jinping administration has a strategic personality, but coming to practicality of really putting china in a collision course with the united states i think practical consideration in china was to draw the conclusion this was not a war china can really win. so given that precondition, i think as a lot of nuances to t

china sea and putting naval and air bases on it. at one point i think they said to president trump these are just housing projects, well, yeah, housing projects for the people's liberation army and the people liberation navy, that's not how you get peaceful negotiation and resolution of territorial disputes there. we have a poll question if we can pull that up, we have it? if we don't, we will move on. here we go. a nice cheerful way to start the morning. will u.s. and china find themselves at war sometime in the next 20 years, please fire up apps and so far john 100%, that's -- you're not adversing -- >> i haven't answered that question. >> that's actually pretty 50-50, people think we will find ourselves at war in china for the next 20 years, how do you respond to that? >> obviously our strong desires to avoid it but i don't think it rests with us. i think it rests with china. poll question i would have asked for ceo's and other executives here is how many of you -- let's do it, how many of you believe in free trade? okay. how man

navy does patrols in the south china sea. that maneuver to keep their weapons radar turned on and launch helicopters during they chinese 12 mile limit. president trump has not done that. innocent passage, it is called. no harm go through in chinese. that has been done since president obama in 2012. challenging the chinese in the south china sea is one area. second, how quickly there are meetings between the delegations. third, when they set another round of visits. visitill president trump beijing and president xi jinping here. here's never made an official state visit. ae mar-a-lago trip was personal session. these are the three to watch. i suspect there will be progress on all three. you can tell that i am an optimist and receiving criticism from the super-hawks. host: >> president trump signed a short-term federal spending bill today funding certain agencies through december 21. the house, senate, an white house have two weeks to work on a package covering homeland security, agriculture and other agencies. watch live cover

in the south china sea right now. you know, we are sending our aircraft carrier battle groups through waters that they say we shouldn't be able to send through. so we're kind of doing what you're -- i don't think there's a lot of call, like you said, for us to lob a missile at them. >> no, of course not. >> but we are, and the same with russia, we are challenging them. we are deterring them in a variety of different ways. and many of the ones that you just outlined are crucial, by making more friends in the region. >> i think the real strength is not necessarily -- and always acting alone. so when we saw the attack on ourselves in salisbury with the use of chemical weapons on the streets, if i had said to you a year ago that we would see the use of the novichok virus in a sleepy english cathedral city nestled in the countryside, you would have probably thought it was crazy. but the strength of a response is actually about nations coming together and speaking with one voice. when you look at china, without a shadow of

smith: we're challenging -- we're challenging china in the south china sea right now. you know, we are sending our aircraft carrier battle groups through waters that they say we shouldn't be able to send through. so we're kind of doing what you're -- i don't think there's a lot of call, like you said, for us to lob a missile at them. gordon: no, of course not. rep. smith: but we are, and the same with russia, we are challenging them. we are deterring them in a variety of different ways. and many of the ones that you just outlined are crucial, by making more friends in the region. go ahead. min. williamson: i think the real strength is not necessarily -- and always acting alone. so when we saw the attack on ourselves in salisbury with the use of chemical weapons on the streets, if i had said to you a year ago that we would see the use of the novichok virus in a sleepy english cathedral city nestled in the countryside, you would have probably thought it was crazy. but the strength of a response is actually about nations coming together and speaking with one voice. when y

and china would cause a 6.4% drop in south korean exports and about $36 billion lost. but to a certain extent the vulnerability has also been mitigated by the fact that south korea has been pursuing for some time now a diversification strategy away from depending on china too much and that strategy shows itself primarily in the extensive investment and trade this current between south korea and vietnam. south korea is vietnam's number one investor at $62 billion in total investment and also the reemergence of the destination for the investment versus china. on the security front, the big case in point, really the first round case study for the effect of the rising u.s. rivalry on the korean security is the issue we talked a lot about over the course of the last few years where that unit's deployment became a litmus test in the relations as well as a loyalty test ended and the subsequent retaliation by china against south korea for hosting the deployment is estimated to have cost as much as $7.5 billion. so what china was trying to do is draw a line on the scope for sec

smith: we're challenging -- we're challenging china in the south china sea right now. you know, we are sending our aircraft carrier battle groups through waters that they say we shouldn't be able to send through. so we're kind of doing what you're -- i don't think there's a lot of call, like you said, for us to lob a missile at them. gordon: no, of course not. that's not what i mean. rep. smith: but we are, and the same with russia, we are challenging them. we are deterring them in a variety of different ways. and many of the ones that you just outlined are crucial, by making more friends in the region. go ahead. min. williamson: i think the real strength is not necessarily -- and always acting alone. so when we saw the attack on ourselves in salisbury with the use of chemical weapons on the streets, if i had said to you a year ago that we would see the use of the novichok virus in a sleepy english cathedral city nestled in the countryside, you would have probably thought it was crazy. but the strength of a response is actually about nations coming together and speakin

a huge number of tariffs on china and there have been a number of military drills in the south china sea furthermore you know there's also the annual nato drills right on russia's doorstep but he says he wants to get along with russia as well let's review these drills that are taking place. now after all this action. we now see donald trump on twitter speaking up complaining about high military spending and a vision in kind of a rosy future where washington moscow and beijing walk down the yellow brick road together in peace and harmony however he could reverse himself this is donald trump and he is known to be rather unpredictable. we're joined live now by independent political analyst bruno thanks for joining us on the program so good to have you on you don't really know what trump is going to say do you he signed off a military budget over seven hundred sixty nine close to seven hundred twenty billion dollars didn't he now he's saying that will be critical of this defense spending i mean how should we interpret this back and forth. well i have learned not to take trump's foreign p

position on the international ruling on the south china sea. and they joined with them in exercises on the south china sea and sometimes coordinated or uncoordinated activities in the east china sea vis-a-vis japan. on the issue of central asia, when bri was first proposed in october ofuld say and all the policy discourse and 2012, discussion in china about bri, two ferocious criticisms on the bri, one is that if china's going to central asia, it's going into russia's backyard and the other criticism is that middle east, china, really, are you sure you want to go there? in terms of central asia, with the ukraine crisis, they really limited russia's capability to not work with china or to oppose china or stop china from advancing into central asia. for my research i have not seen too much russian opposition or efforts to undercut or undermine china's effort in central asia stans in terms of their infrastructure project. but another component of this is the policy road. it's one of the angles that goes to europe. on that, i would say that you see

what we do in the south china sea is not intended as a kind of provocation to china. it is about exercising internationally recognized rights of freedom of navigation. we will continue to do that because that is part of the international order and thereby ships should have a right to sell through certain routes and they will continue to do that. we support international law. there is issues about the chinese trade practices around property where we share the concern that much of the u.s. administration that we would like to see changes. i was talking to the chinese about hong kong and basically the deal a couple of days ago has worked well, but we keep watching it and enjoying that it has lived up in letter and in spirit. it is not a kind of wonderful relationship and problems arrive with all relationships. the basically we feel we are in a good place with china. >> there has been some commentary from hong kong that the one country to system agreements are working less well and the distinctive position by hong kong is being eroded. >> again, i am not an expert on hong

as a loyalty test in china/south korea relations. and then the subsequent retaliation by china against south korea for hosting the deployment is estimated to have cost south korea as much as $7.5 billion. so what china was trying to do was to draw a line on the scope of u.s./korea security cooperation as a way of trying to send a message that the south korea eye liance should be confined to china only. but in doing so it suggested china should have a veto over alliance responsibilities to defend against a threat. i think the issue remains a sticking point in the china/south korea relationship. the controversy over the deployment could come back into play as inter-korean tensions ease. and the incident appears to have had a major effect on south korean perceptions of chinese intentions. and so i want to talk a little bit about south korean public opinion. and u.s./china rivalry. what we have seen i think in 2017 really as a result of the impact of china's retaliation economically against south korea is that china's popularity among so

china sea, not about the chinese claim but china's position on the international ruling on the south china sea in they joined with them exercises on the south china sea and coordinate or uncoordinated activities in the east china sea vis-À-vis japan. asia, issue of central when bri was first proposed in 2012 and all the policy discourse and discussion in china about bri, the ferocious criticisms on the bri, one is that it china's going to central asia, it's going to russia's backyard and the other criticism is that middle east, china, really, are you sure you want to go there? in terms of central asia, with the ukraine crisis, they really limited russia's capability to not work with china or to oppose china or stop china from advancing into central asia. for my research i have not seen too much russian opposition or efforts to undermine china's effort in central asia stands in terms of their researcher project. but another component of this is the policy road. that goesf the angles to europe. see the mostwould successful commercial projects between china and russia ever. it has been

china sea, what is going on with china, what is going on within the hour. this is a really interesting brushing up of one of the world's big slick on his —— what is going on in india. one of the world's big slick on his -- what is going on in india. the world stock markets. the dow is up slightly. today in asia it is a bit mixed. we have the federal reserve meeting. there is investor anxiety out there. this is what the gulf news article is all about. about what is to come in 2019— 2020. there are so many what is to come in 2019— 2020. there are so many elements that we cannot predict. brexit is just one are so many elements that we cannot predict. brexit isjust one part are so many elements that we cannot predict. brexit is just one part of a big jigsaw. it is. predict. brexit is just one part of a bigjigsaw. it is. it is one part of that global story. when you look at the meeting that happened in papua new guinea a couple of weeks ago, no agreement from that. you look at the increasing rhetoric between the us and china, it does seem that china has

the south china morning post says hong kong has held onto its title as the world's most visited city. it says however the territory has a heavy reliance on tourists from mainland china which could suffer if the us—china trade war escalates further. and don't forget — let us know what you've spotted online — use the hashtag #bbcthebriefing a hectic session on the markets. the dowjones is down, down heavily. we have the key asian markets over here but look at the next board. the oil price is down as well nearly 2%. oil has been rising steadily this week ahead of the opec meeting and that kicks off tomorrow. we will be right across that meeting for you here as well in our business coverage. up next — newsbriefing. the home office has been accused of failing to act on repeated warnings about the negative affect its measures to curb illegal immigration would have on members of the windrush generation. a report from the national audit office says the department operated a "target—driven" policy, and it's yet to establish the full scale of the scandal. here's our community affairs

new construction in the south china sea. tragically, losing more soldiers in afghanistan in the last 24 hours. then i read a report this morning that deals with readiness. the uss john s. mccain that was involved in a tragic collision 15 months ago just re-floated yesterday. 15 months to restore a major capital asset to the fleet. i would submit in today's pace and speed of conflict, it is not satisfactory. those are some of the things that we pointed out. we are very mindful that it will take money to do that. the $733 billion fore,as identified was a and we need to modernize our conventional forces and our nuclear forces, all of which came of age back in the 1980's. we look forward to your questions, and again, i would like to complement and thank our fellow commissioners for their tremendous work and service and dedication in putting this report together. >> thank you, admiral. i think both of you -- i thank both of you for emphasizing how this is put together. i know in the case you, admiral, were nominated by a democrat

as far as south china sea about all we can do there is continue with our passage through there. i mean, we are not going to engage in a military conflict over that but we need to ensure that we still have access through there and maintain military presence in that part of the world, that's important. >> when you look back, it's 20 years since wto happened, were we naive about china's intention at that point? when you think back, should that vote have been differently or should have the united states thought differently about china's intentions at that point? >> all i can tell you i don't think anybody has been satisfied with our trade relationship with china, republicans or democrats for quite a while. >> okay, i know we are running a bit long and i want to take questions from the audience but before i do that i want to ask you a couple of political questions particularly after the panel that we just saw, you heard discussion about some of the challenges republicans had in this election, challenges with suburban women, challenges with the youth vote for another, as you look ahea

on china south korea and also on the south korean stock market the trade association estimated the full-blownbe trade war between us and china would copy a six. four drop the south korean exports and a loss of $36 million. so with this vulnerability for south korea is also mitigated by the fact and pursuant for some time and the strategy really shows itself primarily in the expensive investment and trade that is occurring in vietnam it is the number one investor and as a destination for investment with china. so really that first-round case study with the rivalry on south korean study is that issue that was a litmus test as well as a loyalty test in china south korea relations and the subsequent retaliation by china against korea for the deployment is estimated to cost south korea as much as seven.$5 billion. looking at the scope of the security cooperation to send a message that the alliance should be confined to north korea only. in the process of doing so china also suggested it should have a veto over the alliance of capabilities against the north korean threats the effects of china's oppos

and of course the south china sea, me a break. china is a new rising competitor for the united states. the south china sea is a host to i don't know what percentage, very large percentage of critical world change -- trade. if we let them dominate we will stranglehold over world trade and why would we do that? >> we would not publish that article. let me go back to you. round one in this conflict goes to russia and the crisis, do you agree with that assessment? do you agree that russia came out on top? >> it's not round one. i haven't thought about which round it is but it's not round one it's not a new start but a continuation of this effort to destabilize and continue to influence ukraine, for sure gain some tactical advantages and certainly military advantages and occupying cornea is a huge military advantage to the ministry of defense but also getting political to changing the rules of the game. and advancing in tactical terms the aspiration to the privilege or sphere of influence. whatever round it is, are they winning? yes, t

we can look at singapore the south china sea ruling. we can look at south korea, when he agreed to deploy their thawed missile system. we can look at unprecedented things and we see a trend in the last six, seven or eight years of china growing more brazen. and how it has interfered with issues. i think there's a great deal of evidence for that. and evidence that it has spread across the globe in the west and developing countries. ... i have a question for jan. when you are talking about burma come you mention burma had set up a dri committee or body of some sort to help the cooperate. my question is, is that action typical of what other countries have done? or is it more engagement than surrounding countries have done and if it's more commented the united states take any action to try and convince them not to take it? >> thank you for the question. is it more than what china has done? what other country has done in terms of respecting -- [inaudible] if you look at ozzy on countries, burma is the one that has established the post on tra

china sea is now we decided to step down. from around the world challenges into each sector in chad are driving the refugio families to return to dark for many are now back in the villages they fled when the worst part is. almost four years into a war that's led to the world's worst humanitarian catastrophe could a peace deal ever be reached in yemen all of this week's headline of the foreign minister of the who the rebel led government has shown the sheriff. are men of the house and also on the show almost thirty years ago from just looking almost that we were right.

as far as south china sea about all we can do there is continue with our passage through there. i mean, we are not going to engage in a military conflict over that, but we need to ensure that we still have access through there and maintain a military presence in that part of the world. that's important. matt: when you look back, it's 20 years since wto happened, were we naive about china's intention at that point? when you think back, should that vote have been differently or should have the united states thought differently about all i can tell you i don't think anybody has been satisfied with our trade relationship with china, republicans or democrats for quite a while. okay, i know we are running a bit long and i want to take questions from the audience but before i do that i want to ask you a couple of political questions particularly after the panel that we just saw, you heard discussion about some of the challenges republicans had in this election, challenges with suburban women, challenges with the youth vote for another, as you look ahead in the next 2 years, you've got

because as you say, there's that issue, you've got the south china sea issue looming out there. >> on the trade front, stealing intellectual property and our soybeans. as far as south china sea is concerned, i think about all we can do there is continue with our passage through there. i mean, we are not going to engage in a military conflict over that but we need to ensure that we still have access through there and maintain a military presence in that part of the world. it's important. >> when you look back, it's 20 years since the wto accession site happened. were we naive about china's intentions at that point? when you think back, should that vote have been differently? or should the united states have thought differently about china's intentions at that point? do you think? >> all i can tell you is i don't think anybody has been satisfied with our trade relationship with china, republicans or democrats for quite a while. >> okay, i know we are running a bit long and i want to take a couple of questions from the audience. but before i do that, i want to just ask you a couple of po

the south china morning post headline, beijing walks tightrope in moves to defend tech giant, considers politics of the the arrest and extradition request of huawei's finance officer. it says china needs to be careful in taking on the us, preventing a nationalist backlash and derailing trade talks with washington. one of our main tech stories on bbc online anticipates a tough congressional hearing for google's chief sundar pichai. he previously failed to appear at a senate intelligence committee hearing in september. an empty chair marked his absence. facebook and twitter did appear and admitted their mistakes. now it's mr pichai's turn, and he shouldn't expect an easy ride. and finally, as we near the end of 2018, time magazine will announce its person of the year. they've published a shortlist of ten, included are donald trump, robert mueller, christine blasey ford and meghan markle. we will look at that list. with me is priya lakhani, founder and ceo of century tech, a uk based education technology platform. nice to see you and so much to talk about. i do not think we will get throug

and of course the south china sea, give me a break. china is a rising competitor for the united states. the south china sea is a host of either know what percentage have a very large percentage of critical world trade. we give the trade over world trade them i would redo that. >> we would not have published that article. bush has put it that way. let me go back to you. ambassador just wrote an article for berkeley and then one in the conflict goes to russia and the crisis. you agree with that assessment? did russia come out on top? >> it is not ground one. it is not a new start. it's a continuation of this effort to destabilize and continue to influence ukraine for sure come again some tactical advantages and military advantages and occupying crimea is a huge military advantage to the russian ministry of defense but also the political agenda of advancing in practical terms the aspiration to privilege or influence they been arguing for a decade. whatever round it is are they winning? yes, they tactically won another stab as they tactica

so any time you see china doing, as identify mention -- i've mentioned what they're doing in the south china sea and tanzania and europe and the middle east, you know they're spending -- they're everywhere. and the best answer i can give you to the question is not true. >> okay. >> the national defense strategy and past military strategies placed a distinctive value on the importance of our allies and partners. what we're doing for one thing, our allies i've mentioned this. whether you're talking about the philippines or japan. people question we have the strength to be good allies. because that's not what they see over there. they see what china is doing throughout that region. i think we have to have the allies. in fact, i kind of like what is happening now with the seven islands they have created in the south china sea. because are now starting to affect our allies in that area. if you look at some of the european countries and other countries around the world, they know that we don't have the resources that we had at one time. they know we don't have the resources to participate wi

what they are doing in the south china sea and in tanzania and the middle east and consequently the best answer i can give you is not true. >> the national defense strategy in the past military strategy is a distinct value on the importance of our allies. so our population has wonderful representatives of those allies. given the scale do you feel the administration and congress recognize the value of our alliances? >> i mentioned it two days ago had the opportunity to be at the president and the vice president. that is all we talked about. for one thing our allies japan, people question the strength to be goode allies. they see what china is doing throughout the region. so that is what is happening with the seven islands they have created in the south china sea because now it is affecting the allies in the area. if you look at the other european countries around the world they know we don't have the resources we had at one time or the resources to participate with them. we have to build that up. that is what you will see in this change of the distribution of the budget. d d and this

china see in the philippines and off the coast of southeast asia. his career took him there. he's like 21, an old guy in the navy and a year or so later discharged in september of 45 from the navy, 58 dom bat missions during year-old war 2 in which he was awarded. the distinguished flying cross. you don't get much better than three flying medals. the president union station was awarded to the ship where she was a member of a number of years. that's one heck of a record for a guy who signed up as a seaman second class at the able of 18 and three years later he finishes up after flying all those issues and 21. i was thinking what i was doing at 21. i wasn't doing this and looking forward to going into the navy in active duty on which mcobtain, can off or officers presiding was the wing man and the senator from arizona many numbers of years. i never met george bush when he was active duty or the navy. i wasn't born. my dad served with him with the same kind of duty and they spent a lot of times in airplanes. dad was deleef split steady officer. startin

china sea is now inside the session. from around the world challenges into eight. families to return for many are now back in the villages they fled when the worst part of. the un's new human rights discusses her challenges and plans going forward. tack and and there are some pushback from human rights. talks. to cope with driving in kabul you need nerves of steel and a strong heart the afghan capital has some of the most challenging driving conditions anywhere even though women are allowed to drive by law many men say culturally it is wrong that they are but does that mean there are lots of men here verby abuse you they block your car motorcyclists right alongside shouting bad things no one helps us when the taliban were in control women were forbidden to drive but outside of the main cities it is rare even now to see a woman behind the wheel society is changing albeit slowly but the women drivers of afghanistan there was a long road ahead before they are fully accepted i am his story say for the birth of these people e

china and the united states that it's hard to keep count trade taiwan the south china sea dispute north korea and of course human rights and for that reason say some analysts it's possible that any deal done this weekend will be limited and short lived. china's leader has several things in his favor the trump doesn't she doesn't have to worry about elections in less than two years or a free press to hold him to account the state media can pronounce it any way they want but trump needs to have something that he can show his base and say look we won this first trade war with china that means china has a lot of leeway because they don't really need to worry about what looks good what the optics are like but the trade war is undoubtedly affecting china the shanghai stock market is among the worst performing indexes in the world right now publicly china's leaders are hopeful a deal can be done this weekend but it's also clear their expectations are not high adrian brown al jazeera beijing. as we mentioned the standoff between ukraine and russia is one of the big issues on leaders minds at th