Transcripts For CSPAN3 American Prisoners Of War In The Revolutionary South 20160726

Among u. S. , china, and russia, there are many other players. You also started to bring that out in your presentation. The rise of china, especially economically since 2010 against backdrop of Global Economic and financial crisis and the youre oh zone crisis has changed everybodys calculations. We start looking further afield both in the asiapacific and also europe and see that everybody is factoring china in in a different way. In many cases sometimes to russias detriment. Not just an issue how russia perceives the relationship with the United States against backdrop of the relationship with china but how russia, United States, and other countries are also managing their own complex relationships and trying to figure out how they also pivot towards asia and china. If we look at the asiapacific, another of the countries youre intimately familiar with ambassador roy, japan is also in the process of trying to figure out its relations with russia and also china. Proposed behind the scenes a new asiapacific security arrangement. Many of you will be very well aware Prime Minister abe of japan has been very eager improving the relationship with russia. There is a couple of major points, obstacles in that relationship. Both of them related, in fact. One is the fact they have yet to conclude a peace treaty since world war ii because largely a stumbling block of territorial dispute over what the japanese call northern territories and russia calls islands that were seized. Several of the islands in the chain seized by the soviet union in the closing days of world war ii. Theres been many japanese attempts, russian attempts to resolve this issue. Were in, again, another phase of this, which is, again, driven by external factors. The japanese are very much concerned about what they now see as an existential threat and worsening of their relations with china and hoping to have russia as counterbalance. Russia would also like to counterbalance to the United States in the Asian Pacific but also to china in the future. Because as youve already suggested, there are worries and concerns that russia that not just a shared neighborhood in central asia but also asiapacific region. In 2013, the russians and chinese engaged in some joint naval maneuvers, which have been repeated on a number of occasions. Most recently they have been ebb gauged in naval maneuvers in the mediterranean. After the maneuvers in the asiapacific region chinese warships took a scenic look back, not directly back to base and wen over the top of japan through the sea and scared bejesus out of russians and chinese. After 2013 chinese were quite open about this but hadnt notified russians about the chosen home, through International Waters. You can imagine going north back to japan rather than going north to go back to china and around japan instead of going south got some attention. After this we saw uptick in russian interest in relations with japan. You can see theres a lot of complexity in this relationship. China also launched an expeditionary trip by one of its massive icebergs into the arctic. Again, going through International Waters but very close to russian territory, close to the arctic, much of russia lies in the arctic. After that russia was quick to close up the water to prevent expeditionary trip by more Chinese Military vessels into those waters. Each team you see a very quiet but significant reaction from the russians reflecting the concerns you raised in your introduction. So thats the asiapacific. Quite a lot of complexity there. Russia and china not just thinking about the relationship with the United States. Not just japan but what happens in korea and relations with the north and south that become factors in. You talked about eurasia and central asia. Theres been a turning point with chinas relationship in the ukraine but china made it clear quite frequently it doesnt always like activities and behavior of russia in the european space. Not only did china make its displeasure heard over crimea 2014 but during earlier war in the broader region with gorge in 2008, you may recall that russia made the step to recognize independence of the two secessionist territories of georgia and china most notably did not. In fact, china provided cover later in 2008 for the Central Asians who resist recognizing the independent states. There was a meeting at the Shanghai Corporation in central asia, considerable pressure on the Central Asian states to also recognize independence of these states. And at that summit, Shanghai Corporation organization, the Central Asian managed to resist it and mate it quite clear were doing this with support of china behind the scenes. Again, theres complexity. Theres also been from the Russian Point of view a bit of an unseemly russia by European Countries both east and western European Countries, United Kingdom, france, germany, serbia, greece, a whole host of countries to sign onto chinese infrastructure initiatives and to seek chinese funding through the ai. B, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank for highspeed rail and road linkages. Weve yet to see this constructed. Russia increasingly looking less like a player and economies of the region where it might have been in the past and china is looking more of a competitor in Regional Economic calculations as well. So i just want to conclude there by just echoing what ambassador roy has said. Although this is a very important relationship as well as Strategic Elements, theres a great deal of shared perspective, also elements of competition and other players in this mix that we also have to factor. Even though im suggesting should we change a title to the United States with russia and china frankly none of these states are to lose, not all about those, many mother players here, a much more complex environment. Again, to compliment you on your introduction, we have to understand that complexity and take a much larger perspective when were really trying to think about whats happening here. Thank you. [ applause ] thank you so much for putting the relationship, triangular relationship in a broader geopolitical readings and look at the various countries big and small, how to look at the relationship. Also when you mentioned you changed the title, i cannot help but start laughing because when we send it to you, i saw you i decided to wait until i at least had something to say. This is certainly Different Countries have different perspective. Multiple perspective on that issue. Certainly we use that provocative to try to stimulate a real debate. Thank you very much. A great honor to be on the distinguished list. I really cannot claim the expertise i was credited for. I work on china and consider it my job to work on chinas foreign policies, developing countries and regions, provide what i understand as chinas perspective of the recent developments in the sinorussian relations. In the chinese perspective, western observers reach one of two conclusions about sinorussian relations the western observers either seeer merging Moscow Alliance changing existing National Order or they would see russian meeting out of expediency. In the chinese perception, neither position really accurately reflects the current nature of the relationship which in china is understood as genuine convergence of National Interest despite the presence of competitive and alienating elements. At least from the chinese perspective third option with China Partnership with other alliance or alliance with other alliance is possible and could be durable. Especially if both china and russia agree that their overlapping Strategic Interests outweigh their diverging ones. So chinarussia relations have been on a very positive t trajectory since ping has been in office. He and the president have met 13 times in both bilateral sites and venues both have membership. Those multilateral include bricks Shanghai Corporation and g20. So jinping seems to see the world through similar lenses and reached similar conclusions about the country in the international system. They both believe their countries are in a strategic disadvantage visavis to the United States. Putin believes that russias great power ambitions are being swatted and undermined by the west and tried to reassert moscows interest in the regions. On the other hand china sees the u. S. Rebalancing to asia at best as a denial of chinas strategic space in the region and access to western pacific. And at worst, an attempt to contain china. The ukraine crisis and the deterioration of russiau. S. Relations provided additional momentum for closer ties between beijing and moscow. For china the crisis forced the United States to refocus at least some of its attention back to europe as pivot to asia. Beijing enjoyed more space, visavis u. S. And more leverage visavis russia, vulnerability and isolation increased. In addition to strengthening chinas hand in energy negotiations, moscow has become at least more moscow has seemed to become more willing to cooperate in sectors that were previously restricted, for example contributing statements to beijing last month as an example the two sides confirmed the progress they have made and they will make the eastern route of the sinorussian gas pipeline, which is expected by both countries to become operational in 2018. Russias Largest Crude Oil producer also reached several deals with Chinese Companies including signing of 20 stake of this unit to beijing and prices, 40 stake of the eastern petrochemical to china and a joint development of a petrochemical plant in russias far east. China and russia also signed ipr agreement, aerospace and aviation corporation, which is believed to pave the ground for russian sales of the rd 180 rocket engines to china soon. Beijing believes that the new regional dynamics made moscow more open minded and accept Economic Belt Initiative across central asia. China understands very well that in the early days of the initiative, in 2013 and 2014, had very strong suspicion and reservation about the initiative in traditional sphere of influence. Nevertheless given the so far favorable reception of initiative by Central Asian countries and that the possibility of actual benefits it could bring to russia, russia seems to be more open minded and interested in what russia can gain from the initiative, especially in terms of infrastructure development. So we know that chinas fund and Development Bank committed part of the funding for china railway. If successful it could mark new page in the corporation. The other consideration of russia is also to connect and integrate as the initiative with Eurasia Community for china exclusivity and dominance. It is nothing new for china that there are concerns about russia within china and advice verse, because it is a peril of proximity and history. Chinese will always remember that however much we dislike the United States, it is russia who took most of our lost territories. Similar in russia, there are also voices warning against chinas territory ambitions about those territories that leads us to chinese migration. Putins nationalism in china is perceived to be not only aimed at the west but also aimed at china. Some chinese observers speculate that is precisely the reason why russia is reluctant to sell its core military technologies to china and reluctant to open up its economy to chinese trade and investment and to allow for more chinese participation in the russian far east. In southeast asia, china is suspicious of and antagonized by russias strategic and military ties with countries like india and vietnam. As an energy importer, china also believes the interest in lower prices of the Energy Resources and interest in oil and gas assets in russia fundamentally differ from that of moscow as an Energy Exporter. So repeated hiccups in the western route of sinorussian gas pipeline is an example of this conflict. Chinas economic slowdown has affected its future demand for energy. Given diverse sources of natural gas from central asia, china is increasingly hoping to have a better negotiation about the price for natural gas and joins the Development Team in russia. This is not necessarily what russia is interested in. Nevertheless, the chinese tib to make nice with russia. And as they have at least proudly acknowledged we have worked closely with russia. From the chinese perspective Strategic Alliance with russia has many concrete benefits and factors can be managed, not eliminated but managed. This is particularly, too, when china fu said dealing from a ru is at a strategic advantage. So calm up of points that the chinese analysts would like to make, including one with the 3,000 mile long border, russia has the most impact over chinas national security. And vice versa. A sign of russia hostility is undesirable and unlikely in the near future. This point was emphasized in an earlier articulation. Russia shares chinas interest most. Most have Foreign Policy aspirations that make them targets of the United States. Both feel their strategic spaces are being oppressed by washington. Therefore china and russia share a common interest in, quote, maintaining the balance in the International Politics and creating a more just interNational Order. A certain point is among all powers russia and china probably have the most similar ideology. Both consistent of Economic Development path. Both reject military interventions. The fourth point is that russia and china are strategically complimentary for each other. Russia, in terms of the Foreign Policy style, the chinese feel that russia is good at confrontation. The chinese are good at maneuvering. One is Energy Exporter and the other is importer. One has Natural Resources, the other has the money and the cash. So the last point despite agreements or complaints inside the Chinese Community from time to time, the consensus in china is still that the border has been centered. For decades. So no one should realistically expect china to claim what was given to russia years ago. That case has been closed. As russia and china survey their political landscape, theres a lot of things to unite them. Hour, history has taught them the perils of alliance. The former Alliance Relationship has both sides confidence in the wisdom and visibility of a similar arrangement. That does not mean that china and russia would not align their positions on issues they see coming. Such an alignment will enhance the security and economics of both china and russia. It is in their view beneficial to maintain the balance of the world order. China and russia align positions against the west while maintaining a distance from each other would be more effective than Alliance Relationship. Last, but not least, just to point out a major weakness of russia ties lies in their economic relations, which is fragile and subject to easy influence by external factors. And very much lags behind the political intimacy between the two. While china is russias largest export destination and larger import supplier, bilateral trade with russia only marks about 2 of chinas total foreign trade. Last year the bilateral trade dropped by 28 . Including 19 drop of russia export to china. This trend has continued this year. During the first three months of this year, the bilateral commodity trade dropped 12 . The drop of the price of Natural Resources the deappreciation of the russian currency and the chinese economic slow down contributed to the deterioration between the reses. However, in the long run, how do you improve the structure between the two and diverse fie their interest in Industry Trade are some questions that beijing and moscow are trying to answer. So ill stop there. Thank you very much. [ applause ] an excellent presentation. And so articulate. So effective. Sometimes i mistake you as a spokesperson for the Chinese Government. I am not. You have your own view im going ask you. Now we ended up first i will ask a general question for your view, and ill have a view from each of you. A set of questions is do you see the emergence of a new or can the trilateral triangular relationship be managed in a more cooperative conflicting matter . Now the ambassador mentioned her article. In that article, she wrote a quote from the chinese perspective. The relationship should not be considered a game in which two players or against a third. Do you think that the third [ inaudible ] that was a general question i was asking each and every one of you. Who would like to begin . I think it is feasible. Frankly, i think that we undermine our diplomacy when we try to think or behave as though our goal is to manipulate the triangular relationship. We have reasons with both china and russia. To not have the relationship drift toward a hostile type of cold war relationship. Im not an expert on the cold war, but i spent 45 years as a u. S. Diplomat during the cold war serving in places like beijing and russia, and the tenor of our relationship with china now, with all the Serious Problems we have in the South China Sea among other issues is so different from the tenor of our relationship with russia during the cold war and the soviet union during the cold war. I shudder when people talk about a new cold war in u. S. china relations. Russia never had hundreds of thousands of its best and brightest students flooding our universities. You know, at that time, you cannot go to china without encountering u. S. Educated people at the top levels of the communist party, at the top levels of the universities, at the top levels of the business community. I mean, its a very different type of relationship. Lets not forget that very recently we were getting along fine. President bush in the early stages of his administration, as you recall, looked into putins eyes and thought this was somebody we could get along with. When we decided to intervene in afghanistan, russia actually facilitated our access to afghanistan through central asia as opposed to opposing. At the moment were inclined to dmomize putin, and one can easily miss all the an equities that are there. I like to read the federalist papers and the federalist 63 James Madison said one of the reasons you should Pay Attention to the opinions of other countries is because its a corrective to when you are being caught up in domestic passions over particular issue and its wise to look at the views of the objective external world in order to control your passions. Its worth bearing in mind that three of the leaders who get along swimmingly with putin are Prime Minister abe of japan, xi jinping of china, and President Park of south korea. So if we cant get along with putin, lets bear in mind that countries with whom we have quite close relationship and Alliance Relationships do not find him a type of person they cant deal with. That doesnt mean we dont have very serious differences with russia, but it means we shouldnt attribute the differences to the personality of the leader of russia who has of all the countries involved in the ukrainian process the highest level of Popular Support for the position hes taking as opposed to any of the other countries including in the United States. So i consider this as an issue for skillful component can steer us away from a cold war relationship with either russia or beijing, and i think that we greatly benefit if we can get ourselves back into that favorable position in the triangular relationship, which we occupied for several decades. Thank you so much. I think this underscores why we benefitted so much in the past. We might be able to learn a thing or two from your remarks. I couldnt underscore the enough about the importance and think about things in a much broader spectrum looking forward. This is a very dynamic from the cold war. Its not an ideological i think we heard it outlined. You outlined very clearly from the chinese perspective, theres not much ideology at play here. The perspective on how you want to run your country and engage in Foreign Policy, which produces a lot of challenges that we have to manage and the differences and perspective here, but that is the art of diplomacy. And i like what you said about china and russia maintaining a difference and the distances from each other. Being acknowledging of their differences and their own perspectives. But maintaining that distance even at the same time. That should be an asset to us. Were not going to be particularly close either to china and russia for a variety of reasons. We have a closer relationship with china as outlined in terms of peopletopeople contacts. Its not based on the side of china but its more convergence of economic and trade interest. With russia weve had a difficult relationship. I mean, weve sat here in many different settings at brookings and in many ways dont want to go into too much detail but we dont have that for trade, the commoditydriven nature of the russian economies running similar to ours, in many respects, and we dont have the same interests and russia as a trading sense as we do with china or japan or any of our other economic partners. And peopletopeople ties have been tenuous. We have a lot of russians working in the United States but we dont have the same number of americans in russia and the same way we have students and Business People who are going to china. So that substance of the relations and the grassroots is missing. We tend to get obsessed then with the Strategic Elements of the relationship. We could take our approach to china and think of different ways of managing the relationship with russia. We have an opportunity for a new chapter with our president ial election. We dont know how its going to come out. One encounters a different perspective how we might manage the relationships, which would involve changing the Alliance Structure in the asiapacific, in particular. Not just to mention in europe. This might, none the less, might be an opportunity to think afresh. If were very concerned about getting into a new cold war relationship, which i agree with the ambassador is actually a and perhaps this is the time to start thinking about how we might change that and bearing in mind there are so many other plays in this. We have to think outside the triangle about how we manage the relationships. How we factor in japan and korea, south korea, two close allies to the United States. Different relationships with russia and china in the asiapacific, for example. Ill be very brief. I completely agree. But i want to make three points. The first point is, well, we all say were guest a cold war or the cold war thinking, but the cold wars thinking is prevalent in our countries. And we hear, for example, the Chinese Government and the chinese analysts always claim that we should eliminate the cold war thinking in international relations, but when they say that my reaction is, well, you have the cold war thinking in dealing with other powers. So theres a factor and a factor of their own belief in such judgments, but the point is that i think the cold war thinking does exist. But i dont think it is cold war. I dont think its ideology driven, and all though the disputes and disagreements are intense, the confrontation is not at the same level as it was during the cold war. And your publications have argued that the economic relations between u. S. And china is so important and the two countries cannot afford to get into a confrontation or another cold war scenario. And the engagement by the United States also by lateral dialogue channels are also open. We have ambassador roy among many others managing the direction of the bilateral relations. The last point i want to make is we know that the chinese leaders xi jinping proposed new york time major power relations. Things he assumed in 2013, but there is this sense in china that this new model of major relations has transpired between china and russia somehow. Because the two countries are able to maintain their disagreements and keep their differences, but prioritize the pursuit of cooperation on more practical matters. Theres actually the United States should learn from that experience and try to deal with china and russia in a similar manner. But in other words its easy to say because china and russia, in this case, they see the United States and the u. S. May not have the same luxury on issues of principle matters. So whether it is applicable in the case of the United States remains to be seen. Thank you. Just one question for you each. The question for the ambassador is you mentioned putin and xi jinping. How important has the personal relationship between putin and xi jinping been to the current u. S. I mean, russia relationship . These two leaders are two strong what are the major differences between putin and xi jinping. And what do the differences mean for the United States thinking about policy between these two countries . You want me to answer this . Yes. One or two minutes . Yes. I think that as i outlined in my opening remarks, i didnt base my analysis on personalities. I based it on what i considered the underlying strategic factors that were affecting relations among all parts of the triangular relationship. You dont have a an option to pick the leaders that other countries end up its nice if you like them and you find them easy to deal with, but if you dont like them, and dont find them easy to deal with, you still have to deal with them. President nixon didnt go to beijing because he liked them and found them easy to deal with. If you read the transcripts of their discussions, youll discover it was not an easy relationship. The president thought it was in the National Interest of the United States in order to have a better relationship with china. And he dealt with the chairman mao on that basis. I think that both president putin and xi jinping are reflecting the National Interest of their particular countries in dealing with each other. I think boeft them recognize that they are leaders who have serious domestic difficulties they have to deal with, and the important Foreign Policy interest where theres a convergence between the two countries. And so i think they respect each other as leaders, but i dont think that its the chemistry between putin and xi jinping that caused the improvement in russian relations over recent decades. I think its the underlying strategic factors of the changes in the world situation and to a significant degree u. S. Behavior that has caused these two countries to find there are common interests that have created this improved situation in the bilateral relationship between the two countryies despite the imbalances between the two countries and the inequality of the suspicions that exist on each side in the relationship. And the major differences . Yes. Its very clear china has concerns that were adversely affected by having a precedent of using a referendum to separate a essentially to destroy the territorial integrity of the country that russia formally recognized the territorial integrity of. China has completed the unification process. Its sensitive about these factors. Its a factor we havent mentioned. That the areas where china needs action. The United States is a more important player than russia. In other words a relationship with russia is not going to solve the taiwan problem in a way that beijing would do favorably. And china is behaving in the South China Sea in a way that russia cannot be entirely supportive of because russia wants that good relationship. Lets not forget that the vietnamese border clash in 1979 was a function of the vietnamese having thrown out the chinaleaning in cambodia and substituted vietnamese leading. And the fact the soviet union concluded a Defense Agreement thought was a threat to chinas interest and he wanted to teach vietnam a lesson. So it was the closeness of the vietnamese of the russian vietnamese soviet vietnamese relationship at the time. It was a contributing factor between china and vietnam. These are considerations so you to bear in mind. My question for fiona. Both you and the ambassador talked about the educate of changes and the impact of peopletopeople diplomacy. Let me share with you some data. And currently there are about 20,000 Chinese Students studying russia. Over 300,000 are studying in the United States. In 2013 fewer than 500 russian students were studying in the United States. Only 138 u. S. Undergraduates and graduate students studying in russia. In the same year, about 14,000 u. S. Students studying in china. These are the data. Based on my research the up and coming chinese leaders there are fau of them studying in russia. Some themselves are studying in the United States except a few major here is my question does that will mean that our title with the panel is correct . That we have much stronger ties with china than with russia because of the impact of this strong bonds with the students . The question is from russias perspective and putins perspective is this kind of number later does he really trust the chinese or chinese leaders . What does this mean for policies . Wel well, lets start on a very practical basis. The language study is, in respects, a utilitarian way of education. Its not just for the importance of getting a Greater Cultural understanding but the pragmatic reasons. Its kind of an investment in the future. I can see younger people in the audience who have been thinking about these questions. I studied russian in the 1980s because rush shafs the main event. The United Kingdom and security perspective. It was in the news at all points. I didnt actually expect i would still have a job studying russia, but im encouraging my younger daughter to study chinese and spanish for employment perspectives because chinese and spanish are two Global Languages that open up for the United States and open doors for jobs. Im not thinking shes going to be sitting here on a panel sometime 20 years opining on china. You never know on latin america. I imagine she might have more of an opportunity getting a job. I think thats what a lot of people are think abouting when they make these kinds of decisions. Its interesting such a relatively small number seemingly of russian students here. There are not a lot of russian immigrants in the United States. There are a lot of russian workers who learned english back at home in russia where english is studied to the high level. It has been since the soviet period. I was amazed how well the soviet students i met spoke english. There are, you know, tens of thousands of russians working in the United States, especially in silicon valley. Theres lot of other places that russians who speak english can go and use their english. Not just the United States. Its not just about learning the United States but its about being and when the brexit changes in europe and everybody will go back to french. My french colleagues are suggesting. And, you know, well have to have a lot of Chinese Students rushing out and retuling, i think, is another matter. I think we can look at some practical issues there. Also providing deeper understanding. I dont think that explains everything completely. I think the economic trade relationships are nonproblemic. I think its reduced interest in the United States and being more pragmatic about the relationship with russia. We see less of a necessity for kind of figuring out different ways about managing this beyond the security relationships. They have the perils and proximity. They have more peopletopeople and more russian students studying in europe often in englishspeaking environments. They have to manage that relationship differently. You asked at the end about some of the difficulties in that relationship and the various suspicions. Theres one set of key elements where president putin is different from president xi jinping, and the fact its the title of the book i coffered. Putin is a career intelligence officer. Hes deeply suspicious of everybody. He sees [ laughter ] theres a very high buy in. Hell be deeply suspicious of the relationships. He wants to check and make sure that no one is trying to outmaneuver him. He wants to hedge and keep his options open. China is a great hedge for the future, but there suspicions. With the United States remain that for now, unfortunately, the main opponent. We have some considerable consent about russia. Precisely the same region thats chinese do. The crisis in ukraine, the annexation of crimea is a major turning point. As well as 2008 and russias decision to recognize independent party. The United States is very concerned about these. This is one area where we do have, actually, a common perspective perhaps for Different Reasons with china. And i do think as we think about these relationships for the future, again, we have to think about the different perspectives of the personalities and the countries but how we have a more realistic view of this. How we factor in the complexities. How we dont see them in the bilateral angle or well miss them. As ambassador said about the russiachinese relationship about vietnam and the different perspectives. Each time we have to think about the calculations and given the United Statess role incumbent upon us take this on. Excellent. Last question. [ inaudible ] in what ways like chinese leaders, lecturer, the military, russia proceed the same way or the very much divided and its largely determined by what factors by pro u. S. Or for antiu. S. Or something else. Could you go into specific to talk about the specific, you know, how the chinese divide on the issues and the dynamics diversifiied views in china. I will try. We think the policy community i agree with ambassador roy. The disagreement seems to realize people see the National Interest in this case. Its a different preferences and historical. Its in the interest of china to align the positions with russia as a very historical moment. They do acknowledge theres know material friends or perpetual enemies. At this moment its in chinas interest to work with russia and they will do so maybe in the future when the conditions change. I dont think they have in problem changing the nature of their relationship either. Its just the conditions such conditions have not arised yet. With the Public Opinion, as a little bit more diverse than this consensus among the policy folks. The public seems to be hanging on to the historical issues more, and in china and public scholars territorial laws to russia. To be more open minded about opening their Energy Sectors our investment. They feel that russia should be more tolerant and cooperative in the bilateral relations given the strategic disadvantage. On the other hand, we think the chinese Public Opinion theres also this tremendous admiration of putin. They feel that the russian leader has achieved what the chinese leaders have failed to achieve in the International Politics which is respect and the ability to assert the nations position and protect the nations interest. There are callers for chinese leaders that the chinese leadership should be more assertive and learn from the russian experience. See, russia has been able to do all the things without getting into too severe of consequence. Those are the more nationalistic sentiment. Its different from the policy perspective. Thank you very much. Now the floor is open. Please, first, identify yourself. Please limit your question to one. Also, i just want you to be aware that cspan3 is covering live. Now, first, thank you. Gill rossman. Ithe asean forum. My question is about a dismissal of ideology of the factor. Its not the old communist ideology. Dont we need to think about even in the chinese response to ukraine. So much of the chinese writings talk about the u. S. Responsibility, the color revolution. And this is ideological or identity challenge to russia and they defend russia in terms of how it had to respond to the u. S. And the second part of this, really, is despite last years downturn in russian relations in terms of great russian disappointment with the lack of Chinese Investment and high hopes of 2014 being dashed by how little actually happened, for instance, in bringing together the economic belt and the European Economic union. Hasnt something happened more this year. For instance, the reaction to South China Sea ruling in china. The reaction of both to the deployment decision. Arent we seeing the possibility of a new upturn because of a sense of what is happening in the United States and their resentments of the u. S. Gaining ground . Two questions. Integrated in two parts. Who wants to take well professor good to see you here. People in the audience have done a great deal of service not just on this topic but japan and the broader issues. Youre right. What has to be careful about completely stripping out the ideological perspective. The point were trying to make this is not the old set of relationships. Its driven by a intense aid logical struggle that was defined. This is much more vague, in many respects. Its kind of element of great politics. Theres a degree of national identity. Its not really defined on the United States side in that way. I mean, maybe in some respects its a onesided struggle. The United States, for example, doesnt believe its been engaging in color revolutions. In is a perspective that has been generated both in russia and china. In the United States believes its kind of a cause its a very benign and very universally beneficial thing to be promoting democracy, market liberalization, and, you know, general aspects of good governance. Its an intensic part of the United States Foreign Policy. Also the European Union and most european nations and part of the United States International Development and institutions. The they tend to, up until the president ial cycle its the kind of thing you do as a matter of cause. You we dont tend to see it as we might have done during the cold war. As you rightly point out, its not the view of many people in china and certainly not the view of the inner circle around vladmir putin. Putin, in fact, has the old cold war operative. In fact sees a lot of his activities on the cia active measures from the cold war period. This is a strong view that the United States has been driving many of the absurd and uptick in insurgencies or revolution activity demonstrations, political protests beginning with georgia and the color revolutions but through the arab spring, of course, is not the perspective weve had here in the United States. Weve could have done a lot more getting back to the questions and the proposed earlier and the responses behind ambassador roy managing those perceptions. I mean, in actual fact when the revolutions in georgia and the ukraine in 2000, we did, in fact, have instances of u. S. Foreign policy professionals kind of laying clear to these. I remember being at meeting thinking it was a stupid move and we should be quick to point out they didnt have any role in this. And we werent in the business of manipulating and exploiting. I think weve done a disservice in helping to foster this idea that we play some kind of role in this and not quick to address the misperceptions. This is the same kind of issue, i think, were dealing with in the South China Sea. I think we have to be better in our political communication. We have a real problem in our own hand. We dont always manage these issues especially well. So it is a challenge for the future. I think youre absolutely right. We could see an uptick. Because behalf is happening in the United States, the fact were preoccupied with our own politics at the moment. Were going to be preoccupied for a long time to come, i suspect. Were going to have a serious challenge in dealing with these issues. Its going to be very difficult. I think youre absolutely right theres going to be an awful lot more of these problems that we face. But i think its a problem that we could address head on. Its a factor of better political communication and better diplomacy. Thank you. My name is [ inaudible ] my question is for ambassador roy. In the past two weeks, we have seen a lot of meetings between the u. S. And china. You know, susan rice is visiting beijing now. Also, we see its trying to lower the tension because of the South China Sea. Considering the g 20 summit will be held very soon and in which president obama and president putin will participate, how would you expect the trilateral relations to evolve after the g 20 summit because china will see the summit as bigger role in the international arena