And so the risk of almost all of the flash point issues is whether or not we can manage them without them being politicized. There is probably some kind of wiggle room to address some concerns that are outstanding related to the agreement. I think in a way the bigger issues, they are looking at them from different perspectives. The koreans havent caught up to the idea that for trump the only thing that matters is the merchandise trade balance. That is a contested view. I think even within the u. S. And probably it is going to take some effort to absorb that and try to figure out how to respond to that. They will need some time to put together a strategy on that i think. Yeah. I think a lot of it is the intent and the messaging. You can say maybe there is a mechanism for doing that. Some things didnt work out as well as you wanted to. You can say why dont we gret the folks together and youre willing to walk away from it. If its negotiating it may be counter productive coming in with guns ablazing and if i dont get everything i want and we will walk away and, you know, you kind of get whiplash of it on the messaging. You know, similarly with the comments during the Campaign Last year on the cost sharing agreement. We want 100 reimbursement or we walk. That sort of makes an alliance a bit of an arrangement. It doesnt address it is in u. S. National interest to have alliances. It is in u. S. National interest because we have such National Interest not only in asia and europe. Its in to have our forces overseas. Its a stabilizing mechanism not only for our allies but for us. Its not that we need 100 reimbursement because a lot of it is if you were advising him right now what would you say he should do to win the support of the American People . I would try to advise so many things, especially the Trump Administration is fairly unfamiliar especially about the trade. I think the trade is very related with foreign policy, but this trade must be different than trade from other countries. It was once its own country. We shouldnt just simply look at the amount of profits, gains from trade but these to force relations by ensuring so i think we are concerned about the th kind of situation. Do you any advice for the president . Let me just say, we have many in the audience who are really the person this issue should probably be directed to for comment. You know, if i can address the political demention of this. If we look back and look at who will be advising, you know, essentially what it means is its likely he has people in his camp, some of who are pro alliance. This alliance versus a ton my is really a major tension that has been there. What it tells us, i think, is if the u. S. Can manage it well in order to ensure we are promoting the pro Alliance People and dont get ton wrong side then many of these issues can be dealt with in a rather quiet way. Where the u. S. Makes unilateral statements, i can think of a few recent examples that rere sason for us. You have coauthored a book about korean japanese relations. What do you expect sole relations and i would like to hear your views about beijing as well. Newly elected in his inauguration address indicated his willingness to go to washington, beijing and to tokyo and in order to further south korean security sbretss, he has one obstacle in terms of his own political presence during the campaign and that is that he abdomen all of the other can candidates agreed. I think a lot hinges on how the south korean policy advisers decided to frame this issue. If trying to reopen the issue is putting themselves back in the same box where it is a condition for all other aspects of the relationship well see a relationship and it will be a real drag on south Korean Foreign to policy. If we can dont try to address the task while also moving forward i think it offers an alternative pathway. Well have to wait and see. Do you any views about relations with tokyo and beij g beijing. It can only be resolved with Solutions Based on the International Law that will be acceptable to the agreed information and these people because the other administrat n administration. So problems continue to persist i think. The past administration was not in a code with International Law. So it eventually worsened among korean people. So i believe the agreement needs to be reexamined. What about in terms of china . What do you think he will do . He moved from opposition to really being on the fence. He kept sort of saying well, the next government should deal with that. You will be the next government. He just sort of kept trying to punt on that. You know, more recently, as i said, i think he serves well. It is sort of a done deal. Why wouldnt it be a done deal after five or four or three . And given the north korean threat to you now that they have miniaturized, they have weapon dcweapo weaponiz weaponized. Where as in the past he said skud missiles, they dont have a military target. Its like well, sir, the only military target they have is south korea. I think at least in my view its a question of South Koreans f sovereignty. If youre willing to negotiate that way with china youre willing to negotiate anything away. They have tried to offer technical briefings and they refused. How can they talk about it and he turned it down. They know its not only false, its disingenuous. I think it raises some concerns. I mean we agreed before that the election was basically based on domestic issues. In terms of domestic policy he has proposed ways to restructure the conglomerate. He wants to spend more public funds and creating jobs before you reduce the unemployment in that sector and to spend more on infrastructure to stimulate the economy. How effective do you think or can you be in getting that legislation crew parliment . He obviously needs cooperation. The other aspect of the Current Situation in south korea is when the Park Administration came in National Assembly reached an agreement that nothing would move forward unless all of the parties have consensus or unless a single party can mobilize 60 . So he has some real challenges. The advantage that he has is in this environment i think a lot of elements of the platform and agenda in terms of having job expansion, Public Sector job expansion in order to address high unemployment levels among youth, the need for rolling out a stronger set of Public Services to support elderly. The issue of trying to address common equality and the kind of advantages, those are all things that have relatively broad and are we have come to a point where there is a recognition and necessity to move forward. Even it was lip service. It just didnt happen. Do you think we would see some type of trade off of lets say him softening his policy or what he wants to see for getting conservative votes for corporate reforms . It is probably going to be domest domestic. Thats where you need to spend your political capital. Right. And well have to see how it plays out. Do you think that he can achieve his legislative goals or what type of deals will he need to do to cut with the conservative opposition . I can help him. [ no audio ] and all of the custom in politics, so i think they can make the same policy. So scott, what do you think is going to be president uns priorities. Where do you think that will go . I think most of it, well, the way he work worded the inauguration he put security first. So i do think the importance of the need to fill the political vacuum that was kpitsed for the past six months, but, you know, the real driver will have to be turning to get the economy moving, try to add dretsz issues of transparencies. That security will wind up being his number one concern. I think first of all certainly he wants i think he wants to try to do something. I think the korean public really wants to do something to change, which seems to be corruption and sort of the government relationship. So i think theres sort of a e tsunami to do things. I think its a bridge to see the party Holding Reform hostage to softening or hardening in north korea policy. I think back of he wanted to come thin and had very strong support. The National Economy then the people kind of flipflopped. They are like lets not do that. It is such an oversized impact. Then people are saying lets back off. Theres a bit of a to and from on that. If they started impacting money making operations for the country i believe he is still 25 , if it impacts at a time when its very slow would that cause people to go back . We would have to see. When they havent done anymore missile testing or exercising of any kind i doubt that. When we have the next nuclear test you a north korean crisis and then well see how they work together. If its north korea did this. We need to increase pressure, more sanctions, do this. Say no no. We need to lower the tension and maybe its only they are doing that because of the u. S. Actions thats where you can have some convergence. So you now have not only the uc u. N. Sanctions they are pushing the Previous Administration that they have been reluctant to do or a new administration and then another parallel track is others going around the world talking to others, raising crimes against humanity, the wages of the overseas worker, crimes against humanity, mass destruction in the civilian airport. It weaned away more of the north korean business partners. If you think of if he finally got the townspeople energized and finally, is he going to be guys, theres a secret exit over here. And if south korea implements the required reform. Youre you could see a softening of the international coalition. What do you think that president unwill focus on the economy rather than on security . Yes. I had some misunderstanding. Can i speak korean . This is an english channel. Two things is very important. First of all is let me speak on the misunderstandings that supreme on mr. Un. Oftentimes people say that mr. Unmay be pushing for a more severe and that he would some how take away power. Thats not what he is intending to do. What he wants to do is for his party as well. They want to make it more of a competitor. He wants it to be more transparent. It would lead to the companies being more competitive and on the global market. Is it is not by way of more regulations. But allowing for them to operate more on the global platform. He does not want this. He wants this to be global companies. And under the u. S. Alliance we intend to resolve the north Korean Nuclear issues. Its not like we will be an everlasting friend to north korea. Thats not what he wants to do. Sure. He made some very important points. I think they are there in the platforms. The question that i think people here maybe are still asking themselves is it really going to happen . The answer really is we have got to hold him to his promises and his platform. If that happens well be on the right track. I think there has been some misunderstanding as well as to north korea supporting an opening of the complex. Basically he is trying to say i think we have people around microphones. You can wait and wait until the person with the microphone comes. Okay. Yeah. Excellent discussion. I have an expertise in korean affairs. The item that was touched on a little bit but we didnt talk about it a lot was the beijing i mean covering all of the points you guys discussed is where does repairing relations with beijing stack in his agenda . So i think in the vow of china that china will do things periodically and there will be a negative view taken by the south korean public and if they stop doing that the relationship will get better or south korea will do that. It. Is because of your ally that is taking these offensive actions and capabilities of put in place that are threatening south korea that we are doing this. So sort of it is a National Security issue. It is a matter of ksovereignty. Lets talk about the range of other things. I think when we have north korea or the way it continually or threatens and stuff it sort of raises the true nature of the regime. If china continues to pursue this Economic Warfare then someone who i think would be more likely to be aligned with china or want to improve relations with china, if china is even doing it then i think the problems will continue. Yeah, beijing economic repression and retaliation that they are carrying out, it is actually not just hurting the koreans, it also hurts the people in china. Why does china keep on doing this when it hurts them as well . So china wants something from us and by pressuring south korea china wants to see a change not just in korea but the u. S. And japan as well as north korea. By doing all of these they want the parties to come together. All of the interested parties to come together and discuss a resolution and because we have decided not to discuss or come to dialogues and china is frustrated because they are unable to bring any resolution. So that in that regard i blame her. She refused to talk with china on these various issues including security issues. I think its important that when ever we take measures that we dont do it on our own but actually as a result of having discussed what this is with other neighbors. I think they should focus rather than necessarily allowing themselves to be drawn into this strategic enter play. I dont think it will be profitable for south korea precisely because it exaggerates the issue. It plays into chinas attempt to use it as leverage. Thanks very much. Great discussion, as always. Im seeking clarity and i guess you are too on if there is to be a renewed south korean Diplomatic Initiative with north korea, is it clear yet whether president unwill try to keep it off to one side and focus on the economic and Family Reunion and that kind of thing or has he been clear that negotiations have to include from south korean standpoint and on the strategic issues, has he been clear on this key question, negotiating a freeze with north korea. It runs the risk. Im sorry i havent found it. I havent looked hard. Trump is not doing that iert. If you have thoughts on what the u. S. May be heading towards that would be useful. If we are going to have talks whats he going to talk about . Is he going to try combined strategic economic or one or the other . Thank you. I would say the first issue is really in a way he already issued his statement of desire to reengage with north korea. He is appointed head of National Security which is a veteran in 2000 and 2007. You know, he is doing everything he can to signal an openness and willingness to reestablish dialogue. Ton north korean side i dont think they with con figured yet. They have a military man whose life has been i they they will focus on Family Reunions and build up from there. I think a lot of the advisers seem to want to get back to simultaneous action, which north korea is the one that stepped away from simultaneous action. Then theres also the challenge of north korea wants it and i think over the course of the past decade it has become an issue that South Koreans feel they have a stake in. It means the administration cannot escape finding ways to address that as part of their process for moving forward. They are looking for flexibility in terms of how. I think thats lot of internal debate, which i think will be influenced by the International Environment and by consultations with the United States. We dont know the sequencing or conditionality. He wants to talk about a wide range of issues. He raised peace treaty getting back to the Six Party Talks. I believe he talked about the freeze. He wants to have dialogue. You know, he said as scott pointed out he wants to strengthen defenses and then enga enga engageed. It the reason the u. S. Pushed the Six Party Talks because the u. S. Had heard complaints from south korea where we were negotiating their security above their heads. Thats why we wanted to Six Party Talks to be in the room because everyone has different priorities or different issues. So, you know, again, how is that implemented . Is that in close consultation with the u. S. And we both agree on what south korea will do. Will it go its own way gor further than we are comfortable with just as south korea felt we were doing. I think one issue i think i hope he brings up is human rights. You had an administration largely by human rights advocates. They felt it would undermine their traction with north korea. They refused to sign u. N. Agreements. So, you know, and allegations are that asking them what they thought about criticizing him and said you dont want to do that. So i do hope human rights is a strong issue in the korean dialogue. I think he is quite different from the former president. He also thinks they have to get some channel to eliminate Nuclear Weapons. So i think that he tried all kinds of methods including issues. So i think he tried to get something about that issue. Gentleman in the middle there. Thank you. Asking about a doe mes ig issue. The south korean government has had difficulties responding to emergencies within their country. Thinking especially about the ferry disaster. Are there any indications it will be on this agenda or too far down the list . Thank you. [ inaudible question ] i did not see that addressed among the top 20 policy parties huh . [ inaudible question ] there was an effective emergency management. I think well have so see how the restructuring plays out. Anybody else . [ inaudible ]. Mr. Trump repressed china in terms of the Nuclear Weapon program. I think for example mr. Trump may suggest he takes one among two options. For example, option one, just take some burden of operation costs or expense or you can just give me your idea to review trade deficit. So there are [ inaudible question ] well, i think it will be a critical event in framing i think both leaders will have an interest in establishing some indication they can work with each other because they have to live with each other for at