President obama hosted a trilateral meeting in march in the hague, where he and president obama park and Prime Minister abe consulted on the north korean threat and other concerns. Those groupings are based on shared values like democracy, human rights, and respect for international law. And theyre based also on shared interests, both in the pacific and across the globe. And the group that ill be joining tomorrow, ahead to new delhi, is a periodic u. S. Japanindia trilateral consultation. So these are just a few examples that attest to the possibility of plurilateral, multilateral engagement. They attest to the utility of a flexible geometry involving northeast Asian Countries with the United States. So in that vane, we welcomed president parks call last month z resumption of the trilateral Foreign Ministers meeting among china, the republic of korea and japan. I think theres a widespread hope and expectation that after the meeting of the three Foreign Ministers, a meeting of the leaders will also resume. And that would be a very good sign for peace and stability in northeast asia. Regardless of format, i think we can all see the critical importance of communications among the Major Players in northeast asia, china, the republic of korea, japan, as well as with the United States. Because we need to build on areas where our interests converge, and manage the issues in the areas where our interests may conflict. Our collaboration to counter ebola, as i mentioned, is a good example. So is the Crisis Management mechanism that china and japan agreed to in principle last month in beijing, which we hope will become operational soon. Conversely, last year, the abrupt declaration of an air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea was an object lesson in how not to handle a sensitive issue pertaining to overlapping national interests. The coming year, 2015, presents us with a particularly sensitive set of issues. The anniversaries well mark. Its the 70 anniversary of the end of world war ii. The 50th anniversary between the normalization between seoul and tokyo. 1945 sea the creation of the u. N. It saw the dropping of the atomic bomb in hiroshima and nagasaki. The United States occupation of japan. Koreas independence and also its division. Nationalist chinas decision to recognize mongolia as an independent country, a country that next year also celebrates 25 years of democracy. Navigating all these anniversaries, working through these remembrances, this is beginning to require restraint. Its beginning to require good judgment. Its going to require political and diplomatic skill. And frankly, i welcome your advice and your counsel from this conference on not just how to handle the anniversaries, but how to build on them as well. Because the record of the past 70 years in northeast asia has been one of extraordinary progress. And as ive said before, progress in 2015, particularly in the relationship between tokyo and seoul, and the relationship between tokyo and beijing, in turn, historical millstones into historical milestones. China, south korea, japan are Major Players in the regions security and economy. All three are increasingly active and influential players on the global stage. Far from asia for the asians, its now asia for the world. We cant afford to have the three major countries in northeast asia operating in anything less than a fully cooperative manner with themselves and with us, let alone working at cross purposes. One important way to celebrate good relations among neighbors is support for the well established regional order. That includes utilizing apec. That includes using the east asia summit and other asean centers. That is built on the Strong Foundation of u. S. Alliances and security partnerships that have kept the region safe and stable. This architecture in a system that the u. S. Has championed, has fostered trade and investment. Economic and political linkages. Educational and technological exchange. And rapid development, enriching countries across the region. Its helped lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. And as each country in northeast asia has developed and found its social and economic and political footing, first japan, and then the republic of korea, it has paid back the system in spades. And worked to further strengthen that system and expand benefits. Now its chinas turn. Just look at the period from Richard Nixons historic visit to the normalization of relations 35 years ago, to china to the accomplishments of president obamas visit in beijing just last month. For decades, the United States has supported chinas peaceful rise. Weve worked to avoid strategic rivalry, and to narrow, or at a minimum, to manage our differences. But chinas rise is by no means the only Significant Development in the region. The entire asia pacific is changing. India is not just looking east, india is now acting east. Asean is becoming more integrated. Indonesias democracy is flourishing. Burmas reformers are pushing and pushing ahead. Americas rebalance continuing and our alliances are growing more capable. This is all to the good. But the shifting regional dynamics generate tensions as well. Tensions that pose potentially serious risks to stability and prosperity to all of us. Is the construction of manmade outposts and the continual encroachment of ships and planes and oil riggs, is that going to be the way that asians deal with maritime boundary disputes . Will aseans longstanding effort to negotiate a basic code of conduct in the South China Sea require another decade of diplomacy . The sharpening of tensions over the maritime boundaries in the region underscore the importance of maintaining a regional system based on adherence to rules, not adhesion to rocks. A system where claims are based on international law, not a sense of entitlement or muscle. A system based on interdependence and peaceful dispute. Management and resolution. But while changing dynamics drives some of the tensions, the greatest threat to the region is a chronic one, north korea. The dangerous outliar in asia. The good news is that north korea is an area where the u. S. And the rest of northeast asia cooperate closely. We do so because the risks posed to all of us by the dprks pursuit of Nuclear Weapons and int intercontinental ballistic missiles. We do so because of north koreas rejection of its international obligations, its broken promises, and its sudden provocations. I just gave a speech last week at an institution that will go unmentioned addressing north koreas illegal programs, its nuclear program, and its abominable human rights record. I wont reprise the whole policy laydown. Youre familiar with it. But i would mention something that happened at the event, namely the very first question i got from the audience was basically hey, chinas the problem here, right . I mean, suspect the problem that china is preventing progress on north korea . I gave an eloquent answer that can probably be boiled down to simply no. The fact is that china has sent us mistakable signals of its concern, and indeed its displeasure with north koreas policies. President xis decision to visit seoul before he had gone to pyongyang and never met with kim jong un speaks very loudly. Of course, the u. S. And some of our partners believe that theres more, much more that china can do to apply pressure, and i can attest that china believes theres a lot more that the u. S. Can do to engage diplomatically. But overall, i see a very broad alignment in strategic interests, in strategy, and a strong commitment to cooperation. Beijing, seoul, washington, tokyo are united, and russia as well on denuclearization of the korean peninsula. At the same time, we pursue a free and whole and Nuclear Weaponsfree korean peninsula, were working with our northeast asian partners in many other ways, because each of us has significant role to play in addressing the myriad and significant ongoing challenges we face in the world. In the still sluggish global economy, we are the engines of growth. Working within apec and the g20, were poised to do even more. Implementing the koreau. S. Free trade agreement. Negotiating bilateral investment treaty with china. Finishing the transPacific Partnership, the tpp with japan and others. All of these will provide a huge lift to the global economy. Chinas ftas, koreas ftas, trade proposals like rcep. These are all an important part of the conversation as well. The u. S. And china are the worlds greatest admiters of Greenhouse Gases, but a recent action on Climate Change on targets show were determined to address it. So do president obamas and Prime Minister abes pledges to the south korean host at Global Green Climate Fund of 3 billion and 1. 5 billion respectively. And our countries rnd and Manufacturing Capabilities will keep us at the forefront of the clean energy economy. We each have Public Health and Infectious Disease expertise, and tremendous experience from the bird flu and from the sars experience, and that helps ensure that our nations are key contributors to dealing with Ebola Response and its certain that well need to do more in the future. And were major providers of humanitarian assistance and Disaster Relief from syria to iraq to the philippines after super typhoon haiyan. Were also tackling the closely interrelated issues of food security, water security, energy security, challenges, for example, in the river basin, challenges in the pacific islands, challenges in africa. Our expertise, our capital, our efforts are needed to meet all of these challenges. I want to save some time for questions, so ill stop here, but my basic point is this. Whether it is plurilateral or trilateral or multilateral, the fact is we have entered the age of networks. Essentially, we have no choice but to interact and to collaborate. The major northeast asian powers and the United States need each other as much as the rest of the world needs us. It needs us to Work Together, needs us to jump start the global economy, to preserve regional stability, to enhance Global Security and protect a global environment. So if i can channel my former boss mike mansfield, the u. S. , northeast asia relations are the most important plirilateral relations in the world. Thats why youre having this conference. Keep up the good work. I very much look forward to hearing not just your questions, but in due course your conclusions. Thank you very much. [ applause ] on behalf of all of us, thank you very, very much for your really wideranging remarks. I loved your appeal for flexible geometry. Its what we know intuitively, but you have to practice it every day. Assistant secretary russell has volunteered to taking some questions, so i will recognize them as hands go up. Please keep them brief and identify yourself as well, beginning in the back. Joe bosco, formerly with the defense department. As the person who asked the question last week about chinas role in north korea, i wonder if you could elaborate on what seems to be a suggestion of moral equivalence, that china thinks we need to do more, that china thinks we need to do more. In the same speech, you said we bent over backwards to solve the north korea issue. Do you think china has bent over backwards or come anywhere near what the u. S. Has done . Well, i consider myself blessed to get two questions from you, and two consecutive speeches. Thank you very much. And its roughly the same question. I think the constructive and the useful way to look at this is in terms of common objectives. And a process to reconcile our strategies for getting there. The u. S. , with the republic of korea, is cooperating with china on the challenge of the grand peninsula. Were cooperating as well with other partners, including japan. We, the United States, have experimented with bilateral negotiations with north korea. I myself was part of the negotiating team led by bob galucci that ultimately reached an agreed framework, as is wellknown, north korea cheated on that deal. They welched on that deal. We have the distinguished bob einhorn in the room. Bob is the architect of an important agreement with the North Koreans on missiles that fell apart because the North Koreans will not honor their obligations. Weve tried quadrilateral talks. Certainly weve tried sicy eied talks. I just heard my friend and former boss and predecessor chris hill give a talk on his new book in which he describes if efforts and the frustrations of reaching an agreement with the North Koreans only to see it unravel as they start negotiating again from scratch and consider commitments the way that famously italians considered red lights, as merely a suggestion. Were not giving up. Because our objective, and id venture although diplomats arent supposed to do this, to speak for the chinese, saying this is a shared objective, is to find it peaceful path to halt, roll back, and ultimately eliminate north Koreas Nuclear and Nuclear Missile program and ambition. Of course we want to do this peacefully. The fact is, the simple and unfortunate fact is that thats not what north korea wants. North korea is laboring under the illusion that it can simultaneously pursue and solicit Economic Growth and assistance from the International Community while also preserving an ongoing program, it cant be done. And i venture to say that not only do leaders in seoul and tokyo share that view, but leaders in beijing as well. So we are embarked on a continual effort to sharpen the choice faced by north koreas leaders. The only path leaders. The only path to security and prosperity that north korea claims to seek is a path of denuclearization beginning with a freeze and that pay must run through negotiations. Now, we make on the basis of experience a distinction between talk and negotiations. Negotiations have to begin from an agreed premise that we are putting the issue of concern on the table, that we are entering into an effort to reach binding outcomes. Thats chronically been north koreas problem. The willingness to put forward significant benefits to north korea for honoring its obligations is not in question. That has not been a problem for us. Now the chinese in their recipe may use more dialogue. And less pressure. But fundamentally, we are both trying to bake the same cake. Its a peacefully denuclearized korean peninsula. Thank you. If i could follow on joes question, are we hearing a hint at least of the possibility that the u. S. Is thinking or rethinking what seems to be a policy of no bilaterals with the North Koreans unless denuclearization is agreed upon as the outcome . Just a second ago you said the talks have to agree in a sense whatever the outcomes are will be binding. Is that a nuance . Are you reading too much into that . Are we trying to look for a way to break, in a sense, the deadlock on bilaterals as long as denuclearization is the only goal well agree to talk about . Thanks. No. I dont think thats an accurate recharacterization of what i said or meant to say at least. The United States has never had or at least in most administrations we have been willing to speak directly to north korea. Certainly the Obama Administration has never hesitated to talk directly to the dprk. He believes though that given the stake that the republic of korea first and mother most has in the future of the korean peninsula, that any process with the dprk must include the republic of korea. I believe relations between washington and seoul are better than at any time certainly in my professional lifetime. I have placed tremendous importance on synchronizing and consulting with the republic of korea. We listened carefully to the thinking and initiatives coming out of president parks blue house. We also recognize that china, for a variety of reasons has a tremendous influence to bring to bear and a significant role to play. As does japan, as does russia. And so the short answer is, no. We are not of the view that the pathway to a denuclearized peninsula is through bilateral u. S. Dprk negotiations that we seek must be, i believe, based on the significant agreements already reacheded and captured in the 2005 joint statement of the sixparty talks. Thank you very much for those clarifications. I think everyone appreciates that. Yes, in the back of the room over there. Sir, let me play a little devils advocate. Nobody from peking university wants to stand up. Let me see if i can play devils advocate on that. Negotiation of the United States is often like the wild west. The gangster who goes around armed to the teeth, shoots whoever shows up to oppose him. I havent seen that movie. Yeah. I saw them a long time ago. Im amazed the United States still seems to behave like that. Isnt there a need for the United States to also reduce its war mongering that it does all over the world while saying we want peace. Yes, the military option is there, if you dont accept our proposal were going to kill you. Given that kind of situation wouldnt you want to change some of your positions . First of all. Let me make clear that i came to this event unarmed. Secondly, as the child of peaceniks brought up going on ban the bomb marches and agitating for world peace, i share your objective of a peac