 All right. Good morning, everyone. Can we just start by giving a big round of applause for our esteemed panel here on the stage with me? Thank you. So hello, everyone, and a very warm welcome to the World Economic Forum's panel discussion titled Geopolitics in Asia Threats and Opportunities. We are coming to you with a live audience from the National Convention Center in Hanoi, Vietnam. I'm Julie Yu. I'm with Channel News Asia, and this panel was discussed and developed in close collaboration with the wonderful folks here at World Economic Forum. Today's topic cannot be more timely given Asia's geopolitical realities. We've seen the peace barometer in Asia swing between two extremes of nuclear tensions on the Korean Peninsula to historic peace talks and ongoing security concerns on South China Sea and also the increased friction and competition between the United States and China for dominance in Asia. Now, these shifting landscapes beg the question, is Asia's geopolitical outlook more optimistic or pessimistic? And how the US and China rivalry define the future of this continent? And also, what should the regional players like ASEAN as a grouping do to preserve peace and stability in Asia? Now, we will explore these questions with our distinguished guests. I'm very pleased to be here with such great names. I'm sure we don't need an introduction, but I'm sure we'll benefit from their insights and their perspectives in the next hour. And at the same time, this is not going to be a one-way discussion. We'll invite you, our audience, to take part to please challenge our esteemed panelists in the Q&A session later in the program. So without further ado, ladies and gentlemen, please allow me to introduce my very illustrious panel starting to my left. We are honored to have Mr. Ranil Rakhuramasingha, he's the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka. To his left, Mr. Pramil Minh, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Vietnam. To his left, we are pleased to be joined by Ms. Kangyong Ha, Foreign Minister of South Korea. And to her left, Mr. Taro Kono, Minister of Foreign Minister of Japan. And Dr. Lin Kwong-Kwan Lee, Senior Research Fellow at the University of Cambridge. She's also the Associate Fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies Asia. So welcome and thank you for joining us. I'd like to kick start by opposing this question to everyone here on the panel. Three key things that you're most concerned about, what you're watching out for in Asia's geopolitics. Perhaps you can start, Prime Minister. Thank you. Thank you for calling me and also asking me to mention my three concerns. The first, looking at geopolitics of Asia and the friction between America and China, I would be concerned about how the rebalancing of global order takes place. This is in the background of the rebalancing that finally the U.S.-China relationships have to be determined. And with that, the geopolitics of Asia. It's in the last 70 years after the war, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union. You've seen Asia come up. An original understanding between China and U.S. seems to be evaporating partially. And within it, we have to now work out the relationships. And the issue of China is the, China is not, it's not the Asian issue. But China is also in Europe, in other areas. So that's the first issue. Secondly, the issue of the Indian Ocean or the Indo-Pacific, as we are now called, which again relates to the role of China within the Indian Ocean. And how do we ensure that within the Indian Ocean and in the Pacific Moon Cross is respected? From that comes the third connected issue. What happens to the multilateral order? What we built up has been a multilateral order. Is that multilateral order decay? Will it be diminished? Or can we strengthen the multilateral order? If the multilateral order is no longer there, then what is going to replace it? So these will be the three concerns that I have. But none of them keep me awake. Thank you very much, Prime Minister. Deputy Prime Minister, please. Thank you. Thank you, Julie. For the questions. I think that I have many things to be concerned. But since you asked only three concerns, and the first concern is that for me, this is the fourth industrial revolution. Yesterday and today, and this is also the theme of the forum. And yesterday, we talked about the opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution. Yes, for sure, it is undeniable that the revolutions offer tremendous opportunities. But if the country cannot seize the opportunities, they can be left behind. And the development cut will be widened. Then it will lead to the transformations of the geoeconomic as well as geopolitical landscape. So that would be the threat to the countries that cannot seize the opportunities. And the second concern is that the worrying trend of the rise of the nationalism, protectionism, as well as power politics, strategic competition that lead to the choice of the nations, big or small, to adapt to that situation. And the third one is that the traditional and non-traditional security continue to be a threat, including the maritime disputes, the climate change, cyber security, etc. So those are the concerns that I have. Thank you. Deputy Prime Minister, thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. Minister Gaung, what keeps you up at night? Well, I think three things you asked for. And I think many of these issues are interrelated so they can be packaged into three key areas. Of course, from my government's point of view, getting traction on the denuclearization and peace process, that is very much in motion. It's a daily concern to get movement on this, but if we compare where we were a year ago, I think we're in a much better situation. A year ago, we were faced with growing tension and confrontation with North Korea testing its six nuclear weapons test and a series of missile testing as well. And as a result, the global community has responded with a series of sanctions resolutions which remain in place because these will remain in place until we see our short of North Korea denuclearization. Compared to that situation where we are today, after two South North Korean summits, the first ever U.S. North Korea summit, and through these summits, the three countries agreeing to work towards complete denuclearization, and by that we mean North Korea's complete denuclearization, and also agreeing to work towards a more stable peace regime to replace the armistice regime, which is currently in fact. So in the larger scheme of things, we made huge progress, but getting traction on the negotiations to get to that goal is a daily concern. We are currently preparing for a third summit meeting between my President and the chairman of North Korea next week in Pyongyang and hoping that this will be a significant step forward on denuclearization and peace. Second point, rising protectionism, and I think that's very much related to the rising nationalism in countries, and doors closing. It's most visible in the trade area, but it is also visible in terms of the whole migration issue. I think in this age of globalization, people movement is a natural part of daily life, and I think the world has responded with openness, but in recent years, post the migration crisis in Europe, and we see this happening everywhere. The doors are closing, and I think that will be a huge loss because co-prosperity in this globalization age very much depends on this exchange of people across borders. Obviously, you have to contain the negative side effects of this, and that's very much our prerogative of national governments to control their borders, but we must do it in a way that leaves the doors as open as possible about the people exchange. So protectionism and rising nationalism, and of course the protectionist trends in the trade area is a particular concern. It's a concern for all of us who thrive on free and fair trade, but South Korea is very dependent on our external trade and economic relations, and so I think those of us who are for fair and free trade should make sure that this trend is countered with greater efforts to preserve the multilateral trading system. And thirdly, we are promoting a new policy to strengthen our relations with our southern neighbors, Asean, India, Pakistan Sri Lanka. There are other competing, I think, initiatives in this area, the Indo-Pacific initiative, the One Belt and Road initiative, and it's good that we have these initiatives because it underscores the centrality of this region, the centrality of Asean, but we must ensure that the initiatives are promoted in a way that's complementary, that preserves the openness, the inclusivity and the transparency, and very much in line with established international norms. Minister Kang, thank you very much. I would like to move on to you, Minister Kono, three key things. Well, the biggest headache or biggest concern is probably the climate change. The seawater level is very high, and we are getting stronger typhoons, stronger cyclones, heavy, heavier rain, once in 100 year rain turned out to be once in two years. And it is not just an environmental issue, it would lead to the issue of water supply management or food security. And this is a challenge for entire mankind, so we really need to be serious about taking care of this climate change issue. The second concern is any unilateral attempt to change the status quo in Asia. I think we need to establish rule-based international order and any unilateral challenge to the status quo. I think international community need to stand up against it. And thirdly, the collapse of multilateralism starting from the trade war. I think the trade need to be also rule-based. We have a double TO. And double TO, IMF, Bretton Woods, those liberal international order has led to the successful global economy. And now there is some challenge to this multilateral international order. And we need to preserve that. I think that's the three issues. Since Foreign Minister Khan talked about Korean Peninsula, I will skip that issue. Minister Kono, thank you very much. I think Southeast Asia's geopolitical landscape will be determined by three main factors. The first development that I will be watching out for are developments in the South China Sea. China is consolidating its control of the region and its resources. In the South China Sea, I understand, according to reports, that its thrice threatened Vietnam with military action. Should it continue to drill for oil and gas in its exclusive economic zone? This took place in July last year as well as in March and May this year. I think this matters because it will change the balance of power in the region as well as determine whether behaviour in the region is governed by might or by right. China claims that the region is at a peace and it's in regional harmony. But I think this has largely been a result of the weaker countries or the smaller countries in the region suffering what they must. The second development that I would look out for is really the Belt and Road Initiative and how that unfolds. I think it's got tremendous opportunity to increase connectivity in the region and boost millions of people out of poverty. So it will be wonderful if this really works. However, it's not free of course of risk. And I think the recent case of the seeding of strategic assets in the region, including in Sri Lanka last year, when Sri Lanka was unable to repay the debts undertaken by the previous government, I think that was a cautionary tale. But of course, even without seeding strategic assets, we have the concern with increasing Chinese projects in the region actually leading to increase Chinese influence. And the third thing I would be looking out for is how geo-strategic developments, the broader geo-strategic developments in the region actually have implications for domestic dynamics. Now many countries in Southeast Asia are multi-ethnic. And so if China seeks to persuade as it is seeking to do certain domestic constituents within countries that they should ally itself with China's position on certain issues, then this has destabilizing implications for the internal dynamics within countries and across borders as well. And of course, with increasing Chinese presence in the region through Belt and Road initiatives, we also have changing dynamics, ethnic dynamics within these countries, which we need to be very careful about and manage carefully. So I would highlight those three concerns. Thank you, Julie. Thank you very much for all your input there. A wide, broad range of issues on the forefront of the minds of our panelists here, starting from global power place, North Korea, South China Sea, climate change, and also the 4.0 industrialization. I would like to just start by opening up to the audience and see if there's any, if anyone has a question for our panelists here. Okay, I see one. Why don't we start with you? If I can, gentlemen here in the front, just for a quick warm-up. Thank you. My name is Fai Narajian, YGL from Cambodia. My question regards to the perspective of all the panelists with regard to the free and open Indo-Pacific. Thank you. So should we go with maybe Deputy Prime Minister, would you like to go first? Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for the questions. Now in Asia or in Asia-Pacific, we are not having only one initiative. That is Indo-Pacific or the open and free Indo-Pacific. We have in this region, we have several initiatives. For example, Bell and Role initiative from China. Indo-Pacific initiative, not from the U.S. from Japan, from India, as well as in Indonesia. So this is all the initiative related to this region. Our position is that we welcome all initiatives if it contributes to the maintenance of peace, stability, and prosperity in the region. And the initiative must be open, transparent, inclusive. So this is our position on that. So not only Indo-Pacific. We have many initiatives and those initiatives, if they respect international law, respect self-determinations of the nations. That's we all welcome. Thank you. Minister Tarakano, would you like to go? Very just to that. I think it pretty much said in shorter terms what the Deputy Prime Minister said in terms of the Indo-Pacific. The various versions of that depending upon the country, but it's critical that the fundamental principles of openness, inclusivity, and transparency is what drives all of these initiatives. I think the centrality of ASEAN is also a fundamental element. And therefore, our new southern policy is certainly designed to work with ASEAN towards a generation of momentum for further growth in this fourth industrial revolution age, which means really utilizing the possibilities that technology offers us to enhance connectivity within ASEAN, to close the development gap within ASEAN. And we have sort of a lead experience in this area in the IT sector. Our experience in e-government, e-commerce, and smart cities and smart factories, I think will certainly be something that we can offer to address this challenge within ASEAN of connectivity and development gap. So I think all of these initiatives really should focus on the centrality of ASEAN. And I think if we do so, we have a shared grounding where we can then make sure that these initiatives are complementary. All right, I could just add to that. I think, in my view, the Indo-Pacific concept or strategy is a very important analytical tool to help us understand the region a little bit better. It underscores the connectivity between the Indian and Pacific Ocean as one strategic operating theater. It also underscores the maritime nature of the region and how in the region, security is very much about maritime security. So that's its analytical usefulness. It also has important practical implications. And I think that one of them is to ensure that by having more powers involved in the region, it ensures that no one power dominates the region. So that's the first point. And on the second practical implication, I think, is that it ensures that, well, having buy into this strategy also suggests that countries apart from the United States all subscribe to the principles that Minister Kang highlighted earlier, the principles of openness, inclusivity, and transparency. And that countries in the region actually care about a rules-based order. So I think those are two very significant useful aspects of the Indo-Pacific strategy. Thank you very much, Dr. Park. If I may. Yes, please, Minister. Back in the 60s and 70s, the Japanese economy import oil from the Middle East through Indian Ocean and sold the automobile to North America through the Pacific Ocean. And the seventh fleet of United States Navy ensure the freedom of navigation. And we believe that freedom of navigation is the key for their global economic development. So now what we are trying to do is to connect from eastern shore of African continent through Indian Ocean, through ASEAN countries, through Pacific Ocean to the western coast of South American continent. In order to do that, we need to establish rule-based maritime order. And then we need to increase the connectivity through high-quality infrastructure, meaning that any infrastructure project must be open, transparent, economical, and has to be considered to the financial soundness of recipient countries. And we also need to provide the capacity building for counterterrorism, counterpiracy, maritime law enforcement capability. So that are the three pillars of our free and open Indo-Pacific. Now, United States alone cannot ensure the freedom of navigation in the region. So as you said, it need to be everyone engaged in keeping the sea lines of communication free and open. And that's what we are trying to do. All right, we would like to go back to the audience here. I'm going to bundle two questions together. A gentleman here and a gentleman here, please. Thank you. Hi, I'm Yoshi Hori of Glovis Japan. I think the biggest concern we have is the rising protection from the U.S. And I have a question about the U.S. is leading towards more bilateral agreements. And at the same time, we have a TPP and RCEP going on. How could Asia be as a one to be negotiating against the strong U.S. and to make sure that multilateralism will stay there? Thank you. And a gentleman here. Thank you very much. My name is Kumagai and I'm a chief economist of Daiba, Tokyo, Japan. And panelists pointed out many risk factors. So we are very doomy. So I'd like to ask each panelist to point out the biggest hopes in this area. And also I'd like to ask to avoid the worst scenario and to realize the best scenario, what should we do? And who will be the key player or key driver? We'll start with the first question, please, on protectionism. Anyone like to go first? Yes. Well, we believe TPP is still the best option for United States. I think TPP will go into effect probably by the end of this year. And we are going to start expanding it. Now Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, probably South Korea, and other Latin American countries plus United Kingdom are all interested in joining TPP. It will create a large free trade regime based in Pacific, Asia Pacific. And it'll be very attractive for American industries, American farmers, to join it. So we are still hoping that Trump administration or administration after that will be interested in and will be determined to come back to TPP. Recently we see a lot of high education spreading all over the Asia. Asia produced very good human resource in artificial intelligence, robotics, programming, all high tech industry. And I think that's the core of the future for Asia. And we see more and more human resource is developed in Asia. We are actually supplying out of the Asian region to all over the global. So I think that's what's probably the best scenario. We need to continue investing in human resource. Well, I think Minister Kono has been provided, you know, yes there is, are these protectionist trends, but there is also a huge push to further expand free and fair trade and the TPP initiative is certainly be very important. And as he said, I certainly hope that my country will be able to join sooner rather than later. But there's also a lot of discussions going on to upgrade existing free trade agreements, whether at the bilateral level or at the regional block level. So it's not all protectionist trends gathering steam. There's also a lot of efforts to preserve and further expand the free and fair trade space. I think the President said something very important, I think at the plenary yesterday, which is that the fourth industrial revolution provides us with an opportunity of a world where resources are not limited, but unlimited. Resources are not finite, but infinite. Because what the technology of the fourth industrial revolution enables us is to utilize, you know, to develop human resources to an extent that we were never able to do before with the traditional methods of education, but also use the material resources that we have in much smarter and efficient ways than we have ever been able to. So that hugely opens up the available human as well as material resources that society can use. And I think we have huge potential here in Southeast Asia to really take grasp of that possibility, that the fourth industrial revolution. I think somebody said, don't call it revolution, call it liberation, and that's probably the better framing of the potential that this offers. Of course the pitfall is, as all technological breakthroughs pose, is that if not channeled in the right way, and this is where governments come in, you cannot let these technologies evolve on their own. There has to be some regulatory framework to channel that into ways that benefit the whole of society. And that's good governance, that's good public policies, and that's basically the role of governments. But I think, you know, we should make sure that these new technological advances do not further exacerbate the development gaps within societies between the poor and the rich, between men and women. And I think this is where policy thinking comes in. Alright Minister Khan, thank you very much. I'm afraid, yes please. Yes, I concur with Minister Kono on the importance of the TPP, and we believe in the multilateral trading system, and we support the free trade spirit. That's why Vietnam have served by lateral free trade agreement, as well as multilateral free trade agreement, and we believe that the TPP is the very high standard agreement. That is the most high standard agreement that Vietnam has been participating. So we believe that if the United States join, so we will welcome. And now in the region, we're also negotiating, we are negotiating the asset. This is also the multilateral free trade agreement in the region. So this is oppositionist that we are supported to the free trade agreement. Thank you. Thank you. On the gentleman's question on how Asia can ensure that multilateral trade system remains in the region and is supported, we spoke earlier about the Indo-Pacific strategy. Now that's very much a work in progress, and at present I think its economic dimension is weaker than its security dimension. In this respect, I think the United States lost out an important opportunity to signal commitment to the region economically by withdrawing from the TPP. Now its current focus is on bilateral trade deals, as well as what appears to be private sector-led economic engagement with the region. Now whether that is sufficient to offer out viable alternatives to China's hugely ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, or even to complement it, is an open question. So I think Japan did a wonderful job in terms of leading other nations to go move forward with the TPP, thereby leaving the door open for the United States. And I hope that the United States will reconsider its entry of the TPP. The gentleman over there talked about the greatest hopes for the region. Now my greatest hope is not only to see a region that is strong and prosperous, but also a region that is compassionate and kind to the weakest of its members. Now we've had the conflict in the Rakhine state festive for years now. The most recent manifestations took place two years ago in October 2016 when militant attacks on security outposts in Myanmar led to reprisals which has since led to over half a million people fleeing, many of which are children and women. Now this crisis has been going on for way too long and over half a million children are without education or with very little education. And so what are we going to be as a region going to be doing this as security implications for the region as this problem is allowed to fester? But more than that I think it's just plain wrong that we have people who are without access to basic health care or education and security. I think Bangladesh is trying to do its best. What can we as an international community, we as the region do to promote and facilitate this crisis? We can start small. Perhaps may I suggest a school in Cox Bazaar in Bangladesh and a school in Rakhine state which will have twinning programs where you can exchange of students from the Rohingya minority as well as the Rakhine Buddhist majority in the Rakhine state. Thank you very much. Prime minister you've been awfully quiet. Would you like to chime in? Yes I would say we are using the general slang term Asia's putting the act together and we now got to take responsibility of what happens. Within ourselves we still haven't defined what exactly are we going to do. What is Asia? I mean there are different definitions of it. You have Pacific, you have Asia, Pacific, you have Indo-Pacific. So let's let's be quite definite of what's the area we're going to go but the prosperity of Asia depends on maritime trade and that that we have all agreed on and the need for a free and open, stable maritime order based on rules-based order. So what Sri Lanka is now attempting is to ensure the freedom of navigation within the Indian Ocean. The geopolitics of the Indian Ocean itself has changed with the presence of China and the interest owned by some of the powers. So firstly is to ensure that there's a rules-based order in the Indian Ocean where we build up on the UN clause. So if that could then take some of the tensions. We haven't got the territorial issues that you have in the Pacific. To this fight to succeed, ASEAN has to play a key role because the major to all the choke points come within ASEAN and ASEAN is necessary to ensure. So if you could at least sort out the maritime order in that part of the world then just look at what's left out in the Pacific. Secondly also in treating Indo-Pacific as one area I'm all for it. I think that's Asia but you have to remember the diversity of the Indian Ocean from Pacific. So all stakeholders have to be involved. This is just a start. A start of a new economic order which will see Asia at the center. By 2050 you will see that I mean the whole, if you take the world itself from Korea all the way down to Australia, from Japan all the way down to India, you'd find all these large, some of the largest economies operating in the world and we become the center. So how do we, the responsibility then passes on to Asia on how we maintain such an order what are the rules that we're going to formulate. There was a time when the US looked after the Pacific, the British looked after the Indian Ocean. I was born a subject of George the Sixth King of Ceylon and the British Empire. There are no Ceylon, there is no British Empire. Our Prime Minister, thank you very much. I mean, oh no, we'll take it. I mean we've got so many hands here who like to ask some questions. We'll get three more from the audience, gentlemen here and some on the third, on the third row. Yes, and also here, a gentleman with a blue shirt. Sorry, I have a very fat ass. Yes, please, thank you. My name is Kumar KS Kumar of a company called Sutherland. I had a question for Minister Kono. Japan has got an aging population and possibly it is the biggest aging population of the world and you'll probably have only about 80 million people by 2040. So you have on the other hind the human capital in the other ASEAN countries in terms of the youth population which is very, very high. Now, is there a thinking around, if you look back, US, for example, has got several millions of people supporting their businesses from India and the Philippines. So, but Japanese, you know, is there any strategy to leverage the human capital, you know, especially the knowledge services to support the Japanese businesses by, you know, investing in culture and language of Japanese and support Japanese business from Philippines or Vietnam or from any of the other countries which got a high level of human capital. And there's a gentleman there in the blue shirt and the lady there with the glasses. Thank you. My question is also primarily for Minister Kono. So given that indeed climate change is a very serious issue and it seems that we are falling behind in achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, how will Japan lead this agenda? One more question, please. Gentlemen here. Thank you, Chair Ilama, young global leader. It is indeed that we are going to the fourth industrial revolution. I think it's rather than a revolution, I think we need an evolution that understanding the complete ecosystem. One of the things I want to ask the panel is, it is a great potential, but how we are preparing our graduates, what are our education policies that enabling our graduates to harness the fourth industrial revolutions that for the good for the human, overall human development? And also what are the best examples that we can take it from here, from each countries, or what each country is collaborating in order to support each other, that we are investing on our future graduates? Should we start with the first question? Minister Kono, Minister Ricci, did you? Sure. Japan's aging and we got the very low birth rate. As a result, we are shrinking by half a million people every year, and we cannot sustain society like that. Well, we are opening up our country. We are opening up our labor market to foreign countries. We are now trying to come up with new work permit policy. I think everyone shall be welcome in Japan if they are willing to assimilate into the Japanese society and shoulder Japan with us. If you look at the U.S. open tennis, we see Naomi Osaka. She's a very new breed Japanese. If we look at Rio Olympic Games, we got Cambridge Asuka, who won us a silver medal in four by 100 meter relay. Matthew Baker won us a judo gold medal. So there are a lot of new breed Japanese, and it gives us value added. And I think more and more Japanese are opening our eyes. It's good to have diversity. It's good to have open policy. So definitely Japan is moving into that direction, and we hope we get a lot of Indian people, Filipino, you know, Latin Americans come to Japan and create new Japan. That would be a wonderful thing to happen. Yes, we need to do more to stop the climate change. To degree, is that enough? Maybe we should aim for 1.5 or even lower. I think Japan need to see the reality. We just cannot listen to that voice of industries. Yes, industry plays a big role, but we have to be in a leadership position in Paris Agreement. So I think we have to have open discussion, and every Japanese need, well, I think every Japanese now realize the climate change is one of the biggest challenge for the Japanese community. So everyone need to get involved in discussion, and we have to really come up with a national strategy what we should do, what we can do. Maybe we need to do more than what we can do now. So what do we have to do to the future? Japan cannot give excuse not to challenge. I think we need to take leadership challenging maybe 1.5 degrees. Okay. The third question was on the 4.0 and the support for the future generation. Deputy Prime Minister, would you like to answer that question? Since one of your key concerns was on industrial 4.0 and the support for the future generation? Yes, we have seen the opportunities offered by the 4.0 industrial revolution. That's for sure. But also challenges. That can affect the production method. For example, the country, the economy depends a lot on the labor intensity. It will affect the model of production economy. Then surely it will affect the labor force. So we had to reskill the labor force in order to adapt to the new technologies. For example, the artificial intelligence, automatic advanced robotics, we take the jobs of the current labor force. So we had to reskill the labor force in that. So the young generation will be affected a lot by the revolution. So I believe that education will be the main focus for any country. Okay. I believe we have a time for one point to that. I think certainly it's a challenge for governments to take the possibilities and the challenge of the technology and design education policies to grow people who are fit for purpose, but also while maintaining their humanity along the way. But I think governments also have to be careful not to get in the way. And I'm thinking of K-pop. Everywhere I go, I'm just amazed at the amount of support and enthusiasm that the Korean pop culture has created in so many different countries. And this is not because of any government policy. It's the creativity and the spontaneity of these young generation who are very agile at utilizing all the technological devices at hand. And so the government shouldn't get in their way. The government's work is to open new possibilities, but certainly to create a regulatory environment that harnesses that creativity and rather than hinders that creativity. It's difficult. It's extremely difficult. But that's why you're in government. Thank you very much. I think we have time for one more question. Hopefully this question will be on the dual politics. We have South China Sea, the Korean Peninsula issue. So yes, gentlemen over there right next to the camera. Oh. Thank you for giving me that last question. Could I address this to Minister Kang and Minister Kono? And in the spirit of ASEAN centrality, may I address you as ASEAN plus three foreign ministers? Would you give us a sense of the what you perceive to be the trajectory of U.S.-China relations? And where does that leave you as treaty allies of the United States? Thank you. Just one more from the audience. Maybe I believe, there you go, the gentlemen right at the back. Chris Malone from the Boston Consulting Group based here in Vietnam. We all look to academics and experts who underscore that multilateralism is probably the way forward, but it seems like bilateralism is the reality that we're living in right now. And since we have Minister Kang and Deputy Prime Minister Pham at the center of the stage, it would be interesting to hear about the South Korea-Vietnam relationship, how that bilateral relationship has served the region and where it might go next. All right, thank you. So just one minute each for the answer. If we may, we are just running out of time, so we'll start with the first question please and then move on to South Korea and Vietnam. Well, if I may answer the question on South Korea-Vietnamese, the relation, I think it's by all accounts mutually beneficial and growing. This Vietnam is our largest trade partnership in ASEAN, largest destination for our investment and largest destination for our visitors to this region. And I think there's like 7,000 or nearly 8,000 Korean businesses finding home here with the full support of the government here. And I think our approach to this relationship is one towards co-prosperity. And so, you know, fitting our engagement that it serves the purposes of the Vietnamese government and people. And I think I could rest that question there. But the U.S.-China relations, and if you look at just the trade side, it does look very at a moment of particular tension. But I think these are two big players in the global stage with strategic calculations that sometimes diverge but also at times converge. And I think on the North Korean nuclear issue, they have converged and both working towards a complete denuclearization and I think there's a shared strategic interest in getting to North Korea's complete denuclearization. And this is also because they are two of the five members of the UN Security Council, the P5 permanent members who have the primary responsibility for peace and security issues around the globe. So I think you need to expand the context to see the two powers engaging with each other at certainly their moments of tension, but I think there are also moments of strategic convergence. I couldn't agree more with Minister Tang Kua Ha on the relationship between Vietnam and South Korea. I think that the relation is very excellent. South Korea is the number one of the investors investments in Vietnam and also one of the biggest trading partners of Vietnam. And also we have the Vietnamese, big Vietnamese communities in South Korea. And also South Korea has a very big South Korean community doing business in Vietnam. So I think that the relation between Vietnam and South Korea is very good. Thank you. Thank you. So since we are in a home stretch of our panel discussion, I found the question to all the panelists. Please give it to one minute if you may. Given all the developments we've discussed so far, do your assessment of the geopolitical outlook in Asia is it more optimistic or pessimistic? Maybe you can start from you, Prime Minister. In the medium term, I would be optimistic. Could see the emergence of Asia. We are redefining ourselves and within it the centrality of Asia of how important ASEAN is going to be the different path of it. And it's not merely Asia, but it's also taking the eastern side of Africa. So it's a whole stretch it will go on to the western coast of USA. And there you could see ASEAN being able to play a role which was not imagined when you started out in the 60s. Thank you. Yes, we have gone many, we have undergone many transformations in the area in the region. So the past lessons give us that we can overcome the challenges. And I'm sure that the now the challenges are greater than before. But we can be optimistic if the rule base is respected. International international law must be respected. And sell determinations of the nations be respected. So we can be optimistic if those conditions are met. Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, that's always a very difficult question for me because the answer is different whether you're talking about today or yesterday or tomorrow or week later or a month later. But I think given the primary foreign policy agenda on my plate at this point which is North Korea's denuclearization and peace in the I think I can be optimistic. Okay. And I think nuclear freak or impenetra that is wholly at peace will certainly be a great addition to to the peace dynamics in this region as a whole. Mr. Kang, thank you. Mr. Kono. Well, someone said optimists are always wrong and the pessimists are always right. But all their big change has been led by the optimist. So I want to be optimist. And if you look at the geopolitical situation, I think we need a strong and workable United Nations. United Nations, especially the security Council, doesn't reflect the reality of today. So I think we need to actually reform the United Nations so that it could take care of a little bit more than what they are doing today. Thank you very much. And Dr. Lin, and Dr. Kwok. Thanks very much. Foreign Minister Kono's quote just earlier, I can only be optimistic. How can I be otherwise? But I think optimism must be rooted in reality. And I think in order to be optimistic about the region as Deputy Prime Minister Min mentioned earlier, we need to have a rules-based international order in the region. Now, that doesn't happen because we like the idea of it, the sound of it. We actually have to work hard towards it. So what does that mean for the powers like the United States and the countries in the region? From the United States, I would like to see greater calls for the rule of law to be abided by in the region. I think it went quiet in the South China Sea tribunal ruling shortly after the ruling because partly because of Manila's reticence, but also because of the implications of the award for its own claims to exclusive economic zones in the Pacific. It should also stand, the international community needs to stand by regional countries when it sees encroachments into their maritime rights or other rights. And from ASEAN, I think ASEAN needs to be far more forward-leaning in terms of standing up for a rules-based order. It sometimes will hurt, but I think that's the price it has to pay in the long run if it wants to see a sustainable piece in the longer term. So I hope I will see that for my region. Thank you. All right. So on that optimistic note, that's the end of the panel discussion. I thank you very much, everyone, for being a wonderful audience. And can we give our ASEAN panel a big round of applause? Thank you very much.