 So, ladies and gentlemen, I want to welcome you to the lunch in portion of our events today. I have only two functions here, one I have already done. I have already introduced the Ambassador, who will come speak in a moment, but my second important role is to tell you to eat while the Ambassador speaks, that we will continue to do it. So, please enjoy your salads and Ambassador Nock, please take steps. Thank you. Thank you, Ambassador Taylor. And thank US Institute of Peace for your great work today. President of US Institute of Peace Nancy Lindbergh, Senator Lieutenant General Nguyen Chi Vinh, Vice Minister of Defense of Vietnam, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. One of my American professors once told me, never give speech while others are having lunch. Only the food gets their attention, not you. So, rather than giving a speech, I would like to share with you my story. I was born and raised in Hanoi, North Vietnam. For me, war was not just a detached concept captured in a photo, a movie, or a piece of news from the southern front. We were knocked on our door. We blew off the roof of our home when US bombers struck the capital. My childhood was built upon sad memories of the Vietnam War. During the first six years of my life, six times, I was forced to leave my city, my parents, my home to seek refuge in neighboring provinces. My earliest memory stretches back to the age two and a half, and regrettably, it was a memory born of war. I remember in painful detail my first evacuation from Hanoi in June 1966. Oh, I would like to welcome honorable former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. Thank you. So, I remember in painful detail my first evacuation from Hanoi in June 1966. Press up against my brother, who was barely six years old, I rode a small truck into the inky night, even as bombers rumbled overhead. The next morning, at our shelter in Mu Kien commune, Vinh Tuong District, Vinh Phuc province, to the northwest of Hanoi, we stood frozen as a victim of bomb shrapnel rode past on the back seat of a shabu bike. His head wrapped in white bandage. Anxiety engulfed my mind. This was supposed to be our shelter, but there was no safety, no peace. The shadows of war lurked in every corner. Every day was defined by an overcrowded living space, meager meals, and even life threatening danger. With every breath, we tasted the sorrow of separation, the longing for our parents embrace. Every night, my brother and I stood for hours in the cold and dark, looking towards Hanoi, though we hadn't the slightest idea which direction Hanoi was. We thought of home, of our neighborhood, we thought of our parents, who even then were standing their ground toiling beneath the rain of explosives. It was in December 1972 that the U.S. bombers struck Hanoi for the second time. My brother and I left Hanoi amid carpet bombings by my hospital, Comteon Street, and other residential districts. Even to this day, I still wonder how our truck managed to skirt all the explosions. We reached the Red River just as the bombing ceased. Fire and smoke residue choking our path. My heart clenched at the ruins and wreckage. The grief-stricken cries of the survivors nip at our heels, even as we crossed the wobbly, pontoon bridge leading towards Vinh Phuc. The second time I left Hanoi, I brought with me a shattered heart, an aching sorrow, and a smoldering resentment rooted in the death of my innocent people. For all those long years, I dreamed a simple dream of peace. I dreamed of untroubled days beneath the roof of our sweet, sweet home. I dreamed of burrowing into my parents' embrace when the nights grew cold and a fitful night's sleep not interrupted by blaring sirens and sleepy terror and mad dashes for the bunkers. I dreamed of school mornings, blessed with warm sunlight and clear skies, untainted by the echoes of alarms or the shadow of whirlplains. Back in those days, whenever a bomber zipped past, my friends and I would die for the nearest shelter, uncaring for whatever rodent snake or insect we might find within, carrying along with us all our straw hats, wooden spleens, first-aid kits, and school bags. After the bombers had left, we would dig ourselves out of the bunkers, body and face smeared with dirt, would carry on to school as if nothing had happened. Many years after, when I first watched a Hollywood movie, I realized that I had displayed a talent for being an action movie star. I not entered the foreign services, I suspect I would have become a famous actor, or at least an accomplished stuntman. In early 1980s, I enrolled in the diplomatic academy. I was told that diplomats were good at persuasion, and I would like to persuade for the sake of my people. The more I learned, the more I was attracted to diplomacy. I realized that diplomats play a vital role in preventing war, building peace, and developing friendships between peoples. All of the above, I thought, were crucial for Vietnam, my country. In 1988, I became a diplomat. As if by fate, since its very beginning, my work was tied to the United States. Ironically, my first job as a ministry official was related to war. But it was not the waging of war that I dealt with. I took part in a conference on the courses and lesson learned of the Vietnam War, a joint effort by the William Jointed Center and our Ministry of Foreign Affairs. For days, we debated vigorously, sometimes vehemently, to find an answer to the one question, how could Vietnam and the United States avoid repeating past mistakes and forever lock away the horrors of war? These conversations have motivated many of my thoughts and actions over my three decades of being a diplomat. In the late 1980s, Vietnam was not at war, but neither was our country truly at peace. Many of our soldiers were lost in the East Sea, or you call South China Sea. Our people struggled to rebuild in the aftermath of the war, faced with trade embargoes and diplomatic isolation, poverty and hunger, uncertainty and grief. A foreign scholar once claimed war was Vietnam's destiny. But I did not believe that. I did not wish to see my children and all the children of Vietnam suffer what I suffered. Our people must not be forever trapped in a vicious circle of war and devastation. I wanted to validate a saying I learned in school that the art of diplomacy makes possible the impossible. The people of Vietnam must break free from their supposed destiny and reach forward with all our might, peace, prosperity and a better future. I joined the very first attempts toward lifting all sanctions and embargoes against Vietnam and normalizing our relations with ASEAN, China, the European Union and then the United States. In the following years, I took part in the joy field activities to account for American soldiers missing in the war in Vietnam. We crested steep mountainous ridges where few people dared to walk and navigated forest and rice fields dotted with unexploded ordinance or remnants of Asian orange. We visited residential areas ravaged by war where morning portraits lined the walls and tombstones intermingled with the homes of the living. MIA activities paved the way for reconciliation and trust building, a difficult yet crucial process for both our two peoples. Even as I contributed to promoting Vietnam-US relations, I also took part in efforts to dispose of explosive ordinance, provide assistance for victims of war and accounting for missing Vietnamese soldiers. I roamed the country using the funds I raised to assist organizations trying to address the Asian orange legacy. The further I traveled, the more I understood the heavy toll of war across all corners of my country. The more I empathized with war victims whose every minute was marked by agony and grief, it was through these experiences that I tempered my resolve to strive tirelessly to protect my homeland from the merciless touches of war. Even decades after the war, I struggled to leave behind the ghost of my war-torn childhood. When I went to study in the United States in 1992, before the embargoes were lifted, I was cramble out of bed. At the faintest sound of fire alarm, body drenched in sweat, my mind suffused by echoes of air-raised sirens in Hanoi. As I took part in war remediation activities, I gradually stitched the wounds in my heart and learned to look towards the future, but peace, cooperation and warm friendship with the United States and her people. I came to realize that reconciliation with one's inner self is as important as reconciliation within a war-torn nation and reconciliation with other nations in the world. My earliest memories of war haunted me for many long years, but I learned to turn them into a positive source of energy. A reminder of my calling in life, the past is history. We cannot rewrite the past, but we can work together to prevent that bitter past from repeating itself. It is not that I have forgotten the past. At times, when I watch my children, I recall my childhood, the sorrow of separation of death, the loneliness and helplessness that defined those years. But like my people, I direct my anger and hatred not at the American people, but at war and those who wage wars. My generation is forever indebted to President Ho Chi Minh, who traveled to the United States in 1912, who lived and worked closely with Americans. He has taught us that the American people has been and always will be friends of the Vietnamese people. Today, Vietnam and the United States are good friends and strong partners. Even as we promote relations, we work hand in hand to address war legacy issues. What better way is there to heal the wounds that mark our soil, our flesh, our mind? More importantly, it helps build trust, and trust is the glue of everlasting friendship. Let us pay our respect and appreciation to generations of Vietnamese and Americans who have contributed to this effort. On behalf of the Vietnamese people, I wish to thank our American friends whose courage, compassion, great vision and strategic thinking have helped our countries to overcome the shadows of the past. President Bill Clinton, Senator John McCain, former Secretary of State John Kerry, in Vietnam, our kids named them two Uncle John's. Mr. Patrick Leahy, former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Mr. Bob Mueller, Mr. Fred Downs, Ms. Ann Mills Griffiths, Mr. Tim Risser and many others. Thank you. Thank you very much. You are an infinite source of inspiration to all of us, those who embark on the journey to set aside the past, bridge differences and deepen similarities and reach towards a better future. I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to Ms. Ann Mills Griffiths, Chairman and CEO of the National League of POW-MIA Families for her tireless efforts over the last decades. Our cooperation has led to incredible results. A few days ago, Ms. Griffiths and I watched a powerful documentary about the discovery and retrieval of her beloved brother, Mr. James Mills, from deep under the sea. The journey to find the remains of Mr. James Mills and many other Americans and Vietnamese is the journey of reconciliation, trust, building and deepen cooperation between our two peoples. I have had the honor to work with General Vinh, Vice Minister of Defense and many of my colleagues here in preparing for and carrying out Vietnam's role in the UN's peacekeeping operations in Africa. Today we are part of the joint efforts towards peace talks between the United States and DPRK. Once a war torn nation seeking her own peace, Vietnam is now an active contributor to preventing war and building peace for all the world's peoples. Ladies and gentlemen, a few weeks ago on the first day of the 2019 lunar new year, President Donald Trump announced in his State of the Union address that the second U.S. DPRK summit would be held in Vietnam. That night, 50 years after the last bombing of Hanoi, I slept fitfully without disturbance. And I had a sweet dream. I dreamed that peace would be restored on the Korean peninsula in the Indo-Asia Pacific and across the globe. I believe with all my heart that dream is achievable. And being here today with all of you, that is our way of showing the world that we can achieve if we try. That was my story. Thank you very much. Ambassador Nyak, I want to thank you for that very powerful, very personal story. And I'm now delighted to welcome two very distinguished guests for a conversation to close out what has been a very rich and powerful day. Two guests, each of whom has a very long and distinguished personal relationship with Vietnam and its aftermath. Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hago served as a combat soldier in Vietnam in 1968, a year we've heard a lot about today. He was in the same unit as his brother. Between the two of them, they received five Purple Hearts. After returning from the war, Senator Hagel went on to be a two-term senator from Nebraska. He held many roles related to a service in Vietnam, including chairing the Vietnam War Commemoration Advisory Committee and the Agent Orange Settlement Fund. And in 2013, he was appointed Secretary of Defense under President Obama as the only Vietnam vet to serve in that capacity. Please join me in welcoming Secretary Hagel. And we will be joined in a conversation with one of the most revered journalists in America today. Marvin Kalb's career has spanned more than 30 years and includes award-winning reporting for both CBS and NBC News as a chief diplomatic correspondent, Moscow bureau chief and anchor of NBC's Meet the Press. He has widely published on public policy matters and including his book Haunting Legacy, Vietnam and the American Presidency from Ford to Obama, which was written while Marvin was writer-in-residence here at USIP. Wonderful to have you back. Please welcome Marvin Kalb and I'd like to invite both our guests to come up to the stage. Thank you both for joining us for this capstone conversation and it's fitting to have both of you here with your personal stories after the very moving story we just heard from Ambassador Nyok. One of the things that we've heard a lot today in the panels where we covered issues around unexploded ordinance, missing inaction, recovery, Agent Orange is what it took to address those very difficult issues as part of the reconciliation process. So I'd like to start with you, Secretary Hagel, because you had your own long journey around Agent Orange and I wonder if you could start us off by what your personal experience was in bringing that issue forward. Well, like any one who has served in Vietnam, the consequences of that war are still with us today as the Ambassador noted and others in this room are surely aware of because of their leadership in so many of these areas or so many areas. I first want to thank the United States Institute of Peace for hosting this day and the Ambassador from Vietnam for his eloquent remarks and his continued leadership. And I'm honored and humbled to be near my friend Mr. Kelb. I mean, you don't want to ever get too close to journalists. That's but in this case it's a privilege. So Marvin, nice to see you. The Agent Orange issue as you know and everyone in this room knows evolved. It wasn't apparent after we left Vietnam but through years of individuals beginning to lead on the issue was there something there that partly culminated in an out-of-court settlement and I think around 1981-82 with the six main manufacturers of Agent Orange. And Judge Jack Bean Weinstein of the Second District of New York, he was the Chief Judge at the time, presided over that settlement. I believe about a $200 million settlement was agreed to and that money was put into a separate account but the next question was what do you do with the money? Well, the judge said and others, well it should go to Vietnam veterans or their relatives or their families but how do you do that? He asked me, I had just left the Veterans Administration and in 1982, as a matter of fact, I had resigned my position as the Deputy Administrator because at that time the Reagan Administration's policy was to essentially close the vet centers around the United States that Max Cleland had set up under Jimmy Carter and also cut the funding for Agent Orange Epidemological Surveys and other Agent Orange related expenditures and I couldn't accept that as the highest ranking Vietnam veteran in the Reagan Administration so I resigned. Shortly thereafter, Judge Weinstein called me, told me about the settlement, asked me if I would agree to chair a group of Vietnam veterans to decide what should happen, what should we do with the $250 I agreed to do it. I asked four other Vietnam veterans to join me. Different backgrounds all served honorably in Vietnam. One was a nurse, as a matter of fact, and for eight years then we set up a foundation and dispensed with the money which is still going on for different medical surveys and tests and so on. That was really my complete, I think, beginning about an understanding Agent Orange and over the years it's evolved and when I was Secretary of Defense through our able and others our former Ambassador to Vietnam we were able to continue what Ambassador talked about, the work with the MIAs in Vietnam and with the government and we continued to do that. We reorganized the systems in Hawaii so without going any further that's been my involvement over the years so it's been significant but the main point I think is the people who helped and led and were involved on the Vietnamese side and the American side on trying to sort this out and trying to do the best we can and do right by those who were afflicted and still are by Agent Orange. Thank you Secretary and I want to build on one of the themes that the Ambassador sounded and that was as we look at the reconciliation that's happened between our two countries, key to that was some of the reconciliation he talked about, he had to find his own inner reconciliation but there's also a question I think in this country for the reconciliation that had to happen within our own society, you mentioned your resignation, you also both were involved with the war as were your respective brothers and my understanding is that each of you had disagreements about the war with your brothers so you really represent at a very personal level some of the divisions that were within this country that underscore the reconciliation that has to happen at so many levels as individuals with families and societies that enable a country to country reconciliation. Marvin let me start with you if you have any further thoughts on that. The reconciliation, forgive me, the reconciliation that had to take place in families is one that is still taking place in this nation. For me listening to this conference today and being moved personally by much of what I heard, you talk about legacy, that's the word that you're using. It pains me to believe that an American legacy is Agent Orange. We would have thought that somehow or another America could have left a different legacy and I think there is guilt that goes along with the American effort now that has been expressed time and time again by the ambassador particularly. I noted time and again he would link the efforts that were underway as something that is taking place between the United States and Vietnam and the linkage between the two is obviously terribly important to Vietnam today not only to achieve the aims that you were setting forth but also the largest strategic aim. We as a nation today and Vietnam as a nation are faced with a new China. China is an expanding power. I remember as a student studying China that the idea was that China was the middle kingdom and it really didn't have to associate with any other part of the world but today we find that China is all over the world and is making its mark in many different ways leading with an economic step forward but much follows that and the relationship between the United States and Vietnam is going to be determined in large measure it seems to me by the degree to which we have a common purpose and a common understanding of the challenge that China represents. It is important that Vietnam as a small country in Southeast Asia is associated with the United States as a very large major power not only in Asia but around the world. How we function is going to determine a great deal about war and peace and reconciliation and a final point if I may. My dear brother Bernard who is a young man of 97 and has spent a lot of his life in Vietnam covering the war and after the war returning there time and time again has always said to me that Vietnam never left him that the coverage of the war and the participation in the war I would go there once or twice but covered from here that was fine but he was there doing it as was Senator Hagel doing it as were so many other people doing it and Vietnam is not just a country it is a memory that continues to tear at the heart and soul of this country and I suspect is going to for a long time how we as a nation manage our relationship with Vietnam says an enormous amount about what we are as a people and let's hope that it's always in a positive way. Look at names like Carlucci and Schultz here at the Institute of Peace and that is the thrust of it now. How do we take the past and make it an instrument that leads us in the right direction in the future. Thank you. Secretary Hagel you similarly you fought right alongside your brother and there's a beautiful book that captures your story in country as the two of you fought side by side. Well obviously the Cal brothers the Hagel brothers took different paths but my brother is two years younger than me he now is a judge. I remember when after being a law school professor for a number of years he was a judge and I remember me saying to him God that's frightening that you're a judge. He says well not as frightening as your secretary of defense. So we were always close you could say but we were always close we always were close but in that war he went to Vietnam at 18 years old like many I was 20 so that 18 to 20 year I mean two year difference 18 20 is significant we all remember I guess but he from the beginning thought the Vietnam War was a waste it was a tragedy it was wrong. I didn't feel that way I felt that we were trying to bring freedom and democracy to a country and they deserved our support. Well he didn't change his opinion I did but I came to my younger brother's way of thinking over the years as I understood more and more but even something Marvin said and it's true and Ambassador referenced it in a different way but even though my brother and I disagreed on the war we fought it together and when you're in the field and when you're enlisted person or any rank and we were both privates when we went over there. Your war is more private in one sense it's not so much about the great idealism of setting a nation free or whatever the leaders of the country tell the nation it's more about taking care of each other and that's what it's all about when you're in the trenches and you're being fired at whether you agree with the war or not you're there you are doing what your nation asks you to do you might think it's wrong some who did think it was wrong took a different path but I've always admired my brother for the path that he took because he could have done different things but he never did he served honorably but that was the difference that my brother and I had but we were always close we always took care of each other and as I said I came to his way of thinking I just wanted to add one point it slipped my mind before when I was speaking and that is the differences between me and Bernie there weren't deep differences but I was covering the war from Washington he was covering it from Vietnam and he had something that I never quite grasped until later he had an understanding I think for the people in Vietnam for the history of Vietnam for an appreciation of where Vietnam fit into Southeast Asia into Asia as a whole I was thinking of it here my mind influenced by one assistant secretary of state or another filling me in on this that or the other I was seeing it from a geopolitical point of view I was seeing it from the Cold War perspective and so Vietnam was just another small country threatened by communism the United States had to in that Cold War environment defend the anti-communist operation the free world quote unquote and so that justified I was saying on air that justified our commitment of 550,000 troops by 1968 now by 68 I was already flipped I had turned not into a vocal critic but a personal deep inside me critic of the war and feeling I had messed up by some of the reporting that I had done I had been taken in too much by the party line so to speak but I think that most Americans covering the hill in 68-69 people had moved away from the support of the war and were seeking a way out and when president Nixon came in at 68 during the campaign and said that he had a secret plan to end the war he didn't quite say that by the way but he implied it that was a good thing for the American people we were at that time ready to pull out we've talked a lot today about what it takes for two nations to come together after that legacy of bitterness and destruction and the word trust has come up over and over again and secretary Hagle you've talked about the courage of some of the veterans who led that reconciliation process the return of senator McCain senator Kerry yourself and others who brought that kind of credible voice that opened up the possibilities for peace and I wonder if you could say a little bit more about how you see the role of Vietnam vets at every level and how you see the role as having been the role that they played in creating those bonds of trust and creating the ramp for reconciliation. Well first of all I think when you talk about Vietnam veterans that the generation Vietnam veteran generation versus the Korean war generation the war war two war war one each generation is different with different dynamics and different challenges as to how they express themselves and also the war they fought in because the Vietnam was the most divisive war in our country and one is one of the longest I mean Iraq and Afghanistan have broke the records but Vietnam was up until up until Iraq and Afghanistan the longest so so you look at the environment that shaped Vietnam veterans when they came back starting with when Vietnam veterans came back unless you were career military they took their uniform off and burn it or didn't ever want to see it again never want to talk about Vietnam I want to get on in my life as a terrible part of my life that's really different from past generations of warriors so you start there as to the difference they made then you see over years Vietnam veterans who to this day many Vietnam veterans I'm told by friends that if there had a dad who was in Vietnam never talked about never even acknowledged it a lot of Vietnam veterans but over the years buddy kind of matured everybody look back and I think came to the realization as bad as that was and as unfair and all the other dynamics that played out that maybe Vietnam veterans could play a role in making a better world and actually taking that experience in Vietnam and going through what they went through and apply it to some of the things the ambassador was talking about in his speech that war never solves these things especially in these kinds of wars it's easy to get into war but not very easy to get out of war and I think all the lessons learned the legacies we're still learning from Vietnam many of my generation Vietnam veteran generation wanted to amplify that and wanted to say something about that it's interesting Tim Riegers sitting here from Senator Lay's office when we had the great debate and many of you were part of this audience over a rock should we invade a rock and so on and so on and so on it was very interesting where veterans came down on this the veterans were especially Vietnam veterans much more cautious I mean John Kerry and I gave a speech on the floor of the Senate a few hours before we voted on that resolution in 2002 and it was a resolution to essentially give the president military authority to use forces it wasn't a go to war in a rock resolution the president used it for that but I gave a speech Kerry gave a speech McCain gave a speech all three of us cautioned about going to war consequences unintended consequences of war and there are many no exit strategy and so on I think as a whole the Vietnam veteran generation in their own way at their own time whether it was in the veterans groups Legion clubs Fred Downs his whole career has been at the VA then went to Pentagon so many Vietnam veterans played out their role their way different in the World War two generation different Korea and a lot of them my last point a lot of them didn't use the political vehicle to make the point when I got elected to the Senate in 1996 another new Vietnam veteran got elected the same year Max Cleland that represented the most number of Vietnam veterans ever in the Senate we've ever had six John McCain John Kerry and Chuck Robb and that was the highlight of Vietnam veterans when you consider as many people serve and as long as that war went on that's pretty small percentage so Vietnam veterans didn't pursue the political path they they went in different directions to try to affect change and accomplish what you're talking about reconciliation and what America in some ways owed the Vietnamese people and I think I'm proud of my generation because I think they did do a lot of work and there they're still doing a lot of work and just what was it like for you when you first went back you returned for the opening of of the of the first embassy was that your first trip back my brother and I were both invited back in 1999 first time either one of us have been back by then our first ambassador Pete Peterson after President Clinton had normalized relations and Pete Peterson was one of the longest held POWs from Nebraska I'm very proud of we shaped that boy and informed him and then he went off track and went to Florida got elected to Congress from Florida but terrific guy he asked my brother and I to come back and cut the ribbon the new consulate on the site of the old embassy in Saigon Ho Chi Man City that's first time we had been back but the Army had all the records and they took us out in areas where our base camp was we were in the Mekong Delta with the 9th Division south of Saigon so we had all that area but our old base camps and where we were wounded and it was really quite an experience I've been back a number of time since but it was you can imagine it was an emotional trip like any in Vietnam veteran who goes back and many in this room have boy I mean it it really hit you and it just comes to focus again and how it all happened and why and it makes you more resolved to try to make a better world that war doesn't solve it Marvin you know from your time here at USIP that one of the things that we do is try to draw out ideas and lessons that can inform future when you think about the reconciliation process the wars after the years after the war and what's happened and the way in which we've gone through the hostilities to a relationship of peace are there lessons or themes that occur to you that we should highlight memorialize make sure people don't forget apply in other places there's no question of it but I doubt that I'm able to do all of that there are certain specifics that leap to mind when we went into Vietnam we had no idea what was going on there we didn't speak the language the people we sent there were sent as emissaries of a strange dream driving the United States in the Cold War if there is a lesson for the future at B let us learn a little bit of history can this country be a bit more modest in its expectations about itself and other countries around the world a bit of humility is a nice thing every now and then and if we are determined to get involved in a war let us at least understand why and understand something about the country we are fighting I am now amazed at how easily we have swung as a nation into a kind of second Cold War feeling about Russia we're sort of ready to go and there's a discomfort a deep discomfort I feel as if we are rushing into something without appreciating what is that's going on in Russia and do we know enough these days do we teach civics in school answer no shouldn't we obviously yes language why is it that this country knows so few foreign languages if we are to be a great leader in the world we have to speak some of the other languages the ambassador can speak in excellent English where is the American who speaks in excellent Vietnamese is that the person who was sent there it's a humble said it's a humble set of expectations for a great nation we still are a great nation we still have huge things to provide to the rest of the world but I hope that some of those things in there is is moved by an appreciation that we are only one of many and that we have a lot to learn from the rest of the world as I hope they have from us thank you I want to ask one more question and then see if there are any questions from our from our lunch partners and that is we heard a lot today particularly in the final panel about the future you know the we've we looked both at the immediate aftermath of the war and some of the critical issues but also what is the future hold what should we be focused on in the relationship between U.S. and Vietnam any reflections well I'm I'm I just want to note Marvin's last comments because I think he he captures the essence of what we I hope we have learned I hope we have learned not just in Vietnam but Iraq Afghanistan and moving forward and I think his concern about where we are in this country today is a correct concern about whether it's Russia or whatever you can find yourself in a very bad spot very quickly here and especially in this volatile unpredictable combustible world that we're in today things happen fast I think as you kind of wind our part up here to you look at how you can Marvin touched on some of it but apply what we've learned to our future and one of the things I think it's pretty clear certainly since World War II you can't impose your values your standards or democracy anywhere on people people have to come to their own way of thinking of governance based on their own values their own history their own religious background tribal background and Marvin said is right I hope we've learned this is that you better understand the country a little bit that that you're going to war and you better understand the dynamics of that as best you can and something Colin Powell another Vietnam veteran used to say and talked about what is the exit strategy but even before that some Marvin noted the strategic diplomatic objective because that has to drive everything we have been very very free and easy about using America's military way too often and putting America's military in positions where they can't affect change we've asked our military to do too much and we've asked them to veer over in the diplomatic area where we should have used diplomacy those are all different areas that I think we certainly I have I think a lot of people a lot of us have learned those lessons at great cost for this country and I think our standing in the world is in trouble I mentioned just one thing on this the latest Pew survey and Gallup survey is very bad news for the United States because freedom house too it shows that authoritarianism in the world is on the rise democracy I think for the 13th straight year freedom house says is declining but for America it shows that disapproval of America is the highest it's ever been the disapproval rate among our closest allies and friends all over the world that China has a higher approval rate around the world in 135 nations is the Gallup poll then the United States Russia is tied with us the coin of the realm always in everything is trust and confidence and I fear we're losing the confidence of the world not that the world always agrees with us that we're always right but if you do not have a geopolitical center of gravity and we've had that since World War two with the world order that we help build with the United States and its allies anchoring that then the country will be in disorder and the world will be in disorder and that's not good for anybody not in a world of seven billion people nuclear weapons pandemic health cyber climate change all these issues facing us today are issues that affect us all they're the common interests of mankind and we're going to put two billion more people on the face of the earth by 2050 the demographers tell us so I mean maybe I'm reaching a little bit too far beyond the mandate here but I don't think so I think this is all in the scope of our future and decision makers and decision making right now and that Vietnam is a big part of that as to the lessons learned. It certainly underscores the power of the partnership that has been built and the alliances as opposed to continued enmity with Vietnam. We do have some mic runners if there's anyone who'd like to ask a question. Yeah and if not I'll ask another one. Oh there we go please and if you could just introduce yourself. Again I'm sorry to do a third question it's John McAuliffe. Apply what you've just been saying to Venezuela and the coverage of the rush towards military intervention in Venezuela in order to put in place somebody that we think should be the president. We're really asking you go beyond your mandate but if did you go ahead. Would you like to make a comment. Just very briefly what was interesting was that Russian mercenary troops associated with something called Wagner which was demonstrated as well in Syria did show up in Venezuela according to a couple of reports that I read several months ago. The recent report of a hundred Russian troops arriving there certainly introduces a serious new element into the equation. I'm not sure about my memory here but I have a feeling that under a president or two or three ago we saw the removal of all Russian military forces from Cuba and then there was a period of about 25 years when there was no Russian military presence in the western hemisphere but that has now changed. Again picking up a central theme that Senator Hagel made just a moment ago. How do we judge foreign governments? What do we know about them? How do we manage things that we don't like but how do you deal with these problems today? Where is the sensitivity, the background, the schooling, the education that we require as sort of national diplomats to face the challenges around the world? They are obvious. Venezuela happens to be a relatively new one and I would like the experts to sound off on Venezuela. I haven't heard that. I haven't heard that within the US government. I haven't heard that from the outside either. The only thing I would add to Marvin's points in Venezuela's case we have to be very careful how we handle not just that but other situations like that because at least the latest reports are that Maduro is hanging on and it's not good. The Russians are there and Guido is losing altitude so because we have been so out front on this and warning coming from the present Secretary of State that the issue has come up and been asked by different reporters of the administration, well are you going to use military force? And this is how you can slide into something very quickly because you haven't thought it through. Maybe they have thought it through. But surely we would not want to use military force and inject American troops in Venezuela because what that would do that would explode all over Latin America. I mean we would be in real trouble. But my point is Venezuela is a tough situation. It's been bad for the last few years. It's not new. I mean Chavez started to really unwind it in a ruinous way. The answer seems to me working diplomatically working with all those nations down in Latin America to continue to use the levers that we have but because it does escalate into well military force is next and you got to be real careful that you don't get pulled into something here that you've kind of been your own making that you've positioned yourself there. Paul. Gentlemen, Paul Hughes from the U.S. Institute of Peace. It's a pleasure to see you again Marvin back here. I want to go back to what you said when you said the United States is still having difficulty reconciling the war with itself and couple it with your comment secretary about the American military and how it tends to be overused all the time and I would just posit a thought for your comments. America values and honors its military. Christ knows how many times I've been told thank you for your service you know to the point that it's become trite. But when you go to a football game or basketball game or a baseball game you'll see the flights of jets flying over and soldiers marching out there and displaying the flag and whatnot and then learn later that the league pays the Department of Defense for that. How do we change the mindset of America so that they see other things that are honorable that impact foreign policy and foreign interests. Why is it always the military that gets thanked and diplomats and AID representatives never get thanked for their service? Just some thoughts please. Go ahead. Well as the former Secretary of Defense and former soldier and former senator and citizen of this country first and foremost I understand exactly where you're saying. I think I would answer your question this way the military is an identifiable unit. What's the military the individuals who serve in the military represent selfless many times dangerous service in defense of this country. That's pretty damn honorable and I think all Americans recognize that and so it's identifiable by uniforms by the jets the platforms war and so on and so on and that's good that's in gallops pulling every year on the 15 institutions in this country the military is always 75 percent approval confidence trust everybody else's teens and twenties. On the other side the State Department USAID those who don't wear uniform who are never really seen or identified in a way of really doing tremendous things for our country and brave things for our country they don't get the same things that the military does taking nothing away from the military or the State Department but I use the State Department as a whole there are other agencies international agencies are law enforcement agencies and so on and so on but but I think that's part of it I think there's an identifiable issue there that you just you don't think of a diplomat in some ways of well that diplomat he or she leads a pretty damn selfless life too you live all over the world in some of the worst places in the world matter of fact they have a lot a lot worse in some cases than the than the military does and but they just don't get the same recognition and I mean that's a very I suspect simplistic explanation but it's something that I've seen over and over and over I've been like all of you I don't know how many countries I've been to a lot of them and that's always bothered me because I think our diplomats deserve the same recognition and respect and I don't think it's anything that Americans want to separate and say oh they don't deserve it the State Department or diplomats they just don't recognize I think the the same service in a way they do military so we're almost out of time but you've teed up a question that I wanted to finish off with and that is in the last panel there was there were several questions about how do we continue the commitment to this wreck this relationship between the US and Vietnam and also how to continue the support that Senator Leahy and Tim Reiser have led in terms of providing the financial underpinning for some of these really critical programs that have addressed things like unexploded ordinance and age and origin created that that opportunity for reconciliation how do we carry that forward into the future how do we help maintain that commitment it help that history carry forward into future knowledge in action I have a feeling from things that Tim said today twice that that is very much on Senator Leahy's mind and that is the reason he is going to Vietnam in three weeks with younger members of the Senate and the House as well yes the Senate right that's clearly on his mind as well now Tim also said that so long as Leahy is there you're going to get the money but ladies not going to be there forever and so who are the young people today who are coming up within the Congress who are going to carry that message forward in the 90s the people who were elected didn't even have passports many of them the people who are elected today it's an interesting mix of the people who were elected last year because a good number of them actually came out of government service military service and so there may be the core of a group of congressional leaders who can carry the message of Vietnam and the United States forward it's not a guarantee though it has to be developed there have to be the right people there at the right time my sense is that we are now closer to the America that Senator Hegel was describing earlier than we are toward the Leahy type government of the future that many of us would like very much to see so I would love to see some of this continue I hope the center Leahy can light a fire under the other nine people and move this forward in the way in which the ambassador time and time again spoke of the importance of the U.S. Vietnam relationship it is important but it's important primarily for us it's not necessarily important as a geopolitical factor for the United States Vietnam is still the geography hasn't changed it's still a small country in Southeast Asia our vision as a nation is global so we position that as part of our global obligation but it's not the core of it and so we have to be aware realistically that that kind of relationship goes only so far well I would add first to thank senator Leahy and Tim for all they've done with with Vietnam and so many other areas that don't always get a lot of attention and by the way this building would not have been built without senator Leahy and Ted Stevens and people who really believe this was an important if nothing else symbol that the United States would have and I think you've used it very wisely over the over the years to make the point Marvin's right it's you bring the new leaders in your body in the Senate a house along the new fresh members and let them see let them understand let them watch people like senator Leahy they will use as a role model that's so critical because we are seeing the baton pass to a new generation but those over 100 new members in the House and Senate much younger much more diversified in every way sex color any way you want to describe diversity but the Vietnam generation is is over I mean we have no Vietnam veterans left I don't think in Congress none in the Senate and I don't think in the House as well so what Leahy's doing is he's bringing the next generation of leaders along they'll see him as a role model but but here's something that underpins all of that is common interests we are all human beings around the world we all have common interests we're not always going to agree we never have but the reason that the world order was built with coalitions of common interests the all the institutions that were built was not to solve all the problems in the world but to find forums and ways where we could focus on our common interests and then figure out the conflicts but if you don't start with a common interest that baseline you'll never fix anything it'll only get worse and that's the biggest fear I have here where we're going in the world today is erosion and really the debasing of these institutions that have been so critical for world peace last 70 years I know we've had conflicts of course we have but more freedom more democracies no World War three no nuclear exchange by any measurement we've had a pretty pretty good run we all have in the last 70 years more progress in disciplines all disciplines medicine healthcare science space a big task ahead of us but I think it's all those things to answer your question how you do it I would just add one thing Marvin I'm I'm as optimistic as maybe I've ever been in one sense I'm more concerned than I've ever been about our future about the future of the world but I'm optimistic for three reasons one our people the people of America are good people they're fair people and I think what we're seeing in that new class of 100 that they're represented that way second we have a Constitution that works it allows us to self-correct and we've done it many times we don't get anything right didn't get a right the first time we wrote it but we have 27 amendments the Constitution think we keep getting better and we're national laws and as long as we have those three things we're gonna we're gonna be okay but this probably is the most challenging time for me at least in my life I've never seen a time quite like this in the world and with dysfunction paralysis disorder division politically in this country like it is but I think we're gonna come out of it give me a drink I want to thank I want to thank both of you for joining us to share your wisdom and your experiences and your optimism that we still heard but this has been a very important conversation that caps off a day that took us through an important journey instead of reflections about the shared experience that the US had with Vietnam I want to thank General Ving for his inspiration and leadership and for bringing your delegation here Senator Leahy who has just been a giant and all of this and Tim you've been right there making things happen we we are honored to have both the past and current Vietnamese ambassadors to Washington Ambassador Ving and ambassador cup sorry great to have you here all of our moderators all of our panelists and all of our guests many of you who have your own long shared experiences we we very much appreciate your being with us today and hopefully carrying these lessons forward and I just want to echo something that was that was very strongly noted in our conversation and that is the conviction that veterans of war have about the importance of peace and that was what founded this Institute with veterans in Congress who were committed to having greater capacity to think about talk about learn about peace and so we will continue on with that mission and we are grateful to the support from our congressional champions we're grateful for all of you for picking up this set of issues thank you for joining us today