 My name is Murray Hebert. I work on the Southeast Asia program here at CSIS. On behalf of CSIS, we're pleased to invite all of you here. It's a real pleasure to have so many of you come. It looks like we're slightly overcrowded. Sorry about that for the discussion on Vietnam 20 years after normalization with the two ambassadors. Ambassador Pham Quang Vinh is the new ambassador to Washington. He's been here since about the middle of last year. And previous to being posted here, he was a deputy foreign minister, responsible for a lot of Asia, but particularly Southeast Asia. And he's had previous postings in Bangkok and New York. And on my left is Ambassador Ted Oceas, who's been ambassador in Vietnam since December. Prior to going to Vietnam, he was the deputy chief of mission in Indonesia. He's had various postings in Thailand and in India and other places in Asia. So delight, the ambassadors will each speak briefly and from their point of view of where the last 20 years, where we've gone in the last 20 years in bilateral relations. And then we're going to open it up for questions from the floor. What we're going to do is wait for a microphone and identify yourself and be brief. So best serving, please. So thank you very much and good afternoon. And thank you, everybody. I'm very much honored to be here, Murayun Bird, and thank you for the initiative. This is quite a rare chance, as I mentioned to Ted Oceas, that the two ambassadors who is based in the different capitals can be together and to share our thoughts on our relationship at this commemoration and also to share our thinking for the future. So it's very much helpful that you can bring also the audience here that we can share with them. And to me, I think this year is very historic and unique that we commemorate our 20 years of diplomatic relations. We have gone a long way and achieved a lot of progress. And this is to commemorate the year 1995 when President Clinton, accompanied by the two famous statements, John Kerry and John MacKinnon announced the normalization of our diplomatic relations. But we are here also to commemorate and celebrate the progress we achieved. I just want to mention some of the things that we have achieved together. Let's say first, what has been so much deep between us is a kind of the so-called symptom, the Vietnam symptom or the American symptom in its respective country. We can do together form reconciliation, to healing, and also to partnership and cooperation. And the people to people exchanging, including the veterans, has been coming together. They are sharing not only about the hard parts, but also share about what they can do together for the present and for the future. And a lot of things we can do together. And for us Vietnam, we have planned that our full cooperation on the MIA issue. Why the US has been working with Vietnam very actively on the world legacies, including cleaning up the dioxin, the landmines, or the unexploded ordinances. All these have been our common efforts and it's significant. We also have expanded our cooperation in a number of areas, from economic, to trade, to investment, to education, to technology, and others. And I think that the number of Vietnamese students in the US is a figure that speaks for itself. We have before, around the time of 1995, about 800 students of Vietnam over here. But we have now, as the figures that I have got, is about 16,500 students or so. This is the first among the Southeast Asian countries and the eighth across a group. And this is significant for people to people exchange as well. And why we can do that together? We do it by hard work. And Ted and I very much often quote the same observation by Secretary Kerry. No other two countries can work harder, can do so much, and can do better as our two countries to overcome the past and work for the future. This is what we have been doing. And I thank you for all of us, for the leaders, for the communities, for the business circles, and all others who have helped our countries to be together in partnership. And the second point I want to mention is that we have a strong partnership and we have strong foundations to advance further forward. And I can recall that the last month, I presented my credentials to President Obama and he mentioned that this year is the unique opportunity for us to work together and to bring our relationship and partnership to a new high. And I think the word unique is very much important. 2015 is unique and historic. That's what we often mention. And we have a strong foundation because we have the comprehensive partnership that has been launched since July 2013 by President Obama and President Chung Teng Sang. It covers a wide range of areas of our cooperation, from political to foreign affairs, to economic and trade, to education, technology, environment, and to security and defense, people to people, exchange and OR, and many others. And we have been doing a lot. But I think our cooperation potentials remain enormous and we can do a lot together. And Ted Ose has a very good speech and remarks in the Vietnam National University last month, I think. And he posed a lot of questions that we can do together and the answer is nothing is impossible. And all the points that we can do together can be made possible. And I have the same question as well that I must share with you here. Can we double our trade volume, for example, which is 10 now, 36 billion US dollars? Double that figure, maybe first one to 50 billion US dollars? I think we can do it. Can we work together to enhance further our cooperation in education, in technology, in climate change and disaster relief, for example? Certainly we can do together. The number of students can be here more, can be here in a greater number. And at the same time, we can facilitate the exchange of people to people, contacts. And I remember that some half a million exchange of people last year between our countries and more can come as such. Can we do more with the civil nuclear energy when we have the agreement achieved last year, one, two, three agreement? I think companies like Westinghouse has been there and other companies have been there also. Can we do more when the partial lifting of the legal weapon has achieved? Certainly we can do more. Both from capacity building to technology transfer and to human resources building. All this we can do together, not to say the legal weapons. Can we do more at the regional level? I think we can do more. We can work together with our sign for peace, stability and prosperity in the region. We can achieve with our sign for regional architecture that is based on international law. We can do together to achieve maritime security and address the challenges we face together like climate change, disaster relief, terrorism and others. We can do together. And very much strategically important is the TPP. Certainly we can do together. The government of Vietnam has a determination to work together with the US and other participating countries for the early conclusion of this one. It is hard work for us, certainly, but we have the determination. And we need dialogue and consultation with all countries. And for us Vietnam, this year also marks our three decades of renovation and we have achieved a lot. And we have achieved a lot also with regard to market-based economy. And this will help us to move further forward. But at the same time, it will be a more attractive market for others. So I won't stop here. And the conclusion is that this year is unique and our relation has been going through a process of significant change. And we have the strong foundation to move further forward. Thank you. Thank you, Ambassador Ving. Ambassador Osius, please. Thank you. Thanks, Murray. And it really is a pleasure to be on this stage with you, Ambassador Ving. I think if you're waiting for a debate, you're going to be disappointed. Because as I listened to Ambassador Ving, I agree with the vision that you have created. I think the right man is here at the right time with the right experience and energy to carry out this task. As the ambassador mentioned, this year is a really, really important one, the 20th anniversary. And so it seems to me that what I could do that might be complementary of what Ambassador Ving has just laid out is to mention a few areas, five areas, where I think we can use the opportunities of some high level visits and focus on the relationship to move forward in a number of key areas. And you've mentioned them. So the risk of running over some of the areas that you've already mentioned, I'm going to list them. Trade, maritime security and defense cooperation, environment, science, technology, and health, education, and human rights. And so I thought I'd briefly go over each of those. Murray and I participated in a conference in January in which Ambassador Ving's good friend and colleague, Hakim Ngoc, opened the conference by saying, it's time for the United States and Vietnam to move past bilateral cooperation to regional and global cooperation. That's how we move the partnership to the next level. And he specified, particularly in the fields of nonproliferation, climate and water, food and energy security. And I think he's exactly right. So as I go over each of these areas where I think there's opportunities for us to do more and move the partnership forward, each one is keeping in mind the idea is to move this partnership beyond just bilateral to also regional and global. First is trade, as Ambassador mentioned. Trans-Pacific Partnership is a huge opportunity. It allows Vietnam to take the next logical step in its integration into the global economy. It will create all kinds of opportunities for American and Vietnamese businesses and entrepreneurs. It opens new trade possibilities. It makes the goal that you just set of doubling our trade volume possible, I think. And it also includes strong legal labor and environmental protection to support those possibilities. I think it will create jobs on both sides of the Pacific. So coming back to what you said, can we do this? I think we can. I think we can complete the negotiations and make the TPP a reality this year. In addition to the goal that you laid out of doubling our trade volume, I think we can take steps this year that would permit direct flights between our two countries. And think about that. Think about how that opens the aperture. There are more business people traveling back and forth, more students, more tourists. And that's easier if you can fly directly. Can the United States be Vietnam's number one investor? As we are number one investor in ASEAN as a whole. And I think, yes, we can. And can Vietnam reform its visa laws to make it easier to do business in Vietnam? I think, yes, that is possible. The Vice Foreign Minister also urged us to work towards stable international systems and international laws. And of course, a high standard trade and investment agreement contributes to that goal. But so does collaboration in the defense and maritime security realm. I think our goals align in many ways, including in the South China Sea. Secretary Kerry said recently, we care deeply about the way countries behave in pursuing their claims. Intimidation, coercion, or use of force by any one of the claimants is unacceptable. I think we're in agreement on that. And we're making progress in all of the five agreed areas for defense cooperation, maritime security, high level dialogue, search and rescue, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief, and peacekeeping operations. And if you think about it, the fact that Vietnam is now participating in international peacekeeping operations is part of what I think Vice Foreign Minister Ngoc was aiming at. We're not just doing things together, but we're working together on peacekeeping. And then we're going out in the world and making a difference. And I think to continue to move forward in this area, the maritime security and defense area, we're going to have to take some risks. Because of our history, this area is a little less comfortable in some of the others. But I think if we can do that, if we face our past squarely and honestly, then I think we can look forward to a very different kind of a future. Do I think this can happen? Yes, I do. The third area I mentioned was energy, environment, science, technology, and health. And I think this is a great example of where our collaboration, our bilateral collaboration, then can then be translated onto the international stage and can be an example for other parts of the world. Ambassador mentioned the 123 agreement. That's, I think, a great achievement of that science and technology relationship. I'm looking at someone who was there right at the beginning working on that science and technology relationship. And it sets the stage for Vietnam to diversify its sources of energy and creates a possibility for closer nuclear cooperation in the future. We're also working together on climate change, adaptation, mitigation. We have a forests and deltas program that helps Vietnam adapt to rising sea levels and to adopt more sustainable land use practices. We're working together on the ways that Vietnam will act to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. And then through the Lower Mekong initiative, which joins all of the countries of the Lower Mekong, we have an opportunity to collaborate on a number of issues, including water, which the Vice Foreign Minister had mentioned. And recently, the Minister of Agriculture proposed that we do some collaboration on food security and nutrition, especially in the Mekong Delta. And I mean, I think this is another thing where we can be ambitious. We can say, let's explore together Vietnam's vulnerability in food security due to climate change, what it means for Vietnam, what it means for the region, and what it means for the world. Because Vietnam is a supplier among other parts of the world to Africa of its export rice. Health is another place where we have a rich tradition of collaboration. We've invested $700 million through the PEPFAR program. And Vietnam has become a focused country for the President's Global Health Security Agenda. The CDC has been working closely with Vietnam's Ministry of Health to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. And Vietnam has a good record in this area. It's dealt with SARS. It's dealt with avian flu. It's preparing for Ebola, which we hope won't make it to Vietnam. But this is another area where the spread of infectious disease matters not just to our two countries, but to the countries of the region and the countries of the world. And it's another area where I think we can collaborate. Education. You mentioned a very large number of students that are going back and forth between our two countries. The Fulbright Economic Teaching Program has a 20-year history of success in helping transform the way economics and public policy is taught in Vietnam. And its 1,100 graduates are serving in provinces throughout Vietnam and making a big difference. And it is going to morph into Fulbright University of Vietnam. It will be Vietnam's first private not-for-profit university, creating a transparently run academic meritocracy and an important platform for further collaboration and for creating a basis for a long and successful partnership between our two countries. So that's another area where I ask, can we be partners in the area of education? Can we make a difference in our two countries and beyond? And I think that we can. The fifth and final area that I will touch on is human rights. I know it'll be of interest to some members of this audience. It's an area where we have seen some progress and we also see some challenges. Our annual human rights dialogue has been very fruitful. The 19th will take place in Hanoi this spring. Vietnam has released a number of prisoners of conscience in the last 18 months. And I've been in and out of Vietnam for 20 years. I can see myself how much more space there is for religious expression than there was in the past. And there's some increasing space for political expression as well. And in multilateral fora, such as the UN, we've been working together in ways that we never did in the past. And Vietnam has ratified the convention against torture and the convention on persons with disabilities. It has modified laws to decriminalize same-sex marriage and it's supported UN action to benefit LGBT persons worldwide. The United States believes that further civil and criminal code reform, the development of an independent judiciary, and the protection and promotion of individual freedom will help Vietnam succeed and contribute to its economic prosperity. So I think there are a lot of areas where there's potential for us to do a lot together. I agree with him, Ambassador Vinh. There's tremendous opportunities this year, in particular, with the kind of visits that will take place. Vietnam has changed so much since I was first there 20 years ago. And when I look at what's coming up, the next chapters, I'm very excited about the possibilities. And I'm glad to have such a great partner as Ambassador Vinh in this endeavor. Thanks. Thanks, Ambassador Vinh. So thank you very much. Maybe before I open the floor, I'd like to ask a question using the moderator's prerogative. You've both listed a number of areas which you see potential for improving relations over the next few years. Could I just ask you both to maybe tell us one or two areas that you see are just really very difficult to try to tackle? I think Vietnam probably has its difficult issues, and the US has its difficult issues. Ambassador Vinh, or do you want to let Ambassador Vinh cover? You'll enumerate a lot of areas. Well, I don't think the human rights issue is easy to handle at all. And I think the fact that we've seen some progress is fantastic. And I think there really has been progress, and it's important to market. But I don't pretend it's all done. I don't pretend we agree on everything. We, on some very important issues in the UN, we don't vote the same way. We don't see all these issues the same way. But I think the only way to make progress is to keep talking and to continue the dialogue and to see where it's possible to expand the areas of collaboration. And then when we come up against something where we really have serious fundamental differences, at least there's a basis for dialogue, and we can see if there's some way to negotiate a way forward. So I think that's probably the toughest area. To me, I think that no two countries are identical. And in the comprehensive partnership, we share also that we should appreciate the traditions and the political system, the independence of each other. So I find that in every areas of our cooperation, we have similarities and differences. And for example, in the past, we have taken a very hard job to overcome the legacies of the world. And now today, as we expand further our cooperation, and in every areas, we see differences and similarities. But the one thing is that I do agree with Ambassador Ted O'Shea's that we have a dialogue, we have consultations, we understand more each other, and we find the conversion of strategic interests and we can do together. And certainly, we have the wish also to do together. So I think we have a good foundation for that. So I'm going to open two questions from the floor. There's somebody, people with microphones, scattered about. If you have a question, raise your hand. Identify yourself, please. And then please keep your statement short, because we are probably going to have a lot of people ask one-ask questions and end with a question, if that's possible over here. Hi, Scott DeVerry with Asia Tactic, LLC. And my question for Ambassador Vin is what do you feel is in Vietnam's next interest in terms of environmental and scientific exchange to expand that relationship that the two of you had discussed earlier? Thank you. Can we take a few questions? You want to take a few? OK, we're going to take two at a time over here. Yes, hello. My name is Adam B. Sudie. I'm with Politico. I had a question about Vietnam's involvement in TPP. To what extent, I know there is a work plan in the US and Vietnam working on regards to labor standards and obligations in the agreement on labor rights. Can you explain sort of what Vietnam is looking for in a transition to transition their laws to comply with the TPP labor rules and, for example, the right to organize, will that be addressed in some way through TPP? Thank you. OK, should we do that? Thank you very much. First on environment, right? Technology, right? Environmental technology and also environment. First on environment, we have a law on that. We are more aware of the need to protect environment. And certainly the question of climate change have affected us a lot, especially in the South. And for technology, we try, and we have a law for that. And we try very hard to improve the industries and the products for that one. Try to have better standards on environmentally sound technologies and products as well, including automobiles. We have the standard for that. So we will hug up for that. Certainly in the meantime, we have to compromise between our expectations and also our immediate needs for now to take care of the welfare and the growth of other people and the growth of economy. But we are determined to work for environmentally sound technology, workplace, and products as well. And on the TPP, I think the question is not just for Vietnam or for everything. The process of negotiations among the 12-part city-patient countries are going on. And I think market assessor is some important thing, but not just that one. Other standards need to be negotiated as well. And we know that there are high standards on both trade and trade-related issues. And we will hug with that. You mentioned about labor. Labor is one part of the negotiations. So every country needs to have some concessions here, some benefits over there. And the harmonization of interests will be the one that we will conclude later on. But we will work hard for that. We have our system, and we have a trade union also. Certainly somebody can complain here and there that your trade union system is not like us. And we may also often hurt other views as well. So this is the way that how we can do it suitably and better for our people and for the country. But the negotiations is not just on market assess, but on other things as well, very much comprehensive and high standards. But all of us have a benefit. And all of us have to do something for the better. Thank you. Yeah, I like the way Ambassador Vinh put it on TPP. I think that's spot on. I was the labor attaché when I first went to Vietnam to serve there 20 years ago. I can tell you, to me it's phenomenal to see what is on the table in the TPP discussions. Phenomenal. And I think there's an extraordinary opportunity with TPP to bring about some of the changes that I think Vietnam wants to see anyway occur in its economic system and in its labor arrangements. So those of you who, there are a lot of people in Washington who say, oh, TPP is going to lower labor standards, this and that. No, it's not. And in a place like Vietnam, it's phenomenal, the changes that become possible as a result of Vietnam being part of this high standard trade agreement. Now Vietnam, as the country with the least developed country member of the negotiations, stands to benefit economically the most. This is a good thing. This is a good thing because it also, Vietnamese leadership, and I've been struck by this since I arrived, is absolutely committed to completing the TPP negotiations and going forward and implementing the agreements under TPP. So I think it's a very good story. And I just wanted to add one thing on environment. Together, the US and Vietnam have been working on illegal wildlife trafficking. And some people may not get excited about that. I do. I think it's an important issue. And it's another one of those areas where it's not just bilateral cooperation, but we learn through it because these matters don't respect, these issues don't respect borders. Trafficking of all kinds does not respect borders. And so what it means is not only the United States and Vietnam work together on illegal wildlife trafficking and other illegal kinds of trafficking, but we work with Vietnam's neighbors and beyond. So it's another one of those areas where I think we're taking our bilateral collaboration and moving the partnership to the next level. We have to check for the LMI, the May Congregion as well. Exactly. The LMI is another area where we're showing the way water resources, environmental protection, hand care, analysis. Yes. Jim. Jim Kellman, retired State Department of Public Diplomacy Officer. Now I run something called the Washington International Exchange Center. First of all, thank you, both ambassadors, for coming here and allowing we members of the general public to hear your vision, which in many ways is a joint vision. Both of you mentioned people-to-people exchanges as an important element of the relationship. And I would like to hear just a little bit more elaboration from both of you on what your vision is on that and where we can hope to go. Thank you. David. Thank you very much, David Brunström from Reuters. I was wondering if I could ask about the issue of Russian air activity out of Cameron Bay. It's obviously been in use quite a bit in the last couple of weeks. How has Vietnam responded to the US concerns about refueling flights for strategic bombers out of the base, and are these still going on? And if so, could there be any implications in terms of a further lifting of the US arms embargo? Thank you. One of you want to take on? Can you start with people-to-people? People-to-people. One of the reasons I get excited about the idea of direct flights is because it opens the aperture for what you're talking about. For more exchanges between business people and tourists and the expat community, the Vietnamese expat community, those who want to visit Vietnam. I think that's the other reason. I think visas are really important, having as liberal possible a visa regime because we want to have those exchanges. Those are the basis of a successful partnership. In fact, long before we had normalized relations, it was in the areas of education, in the areas of people-to-people exchange, the progress was made always ahead of our governments. I think that people have already always moved faster than governments have in this relationship. And I believe there's an enormous asset in the Americans of Vietnamese origin community in this country because there are a lot of people who are doing very well, more than 2 million people in this country who are doing very well, who are interested in what's happening across the Pacific, and who have contributions that they may wish to make. So I see that as something that was-we have a complex history. I don't have rose-colored glasses about that. It's going to be very difficult for some people to look at it this way. But the younger generation in particular looks at Vietnam as a place where there are great opportunities. You mentioned internships when we were out in the hall. That is such-that makes so much sense to have young Vietnamese intern in American companies or to have Americans intern in Vietnamese companies so that we get to know each other better because that's the basis for a long-lasting partnership. On Cam Ranh Bay, first, I think there are just two important points to make. One is that from my perspective, and I'll be very interested to hear what Ambassador Vin says, one is the United States respects the arrangements that Vietnam has with other countries. We're very respectful, understand that there are traditional relationships that are long-lasting, and who are we to instruct Vietnam on what kind of relationships it wants to have? We celebrate the good relations Vietnam has with other countries. And the second point is that in this particular instance we think the Russians put the Vietnamese in an awkward position by using their arrangement and then engaging in some provocative acts. So I would say the fault here lies with those who took advantage of an arrangement that we respect. First on the people-to-people exchange, I think I say a lot with Ambassador Ted Osius. To me, I think that for the general public, the government and the environment we should promote for the people to come back and forth both sides. How can we achieve that? That is the relationship of ours. And a lot of incentives that need to be promoted and advertised so that the US is a good place, Vietnam is a good place for people to go back and forth. And we have a lot together as well. Educational purposes and the companies, we have a lot of US companies working in Vietnam. And that is a source of encouragement for people-to-people exchange as well. Education is another point. And you mentioned very correctly about the direct fly between our two countries. That means we have a lot. But we can do more together, I think, because Vietnam should be considered by both countries as a place for tourism, for business, or others. All the US can be a place for business, for education, and others, rather than the place of war. That has been considered some 40 years ago. So a lot of things we can do together. But certainly, we need to go to the grassroots and for their interests as well, not just at the government and the elite level. And on the question of the Russian airplanes and also the Cam Ranh Bay, the first thing I want to mention here is the policies of government with Vietnam. And Ted Ocelos has mentioned it very correctly that we have a dependent policy of our foreign relations. And we will not let our relations with any countries that will be harmful to a third party or a third country. That is the policy of friendship and partnership to all countries. And I thank you Ted Ocelos for mentioning that you respect that one. And on the very instance that you mentioned, we open our facilities for all countries, for services, logistics. And it's not presumed to be harmful to any others. And we have no information on this one. So that's why this, we have been discussed between ourselves and the US officials as well. A clear understanding has been made. And I must say that our airport, our place, and our arrangements with any others, will never be harmful to a third country. And this is an independent foreign policy. And the instance is presumed to be in that context as well. So we have a lot of things to do together. And I think that between us, Vietnam and the US, we have working together in the context of a larger international community as well. And we have been doing good between us and together with other countries. Did you have a question yet? Oh, OK. OK. Please keep it short. Thank you, Mr. Marehe. But thank you, Mr. Ambassador Pham Khuong Vinh and Mr. Ambassador Ozias. I am Dr. Kuya Vu, a political prisoner of the Vietnamese government. And I thank you to international and especially American intervention. I have been released from Vietnamese prison. And now I'm here just to cooperate with all of you to promote the relationship between the United States and Vietnam. My question is very, very brief. Mr. Pham Khuong Vinh said that there are differences between the United States and Vietnam. That's the normal, that's the very normal in international relations. But I think about the question of human rights. For instance, both countries must work on a common base. For example, the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. So do you have a question? We need a question, sir. So I think that Vietnamese government cannot continue to say that Vietnamese government has its own policy on human rights. Human rights of every country, including Vietnam, must be based on international law on human rights. For instance, the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. Sir, do you have a question? Yeah, I'm sorry. And my question is, I would like Mr. Pham Khuong Vinh let me know if in the near future Vietnamese government can stop repressing dissidents in Vietnam and stop them to use prisoner of conscience or dissidents in prison as a community to exchange with Western countries, especially with Western countries. And do you recognize that? Thank you. We got your question. Four benefit, economic benefit, or military assistance. Thank you. Pham, do you have a question? Nguyen Nguyen and Peng Hung from George Mason University. Thank you both for sharing your thoughts with us. I have two brief questions, one for Ambassador Osius. My question is, what event in the United States from recognizing Vietnam as a market economy? For Ambassador Vinh, my question focuses on security and defense relationships. The question is, what is a vision of the ultimate goal or desired destination of that security cooperation between two countries? Thank you. On the question of how we can work together in the field of defense and security, I think we have a share a lot. And it has been recognized in the comprehensive partnership that we work together for the benefits of our two countries. We can be stronger, more independent, but at the same time, for peace, stability, and prosperity in the region. And I can give you a number of examples that we can work together, such as we work within the context of ASEAN related process for the regional architecture that can ensure a better environment for peace, security, including maritime security and prosperity for the region. And my understanding of security includes also in a more comprehensive manner, includes also non-traditional security like disaster, like climate change or terrorism. So we do a lot together, but at the same time do it bilaterally and regionally and globally as well. We have a lot of things we can do together. And I think the recent announced project by Secretary Kerry for the strengthening of the Coast Guard capacity of Vietnam is very much important as well. We are working on that. And the process is going smoothly. And we have a capacity building cooperation as well. That is good. And I must say in all other fields, on the question of human rights, I must say that the law in Vietnam protects. And we have been parties to international convention in this one. And I will reject that we have any prisoner of consent or any of that. But with the US, we have a dialogue with the US on human rights. And we have food for exchange of views. We have differences, of course. But we have more understanding when we have dialogue and consultations. We have been parties to most of the core international human rights bills. And if you compare the countries in South East Asia, in Nassan, for example, Vietnam was among the countries that have been to most of the co-human rights conventions. And what is the most important thing is that we have to do it good for individuals and communities as well. And the law is there. And it should be protected under the law. And everybody is equal before the law. And with regard to other countries, we have projects as well. Not only the US, we have dialogue with Australia and the EU, for example. It has been a good way of doing things to work together for the welfare of the people at the same time for better mutual understanding. I know the question about security cooperation was addressed to Ambassador Vinn. But I just want to endorse what the ambassador said, that it's not just traditional security, but also non-traditional security concerns that require our attention and require our collaboration. On market economy status, there are six statutory requirements that have to be met for market economy status to be achieved under our laws. It's not a political process. It's a very open, transparent process run by the Department of Commerce. We have a mechanism in place for dialogue about what steps are needed for Vietnam to achieve market economy status. It's my belief that TPP and completing the TPP process is going to be very, very helpful in this process. And the stability as well? Yeah. But also one of the provisions is convertibility of currency. So not all of the six requirements have been met yet. And as I said, it's not a political process. It has to be done in a very strict way in accordance with the law. And we're not there yet. But do I think we can get there? Yes, I think it's possible. But steps still have to be made. On human rights, Murray asked what that I think was the hardest part. And I do think that's the hardest part, because we don't agree on everything when it comes to matters of human rights. But I do not think our relationship can achieve its fullest potential until there's continued significant demonstrable progress on human rights. And right now, the focus of our joint activity is what Vietnam is doing to modify its civil and criminal codes to make them consistent with the Constitution. There is a recognition that not all of those statutes, not all of those security provisions are consistent with the Constitution. And we are working with the Ministry of Justice. We have a new resident legal advisor who's there's a dialogue going on about how those codes can be revised. It's my belief that it would be great if, while that revision is going on, if Vietnam were to impose a moratorium or freeze on further arrests that are based on some of those provisions that are very, very controversial, I don't know that we're going to come to agreement on that. But we have this vibrant dialogue that I believe is bearing fruit. So bear with us. We're going to make progress in this area. So I think on the question of the market economic status, we can do together. Vietnam has been doing with other countries. And I think it's about 3,000 or something countries have recognized. Certainly, different countries have different categories to be discussed. But I have the same thinking with Ambassador Ted Osearzad. When we reach a conclusion of the TPP, then everything satisfactory there to be resolved. And we are working for that. We are working for that. We are working for that. So back here right straight down the middle. Thank you. I'm Ryan Rainey from Inside US Trade. I wanted to ask Ambassador Vinn about Congress, the US Congress. There's been a little bit of a holdup in introducing a trade promotion authority bill. I wanted to see if you think that that delay could lead possibly to a stalled TPP. And also just on that note, and Adam alluded to this in his question, on labor, the labor negotiations in TPP with Vietnam have become an issue that a lot of members of Congress have had questions about. I wanted to see if you and your role have been engaging with members of Congress to reassure them as you did just now. Thank you. Mark Mannion. Hi, Mark Mannion from the Congressional Research Service. Thank you. Thanks to you both for coming here today. Last year, as I think everyone in this room knows, the US, the Obama administration relaxed our restrictions on sales of lethal weapons systems. And I'm wondering so far what contracts have been made or are being negotiated along that front and what types of expansion or what other types of sales, whether the types of systems do you anticipate? And do you anticipate any further relaxations in the coming months? I think the first question on the TPA should be Ambassador Terosius to answer to that. But we have the group of TPP ambassadors based in Washington, DC. We often talk with each other. I think that if the TPP is achieved by the administration, that would be very much helpful for the US administration in their negotiations. But for us, Vietnam, we think that will be a facilitator as well. But it's not quite a condition for the TPP negotiations. What are on the table for the negotiation in the process of TPP drafting? That is very much important as well. We have been discussing a lot of areas, including trade, market assess, labor, and others. And I think I have explained a little bit about labor already. But my point is that the TPP is so much comprehensive and has standards. And it covers everything. And the discussions are going on. We hope to achieve the early conclusion of that. Vietnam is determined for that. But once you settle everything, then everything will be the TPP rather than pick up one or the others. And I think that every country in the process of negotiations for the TPP will have a forum, some have a milk, some have beef, some have others. And so it will be also the question of concern, not only for the Congress here in the US, with a question of concern for the community and the parliament in Vietnam as well. They ask the government to clarify whether we have good TPP or not. So I think the good TPP is good for participating country and for all the countries in the process. Thank you. On Mark's question, the United States actually recently provided some fast patrol boats to Vietnam for use in maritime security. I think that was made easier by the partial lifting of the lethal weapons ban. I think actually some very significant opportunities now exist for sale and transfer of some capabilities to Vietnam, but no, not yet. There haven't been contracts signed yet. Part of it is that our processes for approving weapons sales to Vietnam are ones with which the Vietnamese are not yet familiar. They have some very traditional relationships that they're quite familiar with, and we're new. So this isn't going to happen really, really fast. I think this is going to be something that will happen gradually. And as to the hypothetical question, when will there be a complete lifting, that really does depend on further progress on the area that I think some of us agree is the toughest one, further progress on human rights. I really intend to have Ted to raise the issue about the partial lifting of the lethal weapons ban, just because he will know more of the programs here in Washington, DC. Actually, I think that it is good sign that the two countries have that achievement. And for us, Vietnam, we want the total lifting of the ban, certainly. It has political symbolic as well. This year is the 20th anniversary of our diplomatic relations. So everything should be normalized, including this one. That is the symbolic as well. Now coming to the contracts, you mean something more substantive implementation of this one. I think number one, we have to identify the systems, the process that you mentioned. Number two, you have to identify the needs of both sides, whether we need something and you can provide something or whether we can do together on this one. But the third point is that I think we are in a process of discussing to know each other, to understand more each other. But for this one, even with the total lifting of the lethal weapon ban, it will be our policy of defensive nature of our army. That is the very basic question here. So I think the package for the Coast Guard capability building is along these lines. And we are doing with that. Let's do with this thing and why we are discussing others. Last time I was at CSAS, I heard a proposal that really appealed to me. You know that all of our weapons procurement systems are complicated, EDF, and this and that. And when I was last here, I heard the idea that CSAS might host a roundtable discussion in which, off the record, these kinds of weapons procurement systems could be explored in a very no holds barred way. I think it's a terrific idea, because really our weapons procurement systems are very confusing. And laying it out, having that frank discussion in a place like this where it's not official, I think would be terrific, very useful. Great. Unfortunately, I think we've come to the end of our hour. We want to thank both Ambassador Ving and Ambassador Oceas for graciously coming here today. I know Ambassador Oceas has had to come the longest way. Ambassador Ving is very lucky. Usually it's the other way around. But please join me in thanking them for coming and for the candid conversation. Thank you. Thank you very much.