 I'm wondering whether we should start ahead of time. OK. Good evening, everybody. My name is Kishore Mabubani, I'm the dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore. And I'm sure the first question in your mind is, why is this man from Singapore chairing a forum on the future of American power? I think Davos wants to prove that occasionally he makes mistakes. Anyway, it's a great pleasure to welcome you because we are addressing an extremely important topic today. What I propose to do is just let you know quickly that I'm just a traffic cop. I will make a few brief introductory comments. And then I'll post maybe one or two rounds of questions to this very distinguished panel that I'll introduce in a minute. And then we'll throw the floor open for questions from the floor. And I hope you were all ready for some good, hard, tough questions because the tougher the question, the better the discussion. And I'm sure the panel will be very happy to have the tough questions. So let me begin in a kind of a stage setting kind of way. Make three broad points. The first point, of course, the obvious point is that in some ways, the question of the future of American power the 21st century is probably the most important question of the day. Because if you look at how the 20th century evolved, much of it, as you know, was driven by American power. The whole history of the 20th century was driven by American power. And of course, their debate, was it good, was it bad? But in many parts of the world, it was viewed as very benign. In fact, just yesterday, in fact, right on this stage, if I'm not mistaken, Farid Zakaria was interviewing the Prime Minister of Singapore 24 hours ago. And the Prime Minister of Singapore said as a matter of fact that the American power in the Asia Pacific has been extremely benign. And frankly, it could even serve as a model for China at some point in time. And so that's the first reason why this panel is so important. The second point, of course, is that while American power, of course, still remains number one in the world, the big question is about the future. Is it going to keep on rising? Will it remain stagnant? Or heaven forbid, will it even decline? And I know that decline is not a word that is used a lot within the American discourse, but as I told the panelists, it's unfortunately being used outside quite a bit. So it may be interesting to get the external, internal perspectives of where American power is heading. And the third point I want to make is that, and in that sense, it's really fortunate to have this distinguished panel here, is that as you know, within America, the political system, let me try and put this very gently, has become quite polarized. And this polarization within the American political system is perceived by the rest of the world to have affected American power vis-a-vis the rest of the world. So to have two distinguished Republicans and two distinguished Democrats on this panel, I think gives it a tremendous amount of power in the discussions that we're going to have. So let me just briefly, briefly introduce them. On my immediate left is Senator Saxby Chambliss, a senator from Georgia. He holds a very important position as vice-chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and also a member of the Armed Services Committee. So when we discuss, for example, the announcement made by Secretary Panetta today, that it'd be $500 billion of cuts in American defense budgets, we can talk about the implications of that. We have then Senator Bob Cocker, the senator from Tennessee. He's the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. And if the Republicans win the Senate in November, you might become the chairman of the Senate Foundation Committee. Next to him, we have Dr. Michael Froman, who's the Deputy Assistant to the U.S. President and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs and also the G20 Sherpa. And last but not least is Congresswoman Neeta M. Lowy. She's from the 18th District State of New York, and she's in charge of foreign aid and through the role that she's played in the House Appropriations Committee. So we have a very wonderfully well-balanced panel. So let me start the discussion by asking the first question about how each and every one of you see the future of American power in the 21st century. Do you see it as, in a sense, constantly rising, or do you see that there are the concerns about it be declining real or misplaced? So Senator Chambley, let's start with you first. Well, first of all, let me say that, you know, perceptions are just what they are, they're perceptions. When you look at the realities of what's going on in our world today, the world is a very changed place from where it was five years ago. Certainly it's a very changed place from where it was 10 years ago. The advent of the Internet has made dramatic changes. We're now seeing the unfortunate military conflicts being brought into everybody's living room all across the world on a regular basis. There are just any number of things that have contributed, I think, probably to what I truly believe, is a perception. Does the United States have issues that we have to deal with? You bet. We have very, very serious issues. Are we operating from a governing standpoint the way that I would like to see, or probably any of the four of us up here would like to see? I think the question is no. But that being said, I would say this, I think there are three areas where the United States has always provided not just the right kind of image, but from a practical standpoint, we have been the leader of the free world. First of all is where the economy, in spite of our problems now, we still have a very strong economy and we have the world's largest economy. We've got to fix it. We've got a real problem with our economy and it needs fixing it. What we do is going to impact the economy of every other country in the world and we've got to make sure that not only we do it right, but we do it soon and we are not there today. Secondly, we have been the military power of the world for several decades, certainly going back to the conclusion of World War II and we have not necessarily the largest army or the largest military, but from a technological standpoint, we are certainly the most advanced military and that gives us a huge edge and the numbers of individuals that wear the uniform in the United States today are different from what they were 10 years ago just in numbers, but there's another difference that is of more importance to citizens of the United States and that is that our military today does not operate on a draft system. Every young person coming into or coming out of school used to have to go into the military unless you had a fiscal reason why you couldn't. Today our military is an all-volunteer military, which means that the men and women that wear the uniform in the United States of America are there because they're patriotic, they want to be there, they know today and they know over the last decade that when they raise their right hand and swear it up over the Constitution of the United States, they're getting ready to go into a military conflict so the makeup of our military is very, very patriotic, very, very committed and we're going to remain the world's strongest military power. We can't afford to be in second place. I know we'll talk more about the cuts and whatnot, but just know that that will be the case and then thirdly, the United States from a leadership standpoint has always had individuals, whether it was the president or members of Congress or whatever that have been in prime leadership roles again for decades and right now if you had to point to who is the leader on the Republican side, who is the leader on the Democratic side, obviously the president's a Democrat and certainly that's where their leadership comes from on the Republican side, it's probably a little bit of a mixed bag because we have control of the house and we have a speaker there, he's a logical, maybe the leader of the Republicans we're in the minority on the Senate side, the minority leader is in a leadership role. Is he the guy that is leading the Republicans? Well if you watch presidential debates you'll get a mixed bag of all of that too but I think the fact is that America has not provided the right kind of leadership on world issues over the last several years and I'm not just referring to this administration but I think that we've got to step up our game there. We ought not to have to have a president who feels compelled for whatever reason to go around the world and apologize for acts of the United States. That was a little bit infuriating to a number of us. So from the standpoint of where we're going to be from an economic standpoint we're going to rebound from a military standpoint we'll always be the world's strongest military from a leadership standpoint I'm confident that we'll continue to provide the world with the right kind of leaders that exhibit true leadership worldwide. Well I must say thank you for that very careful presentation pointing out both the strengths and weaknesses and challenges. So I'm going to turn to the Democrat now we agreed that we would alternate so Congressman Lowy would you like to give your perspective on how you see American power in the 21st century? Certainly and I thank the World Economic Forum for holding this session. I've been very pleased to serve on the State Department Foreign Operations Appropriations Committee and when the Democrats are in charge I was chair of the committee now Kay Granger is chair of the committee and for those of you who haven't seen the article The Odd Couple it stressed the two Democrats that get along and frankly I was very pleased during the appropriations process that we were able to turn out a very strong bill. George Bush made it very clear that our national security depends on defense diplomacy and development and I do believe that this bill that we produced does reflect our strong leadership in the world now and commits to our strong leadership in the future and I am very pleased with the leadership of our president internationally and if you've ever traveled with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as I have if I didn't want to undermine her seriousness I would say that she is a rock star and has the respect of all with whom she meets I don't think there's a place that she hasn't traveled and I would dare say the same for Vice President Biden now I'd like to add one other dimension to this number one we have to keep strong and even though there are proposed cuts there is no question for those of us who have looked at the defense budget my colleagues on the senate side would say and I'm not going to go back to the $600 toilet seat it's too serious an issue that there are places that can be cut carefully with discretion and maintain our strength and certainly with regard to the foreign aid budget we are providing very careful oversight because we know how important it is to spend our dollars wisely I'd like to mention another area which I think is absolutely essential when you talk about American power in the world Senator Schamblers talked about the economy what we do with our infrastructure what we do with our educational system how we train our people for the future we import many students from all over the world to our university system and we're very proud of that but I do think that we have to do a lot more within our elementary and high school systems to maintain our power and our status in the world I was saying to our distinguished moderator some of you may know Scarsdale New York we're doing Singapore math in Scarsdale New York and we had a discussion before this panel began about education in Singapore so I'd like to just say that I have a great deal of confidence that American power, American respect in the world will be maintained and I'd like to sum up not just with our military because I do believe that our military will maintain the edge and will be a leader in the world but I do think we have to continue to invest in our diplomacy and our foreign aid programs as well I'm very proud of the work that we do in lifting up people throughout the world when it comes to diseases through the global fund through other programs that fund tuberculosis, malaria, etc I'm very proud of the work that we do in our villages everywhere throughout the world again to help alleviate poverty and our foreign aid budget and our diplomacy budget along with our military budget must continue to reflect the tremendous needs internationally because that is the responsibility of a world power not just to be strong militarily but to make sure that we are capable of facing the many challenges to help people help people fulfill their dreams help people reach for the stars that's the image of the United States of America that I want to continue to project Thank you and thank you for the plug for Singapore's textbooks Please go on and buy one now Senator Kalka, please Thank you Century's a long time and we're talking about relative American power the priests on the front row might say that comparisons are odious We have a term in our country that describes American exceptionalism and do I believe that America will demonstrate continued exceptionalism in the world over this next century? Absolutely I do, your question your comment regarding the third item and that is where we are politically no doubt is affecting us in the short term I mean, we as a country are faced with the same challenges that so many western democracies are facing right now politicians on both sides of the aisle for decades that have made commitments to citizens that cannot be honored and they're difficult decisions that we know reforms have to be made Europe is facing that our country right now is somewhat paralyzed over those issues because of the partisanship that you talked about a minute ago which by the way both sides very much are at fault it is my belief that I know that you read the publications from the outside and you read about sort of the negative things I see a centrist group forming in both the house and the senate to deal with these issues that we have in our country the tax reform elements that have to take place the entitlement reform elements that have to take place the long term deficit issues that we will be able to be the country that we all want to be around the world those are going to have to be dealt with because what's happening internally to our country is a lot of nativist feelings are coming out people want us to sort of step back from the involvement that we have in the world because of the issues that we have at home so I think the most important thing in the short term for us is to get our balance sheet in order personally over the next two to three years I wish we could get it together this year I don't think that's going to happen for a lot of reasons but I do believe regardless of who is elected president we're going to deal with those issues over the next two to three years on the military side I would say that look I don't think there's any question that the United States of America will project itself around the world but there has to be a rebalancing I mean you look at where we are with NATO right now and so many of the countries there there are countries there honoring their commitments but NATO was built on the fact that each country was going to commit a certain portion of their gross domestic product to NATO and in many ways our country has become the provider of protection and many countries have been the consumers of protective services so that has to rebalance but I absolutely believe this will be a century where America demonstrates exceptionalism there's no doubt there will be economies that just due to demographics are going to be different relative to ours you look at countries with a billion people that are going rapidly that's going to change but I think we will be an economic powerhouse we will lead on democracy efforts we will lead in being a force for good in this world but the quicker the quicker that we can deal with our balance sheet issues the more energetic in the near future that will be Dr. Furman first comment and then we will move on first let me thank you for having me on the panel and you have really three of the most effective and most internationalist legislators in our country here who have done great things on foreign assistance on new start on a whole range of intelligence and defense issues so this really is a very good group to talk to that let me just say a few things when President Obama came into office he set out as his top priority to restore America's reputation and to strengthen its influence around the world and that had many parts to it one was to strengthen the alliances and I think we can say right now our alliances both in Europe and in Asia have never been stronger in Korea, Japan, Australia where we are seeing real strength in those alliances as well as the NATO actions two, that it was critically important to get the great power relationships right that if you don't have Russia and China in a good place in your relationships it's very hard to get anything else done and that's what the restart was about that's what engagement with China was about and that's what allowed us I think to work very collaboratively including through the UN Security Council and to build a coalition globally to address those issues third, there was a desire to do a strategic rebalancing for obvious reasons there had been a great focus on Iraq and Afghanistan previously and there was a desire to reengage with Asia which we see as the fastest growing region for our economic potential but also a region that's incredibly important to us strategically fourth, we set out to reform elements of the international architecture precisely because having a rules-based system that reflects our values as well as our interests is our most effective way to exert influence over the long run and things like the creation of the G20 or the institutionalization of it as the premier forum for international economic cooperation or the president's engagement with the East Asia summit are just two examples of how we've tried to build or the Trans-Pacific Partnership examples of how we've tried to build rules-based architecture to reflect the new realities of the global system and finally none of this can be done without solving our economic problems at home and that had to be dealt with proactively and forthrightly in the midst of the crisis in 2009 through very difficult political steps like tarp and recapitalizing the banks and things that were not popular politically but also to promote growth and to commit to rebalancing our fiscal situation, consolidating our fiscal consolidation our situation over the medium term and let me just conclude with that because I think what's remarkable about what you've heard so far is how much convergence there really is between Republicans and Democrats both on the nature of American power the importance of projecting it going forward and the importance of dealing with problems like the balance sheet that Senator Corker referred to there's no disagreement between Republicans and Democrats on the importance of doing that there's no disagreement between Republicans and Democrats on exactly the right balance between taxes and spending but there's no disagreement that that's what we do must do as a nation and I share his optimism that we will get there Wonderful, now we have about 10 minutes in a panel discussion before we come to you on the floor and so far I've noticed everybody's been very good and restrained maybe I will make the discussion a bit more difficult by posing a very difficult question and from American power in the 21st century let's say fast forward 10 years from now and this is quite a possibility by all estimates Goldman Sachs and other estimates in the year 2022 the World Bank announces that the country with the largest GNP is now China in the same year China announces that it's about to send a man or a woman to the moon so it clearly has the most dynamic space exploration in the world and is then perceived by the rest of the world to be the number one power and United States would then be perceived to be the number two power now how ready is the American population you think for such a kind of perception shift if it happens I'm not saying it will happen but if it happens how ready are you Well thank goodness it's a hypothetical but it may be more than a hypothetical what China is is progressing and as their economy grows and ours goes through this slow process it makes it easier for them to gain on us I think the facts are though that even China is seeing a very slow down of their growth economically right now but I think a couple of things have got to happen I say this stop speech that I've been all over the country talking about with respect to the budget and our deficit and our debt that we've got a window of opportunities in the United States to fix our fiscal house it's going to happen our fiscal house is going to get fixed now we either take the initiative to do it on our own terms or those individuals those countries that buy our bonds and right now the Chinese are the largest foreign purchaser of U.S. bonds they're going to dictate to us what we're going to do to fix it so now is the opportunity for us to do that but if we don't then that scenario Dean very well could play out I think America is not prepared to be in second place and Americans are not prepared to be in second place so I think we're going to see a stronger economy develop over a period of the next couple of years I share the optimism of Bob and Mark and we're going to get there we may have our differences of opinion of what policies we ought to enact to get there but we're going to get there that's what politics is all about that's what elections are all about and irrespective of who's the next president of the fiscal house the current one or another one there's going to be a rallying around the effort to get our fiscal house in order and not allow that scenario to happen great answer Congressman Louis I agree with my colleague enthusiastically that we will get there I think we may have differences as to approaches I do believe that we have to deal with our long term debt and our current deficit but I also would agree with economists like Dr. Alan Blind or Mark Zandy that at a time when the economy is weak that we have to first invest here in our infrastructure put people to work and have a long term plan to deal with the debt and the deficit we have to put people to work here in the you're not here I'm sure we want to put people to work here as well yeah that's just going to work harder too I think it's essential to put people to work now one of the challenges is and in talking to my Chinese friends they will admit that we have the creativity we produce Americans with extraordinary creativity we can look at Apple Google etc and they are extremely good at taking that creativity activity and do a super job of manufacturing and taking the business from us the president addressed some of these issues in his State of the Union and I know it's going to be a continuing debate but I'm very proud of our creativity among our students and our workers and the question is how do you create the jobs at home so I would agree with my colleague that the debt the deficit are serious issues and we have to plan to do it with a seriousness of purpose but right now I am very concerned about jobs investment in education make sure we're training our workers for the jobs of the future and I will put my faith in the creativity of the American people and look forward to positive dealing with the debt but right now invest in our people so you're still seeing America remaining number one then without a doubt I'm trying to see whether there will be anybody who will say it so an American value is it not that we want people without the world to do well and to live with a high standard of living so if you look at a country like China with the number of people that it has I think every American would want people in China not to live in poverty but to have better lives and history has shown countries that aren't able to generate that for the people who live there end up having social problems and sometimes turn their attention to create outward problems to consolidate people's thinking within so look I think Americans would want as they think it through for people in China to do well if people in China do well if you look at the demographics size of the economy is going to be very large and so I think all of us can do the math look at the growth rates and yet I'll stop there because I'm not going to take your I'm not going to bite at whatever it is you're trying to get me to bite at and tell you but I'll agree with Saxby the American people absolutely would not be prepared psychologically for an event where the world began to believe that it was not the greatest power on earth and should an economy end up being bigger than the American economy my sense is that maybe a focus then would be on the type of innovation, creativity you look at a Goldman Sachs type operation just to use financial operations versus some sluggish other kind of large bank that really I mean you might look at America in a different way but I don't want to look at it that way today I'm not going to say that's the way it's going to be but I will tell you that the American psychology certainly is not prepared to deal with that thank you Dr. Froman you've been an academic and you know academics allow to think the unthinkable and say the unsayable I'm afraid I'm in violent agreement with my colleagues up here in a number of respects I succeeded in getting the two parties to be yes exactly that's something they cannot accomplish over there but in Davos they can I certainly agree with what Senator Corker said which is we welcome the rise of a prosperous, stable China where millions or hundreds of millions of additional people are lifted out of poverty at the same time I think the question is what kind of China will we face and will it be a China that plays by and abides by the international rules and norms that have governed the international system for the last 60 years and have allowed for countries like China to grow and prosper or do they follow their own set of rules that puts at risk the prosperity of other people in other countries and I think I won't rise to debate on the number one question either I'm convinced we will be the number one as entrepreneurs in our education our higher education system and our ability to be creative and come up with new ideas and to lead the global economy in all of those factors but it's very important that we help encourage not just us but the international community that as China grows and becomes a bigger player in the international system that they abide by international rules and norms as well thank you very much I think you've had a good discussion now the Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School very wisely said that the questions should have good questions that have three elements one, the name of the questioner two, very short presentation three, end with a question mark so please over to you you take the microphone, identify yourself I'm Suqi from Tsaijin Magazine best in Beijing China so you said you are not prepared for the second place we have to say we are not prepared for the first place the total volume of the GDP you are so modest, you know you Chinese the total volume of the GDP in 10 years also maybe we were alarming but per capita GDP is low and we are preoccupied with the division of the pie with the social safety net poverty reduction and without the US policing maybe we are problematic for the energy security for the security this kind of thing but we have to make some contributions to the global governance in case you say we are too selfish making money at the expense of your policing efforts so you don't have a question there's a comment then gentleman in the back please yes can I get a sense out there roughly one more here, two, three, four great, go ahead the microphone is not working just try hello, hello, is that good Ron Freeman, Atlanta Council, Washington DC there's one area in which America is sadly first and likely to remain so that is the cost of healthcare per capita but America is definitely not first in terms of infant morbidity or mortality life expectancy or general healthcare the health bill turned into a political Donnie Brook started out as a cooperation between the congress and the president these are very leading members of the congress, what are we going to do about American healthcare does anybody want to think a step I'll take a shot at it first there's no question about the rising cost of healthcare in the United States is a major contributor to our current economic situation and there's also no question about the fact that we have frankly done nothing over the last several years to try to curtail that rising cost and it's a cost within the private sector as well as in the public sector that's rising every day and it's a cost that we've got to get our arms around that being said it is very difficult from a policymaking standpoint to enact measures to let's say reform Medicare we have outside groups who as soon as we use that term reform Medicare they go ballistic and say well you're going to cut Medicare we're not going to cut Medicare we can't cut Medicare we owe it to people in the United States to have that valuable program but if we don't make the right kind of changes in this very valuable system then the system is going broke and it's not going to be there so it's health programs like that that have got to be addressed the other side of that is that Americans have gotten very spoiled because even though our healthcare costs are significantly higher percentage wise in other industrialized countries I would submit that the quality of healthcare that Americans get is unsurpassed in any other country in the world there are some that in some areas that may be equal but overall Americans get very good quality healthcare a lot of them don't have to pay for it that's probably going to have to change there are individuals who receive whether it's Medicare or other healthcare benefits that are high income earners that may have to start putting a little more skin in the game there are a number of ideas like this that are floating around in Congress right now but there is a general agreement among Republicans and Democrats that we've got to make sure we protect this program for the long term and that is a very very difficult political thing to do but it's got to be done now I'll leave Obamacare to Bob and the rest of the folks here okay so Congressman Louis you got a short answer because I think we have lots of questions I'll give a very short answer with great respect for the senator it took a while to pass the healthcare bill a healthcare bill that 8 million federal employees have and all members of congress have and the project is calling it Obamacare I think we're really unfortunate most of us would not say it is perfect but most of us would say let's amend it let's make some changes in the healthcare bill but it's taken a long time for the house and senate to pass anything that approach universal care so I personally would be happy to work with my good friend senator shambles in all the issues he was talking about but let's not try to repeal a bill that took so many years that is the kind of plan that 8 million as I mentioned healthcare workers and all of us have right now okay thank you if you don't want to make this into healthcare but and I'm not going to debate I just make some quick points number one obviously we don't know what's going to happen because we have a supreme court ruling that's going to occur this summer a presidential race that will have you know I'm not going to it's going to have an effect but what we've done in America is we focused on access which is very very important we have not focused on the quality side of it and that takes long tough work you know you need somebody at CMS for 20 years if you will to see through the kind of changes that need to take place one of the big frailties is this was a bill that 535 congress people created what a disaster there's no way that you can create something that doesn't have 3 or 4 focus points and that's what this bill became so my sense is that this bill will definitely evolve there's no question I don't think there's a thinking person in Washington that believes as constructed it will continue I don't think there's anybody on either side of the aisle but a big part of it will be determined this summer but we as a country have placed our sole focus on access and not done the tough work that's necessary to focus on the quality that the gentleman just mentioned okay I I'm trying to shift back to American power in the 21st century gentlemen over here yes maybe I'll take 3 questions if you don't mind so that we get a sense of the questions on the floor one from here, one from here and one there I'd like to take on this point American exceptionalism isn't it the case that as a rhetorical device American exceptionalism is extremely counterproductive because A, it's not supported by the facts America is not at the top when it comes to broadband health care maternal health you name it and doesn't it also really undermine debate and experimentation that we need by suggesting that the only good answers come from within the borders of the United States I find that it's shutting off the American mind and therefore I feel that it's cutting off opportunities to improve our political debate gentleman over here in front there sorry I'm Rod Bextrem, C.L.V.I.Can Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers a global internet coordination body we have a hard time for seeing technology in a year or two or three and it's obviously important for the world and the relationship of the world and geopolitically my question for the panelists is how do you see internet and the integration of humans through the internet changing where we are in a hundred years and won't that have a huge effect on this equation then I'll come to you I am David Beckman from for the world in the U.S. I'm actually really upbeat about the U.S. political process the crisis both Bush and Obama and both parties I think you've done a pretty good job in the end I especially appreciate the fact that you haven't really whacked programs that help poor people including the international programs and the four of you have all played important roles in the governance of the last couple of years the brinksmanship last year really did us a lot of damage so I was interested in your comment Senator Corker about the coalition I'm interested in where you see that happening let me just come to the last question over there and I'm glad you posed the question to the specific senator or member of the panel that makes it much easier for the responses please Ahmed Paralyel from Turkey you all seem to have a consensus on the fact that American military power should remain the world's strongest military I'm wondering what is the criteria the American government should use to use that military power anywhere around the world okay so maybe can we start off with Senator Corker where you're responding to the specific question about the brinksmanship so first of all I want to the Simpson-Bowles commission I think provided a beginning framework for a lot of very good discussions and around the issue of tax reform I think we will see in our country regardless of the rhetoric that's occurring right now I think you're going to see a flattening an elimination of lots of what people would call loopholes we call them tax expenditures a lowering of marginal rates but an increase in the amount of revenue that's generated and I think there's a tremendous amount of consensus building around that both on the individual and corporate side I really believe that I believe there's in concept 60-70 votes in the senate for that type of thing now you know the details obviously they're tough on the on the Medicare piece I'm seeing proposals now where we say okay let's leave let's leave fee for service in place for people who worry about things like premium support but let's have an alternative track that basically looks a lot like Medicare Advantage I see some breakthroughs taking place there so I really do on the big picture if I didn't believe this I would not run again for the United States Senate but I believe over the next two or three years you're going to see real tax reform that generates economic growth you're going to see entitlement reform that saves these programs which I think is something you care deeply about the average American family today pays over their lifetime into Medicare $119,000 and the average American family when they begin receiving Medicare takes out $357,000 and that formula is not one that's sustainable so we've got to figure out a different way of making it work especially for people without means but I see it and I think we're very very close and I think regardless of who is president you're going to see major tax reform, major entitlement reform and as a result long-term deficit reduction I just believe it. Dr. Froman can you respond to the question on American exceptionalism then I'll come to you Senator Sure, I'd be happy to I think I fundamentally disagree with the premise of the question because I don't think American exceptionalism means we have all the answers and we're always right there's no debate and we don't respect the views of others I think in fact one of the parts of American exceptionalism is how self-critical we are and how open to debate we are internally about whether we're heading in the right direction or not and whether our values are lined up with our interests or not I'm struck that we went through frankly a difficult period earlier this decade where there were a lot of people around the world that didn't like what the US was doing in Iraq and didn't like the position of the US on world affairs but I am struck that whether it's the G8 or the G20 or in travels around Asia or engagement in Africa or engagement in the Middle East people want us there and they want our engagement and they value our values and that's what American exceptionalism is to me to go back to our moderator's opening point and it goes a little bit to the last question's point we are seen largely as benign as keepers of the system and we are constantly taking actions that we view not that they're not in our interest but are also in the interest of building a stronger, a fairer, a more just international system and not every country does that in the world and the US does whether it's Republican or Democratic administration and I think that's what has held us well in terms of providing influence over the long run Congressman Lowy, you want to respond to the internet question? Yes, I want to be very brief because I know time I grieve so much what Michael said. First of all I want to say Bread for the World reflects probably the very best of our non-governmental organizations and I want to thank you and I am proud that the US government does support these organizations this is a critical part of our outreach to the world to help lift people up. Secondly people want to respond to the Atlantic Council because many of us appreciate you and others who are always there to give us advice and support when we have to make difficult decisions not to respond to the gentlemen from Turkey one of the things that I am most proud of in this administration is the leadership of President Obama and the Secretary and the Vice President in operating not solely as a unilateral country we should be strong I am proud that we are strong but reaching out to the UN building coalitions and addressing the many challenges I would hope as I look forward in a peaceful way I just wanted to make the point that although we have said America must be a power the power I would hope is our power to move the community in peaceful ways to achieve goals through consensus I think Senator Chambliss is chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee why do you need the world's largest military well I think it is important that as the leader of the free world that we are able to respond militarily when we are called on I mean look it is not just the leader of the free world from a military standpoint the United States is in the position of because if there is an international crisis whether it is a health care crisis where the CDC is at the forefront whether it is a natural disaster where our national guard may be called and sent to some other country or whether it is the economic crisis that we are going through now or whether it is a military conflict or a military issue the United States is always the first country to look to and the reason is is because we always respond so we have to be in a position to respond from a military standpoint the the one thing we know about military conflicts is that very smart American military personnel have projected over the years where the next conflict will be and who our next adversary is going to be and we have been wrong 100 percent of the time so what we have to do and why it is important that we remain a powerful military is that we know we are going to be called on to respond somewhere but who would have imagined 10 years ago that we would be firing 50 pound Hellfire missiles as a part of a military conflict and we could do it in such a precise way as what we are doing today who could imagine that we would be in Afghanistan most Americans had not even heard of Afghanistan 15, 20 years ago so it is important that we remain diverse and it is important that we remain powerful militarily but Bob Corker made a very good point that we got a lot of friends around the world whether it is members of NATO or otherwise who have provided military assistance in both Iraq and Afghanistan and I think you are going to see more and more of that in the future because we can't afford to expend US taxpayer money being a policeman of the world it is going to be in concert with other countries and I think that is good I think that even though we provide the right kind of leadership, the right kind of technology the right kind of weapon systems and the right kind of manpower it will always in my opinion in the future be in concert with other nations Turkey has been a great ally by the way Next round of questions and if you are short and sharp we can take 2-3 questions before we go to the next round I saw a gentleman at the back that he left no more questions? I don't believe this one over here please over there over here then I have to think of some difficult questions my name is Kelle Louis-Petersen I am from Denmark for 10 years the countries of the world at least 153 of them have been negotiating the Doha round so looking at the 21st century from an American point of view the Doha round that and if so what will be the U.S. trade policy going forward good question over here my name is Rocheva Rocheva I am from Georgia, my question is the perception also when we are speaking about U.S. involvement in Europe is that perception is that it is a little bit declining and Senator Corker somehow mentioned a little bit dissatisfaction how some of the NATO allies contribute to the security so can you a little bit comment more on how U.S. sees this transatlantic partnership with Europe okay any more questions if not can I add a third question you know I'm sure you've all heard of this book by Farid Zakaria where he speaks about the post-American world you know emerging now what's your reaction to this thesis that we may be entering a post-American world as we talk about the future of American power so again who would like to start first Doha round maybe Michael you start I'll do trade policy unless anybody else would like to just tell us when you'll be completed that's all right so I think you're absolutely right there's been 10 years of negotiations in Doha and they have not reached a successful conclusion not before lack of effort not even for lack of political will but because I think the world has fundamentally changed over a decade and the China, India, Brazil and emerging economies that existed in 2000-2001 are quite different today so it's no longer appropriate and this really goes to the point I said about China living up to international norms and obligations it's no longer appropriate for us to provide unfettered access or new access to our market without other economies opening their markets as well we were not able to achieve that and we are still committed to the US and I think all the parties in Geneva to see what parts of the Doha round agenda which we're still committed to we can try and get done in various ways you know at the same time we've completed the three and with the help of bipartisan support in Congress have those ratified and those will be implemented we've launched the Trans-Pacific Partnership which is very important because it's goal is to set a new high standard for international trade agreements among first the countries that started this negotiation but eventually other countries as well who want to join and are committed to those international rules and norms and we're hopeful that those standards will eventually make their way into the multilateral trading system as well we're in deep dialogue with the European Union we've announced a high level panel to look at a whole range of ways of expanding trade and it could be everything from a little bit more regulatory cooperation to an FTA or something beyond an FTA and we're in that process of analysis now and we're focused in Geneva on seeing what can get done both multilaterally which is very important but also potentially plural laterally just very quickly on Doha also because I've been very much involved in that because of my former position as chairman of the AG committee obviously there are three segments to the Doha round you got the manufacturing sector you've got the services sector and the agricultural sector it was thought the perception was there that AG was the one that was holding this up but at the end of the day it was the services sector that really caused the last negotiations to fall apart I'm sure that those negotiations under USTR Ambassador Ron Kirk who's a terrific guy and very positively trade oriented are going to resume we're going to have a farm bill this year we have talked within the AG community that we got to make sure it's WTO compliant that answers the questions that the Doha around presented so hopefully we'll have at the end if not this year certainly within the next couple of years we'll have an end to the Doha round it'll be concluded positively and do you want to respond quickly to the question he asked about METO I think I was the first elected official in the country of Georgia in Sarkisvili's office after Russia you all had a little skirmish recently and my comments were meant and are about the fact that the relationship has got to be more robust than it is there is no question with the pressures that many of the European countries have had fiscally and maybe for other reasons NATO has become something different than I think originally envisioned and my point is is that that rebalancing and I think Senator Chambliss alluded to that too has got to change for there to really be a real robust relationship it's been a little bit not every country but generally speaking it's been two one sided oriented towards the United States of America for what it's worth I thought the way the president handled Libya first of all I never thought Libya was in our national interest I may get some ire from people here in the room I didn't see that as necessarily being in our national interest but if we were going to be there I thought the way it was handled by the administration was far better than I was taking the lead Congressman Louis you want to touch the question about the post-american world or I'd be delighted to respond to that I wish all the countries of the world strength economic progress progress in democracy human rights giving each of their people the opportunity to live a good complete life and I would hope I have not read the Fareed Zakaria book I apologize I would hope they can join us in being part of the international community working through difficulties at the UN and I am not ready to say no they cannot reach the level that we have achieved I wish all well and hope we can work together Dr. Froman do you want to add something to any of the questions I won't read a friend so I won't review his book but I would simply say to go back to really the purpose of his book I think we're in an American century I think we will be in an American century it requires us to exercise our influence more intelligently more creatively and some of the things that Dave was talking about in terms of food security or global health or other pandemics we need to be able to show the leadership in dealing with those issues as well as the traditional issues of American foreign policy but I have no doubt that we have very good days ahead of us Ladies and gentlemen we've had interesting one hour you must say that before this panel discussion began I was afraid that the polarization across in America was still over here I'm amazed by the amount of agreement there's agreement that America will always be number one there's agreement that they'll take care of the fiscal deficit there's agreement that they'll work with the rest of the world so it's amazing we've achieved a lot of agreement here in Davos so now all you have to do is now transport the spirit of Davos back to Washington DC and once that's done the world will be a better place so thank you very much Thank you