 Good morning, everyone. I invite you to come up and fill in here Good morning. My name is Nancy Lindborg I'm the president here at the U.S. Institute of Peace and I'm delighted to welcome you for our Bipartisan Congressional Dialogue Series. This is a really important platform for members of Congress who are working on critical issues from Opposite sides of the aisle to advance their common interest in U.S. national security. And so we're particularly mindful on this very somber anniversary of 9-11 That throughout history our nation's steepest challenges have really required us to work in a bipartisan manner to advance our common interests So I thank our congressman for joining us this morning You know, I think all of us read the papers and and it seems like unity and Consensus are really hard to come by in politics these days but our experience is in fact that Many members of Congress maintain a really deep commitment to the kind of problem-solving that requires bipartisan action And so it's always encouraging to see that in action It was this bipartisan spirit that led to the founding of U.S. Institute of Peace in 1984 when Congress founded USIP with the mission of preventing and resolving violent conflict around the world and We do so as an independent nonpartisan National Institute and we link research with training with policy and Analysis and direct action in some of the toughest places around the world in support of those who are working to prevent and resolve violent conflict USIP has also been a long has a long history of serving as a platform for people with a lot of different views and coming from different Sectors to come together and think about what are the best solutions tackle some of the most challenging foreign policy issues And that's what brings us here today for a very timely and critical conversation About us and China relations. We've seen over the past decade the shift In China's actions in the world and in the US-China relationship Especially as China invests heavily in Africa and Asia We here at USIP lead a series of bipartisan study groups looking at Critical aspects of China's growing engagement of the world and I invite you to check a couple of them out on our website One is on China's role in North Korea Nuclear and peace negotiations and the other one is on China's role in Burma's internal conflicts We are really honored to have with us here this morning two congressional leaders Congressman Rick Larson from Washington and Congressman Darren LaHood from Illinois to share their experiences and their deep expertise on these issues Congressman Larson and congressman LaHood are co-chairs of the US-China working group a Bipartisan group that was formed in 2005 To enable members of Congress To be more informed about US-China relations. They travel frequently to China including most recently last March To engage with a variety of leaders in China on elements critical to the US-China relationship Congressman Larson represents Washington's second district which includes San Juan and island counties As well as other communities in northeast Washington and congressman LaHood represents Illinois's 18th district Which includes the western parts of Illinois and the greater Peoria area? Each of them brings insights that are formed by deep experience They know First hand about the China US relations and broader areas of International affairs and they've served their constituents in US national security with vision with commitment and extraordinary leadership Congressman Larson and congressman Lohood. Thank you so much for joining us In today's very divisive times your commitment to working on these issues together is really heartening and It stands as a I think a Symbol of how to make things work to Tomorrow's foreign policy leaders and we have quite a few of them in the audience with us today So I want to just acknowledge that it's a real pleasure to have students from the University of Washington Bothel Joining us here to this morning And we also have a distinguished group of graduate students from Stanford Center for International security and cooperation here with us today So we look forward to your all's question and for those following this event online Especially those who are waking up early in Illinois and Washington I invite you to join the conversation on Twitter at US IP using the hashtag Bipartisan US IP and so with that please join me in welcoming our two guests and Each of them will begin our conversation today with opening remarks starting with congressman Larson Thank You Nancy and appreciate it and who's here from UW Bothel. Yeah Go dogs. All right. Good to see all of you here and As well I understand some Stanford folks are here too So the Paxwells represented wealth here today So I want to thank the US Institute of Peace for inviting Darren and me to speak and In someone in the green room pointed out the bipartisan nature of the US China working group Which they said is why Darren and I must have Coordinated our our suits this morning. I'll be sure we are both wearing gray But That's just one way we show our bipartisanship in Congress So for those who again, I don't know me. I'm congressman Rick Larson. I represent Washington second district So think of north of Seattle, but none of Seattle on the map if you want to think of it that way That's how I think of it as well I'm pleased to be here with my friend Darren LaHood from Illinois and talk about our work on Congress It's noted the US China working group started in 2005 and Senator Senator and then former representative Mark Kirk And I created the working group then because there was a Durth a lack of nuanced conversation about the Relationships that exists between the US and China and that's I guess one theme for everybody So there's not one relationship that we have with China. There are many different kinds of relationships depending upon the issue That the United States has with China and so felt there was a need on Capitol Hill to have a forum to talk about About the various issues that the US and China have together It was a it's a working group to bring information to members of Congress and staff and provide a forum for discussion and dialogue We were there in March It was my personally my 11th trip to China and one thing I like to say about Traveling to China as a member of Congress is the one thing that you learn when you go to China is that you need to go back to China It's not enough to go once And we try to as well get around Different areas of the of the country as well while we're there But it doesn't just matter to us in this room. It just doesn't matter to Darren and me it matters to our constituents in Washington State 40% of all jobs There are directly tied to trade In my county of Snohomish County Which our friends and Bothel know really well 60% of jobs are directly tied to trade That's largely because of the presence the presence of the Largest building in the world by volume at the Boeing factory in Everett, Washington so 60% of all jobs directly tied to trade so trade with all with all countries, but certainly China China trades important and As a result a lot of my focus has been on on trade and I think you'll hear some of that from Darren as well And and we're trying to get Some pretty clear goals established for trade with China right now and and these are the issues that we brought up in March And we showed a bipartisan approach to this is I think an important point in March while we were there We focused on trade there were two Democrats and four Republicans who went on this trip and we focused on talking about The consensus that exists in Congress on what those issues are that we have in the United States With China's trade and economic policies in order to buttress the administration's efforts to try to get a resolution to the current trade war One increased market access for use competitors ending forced tech transfers stronger intellectual property protections eliminating trade barriers and then as well Dealing with the the force joint venture issue There is a bipartisan report by partisan support for these this trade agenda Although there are differences in how to approach that but we did not get into that discussion with the Chinese That's a discussion that we have to have in the United States about approaches But there is in fact this consensus on what the problems are with with trade I would note though, but because of this trade war I wouldn't I would argue it's not really working for us right now Since the trade war began think about this in early March of last year Before the first tariffs really went into place the average tariff on goods according to Peterson Institute study Sorry, USIP citing other think tanks current at Peterson Institute study the average tariff of a non Chinese good Going into China was about 8% didn't matter. What was coming from is about 8% Now the average tariff of a US good going to China If the next round of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs going to place in December will be about 23 to 24 percent of a US good a non US good going into China will be about 6.7 percent tariff So that doesn't seem to be working for us at least according to the Peterson Institute numbers, so I Always argue that we need a new and different strategy and this is my personal views on this I'm not gonna make anyone own them But what we agree will agree so I put out I put out a white paper Provides a pretty comprehensive view of how we ought to change our strategies towards towards China that would I Think remove it from the current moniker of a strategic competitor But still recognize there are areas where we do compete directly The United States and China do compete directly with China, but there are Areas where the US of China need to cooperate as well, and I think we're in this world right now where Where we don't know if we're if we're cooperative competitors or a competitive cooperators Really, that's that's my view of it. I would note in in conclusion And when we get to the Q&A we can get more detail about where those issues where we cooperate and compete that the I would Know in conclusion that from a congressional perspective. I Again, I'll speak for myself on this Might be in a minority in Congress think in 2005 I might have been the majority in Congress in terms of engagement, but the the ground has shifted in Congress If you want to split up members of Congress in the three groups on China There's there are economic hawks those who look at the trade neck on policies and are frustrated with them National security hawks those look at China's a national security competitor and human rights hawks those will look at China's human terrible human rights record, especially look at what they're doing in Xinjiang with the Uighurs and Those hawks flew separately for the longest time. So long as it flew separately. There was not a broad-based consensus In Congress to confront China those three groups flocks of hawks have come together They have found each other and that has shifted and this is my analysis that shifted the the Foundation in Congress It is a bipartisan foundation. I would note but it's shifted foundation in Congress to take a more competitive and more Confrontational approach than we've had in the past not competition all the time But certainly more so than have in the past and that's I think the current state of Current state of play in Congress and then we'll have a chance to flush that out maybe through Q&A But do want to thank you s IP for inviting us here today. I appreciate it You might have noticed Rick and I are also members of the Tall Caucus, so let me Thank the US Institute for peace for putting on this seminar here today and thank all of you for coming out today for your interest in the subject of China and Look forward to your questions and dialogue and conversation I think it's important that we have forums like this to engage on the important issues And there are plenty of them as Rick just talked about but I'm honored to serve with Rick as the co-chair of the US China Working Group Little bit about the district that I represent Central West Central, Illinois. My hometown is Peoria And my district I border Iowa and Missouri on my western boundary. I have the Mississippi River That is my my western portion of my district and My district's a heavy agriculture district So of the 435 congressional districts ours is the eighth largest in terms of corn and soybean production So we got some of the most fertile farmland in the entire world in our district Illinois has led the nation for the last five years in soybean production 25% of our soybeans every year go to China Much of that is for not for human consumption that goes to protein to feed animals But it's a it's a market that my district is heavily relying on for for trade also, we Little-known fact we produce 98% of the pumpkins in the world come from my district The growing climate for pumpkins a hundred miles north of Peoria and a hundred miles south of Peoria is perfect. So So anybody wants to come for some pumpkin pie. We we'd love to entertain you in central, Illinois and Also love to tell people a little bit the district that I represent is the Abraham Lincoln congressional district So Lincoln served one term in Congress 1847 to 1849 and he represented nine counties that one term I represent all nine of those and he's buried in my district in Oak Ridge Cemetery And so proud to represent the Lincoln district I have a colleague to the south of me congressman Rodney Davis and he has the Lincoln home in his district So we get in this argument about who represents, but I have the body so I take credit for Representing the Abraham Lincoln district, but but proud of the the heritage and history ever Dirkson famous senator served in this district Ronald Reagan was our only president born in Illinois. He was born in Tampa Co, Illinois Which is about 30 minutes from where I live in Peoria So anyway a lot of a lot of heritage in the in the district that I represent I've been in Congress for about four years and Representing the district that I do And Some people might ask well, what's your interest in China? Well, I just explained a little bit to that right the having a heavy agriculture district I also caterpillar which makes a lot of earth-moving products We I have the largest concentration of caterpillar workers anywhere in the world in my district We make a lot of mining equipment D10 tractors excavators and of course Caterpillar has a big footprint in China. They have 29 manufacturing plants in China They have four R&D facilities and so trade and particularly the relationship with China is important for my district We'll also tell you I represent Pekin, Illinois And you may want to know what that Pekin got its name because if you go through the middle of the earth You'll be in Peking China is the origin of that So I know you guys are getting a lot of faxie that weren't aware of before but Anyway, but I'm I'm really Proud and honored to be part of the working group And there is a whole plethora of issues that are going on right now But it's been good for me parochial e for my district to be engaged on these issues and I've had the opportunity with Rick to do two bipartisan trips to China The most recent one that we did in March Was obviously right before the the trade war really went to another level, but we were in Hong Kong I spent a couple days there, which was very interesting We were in Hongzhou got to visit Alibaba and a number of other companies and then we spent a lot of time in in Beijing But it was a very worthwhile trip and I would just say this, you know when we think about the trade war I really it is a trade war. I really think about it as an economic war And and when you look at the economics of you know, who's gonna lead the world when it comes to technology Which is a big part of this economic war we're in and then lots of other ancillary issues that are out there whether it's North Korea, whether it's Hong Kong, whether it's Taiwan Whether it's the human rights issues Huawei is a big issue the one belt one road. Obviously, there are many ancillary issues that as the working group Rick and I work with our colleagues to educate them to get feedback and and to try to You know navigate many of these Issues that we deal with in China From the standpoint is you know, we have the two largest economies in the world and we are intertwined in so many ways so from a economic standpoint and from a National security standpoint trying to figure out how you navigate those issues has really been worthwhile for me as We from a public policy standpoint try to figure out the right approach moving forward in the Congress and Again, I've enjoyed that opportunity to do that and we'll continue to do that I would just comment just for a second, you know, obviously the approach that this Administration has taken when it comes to China is much different in some respects than what we've had in previous administrations You know Listen, I'm not a fan of tariffs tariffs or taxes their taxes on consumers their taxes on businesses But this administration has taken approach with tariffs that particularly with China. That's much different, right? And I think if you if you listen to them what they'll tell you is Lots of administrations and presidents over the last 25 years have dealt with China But they've never got that systemic change that we need and and some of the origins of this go back to when we brought China into the World Trade Organization 2001 2002 the argument at the time was bring them in They're going to abide by all the same economic standards that every other industrialized country in the world does or will do that Clearly that hasn't happened on the technology front the intellectual property front And so this administration has taken a hard line on that specifically on how you get that change that we have not been able to get in The past and so that's why we're in this trade war that we're in right now And does that affect my farmers sure does it affect lots of industries in this country? Yes So how does this all end? I mean that's I think we're in kind of Unknown territory right now on on how this trade war this economic war Ends obviously there's a lot of argument that the Chinese are going to wait us out until after the election But but drilling down a little bit on the on the tariff issue, you know what we're trying to get is if you look at the Cases we've had in the World Trade Organization against China We've had lots of them. I think 18 19 over the last 15 or 16 years we've won every one of them But it takes you know somewhat two to four years to win those right so it's a very frustrating process And by the way, we're not the only ones that have these issues with China The Europeans do the Japanese do the Koreans do so people are watching very closely in some respects Do I wish we would partner with some of our allies and go after China? Yeah? I think that would have been a better approach, but clearly that's not what this administration has has done So it's a bit of a risky strategy, but in some respects It may help get the the ultimate resolution that we need so anyway Lots of issues to talk about today happy to be here, and I'll just mention one other thing Rick and I work a lot on China, but we're also the co-chairs of the soccer caucus, so we enjoy Soccer together too along with China. So anyway, thank you all Thank you both for such knowledgeable and thoughtful Presentations I will add one fact to yours and that is when the US IP legislation was signed by 19 in 1984 in the White House it was President Reagan who signed it So I'm sure your district is is was cheering with excitement And I'm also glad that we're seated because I am not a member of the tall caucus But you know given that you both talked a lot about your districts as agricultural so manufacturing the potential impact of The the whole trade situation with China. I want to dive right in and ask Do you we're seeing that the trade talks are meant to resume in October? Do you see a pathway forward and and a future in which this will be resolved in a way that? Has lesser impact or greater success for the United States and for a trade partnership I'm I'm personally pessimistic. I think this is the continual story of Charlie Brown and Lucy van Pelt where Lucy is holding the football and Charlie Brown says this this time I'm going to be able to kick it and then right at that time Lucy picks it up and Charlie Brown goes flying and lands on his back And that that is what we've seen Every time there's an announcement that Chinese And a locker is coming to the US or US and lockers are going to China that hasn't changed I see nothing at all that indicates anything. It's any different. It is important that we keep talking That's a positive, but I don't I haven't seen anything that has Changed to Ensure that something would be different. I think that the problem that the Two countries are facing is this again. This would be my assessment is that The US wants an enforcement mechanism, which is a great thing but only wants it for China and China wants an enforcement mechanism that applies to both countries and we heard this in March as one of the Wasn't necessarily a sticking point. They didn't say the sticking point But did the Chinese leaders did say that basically enforcement, you know has to be for everybody not just on China And unless there's an acceptance again, this I'm only reflecting here Unless there's an acceptance of that point, it's gonna be very hard to get a Agreement and I would say it'll be a use word resolution This will not be a trade deal. I won't not be a trade agreement It'll be a resolution of the problem that we have together and that's about as much as I'm expecting Are you pessimistic about the potential at all or just about the current strategy? I have my own issues at the current strategy and I've got a long list of things We we ought to be different a lot of you differently But it's it's it's a list that I'm basically borrowed from other folks too So I'm not alone in that but but I think that's not right now As important as trying to find a way out of the damage the tariffs are doing to the businesses to Consumers to moms and dads who according to Forbes at the for a Forbes studies They were gonna be paying a thousand dollars more out of pocket Directly due to tariffs that American consumers are trying to find a way out of that I think we got to try to tackle that problem Couple points I As I mentioned in my comments, I think China Probably at this point waits us out until after the election But there's a couple factors to think about if you back up if you go back to earlier this year January and I think ambassador Lighthizer who I have immense respect for I think he's an extremely capable negotiator He's been around a long time. He understands China. I think we were 90% there with working on finding a resolution Of course the last 10% is always the most difficult part and I mentioned You know that enforcement mechanism that Rick talked about or what I call the hammer over their head that we've never had In the past putting something in there for instance, they've talked about a snap-deck tariff provision Which would be once you sign the agreement in four months from now when China violates it that instead of going through the world trade Organization we would have be able to snap a tariff on so that's Controversial never been done before they don't want to agree to that so So what could change in terms of these negotiations? I mean listen I think this administration one thing they follow and listen to is the stock market, right? I think if you continue to see the economy slide if that's in fact, and I'm not I don't think that's happening now But there's some signs, but if trade directly affects the economy. I think You know giving up on the snap-back tariff provision trying to get an agreement But remember I think we could have a year ago done a purchase agreement, right? Which lots of other administrations have done buy more goods buy more products buy more agriculture But not have that systemic change. So again, I think The likelihood is is probably not good that we get a resolution, but if there is you know There's a triggering mechanism Something in the economy. I think that could force the administration to try to cut a deal And I think this president would be willing to do that I'm gonna make another note about that as Darren mentioned the ambassador light hyzer And as a Democrat, I can think I can accurately say that There's a lot of respect for ambassador light hyzer both in the USMCA negotiations and and trying to work out this These trade problems with China. He has he has respect from both sides the aisle and Again, I want to be supportive. We all want to be supportive. It's just at some point There is a discussion about is this particular approach working or not Right, which is a matter of strategy as opposed to politics per se. I You were present at the creation of the caucus, right? Yeah, sure. Yeah In the in 14 years the ground has shifted substantially in terms of the nature of the relationship how people view the relationship You characterize some of that in your opening comments But you characterized also a more nuanced view of the relationship it how broadly shared is that and what do you see as The most successful way forward for approaching a very complicated very important relationship Yeah, I think that so going back say to 2016 before the election and talking with some Democratic foreign policy people who were involved with The Clinton campaign and who were in the Obama administration there was going to be a tougher tack taken on on China relations even by the new Democratic administration and Probably not this particular approach The Trump administration is taking but but tougher in some respects on some on some issues mainly mainly national security Issues, but the so the the ground is shifting anyway And I think that with the current administration is given I think permission if you will for members to You know Say what they really think about China if you will But I also think that ends up not being a very nuanced approach because again We're not going away. China is not going away We have to think a little bit more long-term and where we want to be in relationship to China on any number of issues and we might be giving up some of those opportunities as a result of a Confrontation first approach on some things, but it's an interesting Dynamic because the president himself says that he wants to be personal friends with President Xi Well at the same time the administration has a much more confrontational approach with China and those two don't really match up all the time but I think that The maybe the most recent best way to describe it and I'll conclude on this point with your question And talking with the chairman of the National People's Congress is one of our last meetings in their in their system that person's about number three in their in their hierarchy in the Chinese Communist Party and And I and I said look yeah our relationship over time has been one of a roller coaster All right a roller coaster goes up and it goes down it goes up and it goes down I said frankly right now. I think we're really in a down We're in a trough in this relationship and his response was that he Understands that so long as a roller coaster doesn't go flying off the tracks And it will be you know, we'll be okay So let's just keep the thing on the track and work from there That's a very wise metaphor And you Did you join upon your election to the house? I did not it took a little while there was Obviously I mentioned the interest in my district with China and the connection Mark Kirk who's a who's a friend and served in the house and he's from Illinois He had encouraged me to get involved. And so that's When I did I got engaged on it and and again as I mentioned I've learned an awful lot in the space and it's been very very rewarding being part of the working group and so It's it's I think serves a very very good purpose in Congress I would just mention you talked about how things have changed over time on the economic side of things you know when we look at What's different now in the relationship economically and we in this in this economic war we're in I think Particularly on the in on the technology side and intellectual property side We are in a different era now and I would just you know, we lead the world in technology, right? You know, whether it's Amazon or Apple or Google or Microsoft or Facebook we lead the world and China wants to beat us in that and It I mentioned earlier these two sets of standards, but it is really really palpable now I think in the tech space on where we're at today, you know We we visited I mentioned Alibaba when we were in China But you look at a company like Alibaba that comes to the United States They're treated like any other company, right? They engage in the free market system We don't ask well how you built your cloud services or what your trade marks are your patents But when technology companies go to China and this is really the core of what's different now I mean they they can't operate right because they want to know how you built your cloud services You know what went into that you have to partner with a Chinese company and they have to own 51% You know this is stuff that's unheard of anywhere else in the world And that has really caused a lot of pain and a frustration and does China want to beat us in technology? Of course they do do they want to replicate or or in some ways? steal many of our Technologies absolutely and that has caused a lot of friction in this relationship and balancing those needs. I think they cross you know political boundaries and Ideological boundaries in that space and and I think that has been you know again this relationship with China You know 40 years as today talks about has been ups and down But I think right now that that is a real core principle of what is causing a lot of the friction It's it's often hard to keep the nuances of a big complicated Relationship in focus. Do you think that within the caucus? We're able to do that. I Think we have our best shot. I Think if you've heard nothing today understand members of Congress represent the districts they come from and And and how that relates to your question is that We are all individually going to think about what is happening and you know, what's happening in my district? How does it how should it impact my outlook? Because it will impact how I can best represent the people that Live in my district and that's going to be different for members and for every member Mark Kirk had a great had a great Saying about the U.S. China working group. He said that we'll take anybody All right, we'll take panda huggers We'll take dragon slayers and we'll take panda slayers Hit his never popular never popular but his point was we were ecumenical Or agnostic when it came to what a member of Congress brought to the table because if this was a forum about education and Opening up minds and learning from each other It wasn't about we're doing it this way and if you don't like that then you can't participate and there have been some groups in the ad hoc groups in Congress on China that have taken more of that approach We're doing it this way or or not a different way. I Would just add, you know in many ways Our policy is like other things in our government is dictated by our participatory democracy What what members are feeling whether it's what they're hearing back home or how this relationship of China is affecting them drives policy, right? And I think that reflects our district We got to go back and get elected every two years and you got to go back and talk to folks and I think that political pressure Which of course China doesn't have right they can play the long game a lot better from us They don't have an upcoming election or any elections. They're going to have constituencies that You know press on them the way that ours do and so You know there in some ways They again have the have the long-term strategy, but in our democracy I think that helps drive a lot of how we react and what we do and I think you've seen that With the the Trump administration. I mean there is there is really on trade in general and on China You have you you have two different views within the White House. You have the the real China hawks there and you have the more, you know trade-oriented folks in there in there. I mean These are battles and ideological Discussions that go on often and I would say the president has sided with the the hawks on most of this Instead of with the the more free traders in there and I think that's been reflective about where we're at right now So one final question. I want to open it up and get questions from all of you You alluded to this in your opening comments Congressman Larson We are seeing the rising concerns about the rights of the Uighurs everyone's watched The marches that have gone on in Hong Kong How do we factor in those human rights concerns against a variety of priorities in the relationship? Well, I think to start broadly we need to decide If in fact the tradition of democracy's promotion and human rights promotion is part of a foreign policy or not And if it is then it is an issue for us And that doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's in China or if it's Saudi Arabia or anywhere else It's either part of our foreign policy tradition that we're going to put resources and rhetoric behind Or we're not going to do that and I Happen to think that it is and it is an issue that this particular issue of the Chinese government treatment of the Uighurs is an issue that we brought up and meeting with the Chinese leaders We got you know, I The response we got is the response that you can all you can all read about It's the same one the talking points are really clear from the Chinese. These are Re-education camps. They're just trying to help people with workforce development and I didn't realize a million people needed help with workforce development Re-education, but apparently that's according to Chinese. That's the case. I don't believe them I don't believe the Chinese leadership on that and in Hong Kong. We met with young people involved with the umbrella movement as well and young people that you're reading about in the paper today and Again our response ought to be Consistent with what our response has been and I will say this that Chinese leadership doesn't like that We say that but that's you don't have a relationship between countries because The other country gets to dictate what your view should be You you get to dictate what your views are and communicate them and find ways to promote them so that's the principle that I think we need to continue to stand behind and and I will say in going to Hong Kong We had quite a bit of negotiation about meeting with some of these folks and our staffs did a masterful job of making sure that we stayed on the straight and narrow to and talking with the Chinese leaders to to emphasize the fact that this was an important part of our trip and a necessary part of our trip I would just you know again I go back to the issues that You know in the last administration there was a real emphasis on the South China Sea More on Taiwan and on human rights I think and in some ways those have kind of evaporated in terms of you know the economic issues Here that have kind of come front and center. So I mean again, it's reflection of our elections have changes, right? They have policy differences and and you know you see that from administration to administration on this, but There is not and in ricks, correct I mean much of our foreign policy has been premised on human rights all around the world and that has gone from administration to administration But putting a priority on that. I don't think Has been part of this administration on that and I think that's reflective with with the Uighurs, and I would also say with the Uighurs too, you know I It's kind of amazing me that these other Muslim countries in the world whether it's Saudi Arabia others don't seem to have any sympathy for the Uighurs, right? And that may be because of their relationship with China, but you know, it's it's it's a bit disappointing not to see the consistency that we've seen in the past Yeah I'd like to open it up I'm gonna take three questions in a row and Take those and you all can answer both of them. So I actually I want to start with One of the University of Washington students any questions from that group. Yeah, are you from? Yeah, go for it. Hi Prove it microphone. Where do you live prove it? Where do you live ever Washington? All right my district? And my two children like your two children are also fifth generation for our county Oh, yeah, there are also fellow Huskies. Okay. I'm a student as well. I'm currently researching For the protection of the human rights of the protesters in Hong Kong I'm interested to know your position on the bill that's been reintroduced the bipartisan bill for the human rights or the Hong Kong protesters 3289 I Don't have the details on 3289 Okay, don't I would say don't give me bill numbers tell me what the bill does I Got a lot of I got a lot of stuff my head if you just kind of absolutely it's to annually review the special Sanction or the special Authority that's been given to them annually so that we can be monitoring them So thanks. Yeah, so we have a mechanism currently in US law to evaluate human rights progress and maintenance and democracy progress and maintenance in in Hong Kong and There's an effort to through this bill. I believe I believe this is the particular bill this effort to actually More deliberately connect US economic and trade policy to Hong Kong with that progress that is we treat Hong Kong like it's it is it is You know, it's a special administrative region of China, but it is also Generally a free market currency exchange the important important stock exchange in in in the region and The question is whether we should Treat Hong Kong More aggressively negatively because of lack of progress in human rights and this is where the This conflict of human rights and the economy coming to play I've currently Current my current thinking on 3289 is that we ought not to do it that we ought to Be better about our position about our rhetoric about how we View the protests in Hong Kong because right now the messages community United States. They're not they're not negative, but they're not supportive We're treat right now. We're trading off the relationship with Beijing For the Hong Kong protesters and if we want to I think we need to first start to say that the Hong Kong Administration needs to be responsive to the concerns that the protesters are bringing up not gonna say they should accept all the demands That's not my job to say but I Point back withdrawing the extradition bill when executive lamb did Was a good thing and it was way too late Because the demands have built up behind that other demands have built other legitimate demands have built up behind that And we need to be saying that and we're really not pushing that point at all. So I think before we get to legislation Like 3289 we have we it's not we don't have a mechanism in place in the law We do have a mechanism of review in place in the law But we're also not backing that up as I said with resources and with rhetoric and social theoretic What is coming out of our State Department or out of mainly administration? And I promise to take a question then from the Stanford group is there yeah Is there a Stanford student from Illinois? Seriously, okay, you're next So all the members of Congress all local all the time My name is Antigone Xenopoulos and I'm from the CSAC cohort and I'm planning to write my thesis about why the US allowed Itself to become economically dependent on China for some critical dual-use industries My question is earlier on in your or in your opening remarks Representative Larson you mentioned that there are sort of three camps of concern regarding China Economic national security and human rights And I was wondering if either of you could a Characterize some of the shared concerns between the economic hawks and the national security hawks and b try to explain perhaps Why it took so long for those two camps to come together and to realize that their concerns vis-a-vis China were interlinked Okay, before you answer that we're gonna take the Illinois point of view as well I'm Jonah Glick-Onterman. I'm from the 9th district. Okay, big Illinois family, and it's a great state and I'm wondering whether you think there's any chance for any arms control with China whether it's in hypersonics or new missiles nuclear and What would your strategy be to get them involved in some kind of effort? Okay two small little questions Oh, yeah Well, I'll take Rick serves on arms services. I may have him take the defense question But on your question as it related to the three different groups, you know, I mean Politically, you know All of these groups have kind of come together in an adversarial approach towards China And I think they're willing to put aside some of our political differences. Maybe party differences Because they they know the broader I think approach towards China. I think You know to achieve what we want to do. I mean listen China hasn't had a very good record on human rights We haven't got them to change that and so, you know, whether again It's conservative Republicans that believe in human rights and religious freedoms, you know, they're willing to partner with the You know the more traditional human rights activists and I think you've seen that in the Senate and in the house Again to achieve the broader goals of bringing change to China on that putting the pressure on there And again, I think that crosses lines when you talk about the economic hawks and the national security hawks with you know We've been dealing with China. It's a it's a communist country and I think the other thing that's been impactful I mentioned the one Belt One Road, but you look at China's influence, whether it's in Africa Whether it's in Pakistan whether it's in Myanmar. We haven't talked a lot about that But but they're pushing out around the world, right to be a alternative to us and what we've done I think has affected a lot of members of Congress too. There is a I think there's some security fears on that and Then pushing their agenda now. I tend to think I mean a lot of people have been scared and worried about that approach We had a conversation earlier on this, you know If you look at what China's done in particularly in Africa, you know much of the fear that was there that oh They're gonna establish places there and and they're gonna take over and have natural resources Much of the work they've done there has been in some ways inferior. It hasn't been what it was supposed to be There was a lot of talk about, you know, African Laborers being involved with it, but they brought in a lot of Chinese labor And so I don't know that their original goal and their intent has come to fruition on that But clearly in Southeast Asia There they are but they have been very very aggressive on this and we have not and so You know having an approach whether it's through Congress or the administration that focuses on that I think is important But I think that's affected those three groups coming together is their continued outward push in the region and how that affects that So I'll just let me I think in two sentences I can give you My view on this because Darren's really covered a lot of it. I just would I ask you we have a white paper and anyone can have it While you're looking at Everything China is doing Look at the things that the United States is not doing Okay, we're playing defense and We're playing very little offense And I don't mean offense against China. I'm like, what are you doing to take care of ourselves? Spending all this time stopping China while not doing enough to promote the United States Or invest in certain. Yeah, right. Yeah, so it's it's all in the white paper. It's small font very long I can't read it anymore. My eyes are bad I'll be I'll be brief Are there is the cooperate on on the defense side or security side of things? Well, where does it go? I think there's three areas where there's I Don't think I don't think we're gonna get a arms control agreement with China on hypersonics Let me say that but on cyber Attacks on artificial intelligence and on space are three areas that might offer some level of Time to worth that to make it worth exploring All right, how is artificial intelligence going to be used in national security and are there rules of the road that ought to be applied on how we use AI and And in the military and warfare in decision-making On cyber security and cyber attacks They're In the last years of the Obama administration Congress passed and the administration implemented a Law on espionage on industrial espionage cyber attacks and it did actually decrease the number of attacks For espionage purposes, but it required continual attention and implement for implementation And that hasn't occurred in this administration. So There was a response to China that we wanted to see there was a decrease So I think we need to look at cyber security and cyber attacks from a military perspective or defense perspective Understanding what some of the rules the road are and whether or not we're willing to Word is a tribute attacks. So if we're attacked and in the cyber realm if we're willing to attribute those attacks I just say well, we know who did it that has a deterrence effect itself and Having that discussion with China and Russia and other countries that you read about It'd be valuable and in space space is a space is the final frontier space is area that is probably the quintessentially most important part of our economy China's economy Russia's economy everyone's economy how we use space and so having rules the road and space is important to They're just areas to explore there may be different mechanisms if you want to choose but those are the areas Great, we're gonna take two final questions. Please be short and then we'll need to wrap. So I'm gonna go here and We are you go ahead just start talking she's deciding and there hi My name is Elena Crespo, and I'm here with the Stanford group as well What either of you mind speaking to how the success of our domestic policy impacts our relationship with China particularly around educational exchange Okay, and then back in the middle of the back row raise your hand again. Oh No, no, no right in front of you. Yeah Yeah Thank you My question is from a human rights neighbor. I'm Philip Redlich From a human's rights perspective would it ever be in the United States interest to consider Gently helping or guiding the Belt and Road initiative instead of opposing or dismissing it Okay, I would just on on your question about our about America's domestic Policy and about education, you know, you look at the numbers of Chinese that come to American educational institutions University of Illinois our flagship University and in the state of Illinois is I think we're up to 14% Of our students are from from China. It's one of the highest percentages anywhere in the country And and you know, it's one of the biggest demands of our university is Chinese students that come here and and you know Many of them are so proud to be here and engage in our educational system and want to stay and I think that's Very powerful for the relationship and the more exchanges we can have with young people Culturally educationally, I think is is really fundamental to the relationship to learn I wish we reciprocated that more in China I mean we're starting to do that a little bit and there's some organizations that are very involved with that and good people that Want to do that, but but the more understanding on our side. I think Can be very very helpful, but the more people can see our country and and In engage in what our country offers and see how our democracy and freedoms and all those things work Doesn't mean we don't have challenges and problems and difficulties, but I think when you have that I think there's tremendous benefit that comes out of that long term and again I'm a strong proponent of promoting those and I think that helps us long term when we get to these public policy issues that You know can be thorny and difficult long term But that that fundamental understanding of the two countries is vitally important You know one thing that Rick and I have done on a number of our trips We meet with the Schwarzman Scholars over there, which is a tremendous program It's small, but it's it's kind of like the Rhodes Scholarship of China, right? Top quality young men and women that go over to China and spend a year or two years there and engage in you look at the Ramifications of that positive I think can be really really helpful. And so the more we can do that will help us long term Yeah, on the BRI or initiative here's an area where we're playing a lot of defense and we're not playing a lot of offense we passed the Build Act last year which was Expanded the created a new international finance development corporation expanded. Oh pick Capabilities, but we're still sort of taking a rifle shot to this issue instead of playing big and In the larger development space giving example I was in Rwanda in August and we met with President Kagame There and I won't mention the country he had visited but he had visited a European country And of course he was there to talk about investment in Rwanda With the with the Chamber of Commerce group in this particular country well Then he met with the leader of that particular country who is literally on That leader's way to China the next day Right and that leader of that European country was lecturing Kagame about China's investment in Rwanda And he pointed out to this leader is a little why you why are you lecturing me about Chinese investment in Rwanda? When you're headed to China tomorrow to talk to give the Chinese to invest in your country right the point is point being is like you know we're Don't lecture us, you know this is just one data point right don't lecture us about Chinese investment in in Africa When you're going to China yourself to get to deal with investment in your own country so we get to play in this too and I think his broader point is they're they're kind of agnostic and And I don't know if every country Involved BRI has received that investment is agnostic. I'm not gonna make that point But there are some that are so what can we offer? What can the US offer both in competitions? So they give the choice choice presumably gets you a better price As well as a direct us foreign policy initiative to say the US is here, too And that's I mean by going on offense and not just playing defense all the time. Just drive me crazy Congressman Larson congressman lehood. Thank you for taking time out of very busy schedules to join us for this conversation We appreciate it. I think this has been a terrific very thoughtful conversation Thank you for your bipartisan spirit to work on tough issues. Please join me in thanking our Congressman I will meet the UW Bothell folks outside for a picture if you want