 and Australian Ambassador Kim Beasley here with us today. Thank you for joining us. Good to be with you, honey. We have a couple questions for you, and I hope you'll appreciate your answering them. And our online viewers have actually asked some of these questions. So I'm happy to have you here to answer some of them. What are the top issues that President Obama and Prime Minister Rudd will discuss during the President's visit to Australia, and what are the key outcomes that you hope to see from this trip? Well, some elements of their agenda will be multilateral. I think there'll be discussion there about Asian regional organization, particularly as the president will be coming from Indonesia, where that's a hot topic, too. So there'll be that. I think the rest of the issues that they discuss will probably encompass the modern bilateral agenda. There'll be material there on environmental matters, particularly global warming. There'll be issues related to scientific collaboration, educational collaboration. There'll be a reiteration of the fact that we have a very strong strategic relationship. And so the essential defense or military underpinning of the American alliance will also receive a degree of focus in their visit. But also, I guess, what Australians will hope is that the president and his family have a bit of fun at the same time, at least the kids. So with a combination of all those things, it'll be hopefully both real in terms of tangible outcomes, but also highly symbolic. There's nothing wrong with the symbolic in Australian-American relations. The symbols are enormously important to the support both sides, but particularly in Australia. The Australian community gives the relationship. Let me ask you about regional architecture. It's been one of the buzzwords in town. And Prime Minister Rudd earlier stated some views on his vision for regional architecture. And then there were some, lately, some comments attributed to him about APEC. Could you sort of tell us where Australia stands now on regional architecture and sort of set the record straight on what your views are? Well, I'm glad you gave me an opportunity. I'll take the second part of that question first, which is remarks attributed to the Prime Minister on APEC. He was immensely offended by the attribution of those views on APEC to him. They are not views that he has. And a proper reading of the story that was associated with them would reveal that very little seemed to be sourced to anything reliable in relation to the Prime Minister that reflected the views of the author, so to speak. That is the author of the article. The Prime Minister thinks APEC is a very important regional organisation, and he is very supportive of it. It's not, however, an organisation now focused on East Asia. And it is into East Asia that he wants to see regional arrangements complete with a proper focus on the plethora of issues from the economic, through to the social, through to the security, a forum provided that will allow consideration of that. And that is where he has advocated the creation of a new forum. He would be pleased, and the Australian governments already made this clear, with the initiatives emerging from ASEAN last month, which sought American and Russian engagement with the East Asian Summit. I think the Prime Minister would now think that these are the most appropriate direction to go in realising the next phase, if you like, of the initiative that he put forward. Let's turn to trade. Australia has been a real leader on trade. Maybe the Americans, unfortunately, less so. You hosted the last round of the Trade Transpacific Partnership, the TPP. What does the TPP mean to Australia? You've already got free trade agreements with many of the members in the FDA, including the United States. Why are you spending the time on this, and where do you see it headed? Well, I think, firstly, Australia was very happy with the outcome of that first conference of the TPP held in Melbourne, as sitting there defining the issues that need to be incorporated within the TPP. And I think there is a high level of hope that flesh will be put on those bones very quickly in terms of a high-quality, first-class trade agreement that picks up where individual FTAs and extracts from individual FTAs the very best of practice on all fronts and a good regional arrangement emerge from it that will subsequently be capable of being joined by a large number of Pacific powers, 0.1, 0.2. This has been particularly as a good outcome from APEC because it was out of the APEC business area. This sort of discussion emerged how to remove some of the, in a modern trade agenda, some of the impediments to business that goes just beyond tariffs on individual goods. So that's a very good thing. It is true that of the eight participants so far, we have three trade agreements with six of them. And, but I think the view is that ultimately this will be an arrangement for more than the eight. Also though, you have to look in Australia's, in the instance of Australian policy, not only to what we want for ourselves, but what we want for our allies and friends in the case of the United States. Australians would say this, that the prosperity and the influence of the United States is an Australian national interest. And while we are conscious of a pretty good position from our point of view and a lot of trading arrangements in Asia, we're also conscious of the fact that the Americans is not so good. And that the American engagement has been less than what we want it to be. So we also look upon this outside the trading framework, more strategically as something that might allow the United States to deal with gaps. It's good to have friends like that in the neighborhood. Thank you very much. And speaking of friends, China, China has come onto the world stage and the regional stage. How does Australia think about that, China's entrance? And you do a lot of business with China, of course. How are you thinking about regional defense and security cooperation with China? The Prime Minister made an interesting speech on Australian policy towards China. The other day when he announced the creation of a new center for China on the world and put $50 million into it, Australian National University. That's serious money and it's serious purpose. What he called for was a new signology. And that is one which plays proper respect in regard to the massive tradition that is there behind the Chinese state. A recitalization to be respected. And the substantial role that its economic power gives it an opportunity to play in world politics. So one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is what the Chinese need in this new signology is also a preparedness to analyze where there are points of disagreement and where we think the performance could be better. In particular, he called for having regard to a tradition in Chinese culture of the candid friend. Here's another expression for it. He speaks Mandarin, I don't. For me, it's unpronounceable. But I would call it the candid friend. And that is a person who is a genuine friend but also is prepared to call it when he thinks you're proceeding down a dangerous or unwise course. And so that is the, he wants to sort of develop a real sophistication in handling relationships with China. And he also, I think, would want to ensure that people are comfortable with the peaceful rise of China and that comfort will come from a sense of security. And therefore, there is an interest for us in for the powers in Southeast Asia, ultimately for the Chinese themselves and for the Americans to see a new balance emerge in regional affairs whereby the military distribution of power ensures everybody's security and underpins a regional arrangement with which everyone can live. I think by all accounts, those of us who watch President Obama work in Asia, we know that the president has a very warm feeling for your Prime Minister, Prime Minister Rudd. And one of the areas where they seem to have a lot of common interest is climate change. But recently, your Prime Minister has, seems like he's peddled back a little bit on the climate change, at least domestically. What do you suspect the two leaders will talk about in this area when they get together in June in Australia? And what motivated his shift, if he did indeed shift? Well, the Prime Minister said he pressed the reset button on carbon trading, emissions trading. Basically, he said he's confronted with a situation where the Labor Party had on the table a proposal, the Labor Party negotiated with the Liberal Party a proposal that the Liberal Party initially supported. And the view was that neither of those positions was going to get through the Senate. The election was X months away. And therefore, the situation where you'd had things repeatedly rejected, best to press the reset button and think about it again. And then he said, he is still committed to an emissions trading system. He is going to allow time to percolate back through the system and have a look at what the Chinese, Indians and Americans are doing and then having satisfied ourselves on that front, move Australia forward again in regard to an ETS. But that wasn't the only thing that he said. He also said, Australia remains committed to all the targets that were set up, remains committed to massive investments in technologies which will ensure that Australia can meet the targets that it's been talking about and to focus on those sort of, if you like, unilateral measures in relation to the dealing with the question of carbon emissions from an Australian point of view. So the Prime Minister hasn't walked away from that. And it will be one of the things that will be discussed between the President and the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister and the President get on well. The previous Prime Minister and his equivalent in the White House got on well too. Australian leaders and American leaders lately seem to be getting on very well. And I think there is a similarity in approach to a multiplicity of issues, not just the emissions trading issues between the President and the Prime Minister. And that has been good from the Australian point of view and underpins what is a very close relationship and keeps in place that tradition of good feeling between national leaders so marked for some time. Building on that good relationship and the tight ties, one of the agreements that's sort of on the table ahead of this visit is this US-Australia Defense Treaty that's sitting in the Senate, in the US Senate. What does the treaty mean to Australia and what does it mean to our relationship and our alliance? It means a great deal. We're buying half, we're buying an Air Force off you at the moment. We're halfway through the process. Having picked up the C-17s in Super Hornets, we're gonna take the joint strike fighter, we're gonna look to the United States in all probability to supply maritime surveillance aircraft and in-flight refueling aircraft and ultimately global hawk and just about anything you care to name, we're your third biggest customer of defense equipment and it shows interoperability between us. And the processes of approval at the moment are painful and potentially damaging. So we want it changed and that cooperation treaty when signed in the terms that was originally put forward would ensure that. However, the process of the wills of the gods in the legislative and administrative processes the United States grinds slowly and they're grinding slowly on this one. It's really needs to be completed and there's many people in the administration and Congress seized of that. So one hopes that the good will turn itself into a real product in the not too distant future. Here, here. You, as ambassador, if you could grant yourself three wishes that you could accomplish three goals while you're here in Washington, what would those three goals be? Okay, I've got many jobs. One of those jobs however, all those jobs get back to an essential point, other people to turn in policy to me. I am here to implement other people's policy. All ambassadors want to leave with the relationship on the right course in the United States even better informed about Australia. I find the United States and people in the United States immensely well informed about Australia or at least immensely well informed about the good regard in which Australia holds the United States and it's reciprocated. So you'd want to see that in continuation. I would like to see that these various treaties, agreements, undertakings, some of which will be reflected in what the President will be discussing with the Prime Minister, some of which you've already mentioned like this Defence Cooperation Treaty. I would want to see the institutional framework, the numbers of agreements really even more deeply embedded than they are now by the time I leave this place. And the final thing I think I'd want to see is the United States paying regard to the fact that, and it's a difficult thing for the United States to do when they've got the problem on their hands in the Middle East and Afghanistan which is immensely time consuming when you've got your soldiers in the field that's where your heart is. But shifted to the top of the agenda nevertheless for the United States the area that is their sunny uplands. The Asia Pacific region is sunny uplands for the United States where in the main, the odd incident around the Korean Peninsula excepted is just basically a realm of opportunity as opposed to hazard. And that this will be reflected in priority in American policy by the time I leave. Ambassador Kim Beasley, thank you very much for coming to CSIS, I really appreciate it. Thank you sir. Thanks very much.