 Good afternoon. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it is my distinct pleasure to welcome all of you to today's session on ASEAN. Today in partnership with Indonesian media, Brita Satu, this is a panel on ASEAN on the topic of manufacturing identity. Are, you know, is ASEAN a community yet? As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of ASEAN this year, it is an opportune moment for us to reflect on the accomplishments that ASEAN has achieved over the last 50 years. Over the last few days in Davos, I'm sure all of us have realized that this is not the most conducive time for a concept such as ASEAN. So today I'm joined by a distinct, a very distinctive group of panelists to my left. His Excellency Nguyen Xuan Phuk, the Prime Minister of Vietnam, and to his left, one of the most senior Indonesian economists, currently Professor of International Economics at the University of Indonesia and former Minister of Trade of the Republic of Indonesia, Dr. Mari Alka Pangestu. To her left, one of Southeast Asia's most senior business leaders, the chairman of CIMB Bank, one of the truly few ASEAN companies in the region, and also a chairman of the newly established World Economic Forum ASEAN Regional Business Council. And to his left, His Excellency Hansen, the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia, and to my far left, Dr. John Chipman, one of the utmost strategic thinkers and thought leaders in the world on geopolitics, and also CEO and Director-General of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. So welcome. I would like to start with you, Mr. Prime Minister. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on perhaps if we can take a step back and share with us what are your views on the current state of ASEAN. Where are we today? Well, the three pillars of ASEAN is political, economic, and culture. Those are the three pillars that we are promoting in order to ensure ASEAN's growth. Now in terms of political aspect, the 10 ASEAN countries are trying and working to maintain an environment of peace and stability and unity, especially among the friendly countries' neighboring nations, and that is why we were able to maintain peace and friendship in ASEAN. Now in terms of economic affairs, we have established the ASEAN economic community since the beginning of 2016, and currently the legal entity and also human are allowed to move freely within ASEAN, and economic trade and investment continue to grow in ASEAN every year. And each year there is a flow of two million Vietnamese people to Cambodia, and in return one million Cambodians travel to Vietnam every year. Now from the cultural perspective, we are promoting cultural exchanges within ASEAN. The media is broadcasting and bringing the image of other ASEAN countries to our domestic audience to promote tourism and other aspects. So that shows the growth of the ASEAN community. This is a block of 600 million people and 2.6 trillion worth of GDP, and it is prospering in many aspects, and we all know that for every 11 people in the world, one of them is an ASEAN citizen, and ASEAN will continue to work together and to take very strong actions to promote our economy, to bring it to the level of the fourth largest economy in the world, and that is a vision of the 10 ASEAN countries. Where do you see ASEAN's greatest challenges today? Well, the challenge for ASEAN is uneven development, both in terms of economic and development in general, and there's a lack of integration into the world economy to promote our regional growth, and also to catch up with other areas around the world, and the development gaps in ASEAN, especially among some of the groups of countries in ASEAN, is something that we need to address, and we need to work together more closely to share with each other our experience in terms of policies and legal framework building. So you mentioned inequality as one of the biggest challenges for ASEAN to become a community. Some critics of ASEAN have said that amongst the countries of ASEAN, we have amongst the greatest disparities of economic development. How can we address those challenges so that we can make sure that, five to ten years from now, ASEAN will be even more tightly integrated together? Yes, I agree with you. Each year there's an ASEAN summit in which we discuss regional and international issues, and we focus our discussion on economic issues and how we can support each other, and also how do we capitalize on the help of the development partners and the major financial institutions in the world to address the different economic issues and overcome our challenges? Ibu-Marie, if I can turn to you. Share with us how you view ASEAN's current status, especially in the light of the broader economic and political trends occurring globally. Yes, that's an interesting question. I think in the whole of the last few days that we've been in Davos, there's been a lot of doom and gloom, fear of protectionism, fear that the world trading system is looking inward, and things like that. So I think we should be grateful that in ASEAN, we are relatively optimistic that there is progress going on. I say that this is maybe the only game in town at the moment. ASEAN economic community progressing, as well as the widening of ASEAN with the RCEP, so having six more countries join the free trade agreement. It's kind of ironical because a lot of times there's a lot of criticism about how slow ASEAN is progressing or how slow RCEP is progressing. But in today's context, actually, we are the only one progressing. So there's room for optimism that actually in the ASEAN way where there is a lot of consultation, consensus, it's slow, but it hasn't led to us kind of going in different directions. We are united and we're still pushing forward. In the history of ASEAN, normally what happens is that we're slow, we have long, long deadline, but then something happens, a crisis or an event perpetuates you to go faster. It's happened a few times. When we first created AEC, the deadline was 2020, because everybody is so cautious and careful, but then it was accelerated to 2015, right? So while we look like we're going slow, at the right point, I'm still optimistic that we will be continuing to be opening up. And I think the leaders here will agree that in general ASEAN is still about openness because that has been the stalwart of our development. And it's different from what's happening in U.S. or Europe where there's a backlash against globalization. Our issue is more like what the Prime Minister was saying, it's all about inequity and uneven development, which can be addressed in the context of the openness and the economic integration. You just have to make sure that you have the right policies. And the final thing I would say is that we all say this, but I would repeat it again, that the greatest value of ASEAN is the peace that it's brought in the region and the camaraderie that exists between the leaders and between the policymakers. And I would say between the business people as well. And that's intangible. You can't really measure it the way you measure it. Okay, how much has tariffs gone down? How much has trade increased with each other? So you think this whole approach of consensus, you think that's the right approach and it's not just an excuse for us to get us to think that we are actually making progress and to hide our differences? No, I think it's the... We sometimes criticize it as the fact that then you go to the lowest denominator, you go with the slowest or the most conservative or the most careful. But in fact, I think in the ASEAN formula, we did originally begin with consensus and interpreted it as 100% consensus. But in recent times, we've interpreted it more flexibly that you can have a minus X principle, we call it, where there are cases, not very often, where you can't get everybody to agree on... I can only say on the trade side, you couldn't agree on everything. And one or two members will opt out while the rest continues. And then to a few years down the road, the ones who opted out can come back in with some negotiation involved. But you can still make it work. So I think I would say that ASEAN way is, okay, consensus, consultation, but we're also practical and creative in the way we can ensure some flexibility so that we can still move forward. I think that's the main learning experience from ASEAN, I would say in the last 10, 15 years, that at least I have experienced myself. Thank you. Dr. Nazir, you've built a truly ASEAN business. CIMB has operations in almost all the markets in ASEAN. What has been your reflections of doing that over the last decade? Thank you, John. I mean, I think the first thing... Let me caveat everything I say today with this, that we are huge fans of ASEAN. We're big believers in 2007 when the ASEAN charter came out talking about the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community. We went full throttle to build a ASEAN business. We even have a tagline called ASEAN for you, which you will see in most airports around the region. So sometimes I can get a bit vocal or frustrated about the pace simply because we're probably more committed than anyone else to the regional integration cause. The experience from a people standpoint has been extremely positive, building this business across the region. I see how my people come together, work as teams fantastically well. And when you talk about diversity, ASEAN is very diverse, but that's the beauty of ASEAN. For instance, the service levels of my branches in Indonesia are very good. So I get the Indonesian branches to teach the Malaysian branches about service, for instance. And the other thing I would say is, in building a regional business, you cannot take it for granted either. So a lot of work has to be done to kind of create the sense of common identity as in your part of an ASEAN business. And here I draw some parallels to the kind of lack of activity to build the community across the region as a whole. We have sort of the CIMB ASEAN games, the CIMB idol across ASEAN, many, many programs to bring our people together so that they feel a sense of community. And the last point, John, is this that as you build out, you need to kind of have patience because ASEAN does tend to promise a bit too much. So you have to have patience. I mean, I think, and within that also my comment to the ASEAN leaders is this that we should be pleased with what we've done, but we couldn't do a lot more. ASEAN is growing at 5%, and yet I think if we really pull it together, we could maybe grow at 7%. The difference between 5% and 7% is that you double your GDP in 10 years rather than 15 years. Some have said that ASEAN has always been led by businesses, expanding throughout ASEAN even before the real sort of regulatory framework is there. What are your thoughts on that? Well, I think that's not strictly true in the sense that if you look at the pace of the proliferation of ASEAN multinationals, it really came in the late 2000s, and I'd associate that with the ASEAN Economic Community framework that was launched, the encouragement of our leaders. You know, I'd give credit to ASEAN as a body for the proliferation of ASEAN multinationals actually. And as an ASEAN business that started in Malaysia, have you faced any pushback as you've expanded into different markets, perhaps in the name of protectionism against what your business? Yeah, I think there's always a little bit of that, as you know, whilst tariff barriers have come down a lot, non-tariff barriers are still quite high. And this is recognised by everyone, and there's a lot of work going on to reduce non-tariff barriers. In terms of nationalism, I think you have to accept a degree of nationalism. Everybody does, you know, everybody instinctively looks after their own tribe first. But what I would like to see more of is a recognition that, you know, if my nation or my national comrade doesn't win, I'd be happy to have an ASEAN comrade win. And this is where I always argue, if I talk to an Indonesian, I ask the question, are you happier, assuming none of the Indonesian banks win a project, are you happier if CIMB wins or HSBC wins? That's a big question, right? And the answer? And if it's an ASEAN community, if the ASEAN community spirit were real, they would prefer CIMB. Today, unfortunately, they would prefer HSBC. Still HSBC. Prime Minister Hansen, you've been an ardent supporter of ASEAN. Can you share with us what your vision for ASEAN is? What are your hopes for ASEAN over the next five to ten years? Thank you for the question. In order to understand the point you question, where is ASEAN, one should know that, where ASEAN has started. This year is the 50th anniversary of ASEAN, Southeast Asia at the time, at that time was divided into ASEAN and the other side in the block of Vietnam, Cambodia, Vietnam, it's a time of war. And successively, Southeast Asia then was blind to block. But what is important for us until now is that Southeast Asia is under one umbrella, that is ASEAN. That is a special point, it's a big achievement among others in which the ASEAN leaders during that time, we have to respect their vision, the one region of one umbrella in the framework of ASEAN. We have been arriving at the time, establishment of the ASEAN-Ecumen community. Along with that, in the framework of relational partnership, we have many partnerships outside, we see it in the framework of cooperation with mutual benefit. But what everyone knows already, the challenges of ASEAN is to narrow the development. The uneven development requires time that we need to integrate, which has implemented the first stage and the second stage, and now we are implementing the third stage. That is an important issue, reducing the development gap. We face difficulties in narrowing the wealth gap. We cannot make Cambodia, Vietnam, La Myanmar to have the review across to that of Singapore. But I strongly believe that in the 10 coming years, the digital gap, the think tank depth could be resolved first through the promotion of training and education. It's one of the challenges we need to resolve about the think tanks, about there is no big gap between the old members and new members. And the second point, which is none of the challenges is in relation to the connectivity. If our infrastructure, both software and hard cannot be connected, then ASEAN communities could not be achieved strongly. I think that ASEAN is fortunate on the point that ASEAN has solidarity, ASEAN works on the principle of consensus, and ASEAN respect each other, which is a special point that ASEAN would advance forward. But ASEAN needs more time in order to work. ASEAN doesn't push too much because the speed is, to be specific, that causes the problem in Europe, in which inside I ask, don't raise a question, who leaves ASEAN? You should pose a question, who next would leave Europe after UK. That's a question that has been happened. We have learned lessons from Europe. ASEAN has its own principle. Its way is strong. We are slow, but we have solidarity, so the point I hope is that ASEAN has a good future, but we need time in order to solve the problem. Ask us, ASEAN means for the common man, ASEAN means for this issue, we need additional time. Not new ASEAN like Cambodia, that a number of people do not know ASEAN, but even all ASEAN that have for 50 years old, that they still remain, some people do not know clearly ASEAN. When I say the old members of ASEAN, they are not sure to be old because of new leader, and the new ASEAN country are not sure to be new because they are all leaders. But what is important, ASEAN is not belong to the government alone, ASEAN has to belong to the people. However, we have to accept clearly that ASEAN today is of the people already. The leaders of ASEAN was born by the election, by the people, and you cannot say that ASEAN is not just belong to the government. Yesterday there was one speaker who talked that ASEAN just belong to the government, not of the people yet. That is the wrong perception needed to be abandoned. But the government was established from the people, and if the ASEAN did not belong to the people, it means that ASEAN was exclusive from the people, that is the wrong meaning. So I take this opportunity to make a correction that ASEAN belong to the people, ASEAN is of the people, even though we need time for the people to understand. Even some leaders even do not know about ASEAN. So we need time to study and all working together at the same time. Thank you. Thank you. Dr. Chipman, if you can provide us an external view perhaps, an external view into ASEAN, does ASEAN really exist? Or are we sort of an ASEAN hopeful but delusional? Well I think the first thing to say from the outside is that these five countries you met together 50 years ago are now 10. It was quite extraordinary those five countries met together 50 years ago. It's even more extraordinary to a degree that these 10 countries are able to talk about a community given how politically diverse they all are. After all, you have countries under military rule, you have kingdoms, you have sultanates, you have countries that have communist party rule, you have one party enlightened rule, you have managed democracy. You even to a degree have rather madcap democracy. So you have almost all forms of modern political life and some forms of pre-modern political life represented amongst the governments of the 10. But the politics of enlargement have not been without challenges. They haven't been without challenges in the financial and economic sphere but they've been particularly without challenge in the foreign policy and security sphere. And now that there is much more competition in the Asia Pacific region, that there is greater divergence of views amongst the major powers that have a stake in the security and prosperity of the region. The test of ASEAN coherence is becoming all the stricter. And ASEAN leaders themselves have often publicly complained about the difficulty to achieve an ASEAN consensus on the difficult foreign and security challenges in the region. And the People's Republic of China has demonstrated a degree of skillfulness in being able to tone down ASEAN resolutions or even to direct them in a certain area. And there is concern within ASEAN, and sometimes publicly expressed concern outside of ASEAN, that a number of countries in ASEAN check first with Beijing before they check with their ASEAN partners as to what Beijing might like in an ASEAN communique and are able to guide an ASEAN resolution in a way that finds favor with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China. And while two or three years ago it was normally thought by the strategic community that tenancy was most pronounced with Laos, Cambodia, perhaps from time to time Myanmar, we now see for a number of reasons that a number of other countries perhaps are leaning towards the Chinese point of view. The Philippines, Thailand, Brunei, from time to time Malaysia, making perhaps Singapore, Indonesia and Vietnam feel a little bit more lonely in standing up for questions of the rule of law and principle in the foreign policy and security sphere. So I think in this 50th anniversary year of ASEAN there will be more strains placed on ASEAN solidarity and more pressure placed by China, by the United States, by others to form a consensus that can help ensure that the problems of conflict in the Asia Pacific remain diplomatically managed and not managed through military means. And with the inauguration of President Trump today and what is likely to be some of the changes that would occur in terms of their outlook on the rest of the world, how does that change how you see ASEAN's prospects going forward? Well, the early indications are that the Trump administration will take a robust view on the foreign policy and security ambitions of the People's Republic of China and, unfortunately, on the so-called core interests of China as well. Everybody was struck by the reference made by the nominee, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in his Senate testimony, where he indicated that the United States might wish to consider interdicting access by the People's Republic of China to the reefs islands that they had claimed as their own and on which they had built installations and in particular military installations, if really the United States were physically to interdict access by the People's Republic of China to these islands, reefs and features in the South China Sea that has a real risk of bringing the U.S. and China into conflict and will really strain ASEAN consensus that on the South China Sea is immensely fragile. How many years has it taken not to arrive at a code of conduct on the South China Sea? And the pressures on ASEAN might become all the stronger if the United States decides to assert itself in this way in the region. So what ASEAN is good at is encouraging dialogue and creating institutions through which that dialogue can be effectively managed, ASEAN itself, the ASEAN Regional Forum. We the International Institute for Strategic Studies have tried to contribute to that defense diplomacy as well by establishing in Singapore as from 2002 the Shangri-La dialogue that brings defense ministers together. In 2002 and for the 40 years before that in the Asia Pacific presidents met, foreign ministers met, finance ministers met, but defense ministers never met, perhaps they did bilaterally, rarely in groups of three at the Shangri-La dialogue from 2002 onwards they met and that exercise in defense diplomacy has been very useful in ensuring that the debate in the Asia Pacific becomes more transparent. As a result of their happy experience in the Shangri-La dialogue in 2006 the 10 states of ASEAN decide to have their own defense ministers forum and now you have the ADMM plus that has added eight other countries to that. So ASEAN is very good at developing institutions, at ensuring that there is dialogue, but the pressures now develop a consensus on these issues of foreign policy and security or ones that ASEAN will have great difficulty escaping from. Prime Minister, you wanted to respond to Dr. Shipman's comments and I just wanted to come to you as well. Please. I should talk a bit, we go a bit further about the framework of economy come to political forum and this issue is also in relation to the sensitivity within ASEAN that lately Cambodia is a victim of the South China Sea issue. I would like to speak because today it's a day Obama left the administration of his two-by-two world as a Pacific of President Obama that bring the complicatedness to Asia. I can say so because it has been two times already that has been working in relation to the South China Sea and this issue has been blamed on Cambodia successively. I encourage the dialogue by laterally among the relevant countries. It's true, DOC has been signed in the capital of Numpung at the time I was the chairman of ASEAN during that time. In 2012 the 10th anniversary of DOC we are now working towards the DOC but this issue has been interfered from outside. If we leave it to the relevant countries to have dialogue and courage for the dialogue that would be good. I say with the purpose to protect the relation one side is ASEAN, one side is China in which it has a bigger trade volume and has a benefit for all rather than confrontation. So I do not feel pleased, I criticize that the policy return to Asia and I appreciate the policy of the new President of the Philippines, I told the President of the Philippines clearly that during the time he visited Cambodia America can come, it's up to the Philippines because the Philippines is an American basis. So in this region there is no outside interference. And we have harmonization within ASEAN and harmonization among ASEAN and partners that isn't their neighbors. That's something I needed to talk. It's different from economy but it also serves economy. The trade volume between ASEAN and China is big. We need to be protected. If you take a look at the history of ASEAN, external pressures is nothing new. ASEAN was started amidst sort of Cold War rivalries of the USSR and the US. So in some ways we're used to that sort of conflict. How is the conflict today or how is attention today different from what it was in the past or do you think it's really the same and therefore we will be able to get through it? The issue here before is the war of aggression from America. You cannot talk about anything other than that. It's not the Soviet to come take the land of Vietnam to attack America. It's America come and invade and make aggression in this region. The bomb, the unexploded bomb, many in America had to pay more for to Cambodia, to Vietnam and Laos in order to clear money and exploded onions. But they did not do that. But they demand the depth from us as a victims of that war. Now we still owe the depth of America in which I appeal to the Trump administration that has come to power for a few hours to write off the debt that Cambodia owe America during the time of the illegal government that stage the coup supported by America. Oh, a hundred million and then we have to pay for that. And it's a bad debt. World Economic Forum should support writing off the debt which is a bad debt. Now at this stage, before America left, it seemed that we have enjoyed stability in this region. But Barack Obama came to power, put out the policies, the return to Asia of America and the rebalancing. It was then that we see increasing tension has been growing up. So the difference is within ASEAN of how to solve this problem with China. I'd like to hear the comments from the Prime Minister of Vietnam. You had laughed that Dr. Chipman's comments with regard to some of the tensions from China in the U.S. How do you see that from the Vietnamese perspective? Well, I agree that we need to show the past and look toward the future. Every country in the international community needs to ensure peace and stability for mutual development. And for ASEAN, the things that Dr. Chipman just said, I'd like to respond to that. First is the importance of the South China Sea. It has 29 out of the 39 biggest shipping lanes of the world. And we all know that this is one of the most flying routes of the world, too. And therefore, we need to ensure a stable, peaceful and united sense of unity in the South China Sea. And in order to do that, we need to comply with the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. And all parties' concern needs to go through consultation and negotiations, diplomatic processes in order to solve the disputes peacefully. And that is the responsibility of all leaders, whether they are Chinese, American or Vietnamese, wherever. So the main overarching principle is that we have engaged in discussion with the leaders of the countries concerned, including Premier Lee K. Keong. He agreed that we will work together to conclude a COC, Code of Conduct, by the end of 2017. And Prime Minister Hun Sen and I here will work with other ASEAN leaders to make that happen in order to promote trade and ensure mutual development in ASEAN. And so therefore, in terms of economic issues, we need to work together for mutual development, for security and defense. We will continue to engage in dialogue to maintain an environment of peace and stability. And it is the responsibility of all governments to get together to make that happen because it is, because all governments need to serve the people. So whatever is in the interest of the people, we need to take part in that. So all the initiatives such as the RCEP or the AIIB or the One Belt, One Road programs, these are the initiatives that we have devised together with China. We will promote them together. Now, for the differences, we will try to solve them together peacefully on the basis of international law. And that is the requirement for us. Now, Dr. Chipman said that there is a risk of the conflict between the U.S. and China. But I and even Prime Minister Hun Sen would agree that there is not such a possibility because I believe in the responsibility of the leaders. And I think all countries want peace and stability, not only us. I'd like to open our discussion to the floor for questions. But I guess while we prepare for that, just one last question to Ibu Marie. Can you enlighten us? There's the RCEP. There was a TPP and I guess now no longer. The Prime Minister mentioned the AIIB. How do we understand all these different pathways? And what should be ASEAN's approach? I think ASEAN should see it as the way that we would like to expand and consolidate the economic integration in Asia. And that it should be an example of openness and open regionalism in today's rather gloomy context. Because I think the prediction is that TPP is kind of on the back burner. And that the U.S. is going to adopt a bilateral negotiating model. And that's not so good for us in Asia because it means that you're negotiating with a very strong partner. Whereas in the Asian model, it's kind of more the consensus building and the stage by stage progression. So I think what's happening with AIIB, RCEP, for those of you who don't understand what RCEP is, it's basically expanding the ASEAN Economic Community Agreement with the plus one. We have six FTAs with the six major partners, which is China, Korea, Japan, India, Australia and New Zealand. They're expanding, but it's open regionalism, by the way. So if the U.S. at any time would like to join, of course, on the terms of RCEP, it can, right? Theoretically or real? Real. There's a clause in there about opening to other members, right? And I think the AIIB and the Belt and the Road are very interesting initiatives to actually address the divide. The different levels of development that exist in ASEAN as well as between ASEAN and these other countries, through infrastructure building, through capacity building, through people-to-people connection. So I think it's a good balance if it can really be made to work. So I think there's still a lot of question out there how this is going to be implemented. But I think as ASEAN, we should be proactive to make sure that it's going to benefit ASEAN. Connectivity, I think both Prime Ministers mentioned connectivity. Connectivity to me is about infrastructure, it's about the digital infrastructure, and it is about the education and the people-to-people platform. And I think a lot of that can be facilitated by such initiatives such as AIIB and Belt and Road. Thank you. Any questions from the floor? John, while you're waiting, might I just say one or two things in response to what the Prime Minister said? I think that in Europe and North America everyone would be delighted if there were an Asian solution to the Asian security dilemmas of which there are very many. And the United States in particular has been very keen not to take a position on the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, but there are claimant states amongst ASEAN. There are disputants, and it was after all an ASEAN state that took the question of the South China Sea to the international tribunal. That wasn't an initiative of the United States, but of an ASEAN member state that wanted an international legal ruling on this question. The second point I would make was that I think it's important to recognize that whatever the flaws of Obama's pivot then rebalanced to Asia, it wasn't just a rebalance to Asia, but it was a rebalance within Asia, that during the Obama administration the United States made a great effort to diversify its relationship with Asia Pacific countries, including all the countries represented here that previously perhaps did not have such strong relations with the United States. And looking at the other two big, geostrategically significant areas of the world, the Middle East and Europe, the inhabitants of the Middle East and Europe have traditionally had two separate concerns about the United States. Either the United States pays too much attention to the region, or that it pays too little attention to the region. And beware of what you wish for, because if the United States were to pay a lot less attention to the Asia Pacific, my judgment is that the Asia Pacific might be in a more unstable situation. So a bit more continuity is, I'm sure, what ASEAN leaders as a whole might wish for. That's a good point. Any questions? There is a question. I would like to highlight a bit, John. I mentioned that the rule of ASEAN is what a member of ASEAN. But me as a member of ASEAN, and the other nine ASEAN, as I feel there is no other country, a larger country came to the international court. I would like to stress that it's not what members of ASEAN would like. The whole complaint is Philippine alone. And now the new President of the Philippines visits China and did not bring the verdict to discuss with China. So it came out too. The verdict has no value at all. I would like to stress that it's not what ASEAN wants. I object at the time before the verdict issue because it's a collusion, the bad collusion on the international collusion. Why? They know two months beforehand, they know about the verdict. They lobby me to support the verdict. That is a problem that I object with the statement of ASEAN supporting the verdict. Leaving China and Philippine, a whole discussion by later discussion. Thank you. I'll take a question from the floor. Sure, please. Thank you very much. This has been fascinating. But as we all know, the story of ASEAN can be told as a glass that is either half full or a glass that is half empty. And I'm afraid that partly because of the way the discussion is turned, the focus has been a lot on the glass half empty and not on the glass half full. So I think maybe we should acknowledge the fact that if you did a very objective audit of regional organizations, regional organizations are strange creatures. They don't work like efficient companies. They are by definition messy, untidy and three steps forward, two steps backward. But in the world of regional communities, there really isn't one better than ASEAN. And even the European Union, John would acknowledge now that the UK has decided to leave it, that's a very powerful statement that it's a broken community. What used to be the shining symbol of the world is now scrambling to handle a very messy divorce. In that sense, I agree with Prime Minister Hun Sen that ASEAN is ahead. We don't have a messy divorce on our hands. We have lots of challenges. But realistically, look around the world, whether it's Mercosur, whether it's the African Union, whether it's the Arab League, find me one organization that's done better than ASEAN. So I think maybe a little bit more focus on ASEAN's successes looking ahead would be great because that's what actually I tried to do in the book I'm coming out with to point out that ASEAN, by any standards, is a miracle. And here in Davos, we have to tell the world that if you want examples of regional cooperation, there's no better one than ASEAN. I like that. And Keith's question is, do you agree? So let me just tell him one regional organization that I think does have a great deal of promise, which you didn't mention, and that's the Pacific Alliance that brings together Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and Peru. And those four countries four years ago formed an alliance. They are now moving very fast to an economic union, to financial cooperation. They will have a common stock market. And this is an organization to which macrosur countries even want to subscribe. So Argentina under Macri has talked about, could we become a member of the Pacific Alliance? Even though the last time I checked, Argentina was not a Pacific nation. And so there are examples. And one of the secrets of the Pacific Alliance has been actually to keep the membership tight. There's about 55 observer nations to the Pacific Alliance, including Singapore. And yet they have decided not to expand too quickly, and also not to over-institutionalize. There's no big secretariat general. There's not thousands of bureaucrats that meet all the time. This is an agreement that has become organic between the four countries. Unless one thinks that this was easy, today you would think that the Pacific wars happened two weeks ago, because it's very quickly for a conflict between Chile and Peru to emerge because of a statement by a parliamentarian in one country or the other. These are countries, too, that have territorial disputes between them. So I would look at the Pacific Alliance as an organization that also has promise, and my counsel to the Pacific Alliance is not to expand too quickly. I celebrate the successes of ASEAN, and it's because it's been a successful organization that people place greater expectations on it. And that's the reason why I think that ASEAN leaders should continue in the interest of their own 650 million-plus people, and in the interest of international stability to find even more inventive ways to push that consensus forward and ensure that there is ASEAN-led diplomacy in the region. Dr Nazir, do you share that optimism? And perhaps, can you suggest a number of concrete ways in which for a business like yours, how can ASEAN more quickly arrive at a full glass? Yeah, I think, firstly, you know, ASEAN has been around since 1967. So, you know, we've been tested, and I think ASEAN is the partnership between these ten countries is very robust. And I think, you know, even though, you know, what I like doing is trying to challenge whether we can do better. Yeah, that's not saying that we haven't done a great job. Yeah, given certainly where the prime from the prime minister who has long lens of where we started, ASEAN does a phenomenal job. Yeah, but as we stand today, I would like to see, you know, the integration efforts being more directed, if you like. If you look at my sector, which is banking, there are certain initiatives under the umbrella called Qualified ASEAN Banks. And within that, it's about licensing in various countries, et cetera. Whereas I think if one is more directed, you'd kind of go in and say, okay, the better way is to resolve issues about movement of labour, about outsourcing of operations, movement of data. Those are actually more value creating and actually less contentious. So when it comes to ASEAN integration, I just feel that there needs to be more focused leadership. And here's where, contrary to what John says, the experience of Pacific Alliance, I actually think we need to enlarge and empower the ASEAN secretary a little bit more. Yeah, so that we can have more focused leadership into the details of where we can have more value creating integration without, you know, the negative side effects that we don't want. There was another question from the floor. I'll take one more question, please. John Ehara, Unison Capital of Japan. I want to ask a question somewhat financial and economic oriented. We are in the period of great uncertainties. And the mood here at the Davos is full of that. But there's one certainty that we are witnessing that is a hike in U.S. daughters' interest rate. And I'm a bit concerned about the impact of it on ASEAN countries. In the past, emerging countries including ASEAN countries have contributed significantly to a worldwide growth in terms of GDP and so forth. But now we are talking about not just a little hike, how many hikes, and how soon in daughter interest rate. So I'd like to hear your views. Perhaps Ibu Marie? Yeah, I think this has been also discussed quite long in ASEAN as we wait for the U.S. interest rates to go up. And in the case of Indonesia, we've already had two rounds, two shocks in 2013 and in 2015 where we did have capital outflow and the exchange rate took a big hit. So I think it's in a way been factored in already. And I think what's important is actually for Indonesia and for the other ASEAN countries to face this uncertain path of the U.S. interest rates going up by making sure that our macro policies remain stable. And in the case of Indonesia, for instance, it was a fiscal policy sustainability issue, which was an issue of why we had these capital outflows. But I think we are in good progress now and process to ensure that we have fiscal sustainability. So I think the key is really about making sure you have your macro fundamentals right, both on the fiscal side and the monetary side. You will still feel a little bit of volatility in the exchange rate, but I don't think it will go to the extent like in 2013 or 2015. And I'm not sure where the U.S. dollar will go right now. It's strengthening, but it will hurt the U.S. economy if it strengthens too much. So in a way, they will also be careful about how they manage that and not to have inconsistent real sector policies that will scare investors away. That's really the way to deal with it. Well, if the dollar continues to rise, then the U.S. exports would be hurt. So I think that the U.S. can allow the U.S. dollars to rise indefinitely. So I think that the world right now is a flat war, so there will be manageable policies. Great. Thank you. Please join me in thanking the panelists for what is a wonderful and lively discussion.