 Good afternoon. Welcome to our session on the new agenda for Asia. I'm Zanni Minton-Bettos from the Economist and I'm delighted to be moderating this session where I hope we will be discussing how business can take a leadership, a greater leadership role in fostering cooperation among Asia's economies. I can think of few things frankly that are more important for the world economy than this topic. The East Asian region, East and South East Asian region is the fastest growing part of the world. It has some of the world's most dynamic economies. It's a region that is growing ever more integrated, but it is one against which there is a background of ongoing geopolitical tension, whether it's the South China Sea, whether it's the East China Sea. And it is I think then very striking the contrast between a part of the world where the future is being built remarkably fast and yet history looms remarkably large. And we all know what those tensions are and I think we won't be focusing on the tensions per se but we will be focusing on the consequences thereof and particularly the role that business can play in mitigating them and in developing the kind of economic integration that will ensure maximum prosperity. To have that conversation I have here an extraordinary collection of individuals who are playing individually an enormously important role in that integration. So very briefly because none of them need any introduction, Victor Chu, Chairman and CEO of First Eastern Investment Group, next to him Tony Fernandez, Group Chief CEO of Asia in Malaysia, next to him Chairman Yohiko Kojima, Chairman of the Board of the Mitsubishi Corporation. Welcome, next to him Dr Kil Jong Woo, Member of Parliament of the Republic of Korea. And finally last but not least, John Riadi, Executive Director of the Lippo Group in Indonesia. So we have a very broad spectrum of countries represented but all of you I think are engaged in the same mission which is to boost integration through what you are doing. And so I'd like to start with a very broad question actually of all of you because I think you'll all have a different perspective but maybe Victor will start with you. Which is can you characterize for me first of all how the geopolitical tensions affect the business environment? And then secondly what do you see as the role of business in mitigating them? Thank you very much and good morning ladies and gentlemen. Before I respond to that question, you're from London. I am. May I congratulate Britain on her Majesty's becoming the longest serving monarch tomorrow. I think it's a special day. It's depending on where you are in the date line. I guess it's today. Congratulations. I think obviously the macro geopolitical tensions affect business. But as all of us here, our business are global and despite the tensions we are cooperating with each other very well indeed. Chinese companies are cooperating with Japanese companies in projects in the Middle East and Africa and worldwide and vice versa. And the point we have to remember is that these tensions are long term historical tensions and it would take a lot of time and effort to find a reasonable and mutually satisfactory conclusion. I mean there are three scenarios basically. If we can't find a reasonable solution, we go into conflict and that is a loose-loose scenario. If the parties agree for the issue to be arbitrated or mediated, which is difficult, it will be a loose wind situation because one part will prevail and the other part will lose. If we can find a way to cooperate and build trust to find a lasting solution without conflict, that's win-win. So all things have been equal, the answer is simple and we in the business world understand that despite the tension we have been integrating, cooperating very well. I mean the important thing is that the other stakeholders in the game, the politicians, civil society and indeed the media, we have to join forces to make sure that we find the right solution. Can I press you on that last point because it's I think very important. What role can you in business play in influencing the public debate, in influencing frankly in getting the message to the media, civil society and indeed the politicians? Do you see a role there for business? Absolutely. I mean exactly what we are doing here, we need to articulate that despite the political difficulties we in business we are contributing to the regional growth and prosperity. I mean today's society we're talking about jobs, we're talking about making sure they're more equality, we're talking about sustainability, we're talking about how to help the underprivileged to get up to the acceptable line. We're talking about how to educate our young people in the best way possible. We're not talking about conflicts and I think the younger people amongst us even resonate that much stronger. That's very interesting. Maybe I can chime on Kojima, I can turn to you now and get your perspective. Do you agree with Victor Chu and his characterisation of the role that business has? Okay well frankly speaking and I agree with this comment and say I'll explain about our company and maybe everybody said Mitsubishi Corporation is a trading company and used to be a trading company but now trading profit is 20% to 30% 70% to 80% investment profit. And this means we have already invested more than 600 throughout the world and this investment is very important. We need a very reliable partner country by country. Therefore geo-political problem is firstly we need a very reliable partner country by country and always communicate each other and also the other communication is the government and business people should have communication also from time to time. And therefore of course in Japan I have always communication with our prime minister or ministers. This is very important and also even for the foreign countries I try to make communication with the governmental people as well. And usually a trading company therefore we need a so-called trading profit but the important issue is the investment not only money but also human resources to that subsidiary company. Therefore important issue is now the trading company business model invest not only money but also human resources and this means management education is very important not only in Japan but globally. And then those are people via CEO or CFO in the subsidiary company to add the value for those companies and this will be contributing to the profit of that country as well. This is very important. Therefore based upon that I am always prepared to discuss other government people or foreign government people. And when you discuss with your government do you tell them that the geo-political backdrop makes a difference to your company and do you offer them advice on this? Of course we will explain about our company's business but besides that and those related business circumstances is also sometimes geo-political problems but how to resolve those problems that is very very important. Therefore country by country geo-political problems are different. Therefore country by country we need a very reliable partner there and we can discuss very frankly and we will get very very good information about that countries and that is good and then based upon that we should discuss negotiate sometimes with our government. Dr Gil you are looking at this from a slightly different perspective as a member of parliament and from the Korean perspective how do you react to the two speakers before and what is your sense of the role that business is playing and should play in the geo-political tension? These people are business people. I'm a politician but let me focus on North East Asia consisting of China, Japan and Korea. The trade volume of three countries takes around 18% of global trade and in GDP around 21% of global GDP. But you probably know about the terminology of Asia's paradox. Asia's paradox means three North East Asian countries economically prosperous and very big potential but they are victimized by themselves due to their historical animosity. So when you are asking about the kind of business community's mitigating role of political tensions I would better say this is regret but I should better say that economic community are negatively affected by political tensions. So structural reason or probably outcome of the political tensions is inter-regional trade volume of among three countries is slightly over 22% much lower than really anticipated comparing with the 40% of NAFTA, 56% of EU. So I think those kind of very limit and this is getting smaller. I can say that reflects the business community is negatively affected by political tensions. But do you think there is anything that the business community can do to affect the political debate that you are taking part in? There are surely a couple of good examples of business communities when we are talking about the Korea-Japan kind of tensions due to many different issues. Business communities, especially the Federation of Korea Industries and their counterpart in Japan, Geydan Nen, had a meeting and they made a kind of joint recommendation to each government. So business kind of cultural climate should not be jeopardized by political tensions. But not exactly the kind of each business company or big companies can play a role, their role is better limited and vice versa. Government role is predominant than business community. John, do you agree with that? I mean this is from an Indonesian perspective a very big player economically, demographically from a slightly different part of the region. When you listen to this conversation what do you see the impact on business and how do you see the role of business in mitigating these tensions? Thank you, Zani. I think undoubtedly the larger geopolitical context certainly has an impact on business. As many of you may have read over the last few weeks Indonesia held the auction for the Jakarta Bandung fast speed railway. It was very very rigorously contested by China and Japan. And this is a strategically very important project because the railroads that you build for this first bit will determine the railroads and the systems and the cars that you use for the entire nation. So between Japan and China clearly it's not just business. There was allegations of one party stealing elements of the other party's bits. There were elements of illegal bits sort of violating the bit process. And so you can clearly see that the geopolitical context affects that. And also there was not to mention the American consulting firms who the Indonesian media believes to be sort of corporate CIA spies. So there is all elements of that. But I think if you take a step back. So what happened? Well in the end the government said that we actually don't need the fast speed railway. We need a medium speed railway because the distances between each stop is actually too close for a fast speed railway that the cost is too expensive. So I think the government of Indonesia was pressured immensely by both sides. They were not able to make a decision. I hope that if that epitomises the impact that is very depressing that you end up not having either because of the geopolitically pressed rivalry. So what can be done? But I think if you take a step back generally businesses are progressing. Generally economic integration is happening as Mr Chu had mentioned despite the geopolitical context. Another element that I'd like to bring into the discussion today is we often talk about the geopolitical risk in terms of sort of the tensions between both countries. I think it's important to see that I think in today's world the context that businesses operate is not just sort of the traditional geopolitical risk. But it's also what people are often saying now it's sort of the geopolitical risk of technology. We are now you know I believe moving away from the Westphalian system of nation states towards a more borderless world driven in large part by technology. So governments you know businesses politicians everyone I think we cannot view I think the boundaries between countries are fast vanishing. And we all have to recognize that and this has huge repercussions on how businesses operate how governments regulate and how trade has to happen. So in short I think the world needs new institutional infrastructure to that better reflects the underlying economic activity of the world. And is that blurring of boundaries whether it's in cyberspace or whether it is in new technologies broadly does it make it easier to deal with the geopolitical tensions that are there in the in the kind of world of nation states. I think geopolitical risk has always occurred since you know 1648 when the treaty was was failure was signed. We know the world has it has has function on on the basic assumption of the sovereignty of the nation state that still exists today. But I think the whole concept of the sovereignty of nation states is coming coming into conflict with the realities of technology and the borderless world that we live in. I'll give you a few examples in Southeast Asia. The largest sort of taxi app booking company is was founded in Malaysia and now it's all over Southeast Asia. The company that's disrupting how groceries are bought and sold was started in Indonesia and now has gone all over the world. The way properties are bought and sold Singapore company now it's also disrupting the whole property agent industry across Southeast Asia. Governments in Indonesia for example can no longer say this is my territory this is how I'm going to to regulate it. I think the fact that the matter is it's a borderless world so we've got to live with that new reality. Tony last but absolutely not least to you you you are you are not in the virtual world very much in the real world in your industry but you epitomise the integration of countries. How do you see the backdrop of geopolitical tensions is it something that concerns you and how do you think business should react and help mitigate. Well I mean you know when they're geopolitical tensions we're a low cost airline so we encourage politicians to fly with us and go and meet with each other often and save money. Geopolitics is a real problem it's a problem for us in reality especially in the aviation business when countries don't get on with each other the first thing they do is block air rights. And so it's a real issue I agree with John that the new world is moving away from borders because governments are less involved but the old world there is very much repercussions from geopolitics. How can business help really is what was said early in terms of good dialogue getting the message across. My message the whole time is jobs and that tensions between two countries cause jobs to be lost in tourism in related industries. So it's constant dialogue to show the benefit in Southeast Asia there are tensions on the Spratley Islands which have caused lots of aviation related issues. All we can do is constant dialogue. It's painful but I think business does play a big part. Within our own region in ASEAN a few of us have driven ASEAN integration probably further than the governments would. You've got to have a necessity for regionalization. What does ASEAN mean? And business plays a very central role in that we've created an ASEAN airline through this process. So I think business plays a huge importance in disagreeing a little bit with what was said earlier. Yes ultimately the politicians will decide but I think business plays a big part and must continue to play a big part. I think the new technology world has shown that there is a borderless world coming. That's interesting. That's an area where you can get beyond the nation state and the borderless. And we'll get to that because I think that's a very interesting part to dwell on. I wanted to switch slightly though to and ASEAN provides a perfect segue to the question of the regional architecture and whether it's regional partnerships, regional trade agreements, how the way they are drawn up sets the backdrop for economic integration and whether it reinforces geopolitical tensions or whether it mitigates them. To be a bit more concrete one way of looking at it is TPP for example becoming the gauge by which American leadership in the region is measured. Is it an integrative view of the region? How do you see the various different economic partnerships fitting together? And will they help diffuse geopolitical tensions or will they actually exacerbate them Victor? This is a very important question. I need to disclose my interest here. Personally, I'm dead against these regional deals because they undermine the multilateral system. And although it's not perfect, the multilateral trading system in the form of WTO is the best at the most, the fairest, the most non-dysfembratory system we have. And when you have bilateral deals or regional deals, you undermine the system. But be that may if there's no conclusion on the multilateral system, of course, the second best is regional blocks. And you hope that these regional blocks benchmark the standards that eventually will harmonise into a multilateral system. Now the difficulty here is that we have two parties. We have the ASEAN, maybe ASEAN plus three. The train has already left the station and we have the prospect of a TPP. And the TPP started rightly or wrongly as a partial containment on the rise of China, despite the rhetoric. I mean, that's really the psychology. But today it probably has been driven more down into the middle that TPP founding partners welcomes China's participation on the table. Although China may not join the TPP right to right start, but it can also be a party to the deliberations. So one day China may become a part of that. And quite frankly, without China, TPP would not really be a meaningful block for this particular region. And then you have ASEAN, economic community, and that is already in effect. The difficulty there is that if you have two out of the three largest member of ASEAN facing huge domestic issues, how can we drive that forward in full steam? I think we need to see and we need to work harder there to make sure that it works well. Ashi, I think Tony, why don't we ask you and John of that? Let's focus on ASEAN. Oh, right, Dr Gillan. When we talk about kind of regional trade kind of integration, first of all we should throw out some kind of geo-strategic, ill-directed analysis of TPP is led by the United States versus RCEP, a regional comprehensive economic partnership initiated by China. We should free ourselves from that kind of geo-strategic analysis. More integrated in the region, I think less possibility of kind of military regional confrontation. So I think there is TPP and RCEP, or in addition to them kind of transatlantic or trans-specific economic partnership, that might be good. Surely I joined the Victor about the kind of debt that might undermine the multilateral trade rule under WTO, but kind of going back to the past experience of what happened in the region, I think more integrated is better for the time being. But we could, I'm sure, all agree that it would be a good thing to have a broader integration with as many countries as possible in it, but the reality is right now we have a TPP negotiations with a particular set of countries, and we have an RCEP with a particular different set of countries, and so we do have these different but overlapping trade tracks. So do you think the current trade tracks are alleviating or reinforcing geopolitical divisions? I should wait and see, but in principle the more integrated. I think that is not the conflict between trade regimes, I think. In addition to that, we should focus on kind of President Xi Jinping's idea of AIIB, Kyle Lucic wrote, those kind of new ideas might be a good addendum to lead the future of the whole region in a kind of more cooperative manner. Tony, what's your perspective from the Malaysian view? I think everything is being focused on trade. Regionalisation is not just about trade. In my case, in ASEAN, it's about harmonisation of standards, it's about human rights, it's about proper institutions and proper standards. I think economic blocks are very important. I'm a big supporter of them. You can have as many trade groups as you want, because the more interaction we have, the better. But I think we shouldn't look at ASEAN just from a trading necessity. There's lots of benefits in having a regional economic integration. ASEAN was started as a political forum yet, and it was a very successful political organisation in keeping the peace in what was a very unstabilised, destabilised area. But now it's moved more to an economic block, but I think ASEAN has much more to offer than just trading. Really, that's what we've been driving for. In Europe, you have a joint aviation authority. One sky, one standard. In ASEAN, we have ten standards. That increases the cost dramatically. Lots of bureaucracy in moving goods between ten countries where costs can be removed. Different standards of human rights, different standards of political institutions. When you're in one group, you hopefully go to the highest common denominator of those standards. I think regional blocks are more important than just looking at the trading side. How do you respond to Victor's comment about the difficulty when you have two of the major players with their own domestic challenges? I'm not sure which of the two. I can think of more than two, to be honest. Chairman Kojima, give me your perspective, particularly on what role you see TPP playing. Before that, I'd like to mention something about Asia. Asia is a very, very important country for the world, because the population is now increasing, and maybe 50% of the total population of the world is Asia. 40% of the global GDP is Asia. In that sense, Asia is very, very important. Therefore, in that sense, geopolitical problems and so many problems, we have to resolve each other. In that sense, communication through the countries, particularly Asia, is very important. In that sense, I'm talking about investment agreement type. RCEP. Now it's included, and it's very, very important. Besides that, I think TPP is also very important to include everybody, but not necessarily all of the countries together, but step by step, this TPP will be increased, because communication is very important. Therefore, global, so many countries' communication, it's not so easy to make it the same. Do you expect that TPP will eventually include China? Yeah, I do think so. Does everybody on the panel, that's interesting. Do you all think that, say within 10 years, will China be in TPP? No reason not to join. I think if TPP will ultimately succeed, it will include China. Interesting. I would ask the audience to raise their hands, but I won't be able to see because it's so dark. It's a very interesting question whether China will. John, let's turn to your perspective on regional integration and these particular partnerships. Where do you see the mosaic going? I take a very pragmatic approach to the question of which trade agreement or which institutional infrastructure. I think ultimately the best institutional infrastructure, whether it's trade agreements or the AIB, things like this, the best one will be the ones that best reflect the underlying economic realities. For example, if there's a trade block that attempts to not include the country with whom, for many Asian nations, it's already the number one trading partner, it's not going to work. If there's an institution whose voting structures do not adequately reflect the balance of power between today's economic powers, over time it's going to lose credibility and it's not going to work. In the meantime, before we get there, I believe in free markets. Let the RSEP compete with TPP, let it compete with ASEAN Plus 6, Plus 3, whatever it may be, and ultimately it will converge at some equilibrium. I think the market equilibrium will work towards the equilibrium that best reflects the situation at hand. I'm going to open the floor to some questions and then we'll have another round of conversation between us because I'm sure you've all made some very interesting and quite provocative points so I'm sure there will be some questions. Is there any questions? I'm not going to have to put my glasses on so I can see. Have you all been cowed into silence by the discussion? How about I give you a few minutes to think of some questions and we'll have another round of conversation. Oh no, there's a lady here. Go ahead. Thank you. Good morning. Hello, Singapore Management University. I like the fact that you are the lady and we have a whole group of men there. Yeah, at least there's some diversity. I'm really curious. I think we are winding down to be post 2015 for ASEAN and I think for Japan and Korea looking from outside in. What are some of your hopes for ASEAN going forward? And actually how do you build an ASEAN identity? Why don't we start Tony with you and then John? I think our identity is a really good question. There isn't one really and it's been something that I've been pushing for a long, long time. Even our regional games is called the Sea Games, Southeast Asian Games and I've been pushing for it to be renamed the ASEAN Games. It took me about five years to persuade governments to have an ASEAN lane at airports so that at least people in ASEAN feel there's a little bit of benefit from that. So I think it's a huge battle but it's a battle worth pushing. I think ASEAN is critical, especially in light of what Victor said. He said two countries I actually think there's a hell of a lot more than two countries that are in a mess. But ASEAN can provide a really leadership role in trying to solve some of the domestic issues. So I hope that the power of the ASEAN secretariat grows much more. There are many more ASEAN institutions and there are ASEAN standards. The ASEAN brand at the moment is meaningless in my opinion. I think governments have failed. We promote ourselves as an ASEAN airline very aggressively just to get the logo of ASEAN onto my aircraft took three years. So there's a long battle ahead but I do think it's moving. I mean the World Economic Forum has recognised ASEAN and is doing a lot in pushing that and has helped me and others in championing that. So I hope for a common market. I hope for a common human rights standard and strong political institutions going forward. And I think going back communication is key and that's the most important part and use the best standards. John, what's your perspective on the ASEAN identity? Thanks for the question, Annie. You should actually be the one here answering your own question. I think it's very important to remember that ASEAN is a 100-year-old journey. My grandfather talks about his time in the early and in the mid 1900s where my great grandfather when you go from what is now Malaysia to Indonesia to Vietnam on a boat off and on, no passports, no nothing when the ASEAN region was a single economic social political unit. And then obviously in the 1940s and 50s you've got the rise, the end of colonisation, the rise of the independence movements across the ASEAN countries. You've got the peak of disintegration with the Confrontasi, the Sukarno Confrontasi activities in the 70s. It was then that the ASEAN said we have to come together and make peace and slowly since the 70s we've been slowly, slowly, slowly reintegrating. So I think in 2015 is an important milestone but it's only a milestone and I think we've got a long journey ahead. Now how we do that going forward, I think Tony has mentioned a number of great examples. For us, we continue to look at investments globally. Indonesia is our home but we look at ASEAN as a whole region. So I think investments, the role that businesses play in integrating that region will be very, very critical. Number two I think is also the people-to-people movement and I think that probably the single biggest contributing factor to this has been sort of low cost carriers. Hundreds of, tens of millions of Indonesians are now able to go to Singapore and Malaysia and Vietnam thanks to low cost carriers in a way that before this they are not able to. So I think businesses investing, people-to-people and I think governments have to do more. Can I throw one very quick point actually which John, when you talk about business using integration, business also causes some of the geopolitical tension sometimes and actually causes some of the trade issues because of protectionism. I think that's one of the huge dangers. You can have TPP, APP, whatever, initial the Americans and Chinese and Japanese come up with but one of the big problems is nationalism and I see a growing threat of nationalism which will derail a lot of the good work that's being done. Where do you see that threat to be the greatest? Sorry? Where do you see that threat to be the greatest? I can't tell you that now because I'll be banned from flying everywhere. My mouth is my biggest problem actually. It's there, I confront it head on in those countries because I think sometimes the vested interests within countries are the biggest problem. I keep telling governments, put people first. Does ASEAN make sense for every Indonesian, Malaysian? History has shown. Successful economic collaboration and standards affect people. So I think I'll just turn your point on ahead that actually business sometimes caused a problem. And crazy things. If you look at history, defence industries sometimes rise the threat of geopolitical, the armaments industry, the need to keep things going. We see both sides being in commercial aviation and also we see the other side. So business plays also a negative part. I think that's a very important point to make. I wouldn't sing a lot of businesses, Tony. I think it's special interest. Let's say labour unions or professional associations. These are also oftentimes people who work against integration. It's all down to communication and showing governments take the easy option sometimes. And also companies take the easy option. Let me have a rather blunt kind of question back is what I would travel to South ASEAN countries a meeting with my friends there, they are struggling with the kind of identity. My question to them is why? Why ASEAN countries should struggle with their own identity? ASEAN has provided a very constructive and productive platform to economic integration. And ASEAN plus three using that kind of platform, those three countries really took advantage of their opportunity platform to meet each other not only with ASEAN members but also three countries as well. So some member of ten ASEAN countries are making the bilateral trade agreement with other countries. Why, in what direction, if they find the kind of identity they identify should develop? Let me broaden that to a question which I think is sort of or at least it's a subject that's underlying this which is the relationship and the impact of China on ASEAN and on the countries within it. And I'm going to start with you, Victor. What is your perspective of how, let's stick with business terms, business and economic terms, China's clearly very rapidly growing importance is changing the nature and the determinants of the integration that we're talking about. Well, I think if you talk about the last 20 years China has been the largest recipient of FDI coming to Asia and there's a lot of overflow of those FDI into the ASEAN region which is positive. Secondly, the Xi Jinping's One Belt, One Road programme that will trigger a lot of opportunities in infrastructure and other services and other investments into ASEAN and beyond. And of course the AIIB, there's a full of ASEAN members there. Hopefully they will cooperate hand in hand with ADB and other international organisations. So ASEAN plus three is actually without the plus three I think it will lose the scale. The ASEAN itself is big but with plus three is huge and that is where ASEAN as a community will become one of the three-legged tours in the world. That has, as a group, you have bargaining power vis-a-vis North America and the Europe. Tony. Sorry, what was the question? The question was how you reacted. You were nodding and then you were kind of, you know... Victor speaks in very powerful English so I lose him sometimes. The impact of China and how you see it... It's in strictly linked. I mean if you look at my business, you know, 20% of our business comes from China. We've opened up so many routes, 19 routes from China into Southeast Asia that I can see the link growing and growing and growing. It's there, it's been there historically, it will continue. We also have a big Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia so that link is going to grow and get stronger and I think it's a good thing that that will happen. Do we have any more questions? Yes, gentlemen here at the front. I'd just like to raise the issue of refugees because what we are hearing today is that Asia is progressing. GDP growth is much better than anywhere in the world and the countries are getting richer. So when do you see governments and business in Asia open up their borders to have their fair share of the burden of the refugees trying to get out of their war-torn countries? That's an extremely important and very interesting question and I'm not entirely sure that it is wholly part of the discussion right now so I'm going to offer it to anyone if they would like to comment but don't feel that you have to. You remind me that yesterday one of my colleagues at the National Assembly had a press briefing in Korea in Seoul that Korea is a responsible member of the international community. Korea should join in discussion and think about the possible contribution on the global serious challenges of refugees. I think that reminds me. Do you think it should? I think that might be a good start because Korea has had a long history of migration from North Korea. We do not say that there are refugees. There are the same people. But 28,000 people are still living with us and there are more to come. 25 million people are living in the northern part of the peninsula but we should get prepared. Any kinds of refugees have lived under different culture and the kind of ideology. We should get prepared. I just say one very quick thing when I went earlier on, basic human rights. ASEAN and many ASEAN Asian countries have to solve that very important point and I think refugees also come from different economic climates and if you have a similar economic environment then I think that changes but I think Asia must take its responsibility to deal with global tension that's caused around the world. Thank you. Any more questions? Yes, lady here in the second room. Thank you very much. As we all know that the new round of negotiation about China, Korea, Japan, FTA will be held in a month so with all of the geographic tensions in North East Asia I really want to ask Mr Kojima John Wu about your expectation about this new negotiation and do you think if we can reach this agreement we can reach a level of China, Korea, FTA? Thank you. Chairman Kojima. That is a very good question. Anyhow, say we have already developed our business throughout the world, of course China, Korea is a very important country and therefore we are collaborating and we invested a lot in China and Korea and in that sense from now on and we like to collaborate together and to develop more business and sometimes we are developing a third country business we worked together with the Chinese manufacturer or Korean manufacturer to develop some business say ASEAN countries or third countries and since we have so many offices and so many reliable partners therefore we can create so many business in that sense those three countries are very, very important to develop a so-called economic development and also peaceful conditions, yes in that sense I do think now the three countries have started to speak each other that's a very good timing for us and we business people like to support this. So do you expect progress on this free trade agreement or will you be going to your government saying there must be progress? Of course I always tell this to the government and the point is this it may take some more time but say the business people should support this kind of idea then since as I told you our company has so many reliable partners country by country so we can communicate with those people very frankly and some of them are very difficult to communicate with the government and so forth but in our country I always insist our opinion and to the government and not always the government but we always communicate that's very important Korea has a bilateral free trade agreement with China and trilateral free trade Korea, China, Japan meeting has been several years actually but Korea China FTA might be very much playing a stimulating effect of trilateral FTA as well as TPP Korea is not the initial member of 12 countries but I think Korea will join and TPP is agreed and TPP progress is also pushing trilateral FTA but one kind we should take a look at TPP means to Korea and Japan this is a bilateral free trade agreement between Korea and Japan most of the similar effect TPP is so I think TPP and bilateral trade bilateral FTA between Korea and China will surely a kind of big boost for serious dialogue on finalising trilateral FTA I just want to make one point that President Park on her recent visit to Beijing has managed to arrange a summit between Xi Jinping, Mr Abe and President Park in Seoul in October I mean that meeting will obviously put some stimulus into the economic entry talks I think that's very positive Any more questions? 2 thirds of the way back there Thank you I'm a journalist from Taishan media I think the panelist just mentioned the influence of geopolitics on high speed railway this sector so in the near term where are the other sectors that you say could be most influenced by similar geopolitics Thank you Positively or negatively? Maybe both Can you say the question please? Can you say the question please? You mentioned high speed rail as a sector that had been influenced by geopolitics what other examples could the panel give of sectors where they felt particular influence both either positively or negatively? Maybe you can think of another or Tony Where are the sectors where geopolitics matters most? I think generally industries that are more reliant on some form of a concession whether it be building out a fast speed railway or whether it be rights to mine or rights to an oil field things like that I think geopolitics will play a larger role as opposed to industries that are generally more free market for example the consumer and services industries are just you sell a product to a consumer if he or she likes it he buys it so those industries generally I think would be more isolated from geopolitical tension The industries that are very regulated and have a lot of government involvement obviously are the most in danger of geopolitics Victor? I'm going to invest in Tony's AirAsia Give us the check now Just a quick example Despite the political tensions between China and Japan last year outbound Chinese tourists into Japan was 2.5 million this year is more than double despite the political tension just imagine the political side settled down that could be triple the kind of scenario we are talking about we need stability we need people to cooperate and then business will go from string to string Doctor Kojimi Talking about the relationship between China and Japan and as Chiyo san said so many people are visiting Japan and when I went to the department store most of the customers are Chinese and Japanese development and they said they are very happy and the amount of buying products is much higher than Japanese and under such circumstances an important issue is the talking about the communications between government level and say Prime Minister Abe and Premier Xi Jinping these days try to communicate to each other and well last year last November and APEC meeting and they have a very intimate friend intimate communications and also this year June and here in Indonesia Bandang Conference and Xi Jinping's premiere and Prime Minister Abe also talked very frankly and now the communication and the government level is now starting therefore from now on I think and also say I was vice chairman of the Kedan Ren and I retired this May but when I was vice chairman I visited Korea and Japanese Kedan Ren group in Korea that's a Zenkei Ren in Korea and we communicated to each other that's important progress that's very good therefore gradually communication start communication is the first step I think I have time for one more question if there's one here at the front row thank you I have a question to Mr Victor Chu you seems to place more importance to multilateral organizations such as WTO as compared to TPP regional arrangement or bilateral arrangement do you see these two as a sort of parallel things or do you see regional bilateral agreement as some sort of step toward larger global agreement thank you go ahead my difficulty with bilateral agreements and regional agreements is that it undermines the multilateral system which is the fairest if you are a small country you have absolutely no bargaining power against China or the United States but WTO give you a mechanism so the weakest and the smallest trade nation can have a fair hearing that's my starting point we don't live in a perfect world so if the regional deals harmonize benchmarks that eventually we can get when we all the 180 odd country can agree then I think it can be seen as a good progress and also as Tony said these regional deals and bilateral deals they're not just about trading they're about institutional harmonisation that has improvement so obviously if they break barriers help regional communication help people to understand and respect each other better I think all the better from that point of view we are fast running out of time and I wanted to give you one more quick opportunity to intervene and particularly to answer my hope call which is that we started off saying we would try and be concrete and focus on what business can do perhaps you could all offer one concrete thought of either something that your business is doing or something that you think business should do and there are clearly many businessmen in this audience to foster the integration we've been discussing and to ease geopolitical tensions let's go that way starting with you John I think businesses should work with governments that changes in the current sort of economic balance of power towards Asia and China so to be concrete for Indonesia and many countries in Asia China is today the largest trading partner and yet we trade with China using US dollars and in many ways that's causing many of the difficulties in Indonesia today so obviously this cannot be done overnight but I think more and more and more we need to be using the R&B to trade with each other Thank you We should not talk about the impact of China but rather talk about the role of China in the regional integration so especially the China is not literally pushing its own idea of dream but that dream and vision can be shared with other Asian countries One Belt One Road New Silk Road project can be connected with the South Korean President's Eurasia initiative and China's AIIB can be collaborated with South Korean President Nosey Station Development Bank so one big countries dream and vision can be shared with other neighboring countries that will be the common prosperity guaranteed Thank you Chairman Kojima As I told you, we have almost 200 offices in the world and maybe we can collect the whole information what is happening where and in that sense we are a bit concerned about geopolitical situation serious problem and however we can collect the information and how to resolve those those problems That's a good idea We can do that and we can give this message to the government and also as I told you we have so many reliable friends partners and we can communicate with them then anyhow this has to be resolved in this geopolitical situation as soon as possible besides one more thing is financial problems throughout the world this is very serious then how to resolve this situation this will be resolved by the country but now this financial business problem is now globally developed that is also very much related to the business Absolutely Thank you Tony For me I think both sides of my head have kind of dealt with it I think communication is key and business can get more business leads together to tell the leaders of what Victor said despite your geopolitical tensions this is what's happening in the real world and if you guys could get your act together look at what could happen so I think giving real examples and putting people first is what business can do and keep communicating I mean I'll tell a funny little story just before we end Indonesia and Malaysia we always have little battles and differences etc and one of the former presidents there was a talk about Indonesia invading Malaysia and the former president said to me so Tony who would you support if Indonesia goes to war with Malaysia said very simple sir Eurasia Malaysia would send the Malaysian soldiers to Indonesia and Eurasia Indonesia would send the Indonesian soldiers to Malaysia we are truly ASEAN all the way so I mean I think communication is the key and really putting people first and getting across business can get across to examples of leaders that if you can sort your political differences out look at the benefit to the people Perfect Victor the last words yours briefly Yes I think over and about my colleagues have said I think we need to cooperate deepen the cooperation build trust and there are many important sectors that's completely non-controversial for example business can help regionally to promote gender diversity business can help to promote a more a better elderly care for example Japan has a great expertise and experience there China and the rest of the region having this agent challenges there's a lot that we can cooperate we can also help to provide a safe and healthy environment for the region you know benchmarking standards about how to manage crisis involving infectious disease and also a force majority so these are the area where it's absolutely non-controversial help adding value to society deepen cooperation deepen trust and therefore hopefully the politics can follow well thank you those are all very concrete and very useful suggestions the next challenge you will have is to actually implement them but thank you all very much for a very good discussion