Washington Foreign Press Center Briefing with Update on U.S. Security Cooperation and Defense Trade.
Transcript
So we can begin this briefing. Good afternoon, everyone and welcome. My name is Melissa High beyond the deputy director of the New York Foreign Press Center in the moderator of today’s briefing on US security cooperation and defense trade. Today’s briefer is R. Clarke Cooper, assistant secretary for the Bureau of Political Military Fares here. The Department of State. Thank you, sir, for giving us your time today for this briefing. Assistant Secretary Cooper will begin shortly with opening remarks. And then we’ll have time for Q and A. If you have a question, please go to the participant list and virtually raise your hand when you’re called on. We will on may view so that you can ask your question also, you might type your question in the chat box, and I will ask it on your if you have not already done so, please take the time to rename your zoom profile with your full name and the name of your media outlet. And with that sir, I will pass it over to you. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you. It is a pleasure to have the opportunity this afternoon to finally get back with you. all virtually with the foreign press center. It’s been several months since we provided an update. Wanted to catch everyone up on some activities in the space of security cooperation and what we’re doing on defense trade. I certainly wouldn’t talk to you about how we’ve been navigating in addressing, uh, the impacts that the Kobe pandemic has affected all of us on how we’re approaching all of that, essentially everything and the political military affairs for fully the defense, trade, security assistance, peacekeeping, humanitarian, de mining, etcetera. All of it has been touched, are impacted by the endemic, just like the rest of us. But what has not changed it’s not changed is the programmatic needed requirements that this portfolio servers. What we’re talking about is supply chains. While they may have been disrupted for defense industry and for defense requirements, some of our port foreign partners we understand their budgets remain uncertain in certain quarters, particularly on defense budgets. Both the United States government and the defense industrial base have worked to continue to make sure that we meet and are those commitments to all of our partners. We also continue to process our cases. Our arms transfer cases approximately at the same pace we’re doing prior to the pandemic. That is significant in that we’ve been able to meet Mission despite unaltered posture and U. S defense industry. They continue to fulfill contracts again at a pace that is recognisable prior to the pandemic. Our security partners have also affirmed that they are going to continue with their pending purchases. So if we look at what had been identified in 2019 to come online in 2020 that is still moving at pace. In fact, if we just look very recently back in July of 2020 just last month, this was our second highest yielding month and defense trade for the history of the Department of State, not just for the year 2020 or it ever. Ah, very significant milestone for us now. How did that how did that notification reached that number when we talked about overall in total sales to Congress? Well, this is inclusive of more than $32 billion on proposed sales. If we look at that $32 billion proposed sales of that is the 23 23.1 billion in the ballpark for the F 35 program for Japan. Uh, and again that that is in itself is what boosted those numbers for July. But as I said, not just significant for 2020 significant for the history of the Department of State, this demand is not new. Nor is it really due to the pandemic either again that these air these air pre existing defence requirements that we’re continuing to fulfill with our partners. It also shows that partners that we’re going to continue to march forward, we’re going to continue to still work with them on their defense requirements. And we’re gonna continue to work together to make sure that the United States and our security cooperation partners are interoperable with each other. Another example of our ability to continues to meet mission was just this past week, Secretary Pompeo signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with Poland. This reflects the shared vision that had been outlined by President Trump and President Duda in their joint declarations that were signed just in 2019. When do that was visiting in Washington. It also was reaffirmed with the president’s visit on the agreement is gonna deep in our defense cooperation and commitments to each other. This is a NATO member state that we are heavily reliant upon their greater role in burden sharing on security for the continent, but also our shared security interests. We also want to make sure that this ah, this agreement deepens not just our cooperation but defense. This is a panted and expanded support infrastructure for increased US military presence. Some of you on the call may be aware of the plans for us to have rotational forces on the ground. And what does that mean by rotational? These are not PCs to permanent change of station forces. These air TCS temporary rotations. This could be anywhere from like five. About 5000, about 4500 on the low end of forces on the ground. Having this defensive cooperation agreements signed enables us to be ableto have that in play. It is also signed that despite the pandemic, the PM team remains very active, engaged on the field, Vietti in a virtual format like what we’re doing today or still on the road, working with our colleagues at our embassies and consulates and making sure that we’re still being able to communicate and work with our foreign partners. Regardless, if it’s in our traditional means, which frankly I prefer to face to face or if we’re having to do it in a virtual context, we’re still moving out sharply on and working on behalf of our national security interest. On another thing, if we I want to look at some significant things, last week was a banner week. If we’re looking at it from the frame of national security on defense cooperation, we very much welcome the historic announcement of the Abraham Accord last week with the seeking to normalize the relationship between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This was significant and also opens up the doors to further opportunities not only between these two partners, but also us. So there’s a there’s a There’s a trilateral aspect to this. When the secretary Pompeo noted on August 13 this agreement is a remarkable achievement, will, when he specified that it’s remarkable in that you have to most forward leaning technologically advanced states, and it reflects their shared regional vision for and economically integrated region again. Looking at this broader than just two states Secretary also noted it illustrates their commitment to confronting common threats and this is something that the United States is done bilaterally with Israel and with the United Arab Emirates. There’s a shared understanding about common threats. Eso, regardless of their size as a secretary, noted, they’re strong nations and we have an extensive, robust, close security cooperation with both of these states. We’re gonna continue to seek opportunities with both of these states together or in some cases, bilaterally. We want to further our partnerships with them, and we will make sure that we do meet those shared security challenges that we all are facing today. It hardens all of us that not just here a PM But the entire national security enterprise in the United States sees this as a new opportunity to not just fully normalized these relations, but actually expand them not only bilaterally but again. It allowed early, and also let me take you for looking a little bit in the last week or two. Do want to quickly take a moment to address three Office of the Inspector General’s report of last week. The department welcomes the yogis findings on, and we particularly welcome them because it put out what we’ve been saying all along. the secretary had been, has been and continues to operate within his statutory authority for the Arms Export Control Act and this was specifically requested for addressing the secretary’s issuance of emergency declaration in May of 2019 were where the United States, where the department state was able to further advance and meet a commitment with our Gulf partners with Saudi Arabia, with the United Arab Emirates and with Jordan, this is it in a frame of about eight point billion or $8.1 billion in sales. The OMG report also confirms its we long maintain not only did it allying with the statutory authority of the department and the Secretary and also recognized what we were addressing from a foreign policy and security objective. Iran’s aggressive and malign behavior and activities was on on an increase on crescendo during that time to the year 2019. Uh, and frankly, since then, uh, their behavior has further validated the necessity for the secretary to take that emergency action in May of 2019. So in July, uh, this year we were also able to roll out an update on a 2018 policy. Some of you been may have been aware that they’re bad, a significant work in the multilateral fora to address the export of unmanned aerial systems. Many, many countries are interested in how they could be applied not only in defence but also in law enforcement and commercial needs. The United States sought toe essentially catch up to the needs and requirements of our partners. We were able to do this with a revision to make sure that we invoked our national discretion on the implementation of the MTCR. This is the missile technology control regime wanted to make sure that that strong presumption of denial for transfers of category one systems were to treat it carefully, select a subset of category to in a way that we can modernize our approaches, I said we needed to catch up to the pace of application of us and make sure that we are. We could continue to implement our MTCR commitments. This makes this ah more reflective of those realities and technology that are available today. It also helps make available to our allies and partners some capabilities that can address their urgent and emerging security requirements. I a star or intelligence surveillance reconnaissance platforms are a perfect example. A za, former and user of my start could tell you how valuable that tool is again not just for border integrity, defense deeds, but also for law enforcement applications. And then I mentioned defense trade earlier in in how he had a terrific month in July, our director to defense trade controls. They’re the ones who have been able to really figure out how we can not only keep apace but actually really move in a quick step that is required to fulfill thes agreements that have been reached well before the pandemic approached any of us. They continue to work on their support for the defense industry in our foreign partners by putting in some flexibility is getting to you a few examples. I won’t hit you with all of them, but one of them was some temporary changes to the ICT are this is the international traffic in arms regulations we wanted to do is we were recognizing the reality that many of us, including our colleagues and industry or double working. Most of you were telling working today and we wanted to make sure that factoring that ensuring that, uh, continuity of operations, making sure that practicing of social distance on and that there was not a burden on industry in these I t systems. So while safeguarding national interests of protecting data, what we did is we applied a temporary suspension on the requirement that regular employees work on site. This meant that we were unable to allow trade and industry employees to remote work on do this in a way that will continue. We initially had set that to expire July 31st. We quickly assessed that we needed to push that out further to be extended. That that that suspension of on site requirement to the end of the calendar year to December 31st, 2020. And, of course, we will continue to assess that requirements begin closing in the year and then defer further, demonstrate our support for remote work. We actually held our first a D tag, our Defense trade advisory Group, in a virtual format in May. This is normally convening of individuals who are either from industry, academia or are NGOs. We’ve always done this in person, except this year, turns out that it actually worked out in a very fulsome of format format UM, some of the feedback was to do that again. We’ve also done some in house training seminars historically, where people would come to Washington to learn about tricks of the trade and how toe to coordinating work with DDT. See, those two have been put in a virtual format, and the numbers of participation actually increased in July. Vice what we normally would have had an in person registration. So let’s talk a little bit about the impacts of the Corona virus on security assistance, peacekeeping, capacity building as well as our humanitarian de mining programmes. Many of these activities have been impacted not just because of the virus, but also because there’s been varying degrees of lockdowns. There’s been very degrees of border access or close borders, very degrees of do not travel orders, either on the civilian sector or military enterprises and not allowing their personnel to move our age on. Of course, a. Some maybe have already experienced extremely limited civilian air travel. All of those have been challenges for logistics, but government funding and the commitment to these programs has not changed. The funding has not abated. It has not been reduced on as the global response evolves, we will continue to deliver on peacekeeping and security sector capacity building. We want to make sure that we enable our partners to not only meet those urgent domestic requirement that has has emerged with a pandemic, but they can also still meet and maintain their their broader national security requirements. So, apart from that brief operational pause that seemed to agree, really impacting tired glove in the April May period are crucial work to protect civilians from us. So unexploded Ordinance IV’s landmines that has continued unabated. So together that pause there of the work has done back at the pace are de mining implementer Czar continued to closely coordinate with the host nation governments they’re working with and those nation health officials to ensure that we don’t inadvertently create a further wrist or exposure with Kobe. So we’ve been put in some protocols there in the fields. Uh, and then if we look more recently at the very tragic occurrence at the port on Beirut on August 4th, we unfortunately, despite that the tragedy we already had a team on the ground working on securing a weapon stores on working with the weapon depots in Beirut and they were already was working place to clear some legacy explosive hazards. Uh, so we’ve, of course, I have turn that up a notch, so to speak on are working to add to those efforts. Inclusive of that was providing additional medics to further support the Lebanese Red Cross, as well as how Lebanese officials do some of that. That initial damage assessment that occurred after the blast. So I share all those things, but it shows the flexibility. The adaptability of not only PM is a bureau but of the United States government being able to adapt and overcome challenges and adversity that have been placed normally before us but the entire glow and making sure that our foreign assistance investments are focused on security capacity building to help our allies the help our partners make sure that they get those those key capabilities to safeguard themselves, safeguard their sovereignty and work with us together on shared adversity, work together with us on shared threats. And we do understand on. And I think probably the pandemic is a good reminder that when we’re looking at long term investments on security cooperation that it is, it is a long term proposition. It is a marathon. It’s not a sprint is not a quick ah 100 m race. In some ways, the pandemic has actually really reminded us of what we need to do in the long haul. So I appreciate you a lot of Meteo give you some highlights. Like I said, the last week has been a significant weak on foreign policy objectives. July Banner month on US defence trade for the history of the department. I am certainly happy to take questions and further the conversation. Thank you, sir, for those opening remarks, this will now be the time for Q and A For those of you, have a question. Please raise your digital hand in the participant list. You also may ask your question. View the chat, puncture and function, and I will ask that on your behalf. And if you are not indicated in your proper name on your screen, you may not be able to ask your questions. So that’s a heads up. Our first question goes to Raj Yashwant and police are, um please, it’s ah state your name and organisation before you ask your question. Thank you. Yeah. I mean it Yes. My first question to Rajah. Yeah, Yeah, I can hear me. Yes, thank you. Thank you so much for doing this. And assistance. Cooper, thank you so much for taking the time to for the briefing. Could you speak a little bit about upcoming arms sales to India, Especially in the light off recent change of the new way be export regulations, which you refer to reform your opening remarks. Thank you. Yes. So our defense cooperation relationship with India is, of course, expanding. I mean, this is something that has been a focus of a number of conversations and dialogues, including some upcoming dialogues with India. Your question regarding MTCR and the ability to make a fail a certain category. And us, um, I it is a policy not to discuss what has not yet been announced. Oh, are notified to our Congress. But what I would say is that you know, as we’re offering further advanced capabilities to partners like India, it’s a furtherance of our confidence in that relationship with part. But the yes, the policy change that was announced this summer does essentially open up the possibility or further capabilities that may have not been available in the menu of options for partners of just a few months ago. Thank you. Bigger. Next question will go to Ben Marks with NHK. Ben, when you’re on muted, go ahead. Yes, thank you. Assistant Secretary Cooper. This has been with NHK. I just like to ask you with Mr De Hearts recent appointment to the U. S. Arctic coordinator who will be leading negotiations with Japan on a new cost sharing agreement. Do you have any update when those talks might begin? Will it be before the upcoming presidential election? Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. So I am thrilled to share, um, so very happy to have Jim move into a space to be the Arctic coordinator for the United States. And I am thrilled that at hand and that. But I also got toe hand picked Jim Successor, Donald Walton. Eyes effect has to Cali. She has 25 years of experience with the Foreign Service. Um, for those who have worked Madonna bilaterally, they will recognize her from birth time on the East Asia portfolio. She has spent significant amount of time in Japan. A swell a South Korea. She is fluent in Japanese. Uh, she has a significant amount of relationships in Tokyo that have been built up for years. I am thrilled to have her common board at this time so that the timing worked very well. Aziz. We were closing out agreements like the Poland D C A. And as you said, looking into 2021 preparing for those talks in the host nation’s border agreement, You’re the Japan agreement on the expiring On that is march of 21. S. O Surely, Yes, we are doing work to prepare for that now, uh and we will be moving out on that before the end of this calendar year. But I’m not going to talk about the clock at this point. I just wanted to five that the current senior adviser for senior negotiations for the United States is Donald Walton, and she is currently in place on. That was a very smooth transition. And again, um, I’m very happy that is able Teoh, select her Bijan successor. Thank you. The next question I’m going to read to you from the chat function serving to try to do it verbatim. Uh, it’s from Deng. You with China Review news. Hello. This is done. You with China Review News Agency of Hong Kong. My question is, you met with Taiwanese new representative to the U. S. Recently. Do you have any read out of that meeting? It was reported that the U. S. And Taiwan are talking about selling advanced drones and CDC em to Taiwan. Would you like to confirm that? Are there any changes of arms sales policies and procedures toward I want towards Taiwan comparing with several years ago? You know, they keep the question so as, um, as mentioned to our our Indian colleague on an earlier call, we don’t review sales or notifications that have not yet been announced. Our Congress, you are. Our processes are very transparent and accountable with the executive branch communicating with our legislators branches. I don’t I don’t want to get out of that. What I would say is is that our our relationship with Taiwan is rooted in our commitment in the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979. So while that may seem like yesterday, for some of us, that has been several decades, and it is a platform for our commitment to make sure that Taiwan meats it’s self defense capabilities that meets their self defense requirements. In that if we look back in 2019 there was a significant amount of defense articles that we were able to notify and move forward on. This was was about in the ballpark of $10 billion in 2019. So what? What I would say is that in addition to our commitment to their self defense, there is also a very deep and abiding interest and making sure that there is, ah, cross strait stability. Ah, and making sure that that we maintain that deep inviting, interested in cross strait peace. So if the question is, has there been a change of policy? No, there hasn’t. If the question is, are we working closer with Taiwan to meet their their defense needs, then, yes, we’re making sure that we’re going to address self defense capabilities for time. Okay. Our next question to Ali from our e news TV. Ali. If he could state your full name and organisation and then ask your question. Thank you so much for doing this. This is John’s family from Airline used to be Pakistan on the Washington correspondent, So United Stakes suspended security assistance to Pakistan in general. 28 e. Now for not taking action against the Taliban militants that are getting us personal in Afghanistan. So now when Pakistan is mediating in Afghanistan and kind off playing important role for the peace process, what is the status off that security Cooperation? Thank you. Yeah, yes. So one thing to remember is that the lines of communication with Pakistan in the United States are continuous and remain. And with any security cooperation relationship that may adjust over time Eso What? Why? Well, of course, the intent is to make sure that we get back into a place where we are closer partners. So there has been also a continuum of what it comes, Teoh. Certain certain security requirements of a carding order, integrity, uh, regional counterterrorism requirements that has certainly been met. And our continuous with Pakistan in the United States I would just again without getting ahead of bilateral conversations in that space is that we continue to have those lines of communication with Pakistan. Uh, the doors are always open on again. We know from ah previous precedent with partners that there’s always the space to move forward into a closer relationship. That said Aziz, you mentioned the issue, the challenge of the Taliban on I would say, other other extremist elements. That is an issue that is remaining regardless of one’s posture in the region, on being able to disrupt that facilitation and being able to actually mitigate any sort of, of of roots. Of that extremism also remains of necessary interest. But I would I would offer that, um, we still continue to work with Pakistan on a number of defense requirements, even though the relationship is not the same. But we still need to continue to work with each other. We still need to continue to communicate. Next question. Toe Alex from Azerbaijan. Please state your name and organisation once you’re on mute. Yes, thank you, Melissa. Great to see you both. This is Alex Ruffalo from China News Agency of Azerbaijan and collect thanks for making us have available this morning. The new gorgeous that is present in this house. Pakistan’s with three strategic partnerships focused on regional security on this partitions, however, are Taylor on the three countries. Was different security challenges. If I made Georgia and Azerbaijan are challenged in their sovereignty and territorial integrity given recent escalation between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Bonding. How much it’s going to affect your secret of cooperation in both countries, particularly, in fact, that according to your own office as a general, Armenia are in violation off conventional armed forces in Europe Treaty. So their concerns that your secret, our systems to both countries, I should emphasize could inflame the standing conflict between the neighbours. On my second question, if I may, is about Bela Rose. I just noticed the secretary statement, but I apply it to response by using your security tools in the event off, further escalation in process or Russia’s interference. How can we arm decision makers with the right tools needed to prioritize actuals? Thanks so much. Yeah, I’ll start with the question about tools. So we’ve talked a little bit today about some tools that are available, uh, that our reviewer of a defensive nature protective nature. We talked about some tools that are defensive nature. They’re also tools that are resilient nature of being able to provide, ah, partner state of the ability to pushed back our mitigate. There’s tools that may be about a less kinetic space on their two accounts and you mentioned some regional focus. We look at foreign military financing our embassies abroad. Look at how that works in the context of providing resilience and readiness for the host country. Uh, in Europe. A good example is we have a count. All the cryptic, carrying Russian influence fund that could be applied in many ways that could be applied in a defensive toolkit. It could be a applied in a cyber domain defense posture. It could be a by to support some defense. Terry out S O to the question is to What are we looking at as to what is available? We have certainly identified for our embassies of the host of tools that range from either the kinetic to the non kinetic, uh, and where those accounts could be applied. Specifically, Aziz, you mentioned, uh, countering Russian influence. I would also offer We have a new global accounts, all a c sieve, and that’s the counter and Chinese influence pondered that. One has a little bit of a broader parameter than the crypt of the Congregation Fluids Fund. But again, further, further, additional tools. We talked about some of the others today, Ah, humanitarian de mining, conventional weapons destruction. There’s a There’s a host of what’s available, that we can provide a country to supplement what they’re doing for their own national security interests. And in some cases, as you mentioned neighboring states, working with them together on where there could be some joint elements or efforts especially, we’re talking about border integrity. O. R. We’re talking about an area or region, a transitional space that may be impacted by something like unexploded ordnance. So again, in the general praying, what are we doing with our embassies as we were informing them of what’s available here for them to apply their, uh, And it certainly does take a broader department effort, even though the tools maybe reside in PM, We certainly working our regional counter arts on our embassies to make sure that they’re those air essentially pushed up door for our partners. And regarding this House caucus is, is there any change we should expect given listen, Recent escalation in vision Azrojan Armenia. I’m not going to get ahead of current deliberations, but of course, I would say the situation is is closely, um, of notice to a number of my colleagues, including myself. It would be, I would put it. The frame of the communications are not just at the post of level. They also curry here in Washington as well. Thanks so much. Okay, we have a couple questions in the chat function when we just get to them for us. Okay, so So this says hello, Mr Assistant Secretary. This is duck beyond from Yonhap news agency, South Korea. My question is about the deadlock in defense cost sharing discussions between South Korea and the United States. Recent reports suggest that talks resumed earlier this week with Donna Welton via phone. Can you confirm if there had been any progress made through that phone conversation? And if there will be a face to face meeting in the near future? Yeah, I’m not gonna talk about any deliberations or specific bilateral communications, but what I can talk to those, of course, were were committed to actually getting to the mutually acceptable space for Seoul and Washington. I may have mentioned earlier. Donna Not only is fluent Japanese years, uh, quite familiar with the Korean language as well, but the mutual acceptable agreement for the Republika of South Korea and four for the United States is been in continuous conversation. It’s never ended While there was a pause, we are certainly re approaching, uh, with them on. Not just it’s not just cost sharing again. It’s the the burden sharing of the security of the Korean Peninsula again from a regional context. But the the communication hasn’t stopped. I cannot talk to the specific deliberations that have been addressed, in part because we want to make sure that those warm lines of communication are just that on. We don’t want to disrupt, uh, what we’ve done. We certainly have. I would say we have shown significant flexibility in recent weeks on our bill on the need to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. I’ve emphasized that several times because we have to do this for each other. This is not, uh, an either or proposition. This is definitely of shared interest for both both nations. We have, ah question from to gender sing. Um, surfing could state your name and full organization and then ask your question once a muted come back in here. Yeah, we’ll give it a few moments and maybe come back to Jenner that in the meantime, there is the question the chat function so I can ask that, um this is Hello. This is Artur from Russian Information Agency. Could you confirm that there is an option to export of 35 fighters to the u A. E now that the country has reached a peace deal with Israel? Yeah, Thank you for that question. So I mentioned earlier there was some other questions about other systems with other states. So, as a matter of policy of the United States doesn’t comment nor to be confirmed on any kind of conversations that we may be having of something that has not been notified to our Congress. So there’s that first of all, in the second, I would prefer that inquiry to the governments of Israel on door the United Arab Emirates. I’m gonna, uh, to gender. If you are able to amuse yourself, you can ask your question and you hear me? Yes. Thank you so much. Go ahead. Okay. This is stage interesting from my 80 and Dainik Bhaskar. The my question is that if the Secretary can address the question off whether India’s current procurement strategy off buying a mix of system from multiple countries, including Russia. How does How is it working from a US perspective? And it goes like in most of the capital’s. This is the saying that it goes to us. It goes to all the countries. Finally, it’s Ah, it’s goes to Russia and buys the weapons. So what is your take on that? Well, yes. So earlier I was talking about the deepening relationship with India. So I mean, if one looks historically from where we were 10 12 years ago, maybe there’s been a significant Increased rights is about zero ah investment in 2008 uh, with India to the U. S. Systems. And if we fast forward about now, 2019 2021 train was $18 billion investment, and that’s grown. We also recognized the historic Legacy Sustainment line that a New Delhi had with Moscow on that you need to use a metaphor is not a light switch to turn on or off on. We don’t want to put at risk India’s sovereignty or India’s national defense, as there is a maturation toward future modernization of their systems. That said, there is a risk when significant Russian systems are brought forth that put at risk interoperability with not only the United States, but with other partners that India may be seeking to work with that are either of NATO status or or NATO align on. Then there’s also the risk of a potential exploitation of technology when we’re looking at significant Russian platform. So your question about it is it is an either or proposition is a completely buying area with short answer that is, no, there are probably elements and components that may be integrated well into India’s defense forces that they want to keep. I mean again as a as a former India’s myself. I mean, there’s certain weapons systems that I’m quite comfortable with that I would not, what the part with my previous capacity. But when we’re looking at modernization and we’re looking at interoperability, the key point that has been shared with Indian counterparts in what we’re looking at their future capabilities is do not put at risk future opportunities that may be impeded by significant Russian defense articles. Again, it’s not everything, but there is something like the S 400 would be a challenge. Something like the Sukhoi Su 35 would be a challenge, but we also looking at it from historic time frame. Like I said, it’s not most on anybody in the Department of Defense or the department state that India has had a lengthy, historic legacy line there. And it’s not an overnight proposition on. Like I said, you know the metaphor. I like use. It’s not a light switch and I just have a quick follow up. It’s Ah, you mentioned about 10 years ago or 12 years ago what was going on. If you remember that time, the Pakistan and us were very close. Also today, Pakistan is, as they say, in the lap of China. So how does that change the equation in Southeast Asia? Well, you mentioned China I mentioned earlier from A It’s It’s a global perspective, right? It’s not limited to to that part of Asia is not limited to Central Asia. Um, it is. It is a conversation in the consideration for all states. I mean, we have we have said when looking at, particularly the inter Pacific region that we’re seeking a region that is free from coercion were seeking to work with a region of sovereign states that respect each other’s sovereignty, and that is free on open to all that. The region is also free and open to all, or trade not victim to either coercion pressure or in a place where they’re seeking Teoh degrade or road that sovereignty. So, uh, is it Is it Is it a factor? Uh, from a regional translational context? Yes, of course. It’s, uh and, uh and but China also has the opportunity to be a responsible state themselves. It isn’t. It is not impossible for them to also recognize their sovereignty, but also recognizing value, the sovereignty of the neighbors. Thank you. We have a follow up question for you from Mr Beyond from you own up news agency out of South Korea. And the follow up is Mr Assistant Secretary. You just mentioned the US being extremely flexible recently. Does that mean the U. S. Has backed down from what was earlier said to be a request for a 50% like for South Korea? I’m not going to speak to the particulars of the deliberations again. A Zai mentioned earlier, even before Donna, before I was able to bring a senior adviser well turn on board, we had maintained warm lines of communication between Washington, Seoul But I am not gonna go into the deliberative process. The next question will goto Ken from Nikkei, Ken, when you’re a muted, please state your full name in order. All right. Uh, can you hear me? Yes. Your while You’ve just reminded yourself once you’re in you. Thank you. Thank you very much for this in the invitation email. We thought about this event, Uh, you talked about the record. Depends. Sales to the Indo Pacific region are put in place. Leaving. You said that most of it was the F 35 Japan. My question is, is there, uh, policy or strategy? The increase defense sales in the Pacific region, especially in the rise of what’s account of China. Also, could you explain, for instance, the examples of sales Southeast Asian countries, Especially now that critical player has laid out his town on the South China Sea? Thank you. Sure. Yes. I’ll get back to me. I was talking about, um, that one particular cell. They have 35 Japan. It certainly doesn’t preclude any other pending sales. Put your specific to Japan. We have this. The United States has an unwavering treaty commitment going back to 1960 on, and Japan does have a very two killers role in the region. So with the shared responsibility that Japan has the United States, there are states that take particular leadership roles in the Pacific. To your question about specific sales, what I could offers that when we’re working with partners and Japan would be included in this. There is ah, a shared assessment on what particular requirements need to be meant to be able Teoh again. One would said it maintain sovereignty, Uh, and to be able to project force, those requirements are always gonna be bespoke her state, her partner. Some states may require ah more conventional approach some and require more of an asymmetric approach. Some may require a Mex of conventional and asymmetric, regardless to your question about prioritization, it is based on where a state, maybe in alignment with their commitments to burden sharing. We talked about this earlier, uh, regarding the cream penance that we talked about this earlier regarding NATO on European states basing Russian aggression. Um, so as faras prioritization, I would put it in this this light you what states are taking on a significant amount of, uh, share a burden shared adversity when it comes to not only their own sovereignty, but where we have shared interests and where we’re meeting a shared threat. Uh, and then also where they have departments that may either be evolving emerging departments or, uh, essentially in some cases, catching up to modernize. Ah, certain capability that maybe dated again. It’s been a very from state to state. But if one is looking globally, uh, not just at one particular region and looking at the context of a great power competition and looking at what states are meeting particular challenges, this is certainly where we are both missing on attention and that it thank you on anything on topic a Southeast Asian country. Uh, I mean, we i again, I don’t want to talk about things that have not yet been announced, but safe to say, I mean, we could certainly I’m happy to share with you or any of your colleagues. Uh, what we haven’t else. I do understand, um, that for some in the media, when we roll out congressional notifications, that may not be the first thing. You look at it, you’re in, Vives. But what I can do is share what we have announced. I just what it is, as I said earlier, with several questions particular on India and on you. A. We don’t preview sales that we’ve not yet announced to our Congress. Thank you. They’re going to read another shop question for you. It’s a follow up from two gender out of India. Can the secretary say a few words? Why India should go for us systems? Oh, absolutely. Well, they’re the best. Uh, and I don’t just mean that from capability or apartments. I mean your This is the top quality way we provide the cutting edge technology. There’s actually more than that. Um, it’s not just material that isn’t just the actual system. The article itself. There is a long turn aspect of this. It’s an investment. It’s an investment in the relationship. It’s also it comes with a certain amount of what I would call extras or benefits that come with a maturing. With it comes training when it comes sustainment. When it comes other security assistance and programming that is far superior to what’s available by others that may provide a system but may not provide that that long term sustainment, a commitment that comes with that particular system. It is, um it is also easy to sell on article or good. That is a off the shelf there. The earlier question about requirements for partners The United States takes a very unique approach to make sure that whatever is developed and designed for partner is this to that partners were firing means that is unique on why is that unique? Well, again, it’s easy to buy something off the show. It’s easy to buy something off the rack, but are our procurement programs are our defense? Trade programs are designed to be just that designed to build, designed for the partner built for the partner, sustained for the partner, better quality, better commitment. That’s great. At this time, I’m going to give a brief moment for those who called in on the phone. If you’ve dialed into the zoom, um, and would like to ask a question, you can press star six to amuse yourself. I will see that you’ve un muted yourself, and I will call on you based on your area code. So I believe we have a question from 646 So go ahead. Please state your name and organisation. Hi. Good. Good afternoon, Secretary. Mr. System, Sexually, this is Waj Khan from the Nikkei Asian Review in New York City. Um, I had a quick follow up. Do what you said about again. India. You said certain weapons will form. Ah, red line like the to 35. Um, on some will. Not because it’s not a light switch on Do take years to integrate. Ah. Which weapons beyond the soup do you think are a no go area for the U. S. On for the Delhi Washington diet? Um, versus your light switch option, which is understandable long term and integrated. Thank you. Right? Yes, sir. Again, you know, we’re all wanting to avoid, um um light switch in. Why? I mentioned that I just gonna in a student of history. Pardon? Pardon me for citing this for some of our colleagues. Not Juraj. You already know this, but if you go back to the early nineties and the all of the Soviet Union, you know, one of the things that we observed here in the United States was countries that maintained were dependent on a sustainment I’m from Moscow suffered greatly because that lights which didn’t help. It did turn off. And that was that was quite catastrophic and destructive for any country that had was dependent on particular articles in material. Uh, not sustained that, right? So knowing that we don’t want to put any partner and that would be including India in a situation that occurred like in the early 19 nineties, that’s not what we want to do your question about. You know, What would those red lines be? I would say that we certainly don’t want toe prejudge any specific transaction. Uh, our potential transaction. I mentioned two examples that have been problematic for the United States. Uh, the S 400 that the Cory? Yes, you 35. But but safe to say is that this is part of the conversation that that the United States that the political Military Affairs Bureau here it’s at the department state as well as our defense colleagues, Pentagon. Why we make sure that we have these ongoing conversations with our partners? Because to your question, we certainly don’t want to find anybody in the space of surprise about there being an issue. So it is. It’s important when talking about meeting requirements regardless, if it’s an air defence requirement or it’s a border requiring it, you know, what can we do collectively to address that? And if there is a a particular defense article that may not be of U. S. Origin or Western origin, if it makes the requirement, it is not disruptive to interoperability or does not put at risk unique US technologies. That could be a different conversation. But the reason why there is a a concern about certain platforms is it does. It does make it challenging for interoperability again, not just with the United States but other states that we maybe I interoperable with with so looking at it from a future aspect of modernization, uh, maturation of defense capabilities. This is why there’s there’s candid conversations and capitals about what’s possible and what could what could be putting modernization of risk, right. Thank you. And just a quick follow up, sir, about Do you have a comment about the F 35 sales to the U A. E on this fat which is developing there? Yeah, that was asked a colleague of yours asked that question earlier. So, you know, as I’ve said, but if I had Ah ah, dollar for first time. I’ve said this today a sale. Oh, are independent consideration that we not processed or notified our Congress? Do we go as a policy? We don’t comment on Ah, in particular that when I would refer you to the governments of the u A year is but again on a macro. Uh, you know, we don’t confirm with prominent on on any any proposed defense article that we’ve not yet notified. Thank you. Um, we the our assistant secretary only has a few more moments. We have, uh, 30 in time for two more questions. Oh, yes. Okay. Great. Yeah. So we’ll go. We’ll start with Alex and then end with Raj. So, Alex, you can go first. Thank you so very much to say that I don’t ask about one last question on sexual five to be off the FAA. In other words, how does the U. S policy guidance on arms sales address memorize consideration? I did talk about Belarus and Azerbaijan earlier. Are you prepared to take this chance and address your partners International, that do not engage in memorized violations or else Thanks so much. So yeah, I would add to not just the arms Export Control Act eso In 2018 President Trump issued guidance to the Department of State to to update onto actually bolster, uh, our arms policy and so that this is the acronym Port is CAT is the conventional arms transfer policy on When this was updated by the Trump Administration, it included a host of factors and you named one of them. So in that calculus of burden sharing in that calculus of addressing shared threats in that calculus of, uh, providing capabilities of bolstering the sovereignty of the partner is human rights. And I could tell you that that calculus factors in with we’re looking at how a country applies. Those resource is only for their sovereignty, but how they’re able to do that in a way that mitigates the risk of civilian harm that mitigates the risk of civilian casualty. Uh, you know, we didn’t talk much today about it, but some of our partners are also troop contributing countries to either U. N mandated peacekeeping operations or other multilateral peacekeeping operations. We’re talking about human rights and performance measures of chip contributors and human rights of host country citizens. There is there is a consideration there. Um, I know that there are some partners that question that on have pushed back at that, um, and contain a very general sense that myself and colleagues and in Secretary Pompeo himself have had to address with counterparts eso it very much. If one’s looking at we have, they’re there to two considerations in the interagency calculus and analysis on meeting, as I called it, really but spoke defense capabilities of requirements for partners. There’s there’s the’s statutory factors that you referenced earlier with our Arms Export Control Act. And then there is on a policy side the president’s conventional arms transfer policy. There’s more than that, but those that I would call them bookends, uh, that we have on how we’re able to assess, uh, what could be available on what we would offer to a partner. Terrific. Thanks so much. Thank you. Still will end with our final question with Raj. Raj, you can ask your follow up. Thank you so much for giving me another one. Uh, it’s indicative. Cooper, thanks again adding another one from in response provision about its 400. And as you 35 I just wanted to ask if they have been any conversations with India on U. S offer of Todd and the Patriot missile defense systems. And also, if there being any conversations on this 35. Thanks. Rise thing. Thanks. Thanks for trying. Um, I’m not. Could I get ahead? I’m not gonna get at it of our deliberative conversations, but I appreciate you asking, um, So again, as said earlier, uh, way. Don’t talk about things that we’ve not yet. Uh, either bullet coat and or, more importantly, notified to our Congress. But I’m glad you asked if this goes back to several other questions What we can dio, Because I fully appreciate why many of you would not see or pay attention, Teoh, our congressional implications or CNN. We can, through the press center, make available what we’ve announced to date for particular states or regions. I’m happy to provide that. And you can include that in either one of your filing today or future future stories That that’s all. And he keeps sending us those super Okay. Okay, good ries. Thank you. I will tell Andy told me that. Thank you so much. Yes. All right. Yeah. You have a suit. Yes. Well, that’s it. Uh, I’m glad to also know, and he’s doing a great job getting everybody what they need. Ah, that’s it for questions. Assistant Secretary Cooper, thank you so much for briefing us today. Toe our participants transcript and video will be posted on our website that the FTC dot state dot If you publish your story is a result of this briefing. Please share it with us. And you can send that tow N Y f P C at ST dot gov or even send it directly to Andy. As many of you are already in touch with him. Well, this concludes today’s event. I wish you all a good afternoon.