[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
THE FUTURE OF JAPAN
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 24, 2011
__________
Serial No. 112-31
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
66-531 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the
GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
RON PAUL, Texas GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
CONNIE MACK, Florida GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California
TED POE, Texas BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
DAVID RIVERA, Florida FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania KAREN BASS, California
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
VACANT
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois, Chairman
RON PAUL, Texas ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio Samoa
DAN BURTON, Indiana FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina DENNIS CARDOZA, California
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Battalion Chief Robert J. Zoldos II, Program Manager, U.S.A.-1/
VA-TF1, Urban Search & Rescue, Fairfax County Fire and Rescue
Department..................................................... 2
Mr. Randall Schriver, Partner, Armitage International............ 7
Michael J. Green, Ph.D., Senior Adviser and Japan Chair, Center
for Strategic and International Studies........................ 14
Mr. L. Gordon Flake, Executive Director, The Maureen and Mike
Mansfield Foundation........................................... 22
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Battalion Chief Robert J. Zoldos II: Prepared statement.......... 5
Mr. Randall Schriver: Prepared statement......................... 10
Michael J. Green, Ph.D.: Prepared statement...................... 16
Mr. L. Gordon Flake: Prepared statement.......................... 25
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 42
Hearing minutes.................................................. 43
The Honorable Donald A. Manzullo, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Illinois, and chairman, Subcommittee on Asia
and the Pacific: Prepared statement............................ 44
The Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, a Representative in Congress
from American Samoa:
Prepared statement............................................. 46
Material submitted for the record.............................. 48
THE FUTURE OF JAPAN
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 24, 2011
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in
room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Donald A.
Manzullo (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Manzullo. The Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific will
come to order. Our first witness is Battalion Chief Robert
Zoldos, representing Fairfax County, Virginia, Fire and Rescue.
Chief Zoldos is in his 17th year with the Fairfax County Fire
and Rescue Department. He currently holds the position of chief
of the Urban Search and Rescue Team. Prior to his appointment
to his current position, he served as the chief of the
Technical Rescue Operations Team, the department's local and
regional response element. With him is Ms. Massey and Atticus.
Chief Zoldos deployed with the Virginia Task Force One,
VATF-1, 11 times in 7 different capacities. His previous
deployments include international rescue missions in Kenya,
Turkey, Taiwan, Iran, Haiti, and most recently to Japan as a
task force leader. Domestically, the chief served as rescue
squad officer with VATF-1 at the Pentagon after the September
11, 2001, attack.
He is accompanied today by two members of his team,
Jennifer Massey and Atticus Finch, a 5-year-old German
shepherd. Ms. Massey and Atticus are integral to Virginia Task
Force One and were deployed to Japan as part of the search and
rescue team. Ms. Massey has been with VATF-1 since 1999, and
she serves as president of the board of directors of the
American Rescue Dog Association and as treasurer of the board
of directors of the Virginia Search and Rescue Dog Association.
Our next witness is Randy Schriver, one of five founding
partners of Armitage International, a consulting firm
specializing in international business and development
strategies. He is chief executive officer and president of the
Project 2049 Institute, a not-for-profit dedicated to the study
of security trendlines in Asia. He is also senior associate of
the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Immediately
prior to his return to the private sector, he served as the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific
Affairs, responsible for the PRC, Taiwan, Mongolia, Hong Kong,
Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands. Prior to
joining the Asia Bureau, he served for 2 years as chief of
staff and the senior policy adviser to Deputy Secretary of
State Richard Armitage. He joined the Department of State in
March 2001 upon the swearing in of Deputy Secretary Armitage.
Our next witness is Michael Green, a senior adviser and
Japan chair at CSIS, as well as an associate professor of
international relations at Georgetown University. He previously
served as Special Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs and Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the
National Security Council from January 2004 to December 2005
after joining the NSC in 2001 as Director of Asian Affairs with
responsibility for Japan, Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.
His current research and writing is focused on Asia regional
architecture, Japanese politics, U.S. foreign policy history,
the Korean Peninsula, Tibet, Burma and U.S.-India relations.
The next witness is L. Gordon Flake, who joined the
Mansfield Foundation in February 1999. He was previously a
senior fellow and associate director of the Program on Conflict
Resolution at the Atlantic Council of the U.S. and, prior to
that, director of research and academic affairs at the Korea
Economic Institute of America. He has traveled to North Korea
numerous times. He is a member of the London-based
International Institute for Strategic Studies and he serves on
the Board of the U.S. Committee of the Council for Security
Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific.
Your complete written testimonies will be made a part of
the record. I will try to keep everybody within the 5-minute
clock. We will just do the best we can.
Mr. Zoldos, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF BATTALION CHIEF ROBERT J. ZOLDOS II, PROGRAM
MANAGER, U.S.A.-1/VA-TF1, URBAN SEARCH & RESCUE, FAIRFAX COUNTY
FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT
Chief Zoldos. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
thank you for inviting me today to testify at this important
hearing. I will focus my testimony today on the rescue efforts
and the level of devastation in the aftermath of the tragic
earthquake and tsunami.
First I would like to extend my deepest condolences to
those who lost loved ones, homes and livelihoods in the
affected areas.
On March 11 at 1446 hours in Japan, a magnitude 9.0
earthquake, the fifth largest in the world since 1900, occurred
on the east coast off Honshu at a depth of approximately 15
miles. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the epicenter
of the earthquake was located 80 miles east of Sendai, the
capital of the Miyagi Prefecture, and 231 miles northeast of
Tokyo.
The earthquake generated a large tsunami that struck the
Fukushima Prefecture, resulting in additional fatalities and
damage. At the time, media reports indicated that the
earthquake and the tsunami resulted in at least 300 deaths and
injuries.
The United States Agency for International Development
maintains agreements with two FEMA-certified urban search and
rescue domestic teams, Los Angeles County in California and the
Fairfax County team in Virginia. The teams maintain 24/7
readiness to deploy to international disasters when requested
by the affected country and the U.S. chief of mission.
Within 3 hours of the earthquake, the U.S. Agency for
International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster
Assistance gave an alert to the two teams to begin preparing
for a possible USAR deployment in Japan. This alert allows us
to begin bringing in our team's command and general staff as
well as to prepare our equipment for deployment.
USAID requested two USAR teams, one from each department.
The two teams were composed of a total of 148 personnel trained
in search, rescue, and medical services; and 12 live rescue
search canines, like Atticus here--he is usually a little more
active than this--who is here today with his handler Jennifer
Massey. Working under the direction of experienced handlers
like Jennifer, our live search canines are able to locate live
victims deep within the rubble.
Along with personnel and canines, we also bring with us a
great deal of search and rescue equipment for operating in any
type of construction or building. Each team has the capacity
for physical, canine, and electronic searches, or what the
average person refers to as looking, sniffing and listening.
We also bring a vast emergency medical capacity, which
allows for the treatment of injured team members as well as
victims we find during operations. Other highly trained
specialists on our teams are able to assess damage, determine
needs, provide feedback to local officials, and conduct
hazardous material surveys and evaluations of affected areas.
The teams that deployed to Japan also had a water rescue
capability, which was anticipated to be in demand due to the
presence of the heavily flooded areas.
USAID deployed two heavy teams to Japan, one from Fairfax
and one from Los Angeles. This means that these teams had the
highest classification possible under the U.N.-sponsored
International Search and Rescue Advisory Group, or INSARAG, and
designates the ability to search in any type of building,
including reinforced concrete.
The two U.S. teams arrived in Misawa, Japan, on March 13.
We landed on a U.S. military airbase there. The military
greeted, housed and fed us. Our 60-ton equipment cache was
transported on trucks operated by U.S. airmen, all of whom had
experienced the quake and were very happy to see a rescue team.
After initial inbrief by local officials, we were
immediately dispatched to Ofunato, one of the most affected
areas in the Iwate Prefecture in northeastern Japan. The
Japanese Ministry of Defense transported a large portion of our
equipment from Misawa Air Force Base to where we set up our
base of operations at the Setamai school in Sumita. We had had
readiness meetings with local authorities to establish
operational assignments, search criteria, and incident
objectives. And at first light on March 15, the teams headed
out to begin search and rescue operations alongside the
Japanese and international search and rescue teams.
Our two U.S. teams searched with teams from the United
Kingdom, China, and many of our brothers from the Osaka and
Ofunato fire departments. House by house and building by
building, we scoured the debris-ravaged remains of Ofunato
looking for victims.
There were heavy losses in this once thriving community.
Large boats and ships were scattered throughout the area, with
many resting between building. Vehicles were all over rooftops,
but the majority of the buildings in low-lying areas were
simply gone. Some people lost everything, family, friends,
their homes and businesses, and yet we were greeted with an
outpouring of kindness that none of us will ever forget.
After searching in Ofunato, we were unable to locate any
survivors. Local officials asked that we move on in our search
to Kamaishi, north of Ofunato. Much like in our previous
search, the wall of water generated by the enormous quake
destroyed the area surrounding the bay. Houses and buildings
were unrecognizable.
As a rescuer combing through the rubble, we were always
searching for voids. Even the smallest void space can provide
enough room for someone to possibly survive. Both of our teams
deployed in the aftermath of the January 2010 earthquake in
Haiti, and the U.S. teams were able to make an unprecedented 47
live rescues. Some of these rescues were in void spaces so
small and so precarious that I still can't fathom how some of
them survived.
But in Japan, we were searching in areas where the tsunami
had utterly washed over and through nearly every possible void
space. So if one might had survived the earthquake in a void,
then they had to beat the odds a second time when the tsunami
struck. Compound this with the fact that the weather was often
below freezing. We knew the likelihood of finding someone was
very, very slim. And yet the U.S. teams and our partners never
gave up the search and our hope as we searched every inch of
our assigned locations.
We demobilized and returned home on March 20 after
searching all locations assigned to us by the Japanese
Government. It was difficult to accept that we were unable to
find any survivors, but we were honored to have been deployed
to help the Japanese in their time of need. Everywhere we went
in Japan, we were warmly greeted by a resilient population that
extended their arms to embrace our rescue teams even in the
face of this utter tragedy.
On behalf of the Urban Search and Rescue Teams in Los
Angeles and Fairfax County, I would like to thank the
Government of Japan for inviting us and the United States
Government for deploying us to assist in the aftermath of this
tragic disaster. I would also like to thank the Board of
Supervisors for both Fairfax and Los Angeles Counties for their
unwavering support of our international search and rescue
efforts.
I will be happy to take any questions you may have, sir.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Chief Zoldos follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Manzullo. Mr. Schriver.
STATEMENT OF MR. RANDALL SCHRIVER, PARTNER, ARMITAGE
INTERNATIONAL
Mr. Schriver. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the
invitation to address this committee. I am quite honored, and I
am honored to be seated with my fellow panelists Mr. Zoldos on
the front lines and my good friends Mike and Gordon.
Let me add to the expressions of condolence that have also
been made. The tragedy is 2 months past, but there are still
people suffering in very dire circumstances, so it is important
that we keep people in our thoughts and prayers.
Let me just make two points up front. From time to time, we
hear people question whether or not Japan will recover and
reconstitute. I think we should dispense with that notion.
Japan will recover. It is a great country, a great society, a
great nation, and has a history, as the Ambassador said, of
coming back from previous tragedy. The real question, the
salient issue, is the pace and what trajectory. Will Japan
slide into a middle power status given these not only recent
events, but some of the other challenges they faced, or will
they truly have the wherewithal to emerge to a regional and
global status to where they have been for the past several
decades?
The second point I want to make up front, we should be
very, very clear that it is in our interests in the United
States for Japan to follow that second path, to the path of
recovery to regional and global leadership. It is important to
us not only because of our alliance and our affinity with our
friends in Japan, but our regional strategy, in many ways our
global strategy, is dependent on a strong alliance, what we are
doing on the Korean Peninsula, our obligations in the Taiwan
Strait, our mutual support for freedom of navigation and so
forth. We need Japan to recover, and as a friend and ally, we
need to be seeking out ways that we can help them make that
fast recovery and return to a position of prominence.
Japan, of course, has many of the immediate challenges that
were already mentioned: The recovery of the immediate affected
areas, relocation of population, dealing with the energy
situation, and I would add to the comments already made about
how impressed everyone is with how the Japanese citizens have
responded, their strength in the face of this crisis, their
benevolence to fellow citizens and to hosting our people.
Let me also say in the immediate response, a
congratulations and support is also noted for the Obama
administration and how well they have done, and particularly
our military services who responded alongside brothers in arms
and rescue workers. So this was a joint effort extremely well
done, and we should acknowledge that.
The medium term, of course, and the longer term, there are
some uncertainties. I think Japan's essential choice about
turning inward or seeking to still retain positions of regional
and global influence, these are real questions, and the
discrete policy decisions that will be made in the present and
in the near term will impact that.
Again, our aspirations are for a strong Japan. We can't
have and should not be complacent about Japan looking inward.
But I would also add there are a few voices who have talked
about a reorientation opportunity for Japan, some high-profile
op-eds maybe, about looking at reorienting away from the
alliance and maybe toward China.
I just want to say that while China will surely be part of
the recovery and will surely be part of Japan's trajectory out
of this crisis, this would not be a very wise move, in my
opinion. China is not the same kind of partner that the United
States will be now and looking forward; at best, an unreliable
partner. We only need to look at the events of 2010 to see
China's more assertive sovereignty claims; vis-a-vis Japan,
their cutting off of rare earth materials when Japan was in
need; and in general, an attitude of supporting the adversaries
of Japan, like North Korea. So I hope it is not an inward turn,
but I also hope it is not a reorientation away from the
alliance. I very much believe in the future of this alliance.
I also just want to say, although most of us are consumed
about talking about Japan's challenges and the uncertainties in
Japan and decisions that they have to make, there are some
uncertainties about the United States that we have to be
realistic about. And if you are sitting in Tokyo or anywhere
else in the region, there are questions about our own
wherewithal.
Japan looks at us, I am sure, and sees we are involved in a
third war in the Middle East now. And will our attention be
once again diverted away from Asia? They follow our budget
debates and understand that there may be defense cuts coming.
What would that mean for the alliance? What would that mean for
the region? They wonder about our support for trade
liberalization, a long hallmark of U.S. leadership in Asia. Now
we are hardly in the game, as others are pursuing it in a
robust manner. And they look at things like our own engagement
of China, and they see something like the strategic and
economic dialogue and the number of Cabinet secretaries and the
President himself, their level of involvement with that. We
have nothing like that with respect to our best ally in the
region with Japan. So they look at these things, and they
wonder about us. So I think as we think about how to help
Japan, we also need to think about our own policies and our own
positioning.
So, again, I think it is absolutely vital that we invest in
the future of this alliance for reasons that I have articulated
and others have articulated. It does require the time and
attention of our seniormost leaders. It does require, I think,
for us to be a leader on trade, not a reluctant participant.
And I think we should have high aspirations and expectations
for this alliance, not give Japan a pass or in any way be
implicit in an inward look on their part.
Thank you.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schriver follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Manzullo. Mr. Green.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. GREEN, PH.D., SENIOR ADVISER AND JAPAN
CHAIR, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
Mr. Green. Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me. Thank
you for focusing on our ally in its time of need and support.
The triple disaster of March 11 has been the greatest
crisis Japan has faced since the war. More than 24,000 dead and
missing. More than 400,000 displaced. More than 70,000 who have
lost their jobs. I lived for a time as a student not far from
the area where our colleagues from Fairfax were deployed in the
Iwate Prefecture, and it has been personally heartbreaking for
me to see this beautiful coast eliminated by the power of
nature.
For all the reasons my friend Randy Schriver said, Japan is
our indispensable linchpin not only in the Pacific, but
globally; the second largest contributor to the World Bank, the
IMF, the United Nations. I worked for 5 years on the National
Security Council staff. We could not do anything we do in the
Pacific and beyond if we didn't have Japan as our ally.
Americans know that.
In the first month, $250 million was raised by private U.S.
citizens. Thousands of Americans have gone to help. 20,000 from
the U.S. military. For our part, at the Center for Strategic
and International Studies, we have established a task force
called the Partnership for Recovery with Japan's Business
Federation Keidanren. The task force is chaired by the CEO of
Boeing Jim McNerney, and we have about 25 prominent Americans
at that level from civil society think tanks and the corporate
sector, and we are working with our colleagues in Japan to come
up with ideas and areas where the U.S. can help as Japan charts
its recovery and moves on a trajectory to a strong economic
position and strong role in the world. And we would be very
happy to brief you, and the members of the committee, and your
staffs as we move forward and get some concrete ideas out on
the table. We will be traveling to Japan in June.
I have seen some of the opportunities and challenges Japan
will face coming out of this. I would like to focus on what I
would say are three strengths and three problems, three
challenges. The three strengths are things that people who knew
Japan understood. But I think for much of the world, the
Japanese public's response to this crisis has really
spotlighted some resilience that much of our media had
forgotten about.
First is the esteem and respect with which Japan is viewed
around the world. Public opinion polls taken globally have
always ranked Japan in the top three countries or four
countries, often first, in terms of respect worldwide. Well
over 100 countries have responded, rich countries like the
United States or Britain or Australia, but countries like
Afghanistan, where people from Kandahar who have benefited from
Japanese aid have sent money, sent rugs and blankets to help.
It is played back in the Japanese media, and people appreciate
this in Japan. It has, I think, given a new sense of how
important Japan is to the world, to the Japanese themselves.
Secondly, Randy touched on this, it really is important,
the performance of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces and the
U.S. military with them in a supporting role was exemplary.
Operation Tomodachi, which means ``friend,'' is the largest
joint and combined operation we have ever done with Japan. And
our friends and adversaries alike will take note of the fact
that in 3 days we rebuilt Sendai airport, which had been
absolutely devastated. That is no insignificant
interoperability incapacity. It reassures our friends; and as I
said, our adversaries will take note of how close we are.
Third, the Japanese youth, which has been dismissed in
recent writings as sort of lost and without a goal, has been
incredible in this crisis. Over 300,000 people have volunteered
from within Japan to go north. Companies and schools are giving
volunteer vacations. I teach at Georgetown, and just about
every Japanese student I have ever had or intern I have ever
had has dropped what they are doing and has gone north really
speaks well to the next generation of Japanese leadership.
Three challenges. The economic one is quite clear. As the
Ambassador said and Randy said, Japan will recover. The fiscal
situation is stressful. They will manage that. There will be
some hollowing out in Tohoku as companies diversify their risk
from production. Twenty to thirty percent of production may not
come back to that region, but that is an opportunity to rebuild
a new kind of economic model in that part of Japan.
Secondly, energy. The rolling blackouts are over. Energy
supply is adequate. But in the long run, Japan had planned on
moving from 30 percent of energy supply from nuclear to 50
percent. That is going to be hard. Japanese public support
nuclear, but they are going to have to look at this. I think if
Japan investigates and reports on this experience, it will be
well positioned to lead the world in defining new safety
requirements for peaceful nuclear energy.
Finally, politically this has stressed the Japanese
Government. There are a lot of ideas, a lot of plans. There is
no centralized planning process yet. It will come. It is a
challenge. I think the opportunity is that we have seen in this
crisis some new political stars start to rise and some real
energy in all the major parties.
We will stand with Japan, all of us. This committee has set
the example. Ultimately Japanese leaders will make the
decisions, make the calls, but the fact the United States is
there with them to offer support, ideas, and assistance will
matter enormously. So I thank you for calling this hearing and
for your support as well.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Green follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Manzullo. Mr. Flake?
STATEMENT OF MR. L. GORDON FLAKE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE
MAUREEN AND MIKE MANSFIELD FOUNDATION
Mr. Flake. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, am honored to
join my fellow panelists in addressing this important topic at
this time.
With your lead, I will just summarize a few of the key
points from my written testimony. But first and foremost, I
want to very much associate myself with the comments of my
fellow panelists. I very much agree with them, and in my
written comments you will see that there are similar veins in
terms of our relative optimism about the recovery of Japan and
the potential of this tragic event to in a positive way affect
the trajectory of Japan as a nation and as an ally of the
United States.
As I understand, the underlying assumption of the panel and
the reason we are holding it today is that the events of March
11, as tragic as they were, have the potential to alter Japan's
trajectory, and there is some concern that it may cause Japan
to kind of pull inward. With an already difficult fiscal
situation in Japan, with a tremendous cost incurred by this
tragedy, there is concern that Japan will no longer be willing
or able to engage with us in the region as we have done in the
past. And I think that is a very important issue for us to
address, given the importance of Japan as our ally in Asia and
how much we rely on things that we do jointly.
I think if you look at my written testimony and the
comments made earlier, I am generally optimistic that that
won't be the case. But rather than speak about the issue more
broadly, I think it is useful to look at one very specific and
important example in the region itself. So I, in my written
remarks and today, will choose to focus really on Japan-South
Korea relations as two of our most important allies in the
region.
So as a way to sort of use a litmus test to kind of test
the assumption that Japan might be retrenching--and I think,
again, looking at the case of Korea gives you perhaps exactly
the opposite answer--that the events of March 11, as horrific
as they may be, actually in the short and long run will likely
have a positive influence on relationships between our two most
important allies that at times in the past have been troubled,
and this is a rare and important opportunity for us to improve
those relations and for Japan and Korea to work together as
they go forward.
I would note that many of the issues that we were asked to
address in this panel are also directly relevant to that core
relationship in Northeast Asia: The question of
denuclearization, particularly in North Korea; the question of
human rights, again, with North Korea being first and foremost;
free trade. Obviously we are at the cusp, hopefully, of passing
the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, the KORUS. It is something
that would have a tremendous impact on U.S-Japan trade
relations and, of course, on Korea-Japan trade relations going
forward. The broader question of the role of China in the
region. All of these things really are tied up in that
relationship between these two core allies that we have in
Japan and Korea.
I would note that prior to the events of March 11, the
Korea-Japan relations were on a historic upswing. Political
changes in both Japan and Korea really resulted in a remarkable
improvement in the political relationship, which had been
difficult because of historical legacy and other issues,
territorial disputes, et cetera. But there was remarkably close
coordination with Washington on North Korea; on North Korea
policy; on joint responses to actions by North Korea; on
actions and inactions by China in the region, everything from
China's ignoring the sinking of the Cheonan or the Yeonpyeong
shelling to China's actions in the Senkaku Islands or their
statements on the South China Sea. These all serve to push
Korea and Japan as allies of the United States ever closer
together.
And you had some real positive developments on the security
front with some historic developments in South Korea and Japan
military-to-military relationships, with South Korea and
defense officials attending and observing U.S.-Japan naval
exercises and vice versa.
So again, we are on the uptick. So the question really
would be for this panel today, how did the events of this past
March affect that trajectory?
It is important to note that Korea was the first country to
have a search and rescue team on the ground in Japan. It was
partly due to proximity, but it is a remarkable statement of
how things have changed in that relationship. Some 76 percent
of the Korean public polled shortly thereafter were highly
supportive of that deployment and of gathering aid to send to
Japan, again which tells you how dramatically things have
shifted in that relationship in a positive direction, and that
included some very high-profile entertainers and others. They
are emblematic of the changes in that relationship as you go
forward.
I would note, if you look at, again, some of the
fundamental questions that the committee has raised, there
really is, as a result of the events of March 11, no change in
policy coordination toward North Korea. That will continue
unabated. Just this past weekend there was a very successful
Japan-South Korea-China summit meeting in Japan where, as the
Ambassador mentioned, they went jointly to the disaster area
where they began to push for a free trade agreement.
The Ambassador also mentioned Japan's commitment to
consider TPP. I would urge that if the United States is
successful at passing the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, it
would be a tremendous driver for cooperation between Japan and
Korea in the region on free trade and other issues that we have
a great interest in here in the United States as well.
Also issues such as human rights, of course, are not
resource-driven. So at least in the Korea-Japan relationship,
the premise that somehow Japan deprived of resources is going
to turn inward, I think, is probably going to be the exact
opposite. The Ambassador gave a very telling statistic that,
despite this historic and devastating earthquake, tsunami, and
nuclear crisis, they are only planning to cut their foreign aid
7 percent. And in these days of budget cutting in Washington,
DC, 7 percent seems like an awfully small number to me in that
regard as you go forward. Again, it is emblematic of Japan's
commitment to the region as we go forward.
I would just say that the United States can do nothing
better than to continue to support these trends that I have
just outlined in the trilateral relationship between the United
States and its two important allies in Asia.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Flake follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Manzullo. The congressional district that I represent
has over 2,000 factories. It is one of the most densely
populated manufacturing areas in the country, with quite a bit
of Japanese foreign direct investment. Mitsubishi, known for
automobiles and rockets, actually owns the only American
production facility of rice crackers, which are made in
Rockford, Illinois. Nippon Sharyo broke ground to build a
massive $40 million facility to build cars for the Chicago
Metro. Rocknel Fasteners. We could go on and on with the extent
of the massive investments by the Japanese into the United
States.
I am concerned over the issue of the United States, quite
frankly, focusing a lot on China and not focusing enough on our
friend for years and years. Mr. Schriver, you had mentioned the
fact that China had cut off the supply of rare earth minerals
at a time when here in this country we have a tremendous
shortage in the permanent magnets, neodymium iron boron and
samarium cobalt. China has a 97 percent share of manufacturing
those items, and, of course, they are used in electronics and
guidance systems and in batteries for hybrid and battery-driven
automobiles.
My question is: Are we just sitting on the sidelines
watching things happen, watching China continue to dominate or
try to dominate the manufacturing sector, and neglecting our
bilateral relationship with Japan? It is kind of a tough
question, but you guys didn't think I would throw a softball,
did you? Does anybody want to take a stab at that? Mr.
Schriver?
Mr. Schriver. Well, I guess I introduced the topic
partially. I think there are a number of ways to measure
support and sort of take the temperature of a relationship.
Certainly when it comes to the time and attention of our
seniormost leaders, it looks like sort of a sinocentric
approach to the region, that strategic and economic dialogue
which we are now in our third round of that. At one point last
year during our visit to Beijing in conjunction with that
dialogue, over half the U.S. Cabinet was in China. And I think
in terms of measuring the relationship in that regard, we just
aren't doing that same kind of investment with our closest
allies.
So I think people watch that. And you could say, well, that
is process, and it is symbolic. It is not substance. But I
think in some cases, the symbolic gestures do affect substance,
and certainly affect impressions and perceptions. So I think
more time and attention to our best ally, first among equals
for sure in Asia, warrant it.
Mr. Manzullo. But how do you do that?
Mr. Schriver. Well, we have been unable to schedule a two-
plus-two meeting, which is the Foreign Minister/Defense
Minister meeting. Why has it taken so long to do that and have
that kind of meeting at a time when I think it would be very
welcome? We need to be creative about putting the U.S.-Japan
alliance in a leadership role when it comes to regional and
global problem solving, not relying on China, some people have
gone so far as to suggest a G-2 with China. So it is an
investment in sort of the bureaucratic infrastructure, but it
is really outlook, and it is really aspirations for the
alliance, and I think our aspirations for the alliance could be
higher.
Mr. Manzullo. Mr. Flake.
Mr. Flake. Well, I would very much agree with Mr. Schriver
that there needs to be more attention paid to Japan. I would
caution against trying to measure relative importance just by
the amount of time spent on an issue. I think the amount of
time we spent on China is more representative of the
difficulties that we face in that relationship in that regard.
And I would point out that tragic events like that of March
11th really do tend to bring home the level of importance and
the level of closeness in the relationship. And so in this case
alliances matter. The notion that we could have that level of
close coordination on relief efforts, as both the Ambassador
and Dr. Green highlighted in terms of this Operation Tomodachi,
with a country where we didn't have 40 years of close--50 years
of close alliance, coordination, and cooperation, it is kind of
fanciful in that regard. And I do think that events that we
have seen right now have tended to focus the attention of the
United States on the importance of that ally.
So the amount of bureaucratic and other attention paid to
Japan in the month immediately following the tsunami,
earthquake and nuclear crisis, I think, was unprecedented in
terms of the teams that went out there. Obviously the key right
now is to sustain that.
Mr. Green. If I may, when George Shultz was Secretary of
State, he said that our security in the Pacific and across the
Atlantic depends on our allies. But the diplomacy of alliances
is like tending a garden; you have got to get up every morning,
you have to pull the weeds.It is labor-intensive; it is not
always dramatic or not always in the press. When have you
difficult big relationships like we have with China, that all
gets in the press. And so there is a natural tendency for
senior officials to want to get the headlines, to go for the
big win in relations with China. But in the long run our
ability to manage China's rising power will depend on how much
gardening we do in the alliances.
And there are issues. Randy mentioned scheduling the two-
plus-two, the senior meetings; defense making a decision on its
next fighter, and we are going to have to work through the
bureaucratic process of helping them hopefully decide on an
American aircraft, for example. There is just a lot of this
kind of gardening.
Frankly, to the extent that Congress is engaged in this
dialog, it is keeping the spotlight on it with the
administration, that helps a lot, because, as I said, the
gardening part is not always going to get the headlines, but in
the long run that is what really counts.
And you can see the results in Operation Tomodachi and the
way our militaries operated together, this huge joint and
combined operation. We can do that about almost no one else in
the same way. So it is not as if people haven't put in the
work, but with fewer time on the calendar, this alliance
management is going to need a renewed energy from the
administration, State Department, Pentagon, but across the
board.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you.
Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity and thank the panel for being with us today.
What long-term effects--and any of you can respond to
this--what long-term effects, if any, will the disasters have
on the competitiveness of Japanese companies, particularly in
the auto and electronic sector? And how does the disaster
impact the U.S. manufacturing sector and jobs? Because we get
quite a few raw materials from Japan, particularly in the steel
industry, that are needed here. So what long-term impacts do
you see there?
Mr. Green. The Japanese manufacturing sector, the
production chains were interrupted. My wife and I tried to buy
a car recently, and we were told, at Japanese auto dealerships,
Mitsubishi, Toyota, and so forth, there is a 3- to 6-month
waiting list. It wasn't just final manufactured and sold cars.
Korea has terrific wireless and cell phone technology, but you
open up any Samsung or Lucky Goldstar cellphone, and the
critical semiconductors inside are Japanese.
I was recently in Seoul and talked to the president of a
major chaebol, a major conglomerate, and he said very candidly
when they were interrupted--Korean production was interrupted
because they couldn't get these critical components from
Japan--they looked seriously at creating that capacity
themselves in Korea and concluded it was 5- to 10-year
enormously expensive effort. And they didn't try because they
figured Japan would be back on track within a matter of months.
So I think Japan will retain that competitive edge in these
critical subcomponents. But what I am hearing from Japanese
executives I have talked to is they are going to diversify a
bit. The number I keep hearing is 20 percent, 30 percent of the
production, and manufacturing that was in northern Japan is
going to be moved. Some of that may come to the U.S., some of
it will go to India, some of it will go to China. But the
business community is becoming wary of China. Because the
Chinese side overplayed its hand when it took this mercantilist
step of cutting off rare earth exports because of a diplomatic
flap, that sent a message to the whole world and the
marketplace. So the Japanese are going to look at India and
Vietnam, and they will diversify and hedge their risk.
In the long run I think that means the economy will be back
on track. There may be more jobs for us. We can count on Japan
as a supplier. It creates possibly a different economic model
in northern Japan, possibly an opportunity. They are going to
have to rebuild, they can create a new IT, a different kind of
economic model there.
So there will be changes, but I think competitiveness is
going to be restored and maintained.
Mr. Johnson. Kind of a corollary to that, the Japanese
Government recently announced that it would have to postpone
its decision on whether to participate in the negotiations of
the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. How would the lack of
Japan's participation affect the effectiveness of the TPP
negotiations? And is Japan's participation necessary, in your
view, for the success of the TPP?
Mr. Green. If my colleagues don't mind, the reality--my
first job in government was in USTR, so I know how they think.
The reality is that negotiating with Japan is tough, the third
largest economy, the second largest OECD advanced industrial
economy. TPP right now in countries like New Zealand, Singapore
are easier to negotiate with.
So I think negotiating with Japan will be tough. And there
are some who are, I think, in the U.S. Government and other
governments in TPP on the fence about whether they want to get
into that big scrum in the Japanese Government because they are
good negotiators.
Strategically, however, in the longer term, if we don't get
Japan in TPP, it doesn't accomplish what we should really want,
which is building a trans-Pacific trade architecture. It
ensures that as Asia integrates, we are in, and that we have
access and opportunities. So sooner or later it is, I think,
undeniably in U.S. interests for Japan to be in.
Mr. Johnson. So basically if I understand what you are
saying correctly, TPP, its effectiveness in ultimately
achieving what we were trying to achieve with TPP, it is
essential that----
Mr. Green. Eventually, that is right.
Mr. Johnson. If Japan is not going to be a part of it, we
are not going to get out of it what we are looking for.
Mr. Green. That is right. If it is going to really define
trade rules across the Pacific, eventually we have got to have
Japan.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Manzullo. Mr. Kelly, who knows a little bit about
automobiles.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am an automobile dealer, and we can help you with that
car you can't find. We do have some Korean models that probably
will fit in there real well.
Chief, I want to congratulate you on the efforts as I think
that the United States has always been the first responder. No
matter where the disaster takes place in the world, no matter
what the issue may be, we always seem to be the first one there
with the most help. Any lessons learned?
Chief Zoldos. A couple major lessons learned. That was the
first time our team had actually been collocated with two other
major teams. The Fairfax Team, USA Team 1; and USA Team 2, the
Los Angeles team; and the United Kingdom's ISAR team were all
put at one location and really operate as a triple team, if you
will. That combined with the fact that the Japanese LEMA, local
emergency management, was very well defined and had the
situation very well detailed as far as operational assignments.
Those two together really mapped out our day far more than we
are normally used to. Our last mission was to Haiti, and
obviously that was much more of an open rescue environment.
I think one of the takeaways is that when we are working in
that sort of--those restrictions and how well the day is laid
out, we really look farther down the road, because our first
operational assignment was 1 square kilometer for the entire
day. Obviously we can knock that out with 74 people in just a
matter of hours.
So it is getting the understanding of what our team's
capabilities are out there. Our team is an international
classified; there are only 21 teams like that. And with that
goes a fact sheet, goes some understanding of what our team can
do. I think the more teams operate with the Japanese, with the
Chinese and other teams that are out there, that understanding
of our capabilities will allow for more seamless operation.
Mr. Kelly. And I know for about 50 years we have had a
great alliance with Japan. I know there has been some fear on
the Japanese side that somehow they may get abandoned by the
United States. Certainly our response and our commitment
smoothed over some of those fears. Were you able to detect that
at all while were you there?
Chief Zoldos. Well, the one interesting part was, and we
have said this many times, firefighters are firefighters
worldwide. And we were welcomed as part of the team, and really
it was seamless. Our briefings were at 8 p.m. Every night, and
the Osaka Fire Department ran that operational area. They
brought their people up, and they were the commanding general
staff. And we were at the table just like everyone else was. So
there was sort of a comfort level between fire rescue
professionals there.
Mr. Kelly. From an economic standpoint, I am a very big
backer of the KORUS agreement. I am not sure that our approach
to it makes sense. I think we approach everything that we do as
having some type of a political push on one side or the other.
By having hearings like this, and Mr. Blake, Mr. Green and Mr.
Schriver have been able to address that.
The upside of a free trade agreement with Korea right now
is so critical to the United States and our economic recovery.
I just wonder a little bit, because you made, I think, a very
good statement saying that we are the custodians or we are the
stewards of what we have right now, which we really don't own
anything; it is just put in our care and custody until the time
we actually have control. The idea is to make it better for
that next generation coming after us.
I am really worried right now that we have again back-
burnered a trade agreement that is absolutely--it is not an
option, this is essential. We are talking a $10-$12 billion
upside for the United States, and we made it political to see
who is going to blink first as to whether we pass that or not.
If you could--because these are the type of hearings that
shed some light for the American people as to what is actually
going on--just if you could, give a little bit of a walkthrough
for us of what the upside of that KORUS agreement would be, not
in addition to Panama and Colombia, but I do know firsthand
with Korea and how it would stabilize that part of the world
for us. I mean, we have got two very good allies that we have
to rely on in an area that is really under great duress right
now by an aggressive Chinese President. So if you could give
just us a little upside of that.
Mr. Flake. Let me start off with that and say first and
foremost I agree with you completely. If you were looking at
further upsides in the Korea-U.S Free Trade Agreement above and
beyond the jobs, which again, obviously, on a domestic level is
most important, but on a broader strategic level there really
is a competition in some level going on between the United
States and China in this region. One of the subtexts of this
hearing is what is going to happen if Japan is no longer
engaged? Does that not cede the ground to China?
If we fail to ratify a free trade agreement of this
magnitude with one of our closest allies in the region, what
does that say about American economic leadership in the region
when all the other countries are watching this deal? The notion
that we could go forward with the Trans-Pacific Partnership,
the TPP, if we fail to get KORUS is fanciful, right?
On the flip side of that, if we do ratify KORUS and move
forward on that front, it puts tremendous pressure on Japan--
actually in some ways not pressure, it actually opens the field
for Japan to move forward in working with us on TPP. Obviously
Korea's free trade agreement is what we call a gold standard, a
high-level, high-quality free trade agreement, and Koreans
would almost automatically be in the TPP in that process. And
the notion that Japan then could sit on the sidelines again
kind of misses the broader kind of strategic realities in the
region.
So I think from our own national interests, from our
leadership in the region, from these competing models of free
trade and economic development in the region between us and
China, and from the relationship with our two allies on a
strategic level, I can't think of anything we could do better
at this point. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Mr. Green. We are all friends of long standing; Gordon
worked for the Obama campaign, Randy and I worked for the
McCain campaign, but you would be very hard pressed, in fact I
think you could not find an expert on Asia who spends time in
the region and thinks about it, Independent, Republican or
Democrat, who is opposed to the KORUS FTA. It is critical to
our future in the region. As you mentioned, 10-plus billion
dollars in new economic activity.
But in Asia there are, depending on how you count, well
over 100 FTAs now signed or being negotiated. We are in about
three or four of them. If we don't ratify this free trade
agreement, we are not going have the credibility to get into
any trade negotiations in Asia in the future.
What does that mean? I mean, not only are we going to miss
opportunities to reduce barriers to trade in terms of tariffs,
these are the free trade agreements and the arrangements that
are going to write the rules for everything from services, to
labor protection, to environment, to what kind of access and
contract--I mean, everything. It is much more than just the
tariffs involved. It is about rulemaking in the most dynamic
economic region in the world.
So, you know, our friends, all of us experience this. Our
friends in Asia are sort of perplexed why we are not moving
expeditiously to pass this. I know the reason, not as well as
you all do, but free trade agreements are hard. But in terms of
our position in Asia, it frankly is a no-brainer to most people
who follow the region.
Mr. Schriver. I will just add to that very briefly, because
I agree 100 percent with my colleagues. A lot of us, even on
the other side of the aisle, worked on the Republicans when the
Obama administration came in and said we are back in Asia. We
were grateful to see that and grateful to see the time and
attention. But you cannot be back in Asia without a trade
agenda, you cannot be back in Asia if you are not part of the
discussion and the dialogue about trade and commerce, because
that is the lifeblood of this region, and we are not in the
game right now. KORUS is important for the economic and the
trade benefits, but it is of strategic value for us and for the
alliance.
You know, there is an expression about warfare: It is too
important to be left to the generals and the military. This
trade policy right now needs to transcend trade officials, it
needs to transcend politics. We need leadership, and we need to
get it done, and we need to do TPP as well. Otherwise we are
not back, and we are not in the game.
Mr. Kelly. I sure hope we move in that direction, because
we all know this. The strength of the alliance is the strength
of each member, and the strength of each member is on the
strength of the alliance. So we have got to work together, and
we have got to move forward. This is not a political; this is
an American solution to American needs. So thank you very much
for coming here today.
Mr. Manzullo. This last February I was in Christchurch, New
Zealand, along with seven other Members of Congress, and we
left 2 hours and 21 minutes before the massive earthquake.
I think, frankly, there is no foreign trade policy of the
Obama administration. Let me just throw this out to you, what
we found to be extraordinarily disturbing. New Zealand is a
very interesting country. It is a small country. We got into
some very earnest discussions with the Speaker of the House Mr.
Smith and others in the government over the fact that New
Zealand was almost willing to close their eyes to infringement
on software by China in exchange for more trade with China.
That really was the purpose of my congressional delegation,
because we also had a similar problem with Australia, but not
as extreme as what we are experiencing with New Zealand. Our
mission there was to try to impress upon the people in both
those countries the absolute importance of protecting
intellectual property.
There was a study that just came down, I believe, from
either a think tank or a government agency--that said that the
Chinese were responsible just in the past year for $40 billion
of lost profits as a result of violating intellectual property.
That is extraordinarily disturbing because it continues
unabated.
We held a hearing with the people from Fellowes, Inc. They
make paper shredders out of Congressman Roskam's district. They
just lost $190 million worth of property in China in a total
takeover by one of their supposed partners. No one complains
about that. The trade missions continue, and people want to
form these partnerships. China is going in the opposite
direction on openness, on enhancing economic freedom, on the
manner in which people are treated and human rights, and, as
far as I am concerned, in terms of their business dealings.
I know this hearing is about Japan, but it goes to show
here we have Japan, which is a democracy. It is a light in that
part of the world where there are very few democracies, and I
think that we should be doing everything we can to help Japan
as opposed to letting China continue unabated with a ruthless
dictatorship, because somewhere down the line we are not going
to be able to have light and darkness in the same room with
people who have that sense of core values.
That was more of a statement than a question, but if any of
you want to comment on that, I would be open to that.
Mr. Schriver. Congressman, we appreciated your trip to New
Zealand. I was actually in Christchurch as part of the Track 2
delegation. I did not quite get out in time before the
earthquake, but your mission----
Mr. Manzullo. We almost thought we would see Atticus and
the team down there.
Mr. Schriver. Your mission was very well received there,
because I think, right to your point, people want an
alternative.
Of course China's going to be extremely important to the
region, and we can't begrudge China for their strategy to not
only engage in these trade relationships for their economic
benefit, but they are seeking political gain, and trying to
improve their lie--in the golf sense--and improve their lie in
the region. We can't begrudge them for that, but we have to be
giving an alternative to our friends and allies, and that is
what I am afraid we are not doing right now.
I think Japan, just to return to that topic, you know, in
an odd way it might be a good thing that they can't join the
TPP discussions at this juncture because I think it probably
would have made the goal of having a framework agreement by
APEC and November 11th a little bit beyond our reach. It is
still a tough road to get to Hawaii in November and have that
framework agreement. But if we get it, and we get KORUS, then
Japan well have that tough choice are we in or are we out, and
I think they will be in, and that will be to everyone's
benefit.
But we have to exert leadership and we have to give the
alternatives; otherwise how could we blame these smaller
countries when they look at the market----
Mr. Manzullo. Well, perhaps it would be not only good in
diplomacy, but in terms of enhancing trade for us to encourage
Japan to continue in these talks. This TPP is not going to come
to a final agreement this year. It is not going to happen. But
I think perhaps one of the things we should do is continue to
work with the Ambassador and our other colleagues in Japan to
have them be part of those talks so they are not on the outside
and nothing is strange to them whenever we come to any type of
an agreement.
Mr. Green. I think that is right, Mr. Chairman. We do have
to be a bit sensitive that we don't appear to the Japanese
press to be thrusting them at them against their will. There is
plenty of support in Japan for this. I think it will be
generated from within. We should do what we can to encourage
and facilitate Japan's participation.
This connects, I think, to your first point about how we
maintain strong relations with our allies and don't all rush to
China.
Randy and I both have small kids, and when you watch them
play soccer, the coach tells them, you are the fullback, you
are the goalie; and then the ball goes on the field, and they
all run to the ball. And frequently our Asia policy looks like
that. The ball is China now, and everyone is running there. But
if we invest more time in encouraging progress on TPP, and
passing the free trade agreement, and talking to Japan about
the future of their participation in TPP, we will be in a much
better position.
On intellectual property rights, Randy and I butted our
heads against that issue in government for 5 years. If we have
a regionwide consensus through trade agreements we are leading
on about the need to protect intellectual property rights--
because Australia and New Zealand have their interests, which
are primarily agriculture. They are not going to fight that
fight for us. I think your trip helped.
But Japan and Korea, they do have real concerns about
intellectual property rights; not software, but manufacturing
process technology. So if we have got a broad consensus in the
region about the rules for protecting intellectual property
rights, that is worth much more than 10 of these strategic and
economic dialogues where half the Cabinet cajoles the Chinese
for a day. If the rules are being written in a way the Chinese,
are we in or out, I think they will come in, they will start
coming around, in part because I think the Chinese leadership
knows that if they don't have a better system for protecting
intellectual property rights, they are not going move up the
development chain themselves. They are not going develop the
next generation of companies and technology if you can just rip
off software and technology the way you can in China now.
So it is not as if the system in China is going to be 100
percent against this. If they see the rules are being written a
certain way across Asia, I think that will put us in a much
better position.
Mr. Flake. I could very briefly say that I very much
appreciate you raising this issue in the context of the U.S.-
Japan relationship, because really there is a competition for
what the standards and the norms of the region and the globe
are going to be. In that regard Japan's full recovery and their
active participation in setting those is very much in our
interest.
When you look at questions like intellectual property
rights, the rule of law, the basic questions and value of
standards and norms, this is an area where Japan's recovery is
our recovery in that regard, because it is by working together
with our allies where we have these shared values, standards
and norms that I think we have much more influence not just in
the region, but in the globe at large. So it puts it very much
in the context of what we are talking about.
Mr. Manzullo. We want to thank you all for coming. Atticus,
did he take a snooze over there? He is just taking it easy over
there. He is named after Atticus Finch in ``To Kill a
Mockingbird.'' He stood up. We want to thank you all for
coming. I have never really talked to a dog like this in a
hearing before. But we want to thank you all for coming.
I think it was extraordinary that the Ambassador came here
today and bared his soul. You could tell the pain of the
disaster is written all over his face because he is an
extraordinarily sensitive individual. I have had the
opportunity to get to know him very, very well. He is such a
man of honor, and for him to speak here today and then talk
about the needs of his country was magnanimous on his part, and
also on the part of the Japanese Government that fully
participated, wanting to get out the message that Japan is on
its way back.
Chief, we want to thank you for the work that you do, and
the reason that we had you come here is to really lay the scene
as to the extent of the damage, and the waste, and the
heaviness that is on your heart and your fellow workers' that
went over there, and the obvious disappointment that you
couldn't find anybody alive. I think that statement more than
anything pointed out the nature and the extent of the
devastation. So, we want to thank you. We want to thank each of
the panelists for taking the time to spend with us this
afternoon.
This subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing RecordNotice deg.
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Minutes deg.
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Manzullo statement deg.
__________
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Faleomavaega statement deg.
__________
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Faleomavaega FTR deg.__
Material Submitted for the Record by the Honorable Eni F.H.
Faleomavaega, a Representative in Congress from American Samoa
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
