Toward a More Comprehensive Strategic Relationship With South Korea
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State, Secretary of State
Roundtable with Korean Journalists
Seoul, South Korea
February 20, 2009
MODERATOR: So
it’s my great pleasure to welcome you, Madame Secretary, and I think
I’ll just ask how you’d like to begin, maybe say a couple of things.
You’ve had a long day.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I am delighted
to have this opportunity to sit down with all of you, and I’m very
pleased to be back here in Korea. I have very pleasant memories of my
prior times here, and now to be back and to be in the position I’m in
representing my country and working with your country on so many
important issues is a pure personal delight. So I’m looking forward to
your questions.
QUESTION: You seem to look very happy and
joyful during the conversation with the students in Ewha University. How
was that, and how does it feel to be back in Korea, not as First Lady
but as the Secretary of State?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I loved
the event at Ewha University. I had the vantage point of looking out at
this very large audience of all these extraordinary young women, and it
made me so proud. And I know how each one of them has dreams for her
life, as we all do, and I’m hopeful that as we move into the future that
more and more of those dreams will come true.
So it was an honor
being at the largest women’s university in the world, and I felt a real
kinship, having gone to a women’s college. And to be representing my
country and our new President and the Obama Administration, we’re making
so many changes. It’s only been a month that we’ve had the chance to
take office and start working. But on so many important issues, I think
you can see that the United States is reaching out. We’re listening.
We’re hoping to form closer relationships. And I chose to come to Asia
first because I wanted to underscore the significance of not only the
region, but particularly the countries that I am visiting.
QUESTION: Are you going to meet Kim Jong-il? If so, is there any pre-condition? So what (inaudible) when you meet him?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Meet who?
QUESTION: Kim Jong-il.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Oh, well, I have no intention of meeting him. (Laughter.) I have no
plans to meet him. I did announce today the appointment of a new Special
Representative for North Korea, a distinguished diplomat, Ambassador
Steve Bosworth, who served here in Korea as well as other posts, who’s
very familiar with North Korea. In fact, he was just there as a private
citizen in the last weeks. So I will be looking to get reports from him
and Ambassador Sung Kim, who will continue to lead our Six-Party
negotiations. But I have no intention or plans at this time to go to
North Korea.
QUESTION: Pre-condition?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I have no plans at this time, so that’s not even part of our thinking.
QUESTION:
You mentioned that you were going to discuss the contingency plans for
post Kim Jong-il regime and (inaudible) in North Korea on the way to
Korea. What did you discuss with South Korean Government regarding that?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, it’s interesting because it’s been a matter of public concern for
months now as to what was happening in North Korea. You all have
written about it. People around the world have speculated about it. But I
wanted to make it clear that we are prepared to deal with this
government. And I guess the preconditions we have are not in relation to
my visiting. That’s not something we’re even contemplating. The
preconditions are as to whether or not we can have a better relationship
with North Korea. And we’ve made that very clear, that if the North
Koreans completely and verifiably eliminate their nuclear weapons
program, then we would consider normalizing our relations with them,
seeking to sign a peace treaty in place of the armistice, and working
with South Korea and other nations to offer aid, such as energy aid and
economic aid.
So I think it’s important that the entire North
Korean leadership, not just Kim Jong-il but the entire leadership,
understand what it is we are offering and expecting. So those are our
conditions in terms of going forward with them.
QUESTION:
Okay. I am truly delighted to meet you in this roundtable. My question
is regarding the alliance of R.O.K. and U.S. You mentioned in Japan the
Korea-U.S. alliance is one of the staunchest alliance in the history.
Thank you for your good comment on that. The strategic alliance means we
understand R.O.K.-U.S. will cooperate in globally in terms of to keep
peace and stability in world. But specifically speaking in Afghanistan
peace and stability, what do you expect Korea’s government have in
addition to the civilian assistance? Do you expect some troop to
Afghanistan?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me answer both
parts of your question. First, we do want to work toward a vision of a
more comprehensive strategic relationship. And I discussed that with the
president and the prime minister and the foreign minister. Because
there is so much that we can work together to achieve. You know, Korea
is one of the G-20 nations, so we’re working on the economic crisis and
how we can best resolve that. We want to have a very deep collaboration
on climate change and clean energy. We are looking for other areas of
cooperating on security issues, on development aid, which the ROK is
beginning to be more and more involved in. So there are many areas.
Now,
Afghanistan is part of that overall relationship, and we are
appreciative of what the government has committed to in terms of police
training and joint aid with Japan, some very important contributions.
And we, at this point, are still doing our own policy review of what
we’re going to be doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan. So we have no
specific requests at this time, but we’re friends. We’re allies. We
might very well discuss something in the future. But any decision is up
to the government and the people of Korea.
QUESTION:
Thank you, Madame Secretary. You have mentioned incentives you’re
offering include diplomatic normalization, financial aid, and so on. But
it seem that all that had been put on the table before, before the
Obama Administration. What needs to be done differently this time
around?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think that we have to
gauge the willingness of the North Korean regime to return to the
Six-Party Talks. And I think it’s important to underscore the progress
that was made in that context. The dismantlement of the facility at
Yongbyon is nearly done. It’s something that we want to see completed.
And we are aware of the fact that we can’t stop, we have to keep pushing
the North Koreans to act.
I think there’s a kind of assessment
period going on. The Obama Administration has only been in office a
month. So we want to reiterate our policy so there’s no misunderstanding
as to where we stand and what we expect. And we’re watching to see how
the North Koreans respond. So I think that how we proceed depends,
number one, on what the North Koreans decide, but equally importantly,
what the other Six Parties are willing to do. So I have discussed this
in Japan, I’ve discussed this here in Korea, and I will be discussing
this over the next two days in China.
QUESTION: Back to
(inaudible). You served as First Lady and senator and ran in the
presidential primaries. What drives you to keep going forward and what’s
your next goal? Again president?
SECRETARY CLINTON: No.
(Laughter.) I really have been fortunate because I’ve been able to do a
number of jobs that I find just so satisfying and incredibly meaningful
to me. And I want to be the best Secretary of State I can be. I want to
help my country. I want to support President Obama. I want to convey a
message to the rest of the world about American values and our openness
to working with others to achieve common goals.
I think there has
been a sense that America was absent in many parts of the world, that
we weren’t as attuned to what other countries were thinking and feeling.
And I want to reestablish our presence. It’s one of the reasons why we
appointed a Special Envoy to the Middle East and a Special
Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and why within the first
month we have appointed a Special Representative for North Korea,
because we know that we have a lot of difficult challenges, and it’s
important that we just get up and going as quickly as possible.
Next
week, I’ll be in Egypt for the aid conference that the Egyptian
Government is sponsoring to help with the humanitarian needs of the
people of Gaza.
So there’s a lot to be done as Secretary of
State. And I get to work with wonderful people like your ambassador in
trying to create new opportunities and solve problems, and that’s what
we’re intent upon accomplishing.
QUESTION: The United States has experienced anti-American feelings. Did you feel any of that while traveling this time?
SECRETARY CLINTON: No.
QUESTION: If so, do you have any plan to change the image of the United States much better?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I was so excited by the positive response that I received on behalf of
this new Administration. In every country that I’ve visited, certainly
the governments were very welcoming, but so were the people. We were
looking at a picture in the newspaper today of people with a positive
demonstration welcoming me to, you know, Seoul. And I mean, that’s kind
of new to have people actually out on the street waving placards and
chanting about how happy they are that the United States is here and
that we’re going to work together. So I feel that there’s a tremendous
receptivity around the world to our new President and our new policies.
I
don’t underestimate how difficult the problems are. I mean, we all wish
that the people who are causing trouble around the world would just
wake up one morning and decide that they’re going to pursue a different
path, but in very few instances does that ever happen. So it takes a lot
of persistence and careful preparation in order to engage in diplomacy
that will result in positive change.
And one of the people with
me on the trip is Assistant Secretary Chris Hill, who has been deeply
involved in working with the North Koreans and with your government and
the other parties in the Six-Party Talks. And it’s painstaking work. It
just takes an enormous amount of energy and commitment.
But
what’s the alternative? Just to leave these troublesome situations to
grow worse? We don’t think that’s the right approach, so we’re going to
be working hard in all of these areas across the world. And I think much
of the world is very relieved to see how engaged we are and how
determined we are. We can’t solve all of the problems, but we can
promise our best efforts and we can listen to our friends and allies and
other countries who have experience to offer, and that’s what we intend
to do.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) that the most important relationship for U.S. and Asia is with China. Do you still stand by that statement?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well – (laughter).
QUESTION: (Inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I think that that was somewhat misunderstood. We have rock-solid
relationships, alliances that already exist with Korea and with Japan,
for example. Those are like members of the family. But trying to figure
out what our relationship with China is going to be going forward is a
very big priority. That doesn’t in any way take away from our enduring
commitment to our existing allies.
But we do have to all figure
out how we’re going to deal with a China that is becoming more and more
successful. I think there are tremendous possibilities for cooperation
because of that. But you just can’t stand on the sidelines and hope it
happens. You have to be working and focused on the relationship, and we
intend to do so.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary.
MODERATOR: Last question.
QUESTION:
Yes. This morning in the press conference, you mentioned the U.S.
Government are very supportive for the Lee Myung Bak’s government policy
towards North Korea. And you had a lunch with President Lee Myung Bak
this afternoon. What is your feeling and what is your impression on Lee
Myung Bak’s saying toward U.S. alliance with North Korea issue?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I was very impressed by the president’s thoughtful analysis and
understanding of the complexity of the relationship. I think that he and
his government – because I also spoke, of course, with the prime
minister and the foreign minister – are trying to balance the many
different challenges that Korea now faces, and at the same time, assume
more responsibility in the world.
So North Korea remains an
overwhelming concern. And the Six-Party Talks is a process that the
government supports as a way of trying to influence the behavior of
North Korea. But of course, our alliance and relationship is the
centerpiece of the security for the ROK and the president understands
that. He believes that it’s essential to continue our military presence,
our military cooperation subject to the agreed upon changes that will
take place over the next several years.
But I was very impressed
with the thoughtful approach that he presented in looking at the range
of challenges that are confronting Korea, and the willingness to kind of
step up and take a leadership role in solving the global economic
crisis, in dealing with climate change. The president was very
persuasive about climate change. He’s obviously studied it and
understands it and believes it’s a great economic opportunity. So on a
range of issues, not just on North Korea, I thought that he had some
well thought-out positions that will serve as the basis for deepening
and broadening our relationship.
QUESTION: How do you keep your health? (Laughter.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Two last – real quick questions. All right.
QUESTION: If I can say, I mean, you look very young and energetic.
SECRETARY CLINTON: I look very young?
QUESTION: You do. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, my goodness. I hope somebody is recording this. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: What’s your secret?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
What’s my secret? (Laughter.) Oh, you know, I think I love what I do.
And I’m a very fortunate person. I don’t spend a lot of time regretting
what isn’t done. I think about what I will do. And I’m very lucky
because I have a mother who will be 90 in June, who looks and is very
healthy, so I can take no credit for my genes, which I inherited. But I
think it mostly is because I feel very lucky to have the opportunities
that I have and I love the work that I do and I’m honored to, you know,
represent my country and play some role in that. And I take vitamins.
(Laughter.)
MODERATOR: That’s a very sensitive question.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Is that a sensitive question?
MODERATOR: In Korea.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, is it really?
QUESTION:
And yeah, my last question is about your daughter. As a mother, as a
career woman, what kind of advice do you give to your daughter?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well I keep that to myself. I can’t really, you know, breach any
confidence that I have with her. But I think it’s interesting how when
your – as your children get older, they actually pay more attention to
your advice. Children go through – I think we all do – we go through a
period when we may not necessarily follow the advice of our parents. And
then all of a sudden, you get to be a certain age and your parents seem
smarter than you thought they were. So I think that’s kind of how we’ve
developed, too.
QUESTION: Thank you very much.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much.
Working Toward Change in Perceptions of U.S. Engagement Around the World
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State, Secretary of State
Roundtable With Traveling Press
Seoul, South Korea
February 20, 2009
MR. WOOD: Madame Secretary, I'll turn it over to you.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, thank you, Robert. Well, what is there left to say? (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : I have a question.
SECRETARY CLINTON: I feel like we've been living together for days and days.
Yes.
QUESTION: :
I have a question about what you've learned about the role of Secretary
of State on this trip, and what you see your role is. Because you've
hired a lot of envoys taking over a lot of big portfolios, including
North Korea now.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first of all,
having been on the job now for a month, I think there's a tremendous
opportunity to reintroduce America to the world and to bring a message
consistent with President Obama's vision about how we're going to work
with people to find common ground to solve a lot of these big global
challenges. And I came into it with the very clear idea that we had so
much work to do that I wanted to be able to deploy some of the best
diplomats and representatives that I could find.
So from the very
beginning of my conversations with the President-elect, I said I believe
in envoys. I tried to get the Bush Administration to appoint a special
envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan back in 2007. Because I think that
given the range of issues that we have to deal with, it is not possible
for the Secretary of State to manage and handle all of these problems
without having a lot of strong people working with her. So I came into
it looking to have the authority to appoint envoys, and I'm very pleased
that the President agreed with me. And we worked it through, even
before the inauguration so that as soon as he was inaugurated and I was
sworn in, we could get to work.
I mean, look what we've
accomplished in the last month. I mean, we've made it clear we're
reengaged in the Middle East because we have a consistent presence with
George Mitchell. We are in the midst of an in-depth review of our
Afghanistan and Pakistan policy with the leadership of Ambassador
Holbrooke. We now will have an experienced diplomat who knows both North
and South Korea, handling the North Korea policy on an ongoing basis,
which means that I can work with and oversee and be responsible for, but
come to Asia and then go to Cairo and then go to Europe, as I will next
week.
So to me, this is how I like to operate. And I think it
enhances my ability to actually be effective globally. I don't think
that one person in today's world, given the complexity and intensity of
the challenges we face, could possibly handle all these portfolios
without doing injustice to them.
QUESTION: : Can you just expand on that a little bit?
MR. WOOD: Let's go – let's do one with Nick, please.
QUESTION: : Okay. We'll go with – I wanted to --
QUESTION: : Sorry, are you changing the topic? Because I just wanted to follow up.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Let Martha do a follow-up. Yeah, we'll get back to you, Nick.
Okay.
QUESTION: :
Just a little bit more on the special representatives and envoy. So
they take this portfolio, they do this. How do you view what you do
then? I mean, I know we're going to the Middle East, but do you come in
when there's progress, do you come in as – describe how you --
SECRETARY CLINTON:
But Martha, I don't think there is one-size-fits-all. I think that I've
tried to hire the best people that I can get in the Department, and
I've tried to recruit the best people that I could convince to take on
some of these especially complex portfolios. They work for me and for
the President. They report to me and to the President. And we're in
constant contact about what they're doing, where they're going, what
options they see. So ultimately, I'm accountable because these are my
choices and I have chosen to organize the work we face in this way.
But
it's going to be different depending upon the situation. And so I don't
think there's any way to say, well, this is how it's going to work
because it's more like jazz; you've got to improvise, you've got to have
people who are both great individual and ensemble players. Both – all
of our envoys and special representatives work with the ambassadors in
the region, they work with the State Department, they work with the
White House. I've been around long enough that I don't need to feel that
I have to handle every single aspect of these difficult problems. I
couldn't possibly do that. You can have a lot of motion with no
movement, and I expect the people that I entrusted with these jobs to
get out there and to be focused on making something happen, or at least
to put their best efforts into trying to do that.
So when I'm in
Cairo, George Mitchell will be there, too. I'll be speaking for the
United States Government, but he will get in the region and will have a
lot of information to report. So it's just – it's a constant back and
forth trying to figure out how we're going to push this ball forward.
QUESTION: :
And in the context of that, do you see these envoys as exploring a
regional dynamic and finding the natural grain and then just sort of
kind of guiding things along that serve American interests? I mean, has
this been done before, and is that a very new approach?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I think that's a wonderful way of putting it. I think that in some
respects it's been done. What George Mitchell did in Northern Ireland
was an ongoing commitment by the United States Government to work with
the British and Irish governments, and we didn't have a lot at stake
directly, but indirectly it was a matter of great concern to a lot of
people that the troubles be paid attention to. I think what you'll see
with George Mitchell is similar. He has a tremendous amount of
persistence and patience in dealing with thorny problems.
I mean,
our goal is to try to reignite the willingness on the part of the
parties to move toward a two-state solution. And it's a lot harder now
than it was. I think the disengagement by the United States for the
first part of the Bush Administration was unfortunate, because we
weren't there on an ongoing basis to try to look for those
opportunities, to see what could happen if we were working with those
who were actually committed to a peaceful and secure outcome.
So
we may – I may have some more envoys. I mean, I believe in this. I mean,
I'll just quickly tell you, when I got back from Afghanistan and
Pakistan in January of 2007, I called the White House and I spoke with
the National Security Advisor, Mr. Hadley. And I said: Steve there's
just – this is just not working. You have Musharraf totally negative
about Karzai, Karzai negative about Musharraf. There's not a cooperative
relationship. These two places are linked, and we have no way to keep
them working on the same page. I really urge you to appoint somebody who
can move back and forth between the two countries. And I said I don't
have a name. I mean, if you want a name, I can give you some names to
consider. But please, you've got to lift this up. The Embassy in Kabul
is focused on Afghanistan. The Embassy in Islamabad is focused on
Pakistan. We have to take a more regional approach.
And I was
obviously unsuccessful, but I believed then, as I believe now, that this
will help us figure out how best we can move forward. So that's why
we're doing it.
QUESTION: : (Inaudible) next stop? Actually (inaudible).
QUESTION: : I actually wanted to move to (inaudible).
QUESTION: : If we can go – we can get something on China, because we're halfway through, that would be (inaudible).
SECRETARY CLINTON: Sure, okay.
QUESTION: :
Could I just ask you quickly on Bosworth, who you just announced today.
And because you talked about succession, and there were questions today
– he was just in North Korea. And I understand he actually brought you
and your colleagues and his friends a grim picture of what is happening
in North Korea in terms of leadership, in terms of who's in charge,
who's determining policy, who's trying to prove himself more Catholic
than the Pope, because it's that time; it's a period of transition,
perhaps.
Did that affect your thinking when you talked about the
succession crisis? How is that going to affect your policy making when
you get to it?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I have to confess
that I'm somewhat fascinated by the concern that several of you have
evidenced about succession, which to me is like the most obvious issue.
It's been in the news for months. And I don't think that it's a
forbidden subject to talk about succession in the hermit kingdom. In
fact, it seems to me it's got to be factored into any policy review that
one is undertaking. It's a fact. When you have a government like that
that is so personality-centric, you deal with the hand you're dealt,
which is the government that is there and the leader that is in charge,
but you have to be thinking down the road about when and where. So
obviously it's a factor, but I don't see that as news. I think it would
be irresponsible for it not to be factored into what you were thinking
about. It doesn't change the fact that you deal with Kim Jong-il now and
for as long as he's the man who is calling the shots, and that's what
we're doing. And I think Ambassador Bosworth is incredibly well suited
for the work that lies ahead.
QUESTION: : Do you think he's calling the shots?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I have no idea.
QUESTION: : Can I just --
QUESTION: : (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: : -- can I just follow up on that?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I mean, we have to assume that he is because that's who we deal with.
QUESTION: :
Why do you think it was interpreted by some as something that isn't
said. Because it's so sensitive that it might offend the Chinese?
Because it might have reverberations? Is that something that you, not
being a “professional diplomat,” that you are more likely to say what
you think, what you think is obvious, and not worry about (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I think that to worry about something which is so self-evident is
an impediment to clear thinking. And I don't think it should be viewed
as particularly extraordinary that someone in my position would say
what's obvious. I said it the other day about Burma. Sanctions aren't
working and others in the world who have tried to deal with the Burmese
regime can't figure out how to engage them, so we're going to have a
policy review about Burma. Maybe this is unusual because you're supposed
to be so careful that you spend hours avoiding stating the obvious, but
that's just not productive, in my view. So I think that it's worth
being perhaps more straightforward and trying to engage other countries
on the basis of the reality that exists in a number of these settings to
try to encourage more thoughtful deliberation about where we're going
and how we're going to get there. And so that's how I see it, and that's
how I intend to operate.
QUESTION: : Can we just go to China (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
QUESTION: : (Inaudible) something to write on the plane (inaudible) when we get there.
SECRETARY CLINTON: I thought you were going to have a party on the plane.
QUESTION: : No, no, (inaudible). (Laughter.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, oh. Okay.
QUESTION: : So --
SECRETARY CLINTON: And the middle seat people get extra rounds. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : Thank you.
QUESTION: : I'll have to move to a middle seat then. (Laughter.) I think Arshad will (inaudible). (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : China.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
QUESTION: :
What do you see as the biggest challenge here, and why is it that there
is an impression out there that human rights groups, not just people
like us who are (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I
think that everything is part of the agenda for this first visit. We
have an opportunity, we hope, to engage with the Chinese on a range of
issues. Let me just mention three of them. One is economic crisis. China
and the United States are intertwined when it comes to our recovery. We
both have undertaken stimulus packages. We both face difficult domestic
challenges. And I think there is a lot of room for cooperation, which
we are going to be seeking.
Secondly, global climate change. It's
one of the reasons why I asked Todd Stern, another envoy that we have
appointed, to come on this trip, because so many of the opportunities
for clean energy, technology and the like are going to come out of this
region of the world. I mean, Japan, South Korea, China are uniquely
situated to be part of the answer to the problem of global climate
change. How we engage them, particularly China, is going to be an
incredibly important part of our diplomatic (inaudible).
And
finally, a range of security issues. What will China be willing to do
with respect to the Six-Party Talks and their bilateral relationship
with North Korea? What's their perspective on Afghanistan and Pakistan
where they have not only historical interests, but current commercial
and security interests as well? There's a very broad security agenda to
discuss with them.
Now, that doesn't mean that questions of Taiwan
and Tibet and human rights, the whole range of challenges that we often
engage on with the Chinese are not part of the agenda either. But we
pretty much know what they're going to say. We know that we're going to
press them to reconsider their position about Tibetan religious and
cultural freedom, and autonomy for the Tibetans and some kind of
recognition or acknowledgment of the Dalai Lama.
And we know what
they're going to say, because I've had those conversations for more than
a decade with Chinese leaders. And we know what they're going to say
about Taiwan and military sales, and they know what we're going to say.
QUESTION: : So can't you just stipulate that at the beginning?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I mean Matt, there's a certain – I mean, look, there's a certain
logic to that. I mean no – I don't mean to in any way to say that we
know everything that's going to happen. But successive administrations
and Chinese governments have been poised back and forth on these issues,
and we have to continue to press them. But our pressing on those issues
can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate
change crisis, and the security crisis. We have to have a dialogue that
leads to an understanding and cooperation on each of those.
So I
think it's fair to say that I come with a full agenda. But it's also, I
think, fair to say we know, kind of, what the dialogue is on these
others. We don't know yet how we're going to engage on the global
economic crisis and the global climate change crisis and these security
issues. So if we talk more about those, it's in large measure because
that's where the opportunity for engagement is. And that doesn't mean
that we have any lesser concern about the need for China to be more
willing to recognize and protect the human rights of people, from free
speech and freedom of religion to everything else.
QUESTION: : What do you expect on North Korea?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, look, yeah, I think we should let --
QUESTION: : The – I notice that you're going to go visit a church on Sunday.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: :
And when Madeleine Albright visited – Rice visited a church, but when
Madeleine Albright visited a church, she actually came out and made a
statement calling for religious freedom in China. Are you planning to do
anything like that, or is it just going to be, kind of, just a basic
church visit?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I thought I would
just go to church. (Laughter.) That's kind of what I was planning to do.
I've gone to church in China before. And I'm going to be there on a
Sunday morning, so I thought I would go to church. I think that, first,
says volumes.
QUESTION: : Right. Why don't – probably the
church – I looked it up on the web, but I don't remember now. But it was
one of these officially state-sanctioned churches, right? You're not
–you can't really go to one of the underground churches. I mean, does
that give you pause --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, without endangering people.
QUESTION: : Right, right.
SECRETARY CLINTON: That's the dilemma, yeah.
QUESTION: :
So I think that's why Albright said something about it when she went
there, because she didn't want to necessarily bless the state-sanctioned
church while going to church.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me – let me think about that. I mean, my intention was just to go to church. That was what I was planning.
QUESTION: : Now, you've ruined it. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Now I'll make sure to go. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : Well, we figured --
QUESTION: : Can I – Madame, I just wanted --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
QUESTION: :
I wondered if I could circle back for a moment to what you started off
with and how you're, sort of, defining job. I think we all had a moment
in the last couple of days, watching you either on a TV show or at the
women's university, when you thought this was not your ordinary
Secretary of State. You have a – sort of a personal celebrity and
notoriety that almost guarantees people will – the encounters you'll
have will be different. They'll be sort of more personal in some ways.
And I wonder whether you thought through how you use that celebrity to
get a message across. And are there limits to that in places where you
don't want to go, where it would become, in your view, inappropriate or
that – as the nation's chief diplomat, you also can't be a rock star.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, really? (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : Well, you could have sung. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: : That would have guaranteed she wouldn't be around. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY CLINTON:
That's a good question, Mark. I think that I see our job right now,
given where we are in the world and what we've inherited, as repairing
relations not only with governments, but with people. And I think
President Obama has an extraordinary capacity to do that because of the
really positive feeling that he personally engenders. To a lesser
degree, I have some of the same capacity, which I think is useful,
because we are in a time where public opinion influences governmental
decisions more so than historically has been the case, even in
autocratic or authoritarian regimes. And having the ability to kind of
get down into the population in a way that creates receptivity toward
American policy is a significant advantage.
Now, will it lead to
changes in government policy? I certainly don't claim that. But I do
believe that it is an asset that the President has in an extraordinary
intensity, and which, I have to some extent as well. I think it's also
important to send the message that, as I've said repeatedly, I'm not
just interested in talking to governments. I do believe that when a
person can be connected to the rest of the world with a flick of a
mouse, what someone like me says and I what I do as I represent our
country has the potential for influencing attitudes and even behaviors.
I
don't want to oversell this, because there are some very intractable,
difficult problems. But I think it is – I think it is part of our
toolbox for so-called smart power to be reaching out to people in a way
that is not traditional and not confined by the ministerial meeting and
the staged handshake photo and – that's important. That's part of the
job. But going into universities where the next generation is going to
be thinking about their role and how they see the world and what they
think of America, or walking in a neighborhood in Jakarta and talking
about bringing clean water and healthcare thanks to the American people,
that is part of the message we're trying to convey.
QUESTION: : Can I just ask a thematic question?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
QUESTION: :
So much of what you've been saying across the region is openness,
dialogue, and soft power. But it seems like wherever we go, whether it's
North Korea, Myanmar, and now even on China to some extent, that there
just might not be a willingness on some of these regimes to talk to us. I
mean, even Iran is – there's a real question. So looking ahead, how are
you going to balance both your call for engagement, while at the same
time facing the things that in the end might not want to engage on any
level and could pose a real security threat?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Great question. I mean, first of all, I think we change the
presumption. The President and I, as he eloquently said, are willing to
extend a hand if you unclench your fist. Not everybody will unclench
their fist. But the message of our extended hand has impact. And so to,
in effect, reverse the presumption that the United States won't talk to
you because we consider you X, Y or Z, as opposed to United States will
consider talking to you in return for you taking certain actions that
can lead to some kind of meaningful (inaudible).
So when regimes
decide that they don't want to unclench their fist, I think that puts us
in a stronger position internationally. I used to say during the
campaign that engaging with Iran in an appropriate way had three
benefits. Number one, we might actually learn something, because there
is a certain opaqueness to the decision-making within the Iranian
regime. So actually being in some way involved with them could inform
our own understanding of how best to continue whatever policy toward
them we chose.
Secondly, something positive might actually happen.
You never know. But if you stand at opposite sides of the room and
refuse to engage, it's guaranteed nothing will happen. So is it worth
trying? Well, I think that is certainly possible. But thirdly, it's
important to be seen as the United States who carries a greater moral
burden than most other countries because of who we are and what we stand
for, that we are willing to reach out. So that if we do face these
security threats, we have a more understanding international community
that'll say, well the Obama Administration was at least trying, unlike
others who said no, we're never going to talk to these people.
And
I think all of that added together can change the environment. Now,
does it change it a little or does it change it a lot? We don't know.
We're just beginning. I think that it is also clear that some of our
willingness to even talk like this has upended the calculation of some
of these regimes. A lot of international diplomacy is a head game. And
part of what we're trying to do is to say okay, let's figure out how we
can have some kind of engagement. All of a sudden, you see this panic on
the faces of some of these regimes, like oh my gosh, we can't afford to
do that. Look, they might actually score points with our public, or
they might in some way divide the united front that we have put out.
So
this is – this is a work in progress, but I think it's a more effective
approach than adopting this kind of hands-off, name-calling,
under-no-circumstances attitude. We talked to the Soviet Union during
the entire Cold War. I mean, I was of the generation where I was doing
duck-and-cover drills to protect myself from a nuclear attack. And yet
we always kept talking to them. I mean, they threatened to bury us, they
insulted our leaders, they took shoes off and hit desks. We never
stopped talking to them. And I don't think that was a sign of weakness. I
think that was a sign of strength. And it was also a signal to
likeminded people that we were not afraid of the threat that they posed.
MR. WOOD: Last question. Paul --
QUESTION: : Yes.
MR. WOOD: Last question. We have to go.
QUESTION: :
I wonder if I can go back to those stubborn issues with Chinese, Taiwan
and Tibet human rights. You say that there has been this situation for
many years where we speak our piece, they speak their piece, maybe
there's not too much progress. Do you have any ideas about how we might
budge that dialogue should some of these questions be linked to economic
issues where they want us to do things?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Paul, it's hard to answer that in the abstract. If we were to believe
that such a linkage would result in changes in behavior, we would
certainly pursue that. It matters deeply to me. Remember I made a speech
about women's rights and human rights and the Chinese Government cut
the broadcast. So, I mean, I've had firsthand experience with some of
the reactions.
So I think we are open and we are really speaking
strategies that can make a difference. But I also think it's important
that we continue on the track with these other issues where we do
believe and have reason to believe that there is an openness to
engaging. But I think it's going to be a continuing evaluation as we go
forward. I'm very outcomes-oriented. I mean, what are we going to do
that can possibly create changed conditions, and how do we build on
whatever incremental progress we make? And it's a constant equation
about one step forward and one step to the side, how do you continue to
move the agenda. And that's what we're going to try to do.
MR. WOOD: Okay. Thanks, guys. We've got to go. Thank you.
# # #
