Well, we'd like to welcome everyone to our group with thought for future September. Just a brief introduction, we are going to be recording today's session. We're talking about tips for managing classrooms. I would just remind everyone we'll keep any personal stories anonymous and not include any identifying information about anybody who may or may not be involved in any of the stories we're discussing. So, that's all that I'm going to say at this point, I'm going to turn it over to our speakers who will be using themselves at the top of the phone. We collaborated, so Karen from Student Conduct, Natalie from Caps and myself from Student Care and Advocacy. We collaborate all the time, but we all sometimes different times might receive requests for help from faculty or advisors or anyone kind of working with students who might notice that for whatever reason, maybe things are being said or behaviors happening in a residential classroom environment or even online classroom environment that's leaving others unsettled and might just need help knowing exactly kind of where to go and what to manage on their own, what to report and things like that.  And I'm going to go through the first slides pretty quickly because the meat of the presentations in the middle, but just contextually, next slide. We, a lot, I'll just kind of keep talking. So the evolution of today's college classrooms I don't think we can talk about classroom management or working with students and just kind of assume that the variables involved are the same as they always have been because the classroom has really really changed. I captured some pictures that kind of represent that a little bit I mean it's changed generally like who's in the classroom who has access to be in the classroom. It's like equipped leading up to throughout K through 12 to even be able to kind of keep up and engage with this type of work you can afford it. And even, you know, the classroom itself physically has changed where classes meet how often and what ways and also whether or not it's in person or online so that just kind of creates this environment that makes managing a classroom and engaging in civil discourse we all say like the best thing for, you know, frustrating speech or offensive speech is just more speech but sometimes it's hard to create an environment that everyone feels comfortable doing that to train faculty to be comfortable with those kind of conversations so just be mindful of the evolution of college classroom in general and then next slide. I, in my area I use this diagram a little bit just to reference something that's really familiar in student affairs which is we're working with students they you know they learn a lot in the classroom but they learn a whole lot outside of the classroom as well as they're meeting new people in a new environment and figuring out kind of like how they feel about things separate from maybe the environment with within which they grew up. So I want to make sure to challenge them but also make sure that we're blending with a nice level of support so anytime a student is kind of under challenged. They might in like super super comfortable with what's happening they may become bored and we, we as people that work with students don't want them to do that because they might really kind of act out or just kind of disengage and we might kind of but also if they're so exhausted and challenged but don't feel supported they might start to panic which we also don't want. So as you think about the students that you're interacting with in the classroom and otherwise try to do what you can to aim for that middle zone of peak performance so that they're certainly challenged and that's where we learn the most right when we're like a little bit outside of our comfort zone but also know at least where to go should they need assistance even sometimes the students I work with even just knowing that there is someone dedicated to kind of being their person in whatever way comforts them and they might not even really have to tap into that resource all that much. So given that next slide. And I'll reference that diagram again. So the research done out of within caps is the CCMH, the center for collegiate mental health. Thank you. They are, they were able to recently and on a regular basis kind of pull data that's coming from not just Penn State but across the nation, maybe even outside of the United States I'm not sure. So it's a research practice network of over 500 universities that has a constant feedback loop of data that come from collegiate mental health. And then get fed back into the clinical practice so that we're able to learn so much at every single session about what students are reporting about their levels of distress, the various diagnoses that they might be criteria for. And yes it is outside of the US now, and that's an ever growing population so it's run by on them lock who's our director at caps. So it's cool that it's housed right here, kind of in our own backyard but this kind of captures what students that you're working with their experiencing so if you think back to that that bell curve. More, almost, almost all a significant majority report feeling overwhelmed and feeling really really exhausted kind of the challenges too much. And that is when a student may kind of flippantly say something they don't mean in class or do something that kind of concerns other and so and or, you know, just be concerning kind of relieve that stress and cope and not always healthy ways. And 62% report feeling very sad and lonely and sometimes that's visible and evident. Sometimes it's not I feel for instructors that are teaching online because they don't get that face to face time and get to kind of pick up on some non verbals that might not come through and content. So around half report feeling overwhelmingly anxious and hopeless so we all know that a healthy level of anxiety like you think back to that bell curve is right there in the middle to be kind of driven to complete things. It can kind of be a healthy fuel to the fire but if it if it's more of like a lonely anxious or just a constant worrying and wondering that could be distracting from being productive, and then a little less than half feel hopeless. And then 62% report feeling so depressed that it's difficult to function. I know on my team we use just kind of internally working with students we use a scale, and we ask how how much is this event or the situation impacting your ability to kind of complete daily tasks because as you all know, a be in a course could or on assignment could really inhibit a person from being able to complete daily tasks because that just kind of rocks their world for whatever reason when someone else might lose a parent and they're completely able to function because of different supports in place or, or whatever so we kind of just try to meet the student where they are in terms of how much whatever's impacted them is interfering with their ability to function. 32% probably is the least surprising statistic on here for me just because we do end up working with a lot of students that are out there what's in enough that you're actually considering kind of ending it versus finding an alternative. So these are kind of these are just this is snapshot of the students that are in our classrooms today. So the question is it. Is this of all students or of all students who work with this is this is all students who seek counseling at University Council. Okay, because I'd be really concerned if 32% of all college students. No, it's actually students who seek services but it does sort of tell you how the how the field has changed, right, a lot of people, you know, 20 years ago 30 years ago who were interested in working in collegiate mental health. They thought that they were going to be dealing with adjustment disorders, you know relationship breakup like grief about leaving home and you can see that it's much it starts to look a lot more representative of the population for what what people are coming in seeking help for from from a counseling agency. Okay. And I think that, you know, I don't know if we've ever did a study of some of the students who may act out in the classroom and what percentage of those students are are already seeking services or because I think it's important to know that these are there are resources and I think that sometimes the first time we hear about a student who may be struggling is in the classroom. So it's good to get a sense for it if they were to report or indicate any of these things. These are the kinds of services that they can reach out for help. Right. And, and knowing that there is this healthy level of challenging being out of their comfort zone and exacerbating factor that would kick a student from being in that middle zone to being more like panicked is if they don't feel like they have hope or they don't feel like they have an outlet or support and so that's where also faculty and staff can be really helpful just as identifying themselves as somewhere to go. It could keep people kind of certainly going through stressful times but able to manage it better. And given all that knowing that these are the students that you all are working with. And the level of training and just natural comfort level that faculty and staff have working with students going through challenging times or just in general acting out, maybe just being disrespectful for whatever reason. So we tried to kind of break the behaviors down into three categories to help faculty, especially identify which category the behavior falls in to help decide where to where to kind of go or what action to take so the three categories are, and kind of go through a couple, you know, examples and practical application, but distracting so distracting behaviors behaviors that can be managed without really needing to rush to, to report them or kind of take themselves out of the equation and have someone to contact the student and kind of convey that that wasn't okay. So manage directly. And then the second category would be disruptive behaviors to certainly manage and address them and either real time or as a follow up in a timely way. And also report and that could be, you know, sharing with a colleague or a supervisor to just, you know, as a department kind of I want to put this interaction or student on our radar and kind of come up with a plan to prevent a pattern, or dangerous behaviors to report. And when I was talking to Karen earlier today she said one one behavior that initially is just distracting. If it becomes a pattern you could quickly become in the category of disruptive or even dangerous where you wouldn't want to even try to manage it anymore somebody else just kind of needs to be able to intervene from a from a safety perspective. And I would just add to that. So, you know, one of the things we think about in terms of behavior is you're kind of starting as you look at these things this is kind of like this is the first time this is happening. Right. So, if this is a student you have a history with, then it may very well be that how you interpret that same behavior may be different for one than it is for the other. So, as we're talking about assessing the behavior. It, you have a contextual thing that's really not part of this that you're going to want to add to this that may get you in a place where something that we're talking about baseline is distracting feels really different. So, I think as we talk about these things we're talking about it from the context of this is the first interaction. This is, this is the first time they presented in this way, because multiple times may make a difference. I'm wondering if because we are tagging each other so much if I should just come over here so you know what, why don't we watch does that feel I know but they're panning past me every single time so I can certainly get out of the way wake up sorry that doesn't seem fair yes that's what we're going to be right now and these are not all inclusive there are so the first sort of set of examples we'll review is some things around free speech which comes up a lot in the classroom what our students allowed to say what feels like things that can be sort of provocative or inflammatory and how would we categorize those various things so we took something that sometimes happens in the classroom where perhaps someone is bringing up content that isn't really relevant to the actual content of the course so maybe someone's sitting in a course talking about statistics but one of the statistics examples has to do with pregnancy and all of a sudden the student starts to talk sort of at length about their views on abortion. We would consider that kind of in the distracting category it doesn't have anything to do with the content being off the course. And it really feels off topic and is pretty provocative. So we would look at this as an option for a sort of a management strategy so what might a faculty member do to sort of redirect a student that's not actually the content we're talking about Like let's get back to the statistics feels off topic and is pretty provocative. So we would look at this as an option for a sort of a management strategy. So what might a faculty member do to sort of redirect a student? That's not actually the content we're talking about. Like let's get back to the statistics part, you know, the reason that we're at this at this sort of juncture and see if that remedies the situation. And we so that's sort of that first category. Okay, moving along to disruptive perhaps someone in the class responds to that student or the student is aware of another student a class who's had an abortion and calls out a student and says, you know, I can't believe you would do that. I totally disagree with that. That's against my religious beliefs. We would start to look at this as more disruptive. Maybe they've already tried to manage the behavior and it has not been successful and now it's escalating. So this will be more in the category of what Anna just described where you maybe wanted to seek some consultation. So I tried to manage it. This is what I've tried. Let me get some other ideas of what I can do. It might even be something that you put on your department's radar, like this is happening. This is really unusual that the student is acting out this way. And on the other end of the continuum dangerous, a student who might threaten someone openly in class, you know, I have knowledge that you're going to go have an abortion this weekend, and I'm going to do everything in my power to stop you. That would not be a time that we would want you to manage the situation. And I think hopefully individuals know that but that is a threat. I mean, that is a clearly articulated threat that we would want to report to the proper resources and we'll review all those resources. But that may be one that I would probably be calling police on, probably behavioral threat management team, and then probably doing a referral to Anna's office for the person who was threatened or to our office to counseling and psychological services to do some advocacy perhaps for that person and probably genetic too. But that's that's sort of how we are going to review some various examples. Any questions on this one before we move on to another example? The next one is about emotional distress and when people are having threat to self or suicidal kind of language. And Anna and I talked about wanting to do something that felt like it would be informed by the new way that students are interacting with course material. So a lot more about the technology aspect of when students say these sorts of things. So distracting, perhaps using the online forum in Canvas that you were hoping there was going to be some discussion about course content to be talking about getting support over a breakup. That would be something we would hope that an instructor would manage because very distracting the student needs redirected to what what actually the purpose of this forum is. And maybe even a resource like here it sounds like you're going through something difficult I want to make you aware of your resources but for the purpose of this class that's not an appropriate use of this forum. Disruptive would be disengaging from the required online discussion and then maybe making a vague statement that starts to get the classmates very worried. They mentioned that they can't go on and so this is something that elevates our concern for the student and again would be something we would want you to be seeking consultation on typically. And like Karen said this would really be most applicable for someone who like this is a brand new student to you this isn't someone you have a history with. On the other end of the continuum posting suicide plan to a shared online message board which sometimes students do. You know tonight it's done for me I'm planning on doing this I'm planning on taking my life we would actually want that to be elevated very quickly to letting folks know and letting the police know that someone has made a clear threat to themselves it's actually the fastest way we can locate a student we're always happy to help and facilitate a wellness check but actually telling the police that someone has made that statement is a quick way. If they're an online student and they live in Michigan same thing we call the Michigan police or call the local police. You could actually call the local police and seek advice. We have a world campus case manager at our office and she actually manages a lot of the world campus students that are spread out across the not just the country but across the world with sort of obtaining the resources that are needed in the search. You reach out to that person or you just call the police. I usually call the police the police actually are the ones that facilitate a wellness check and a police to police contact is actually a pretty smooth thing to have happen. Like we're at University Park we've got a student in Detroit you know here's the on the ground this is the local address we have we need a wellness check. That's a pretty common language for police to use and for crisis workers to use that what you're really trying to do is go out and assess the situation and you are worried that somebody is in danger to themselves at that moment. Does that make sense? Questions on on that example? Are you getting students that are having these? Yes. Yes. I'm gonna say I'm gonna call University Police if I have a student just in Ferguson Township or something they just it's very routine and it's a good hub so you don't have to figure out who to call you just always call our University Police. This one is another one with using technology and this is for misuse of technology so perhaps you're in your classroom and I know a lot of students take notes on their laptops you know have their phones open and they're doing various things with them so distracting might be someone who is texting explicit content during class time you're sort of monitoring the classroom maybe something's going on you need to have eyes on the students and you notice that someone's texting something that looks clearly inappropriate maybe there's inappropriate pictures maybe there's language that looks really inappropriate and so again this would be like a let's course correct right here and see if we can manage this behavior let the student know that's not appropriate you know I need you to put that away you know you can't be looking at things like that during class time and you see sort of what the reaction is many students would be like oh gosh I got caught and they would you know put their phone away and that would be what we would want the student to do is to be able to be redirected sometimes though the behavior would turn more disruptive perhaps you're again monitoring the classroom or students are supposed to be doing something on their computer either and you know individually or collaborative and the student is actually watching pornography and other students can see and hear what's happening in your course pretty much everything that you can imagine I'm reminding myself I'm being recorded so I'm trying to keep my commentary to a minimum because I have a yes absolutely so you know this would be something that's clearly disruptive now other students have viewed it this could turn into a title nine violation because other students are having to be witnessed to this so it is it is a moment to not just manage but to actually report and and to get some consultation about what should that reporting even look like is this you know is this to title nine who else should I consult with and so again when we review all of our options title nine is an option here and then I'm moving over to dangerous someone who's masturbating during class while watching pornography this is this is not something we would want a faculty member to intervene with like we would want you to sort of do what you can to minimize the impact on the other students get the other students out and call the police because that is that is not okay to be happening in the classroom environment so yes all of these are are loosely based on de-identified examples but yeah these are yeah these are things that happen I remember it's not someone it's not always just um being aloof or disrespect it could they could be engaging in this behavior because of a mental health related illness and so all the more reason to kind of get them connected with us um yeah absolutely and all the more reason maybe not to engage in that moment yeah um there's a lot of reasons why people may do behavior like this sometimes it's traumatic brain injury sometimes it's early set um stage of psychosis and so these aren't situations where we would be wanting you to engage right away we'd actually want you to kind of you know minimize the impact on the rest of the students keep yourself safe that's always the most important thing and then get assistance and so I'm going to be handing out something um in just a little bit but it has sort of a three-step model that that sort of mirrors are distracting disruptive dangerous which is recognized respond refer and so on that dangerous side we're almost always looking for a referral questions on this example okay and then um disrespect disregard and dangerousness so on the distracting side of the equation perhaps a student is doing a lot of passive aggressive nonverbals lots of eye rolls maybe some snide comments um you're trying to engage them you're sort of using all of that great skill that you might have and nothing you know you speak to them and it just falls completely flat so that would be really distracting the rest of the class is aware of it you're aware of it and you're going to try and manage it so you might do a reminder um there is a participation you know great in this course I just want to give you a reminder I want to remind you that when I'm speaking to you if you could please respond to me and if you choose not to if you could just stick around after class so you and I can figure out what's going on and you know any sort of intervention you can do at this stage to manage is great because then we're looking for what is the reaction from the student most of the time the students are going to respond like oh sorry I'm going through a terrible thing you know I'm not trying to be rude to you and and students will kind of come back online and that's what we want um perhaps though the student is starting to get more disruptive so now not only is the student doing the distracting behavior but they're actually fiddling with a switch blade or doing some sort of something that appears a little bit more dangerous to you during class that is something that we would we would put more in a category of we're going to get some consultation about you should probably tell your department and you should probably get some consultation on what to do with that student because that is concerning and there is a couple standard deviations outside of normal student behavior right typical student behavior and then on the dangerous side perhaps this you you emerge from the classroom the students pacing outside and muttering like some things under their breath like you know kill or hurt or something like that do not engage with the student we would just want you to go ahead and make a referral at that point so we would put that person absolutely in some sort of a dangerous category whether they're aware of the impact of their behavior it doesn't matter that is a that is a scary thing to experience as a faculty or staff member so we want you to refer at that moment questions on this I see everybody is pretty alarmed by the content of what I've shared so I want to pause here and I want to just I want to remind everyone that these are very rare right we're just we're talking about managing dangerous or disruptive students but they they are a small segment of what happens it's similar to what we do when we do um run hide fight um we need to learn it because even though it's so rare it's important that it's in our brain that we know what to do when that situation arises these are very very rare and you have a ton of support that's sort of why our offices exist so um you know that's that's the point of us being here today not to sort of scare but to to let you know that there's help and there's resources and our goal is to really help students be as successful as possible with a lot of the challenges they're coming in with I would say the distracting I have had this night eye eye rolling stuff I mean I had a student who couldn't stop her eyes could not meet the ceiling the entire semester and you know to some extent I think there's way more on this end than there is in the middle or on the end and so you know thinking through some strategies and I'm going to say this for the benefit of everyone in the room in the recording you know part of what the Dutton Institute can do is to help with if you've got stuff on this end and it's not going over here you know we have strategies that we can use both in class and online to help minimize some of that stuff so I was just going to make the same point that I think distracting is the thing that we get the most calls about and those are those are the things that um almost every faculty has some experience with at some level um but I not but and I would also acknowledge though that because some of those distracting behaviors are more common there's not that feeling that I need to address it it's like oh so this happens all the time right and then what happens is that we don't address it at the distracting level okay and it becomes interrupted and then we get to that place where it's like okay now something has to happen um so I think part of acknowledging uh even the continuum is to to reinforce that probably all of these behaviors are worthy of some acknowledgement um to what degree is really going to be up to a faculty member's comfort and and so but also be aware that oftentimes when we don't address it at the distracting level um there there are those chances that it's gonna evolve and sometimes makes the student a little bit more um frustrated because they they weren't aware perhaps of um of how their behavior was being received and so it can be really helpful to intervene as early as possible there are a lot of reasons why we don't though so we're going to talk just very briefly about barriers to addressing concerns um so sometimes we're afraid of upsetting someone if a student is already saying things that indicate they're upset we don't want to you know upset them further which is very natural um fear of violating their free speech a lot of times faculty members will call for consultation say I don't know what I'm allowed to say I don't know what I'm allowed to do at this point so we're going to talk about that next which I think is another common barrier though and sometimes we're even upset about ourselves getting upset like if I try and intervene in this way maybe maybe I'm pretty uncomfortable with the fact that they were texting explicit things and I'm not sure how I feel about having to regulate that so those kinds of things can really be a normal barrier which is why I think the resources that Steve is talking about are wonderful so that we can just all gain some comfort with that management part of the continuum and I'll pass it off to Karen and I just want to add to that I also think that there are sometimes the faculty don't feel like it's their job um you know that that something happens in the classroom that feels a little bit again either distracting or disruptive and and there's a feeling like okay that's I'm I am here to teach I am here to focus on these things um and that's fair I I don't disagree with that I I think though part of what we have is there are some students who they may experience the distracting behavior in one class and then they do it in another class and then they do it in another class and so although it may not be the role of the faculty member necessarily and in it is something that I think faculty can can keep in mind as helping themselves but also helping others because it's setting a precedent it's setting a standard um if these things aren't allowed in your classroom then it makes a statement um but it it can feel though sometimes challenging so we're going to move to talking a little bit about pre-speech and academic freedom as Natalie just mentioned I I do think that there are many times where a faculty member doesn't feel like what am I allowed to do what what is it that I can say what is it that I shouldn't say um and I'm not a pre-speech expert so I I want to make that clear right from the start and and I think that part of what we want to address really is what kind of kind of expectations do you set out right at the beginning when you're setting up the tone for your classroom and something that Stevie has worked on that at some point people will will have a chance to see is actually setting the tone of the classroom and that that ties into this in terms of people speaking out the content of what they say how that may be heard um in in essence just because again of a person's opinion they have a right to have they have a right to disagree how they do that in the context of the classroom may be more of what you're responding to and making those distinctions is really important because we need to be careful that we're not shutting down some perspectives and not others and sometimes that's a feeling that students have is this other person is acting the same way but they're saying things that the faculty member agrees with so the faculty members not responding but I've just said something that they don't agree with so now they're going to shut us down and those are going to be challenges that students throw out there um free speech is one of those things that you know we have students who who are coming forward and that's their first question are you gonna are you going to shut down my voice are you going to limit what I can say in this classroom and again when we're talking about students talking about what the classroom is based on hopefully that's really going to be okay that that that type of conversation is going to be okay but it's when they they start to move to other areas or they start to make other judgments or they start to make some of those threatening comments that's when you want to be sure that there's some kind of response so I would encourage faculty to always think about on that first day of class in that first conversation with class in the syllabus to be talking about the difference between we want everyone to feel like they have a voice in this environment but how you have a voice is really what's important and there are times when that content may be wavering from what the content of this course is and the faculty member is in control of that and that's where we kind of move to the academic freedom piece and I don't know how many faculty realize that university actually has a policy on academic freedom and what it does is it really entitles faculty to essentially control the focus of the classroom so a faculty can essentially say this this is going to be the limit of the conversation that we're going to have and student you're taking us into another direction and that direction is not fitting with what we're intended to talk about today um and we've seen some really tangible things about that in online chat rooms online discussion boards where people start up a tangent and it's going totally out of the direction of what the faculty's intention is and their question is well because students have free speech can we remove that from the discussion post well yes you can it is not part of what that intended conversation is on that online discussion board right now if the student just gives a different opinion about what's being discussed then we're back to free speech but if it's disruptive or again it goes back to that the tone of it is is abusive or abrasive there's nothing wrong with having that conversation with the student but whether or not you take that off of the online chat room or the online discussion board that's when when there's some questions there and and again i i'm not an expert and i always encourage people these are things you ask questions about okay so if a student has has done something said something put something on an online discussion board again for faculty know that university policy gives you rights to control the environment of your classroom and if if that is going off kilter you've got some rights how you do that though look to for support and know that there are people at the university who can help you talk through that situation um best practices again um how we present ourselves as faculty i think it's always important to to keep in mind that we're role modeling the behavior that we want um so the more that we can be clear in our communication the more that we can show respect and and allow people to have a voice the more likely it is it's going to be mirrored the more likely we are to stick to to the subject as opposed to okay well today there's really something interesting in the news and i'm going to bring that up it has nothing to do with what we're talking about but i really think it's of interest because you all are students at this institution for example that may be fine to do but then the the next time the student brings up an issue and says hey faculty i really would like to talk about this and you say sorry we are really sticking to our our syllabus well it's not that that's not a wrong thing for a faculty member to do but it you understand why a student may say well why is it okay for you to do and not okay for me to do now again expectations in the classroom the more that you're able to role model i think the better we have had situations where a faculty member will escalate a situation because the student yells and the faculty yells out the student becomes aggressive and the faculty becomes more aggressive and i understand where some of that anxiety or fear may come from um so it's one of those things where you you think about the skills that you take when somebody does something disruptive it's always good to just kind of take a minute and think about okay what am i what am i needing to do here and am i needing to react in the moment or not is it something that would be better dealt with after class is it something that would be better dealt with in a follow-up email or not is it disruptive and it's causing issues in the classroom right now and it needs to be addressed so always encourage faculty to kind of check themselves as they're responding um in terms of your rights faculty have rights absolutely and it is important that they understand that they are in control of that classroom environment in terms of expectations i don't know how often it is that that people take a look at some of the guidelines that there are for faculty and there are many of them in terms of the university's administrative policies so encourage you to take a look at those see the ones that that are directly related to you again i don't know how often it is people read the academic freedom policy but that's an important one because it does kind of give you guidelines for what you can do in the classroom and always seek out help always know that there are people here to help and that chances are this may be a first experience for you to deal with but it's probably not the first experience for others that you reach out to dealing with it not that every situation isn't potentially unique because just about every day we see something that we didn't think we'd ever see um but chances are we've talked through situations in a different way before and we've done it more often so know that seeking out for help is is one way to get support for you as a faculty member all right next we're going to sort of connect all of this to the red folder initiatives i brought some of those for you do you need one character do you or not but okay um so the red folder initiative is a joint project between counseling and psychological services student affairs more broadly and then upua and it's a guide so that everyone did you get one did you are here i have oh yeah i'm asking you for a bunch So it's this quick reference guide for recognizing, responding to, and referring to stressed students, which is similar to the continuum that we talked about today. And inside there's a nice sort of decision tree of what you're supposed to do. So once you've recognized those indicators of distressed students and you can see that there's various sort of containers where some of that distress lives, the academic, the physical, the psychological, and then the safety area. So once you've recognized you can respond, and the respond section is really, really important. It feels like things we all know, but I'm amazed at how anytime we are under stress or a little bit vulnerable, it's almost like we flip the lid on our frontal lobe. It just goes like right off out of commission, and all of a sudden we're only acting from a place of like a very sort of primal fight or flight response. So I think that what we love about this folder is it can live somewhere in your office where you can always just kind of grab it and remind yourself, like, well, haven't I tried yet with regard to responding? And then on the back, there's all of the referral options. And you can see that it's a little bit small print because there's so many different places you can refer to. So we're going to review some of those resources where you can refer to. But on the back where it says, is the student a danger to themselves or others, or does the student need some other assistance? You can walk yourself right down the line and say, the student's conduct is clearly dangerous or threatening, including self-harm to others. Yep, call 911 or the Penn State Police. Like, that is what needs to happen in that moment. A lot of times faculty members might write an email to our general email inbox and say, this student was threatening me today. You know, what's my next move? And I'm thinking, we want you to get saved right away. Like, that's what we need you to do right away. I wouldn't want you to wait for, you know, our general email inquiry to be responded to, to tell you to do that. So this hopefully will get people exactly where they need to. And then if your answer is no, it tells you exactly what you're supposed to do next. Does that all make sense? OK, wonderful. So I'll leave you these extra ones so that you have a few. And Stevie, I just, I will let our outreach director know that you, that I've passed a few off, but you would like more. I will let her know when I get returned to the office. Yeah. Is it OK if I post this with our employee copy of this? I don't see why not. It's for public consumption. Yeah, we have 10,000 copies sitting in our, in our office right now. I'm sorry to run over. No, no, I just, I think you kind of covered some of the slides and one, go back one more slide. And I was just going to wrap up thinking if you think back again to the distracting, disruptive and dangerous, and then you incorporate those concepts with this red folder. We just kind of wanted to clarify that like, if ever you feel like you or someone else is in danger, never kind of work around university police, because they are used to redirecting people if they're not the best place and they're used to getting people out on site or kind of responding quickly. But if you think that maybe someone's more in like acute mental health related distress, they can be connected with CAPS quickly. We also have the Penn State Crisis Line, which has a therapist on the phone that can then initiate mobile, a mobile unit to come straight to where the student is. It might not always be ideal to walk someone over. And that can be kind of a long walk, even if it's just a short distance. So just kind of remember, again, safety in those situations. And then student care and advocacy, the department that I represent, can really, if you think of kind of we, we're not clinicians, but we can kind of help in from like a social work kind of perspective with kind of everything else related to, or kind of that's impacted by that distress. So if you're, you know, we're actually also probably a little more likely to be available on a quick walk-in basis, especially if the person isn't in significant distress or need police attention. And so don't forget about us, but also don't put us in front of police if somebody really, if you are really in a dangerous or really disruptive situation. And I guess mandated reporting should we briefly talk through? Yes. Okay. So I think everyone in the room knows that they are a responsible employee for, you've already all reviewed all of that and you're, okay, then we don't need to hit that at all. I do think it's important to know that they're actually in a different category, a confidential category, and that's CAPS and the Genak Center. And then it also applies for the CEDR Clinic, which is another sort of on-campus clinic for mental health. We send them most of their referrals, but anytime someone's in the therapy context, they're considered confidential. So if a student is starting to edge on telling you something, you think this might be reportable, it's not good to stop the student, but it is helpful to sort of say, it sounds like where you're heading. I guess I just want to remind you that there are some options on campus where if you want to talk completely confidentially, I want to let you know where those are. But I also am here if you'd like to talk to me and then there's something you want to share with me. I just want to make it clear that there are a couple of places on campus. Yeah, I think it's worth the time you take the pause versus kind of like trying to backtrack it. Yeah, so it's a take that time. I'm going to ask you a question that I get asked fairly often. Student in a class, online usually, but I imagine this could also happen residentially, acting a little off, a little odd, not asking for help. Are they allowed to approach the student and suggest that they might consider seeing CAPS? That's the instructors really feel uncomfortable about. I've seen all this very strange behavior. They're exhibiting all this strange stuff, but they haven't come to me with a question. Nothing's been clear. Nothing's been overt.  Like they're uncomfortable with that. Is that permitted? Yeah, I mean, I think you're always permitted to offer resources. And I had a situation like that arise with an online student. I was instructing in the past and I just asked if he would stay back in the room, the virtual room after the other students had exited. And I just, I talked about the behaviors I noticed. I noticed you're not engaging the way you did initially. I noticed you seem really not yourself. You seem, you know, I called attention to all the behaviors I saw, which is usually a safe way to start with a student. And then, and then leaving it open. And can you tell me a little bit about what's going on? Is there anything you're feeling like you need assistance with to be successful in this class? Sometimes the student will then say some of the stressors that are going on and it's an opening. And if the student chooses not to and says, no, there isn't anything that I need, it's not bad practice for a faculty member to say, I'm just gonna send you a bunch of resources. You can do or not do what you want with them. But I just feel like I want you to know that as a student, you have free help available. So I'm just gonna send them to you, but please know I do that as a matter of course. Like I do that with all students that are just feeling like they're like, not themselves are sort of struggling a little bit in my class. I let them know of everything. And having a nice template response that lists academic resources as well as counseling and psychological resources kind of covers you from feeling like you're saying, you need some help. But like we all need help. You don't have a template for that, do you? I think that's the best thing. I do, I love that. And I have something that I could kind of send you. I think that would be great. I think that would be great. It's not uncommon for faculty members. And I wouldn't recommend, I think that what makes people nervous about identifying saying I think you should go to Capsis. Like I wouldn't lead actually with Capsis. I like how Natalie was kind of, these are the behaviors I'm witnessing. Even if it's somebody maybe on the spectrum that isn't aware of social cues and is like interrupting fellow classmates, that's a behavior that you could, you're not having to diagnose them or saying that they even need mental health interaction. It's just identifying the behaviors and then sending like robust resources even including like campus rec and wellness. Like, I think take it even further and say, I don't think we want you to diagnose it. Right. And I'm sure that after that, well, I think we have had both. Really? I watch a lot of TV. We do, we do. Everybody wants to be housed. We do at times, that is what they do. There's a judgment there that comes out and it may not be intended, but that's what comes out. And I think that part of the reason why we talk about all of these resources is really to say, you don't need to feel like you're an expert on any of this. You don't need to feel like, okay, look at all these situations. I'm supposed to be able to interpret that? No, you're not. And I think as Natalie said, it's so important is you see behaviors and it's being able to talk with somebody about, here's what I see is different. Are you okay? Showing concern. And I think that's where we really want faculty to feel like, yes, that's the part that I think they play a really important role in is acknowledging those kinds of differences in behavior. That's all for us. Any last questions? I don't know if we had a question earlier. Did you get one? Oh, I think so, okay. You have an open face. It's very nice. Okay, all right, all right. I think I was thinking. Someone has a data column consultant. I mean, if I had a student that was struggling in your class or your department, I would call you a consultant and say, I want to help provide the student the best possible experience here. I think sometimes what can also kind of a barrier to intervene in is you're like, I can't believe this student is eight or older and no one has ever given them feedback on this or that. So just, I guess kind of if you can swallow that and just be like, I have the honor of being the first person to give them feedback on this and I'm saving all my colleagues trouble. Like sometimes I think feedback, I think if ever you were bothering someone and they didn't tell you, you'd be like, you got to let me know so I can get better or just give me a chance to get better. Just give them a chance and then if they don't, then that, you know, we can implement other things. But I think sometimes it's just frustrating because it's always a violation of expectations and like that always takes us right out of our game. Like we're trying to do our job and then all of a sudden you're like, now I'm not doing my job. Having to do this other thing and that wasn't what I expected. It's very complicated. Disrespecting students with disrespecting students. The beauty too of the work that we do together is that you can probably connect with any of those resources and we're gonna get you to bear that. It makes sense to go. So it may very well be that somebody is disrespectful but what comes out of that is potentially autism spectrum or something else where it does make sense to engage with someone else. So know that if you don't take any of the resources, we work really closely with each other because many of these things fall along the spectrum back and forth. Yeah, I haven't really thought of, I mean, I had just, I am thinking of this as an intersectional space. I think there's a bit of gender discrimination that's going on as well as spectrum. But I didn't really think of cats being an organization that deals with helping to go on spectrum co-formatic. I hadn't really ever thought of that. Yeah, we have a group for students on the spectrum. We have special, yeah, we have two psychologists who I would say that's like an area of specialty for them. Can be enormously helpful. There's also a support group on campus. I think the Joyce Grafaro runs and there's several resources in town but by giving a general sort of response of different resources that are available and caps being one of them, we can then screen and sort of route someone appropriately. So can be really helpful. And the school can take away the detainee. So there are many students here right now who are going through university conduct process that is intended to support from these two other offices. It's also being really clear that the behavior, there's no excuse for the detainee. This may give us more insight about why there's not the detainee or why it's not stopping. But would it still need to have control to address? We always say it's an explanation. It's not an excuse. Thank you all very much. Thanks for having us. It really was great. Thanks.


Good morning, and so at ECOP, welcome to CSIS. I'm Ernie Bauer. I'm the Symmetro Chair for Southeast Asia Studies here at CSIS, and it's a great honor today to welcome you all to our conference on Thailand and Crisis Policy Recommendations. We have at CSIS recognized that there seems to be a dearth of intelligent, in-depth, well-advised discussion on what's happening in Thailand in Washington, among the track 1.5, track 2, and in policy circles, although certainly the people who are speaking today from the government will tell you that they have been focused like a laser beam on this, and that's true. But I think there is a need to look at what's happening in Thailand. Some have described this as a once-in-a-century sort of political point of determination in the country, redetermining how political power will be ordered. I don't know if that's true. It's something that we've been looking into over the last couple of days. And today's conference, the purpose of it is to dig into some of these issues with what we think are some of the best Thailand experts in the world. Several are here from Thailand, from Europe, from around the world, and we're really looking forward to digging into this. Today's event was made possible with the strong support of the Henry Loos Foundation and Chevron Corporation. I'd like to thank both of them. This event is live, and on the record, there will be a live webcast through the CSIS website. For those of you following us on Twitter, you can follow at Southeast Asia DC, which is the Southeast Asia Chair's Twitter handle, or at CSIS, and the hashtag for today's event is CSIS Live. And we have, we're going to start with the two of our top policy makers in the Asia-Pacific region. I'll introduce them in a moment, but when we have questions and answers, I just ask that you identify yourself and your organization and ask a question. We're not really looking for sort of statements or speeches at this point. So without further ado, please join me in welcoming Amy Searide and Scott Marceal, and thank you all for coming. Sorry about that. My first act will be to douse the Deputy Assistant Secretary. Sorry about that, Amy. I'd like to say that there's an old Thai saying for that, but... Sure, it's good luck. There isn't. I'm sorry, Amy. Our first speaker is the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific, Scott Marceal. Scott is an old friend. He has been at state in this position for about a year now after returning from Jakarta, where he was U.S. Ambassador for three years, and before that was held very senior positions in the department of the East Asia Bureau and was DAS for the ASEAN region, known Scott for a long time, and we're very lucky to have him with us here today. Scott, I'll turn it over to you to make your opening remarks. Thanks, Ernie. Whenever I sit next to Ernie, I always just make sure I just have water. Thanks for organizing this and giving me, along with Amy, a chance to speak, and I think we're both going to speak a little bit in terms of the big picture. Why does Thailand matter to the United States? I mean, looking around this room, I think I could learn a lot from everybody in this room probably more than I can tell you, but I'll just run through some thoughts for a few minutes. I think most of you know that our relationship with Thailand goes back to the Treaty of Amity in Commerce signed by President Andrew Jackson in 1833. So, I mean, there's just a tremendous history, and there's all kinds of cool things like elephants being sent over and stuff, but I won't bore you with all those details, but there's just a lot of history. Right now, for us at the State Department and for many years, Thailand has been, of course, a treaty ally and a close friend, an important trading partner. It's the site of one of our largest embassies in the world that's also responsible for a lot of things we do in the region. So a lot of our assistance programs, for example, in Southeast Asia, particularly in the Mekong region, are all run out of our embassy in Bangkok. We do a lot of our administrative work. It's a huge embassy. So in a very State Department sense, Thailand is critically important. But in a bigger picture sense, I mean, President Obama was the first country he visited after his re-election, which highlights the importance we attach to Thailand. We have a very close and enduring security relationship. I'll defer to Amy to talk about that more. We have very close trade relationship, about $37 billion in bilateral trade. Our MCham in Thailand has 800 companies. I have all kinds of statistics, but let's just say there's a lot of trade. There's a huge amount of U.S. investment. Thailand, for example, is the seventh largest market for U.S. agricultural export, seventh largest market in the world. So the economic and business relationship is a major pillar of our overall relationship. We do a lot, this doesn't get nearly enough attention. We do a huge amount of work on health, health research and health care, both in Thailand and, but more importantly, working with Thai health partners, do all kinds of research that's relevant for Thailand, but very much for the region as a whole and for the world. So it's a really good and close cooperation with the Centers for Disease Control, having a pretty big contingent out there, working with their Thai counterparts. We do a lot of law enforcement cooperation, including very important regional training through the International Law Enforcement Academy called ILEA, where we bring police and other law enforcement people from around the region to Thailand to train. So I guess the point I would make here is that the bilateral relationship is very mature, very long lasting. And it's evolved to be one of those actually pretty rare relationships, where mostly a lot of the work we're doing with Thailand is not about bilateral issues per se, but how we work together to deal with problems, challenges and opportunities in the broader region. So that makes Thailand, frankly, one of a very small number of countries, certainly in Asia, where we have that kind of relationship, where we're truly partners. As I was coming over here and looking at the notes with lots of statistics and so on, I realized that it's hard to capture the essence of this partnership with statistics or just pure facts. I think for those of us who have been in the State Department or in government for very long or in business for very long, we just feel like Thailand's always been a close friend. It's always been a country we could go to, not only to enjoy, but a country we could go to and have serious conversations about real issues and always feel like we had a partner to work with. So certainly that was true back during the Vietnam War days. But after that, I think people forget what an extraordinary burden was placed on Thailand in the form of refugees, particularly after the Vietnam War and then after the Khmer Rouge came into power. And we worked very closely with the Thai for many, many years and still today with Burmese refugees. It's been an area where I think Thailand deserves a lot of credit for what it's done over the years. It's been an area of good cooperation. But even more than that, just for us, it's Thailand's always been a friend we could count on. And I don't mean that to imply that whatever we said, the Thai agree. I don't mean it in that kind of relationship. But when we really needed to do something or there was a problem, we could always go to the Thai and still can go to the Thai and feel like we're going to have a good partner. And I'll just give one brief example. In 2008, when Cyclone Nargis hit Burma, Myanmar, had caused great devastation. I happened to be in Singapore at the time. So I flew up to Thailand and met with Admiral Keating, who was then the Paycom commander. And Henry had a horseman four who was then the head of USAID. And we met, and to see what we could do in terms of offering assistance. And we met with General Nepot, who I just saw again in Hawaii a few weeks ago. And we flew out of Utapau on a C-130 into Rangoon to talk with the Burmese about whether we could provide some assistance. And then based on that, we were able to send it. I don't remember the numbers. But it was something like 150 flights on C-130s of humanitarian assistance supplies through Utapau in a joint US Thai effort. And there was no bureaucracy. We sat down. We said, we need to do this. The Thai said, yeah, we want to help. How can we work together? And we got on a plane and we did it. And that's to me the essence of the relationship with Thailand is really spectacular and something that I'm glad you're having this conference so we can say it so bluntly. It's something that unfortunately is sometimes underappreciated, that this really close partnership with a lot of trust where we actually can get things done together. And that's why Thailand is so important to us, as well as it's a huge role, of course, in ASEAN and the region. I don't mean to ignore that. It's a critical player, a hugely important region. Again, we don't always agree. But we always can count on a good discussion with a Thai, good ideas, and a constructive approach. And so as we look at the current political situation in Thailand, we very much, the Thai, of course, will work this out themselves. But it's something where we wish them great success. Their success is important to the region and it's very important to us. So I'll stop and let Amy comment on the security side. Thank you. Thanks, Scott. Amy Searite is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia. Before that, she was a senior advisor and to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia and the Pacific. And before that, she was a senior advisor to the Assistant Administrator of USAID for Asia. So when I think of Amy, I think of sort of she's everything that policy special forces should be for Southeast Asia. And she does sort of represent a portfolio that's near and dear to my heart, which I would call the Indo-Pacific. She's got South and Southeast Asia, very important set of countries there. Amy, thanks for joining us today and I'm sorry for dousing you with your coffee before you started. Thank you, Ernie, for that very warm introduction. Whenever I sit next to Ernie, I wear a coffee colored suit. So we're all good. But thanks, I will focus my remarks on why Thailand matters for the Department of Defense, although I certainly echo everything that Scott just said about our relationship with Thailand. And I think the way he focused on the friendship that we have, the kind of really good working relationship that good friends have is very much, I very much want to echo those remarks because we certainly see it that way on the defense side. There are a lot of reasons why Thailand's really important to us and I'll run through, I'll run through about four reasons. First, Thailand contributes to both regional and global security. Second, Thailand enables the United States to have a very strong regional presence. Third, Thailand facilitates multilateral opportunities for the United States in Southeast Asia. And fourth, Thailand provides very valuable insights and advice on the region, again, as a good friend would. To put these in context, though, let me just begin with a little bit on some historic ties and the long history of defense cooperation that we've had with Thailand. Of the five U.S. treaty alliances in Asia, our alliance with Thailand is the oldest, dating back to 1833, which is more than 180 years ago. So this long history that we've had with Thailand has really forged deep and enduring bonds and friendship and trust between our military and the Royal Thai Armed Forces, which continue today. Thailand has been one of the staunchest supporters of the U.S. rebalance to Asia in the region. And as you all know, one of the key pillars of the rebalance for us at DOD has been to strengthen and modernize our alliances. And we're taking significant initiatives with all of our treaty alliances, Japan, Korea, Philippines, Australia, and Thailand as well. In 2012, we signed a joint vision statement with Thailand, which really was all about redefining and modernizing the alliance for the 21st century. And the joint vision statement promotes Thai leadership in Southeast Asia, recommits both countries to support stability in the Asia Pacific, and really deepens our alliance cooperation in a number of ways. And I want to note that this statement was signed, you know, signed in 2012 by Secretary Panetta and former Minister of Defense, Sue Kampan. This was the first document that, you know, first strategic document that outlined our alliance activities and goals for 50 years, half a century. The previous one was the 1962 Rusk-Tanit communique, which was a Cold War era document that talked about the United States vital national interest in preserving the independence and integrity of Thailand and talked about aiding Thailand in resisting communist aggression and subversion. So it was high time to reorient our alliance in terms of the region that Asia is today and the security challenges, both hard security and non-traditional security challenges that the region faces. So a lot of our cooperation with Thailand has really focused on areas of non-traditional security cooperation. And in that vein, Thailand has been a real partner and a very strong contributor to both regional and global security. So regionally, the Thai military provides important counter-narcotic enforcement. The Royal Thai Army routinely interdicts large shipments of metamphetamines bound for the international market. Just in the last two weeks alone, there were two drug raids in and around Bangkok that led to the confiscation of more than 500,000 metamphetamine tablets. We also do a lot of work on HADR with the Thai military and the Thai military is a real contributor to regional efforts. In the aftermath of last year's Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, Thailand used their own C-130 aircraft to send supplies, medical personnel, and search and rescue teams to assist recovery in the Philippines. On the global security front as well, the Royal Thai Armed Forces participates in anti-piracy efforts, including taking command of the Combined Task Force 151 in 2012, which monitors a very large swath of ocean in the Gulf of Aden and Somali basin and has really led to a reduction in piracy in the region. Thailand contributes to international peacekeeping missions. It deploys dozens of military personnel and police officers globally. And Thailand is home to a national peacekeeping training center that has hosted a variety of UN peacekeeping training events. So having a close ally like Thailand, one that significantly contributes to regional and global security is very much in our national interest, especially at this time, that's very fiscally constrained where resources are tight. But Thailand also matters to DOD because it helps strengthen our military presence in the region. You know, we conduct extensive bilateral mill-to-mill engagements with Thailand, which include joint exercises, ship visits, officer training exchanges, and military hardware sales, all of which increase U.S.-tied military interoperability, which of course is very important in regional and global contingencies. There's no better example of building interoperability than our International Military Education and Training, or IMET program, which in the last three years alone has brought more than 450 Thai officers to study in the United States. Given our long history of close cooperation and shared security interests, Thailand has become a true partner in regional efforts and an important facilitator of U.S. multilateral defense engagement in Southeast Asia. So this is really the third reason that Thailand matters. It really strengthens, it sort of operationalizes our multilateral cooperation in the region and has really become a true partner in many efforts that the U.S. engages in. It's no coincidence that the flagship event with Thailand is the Cobra Gold military exercise, which began in 1982 and has grown to be the largest military exercise in Asia, perhaps even the world. We had some debate on this about which is the largest exercise in the world, but Cobra Gold certainly comes close. Initially, this was a very bilaterally focused exercise, but over the years it has become larger and larger, more and more multilateral, so that this year's Cobra Gold included more than 7,000 personnel from nearly 30 countries, which highlights the important role that our alliance plays in building security for the region. Thailand's initiative is also seen in a recent ASEAN humanitarian assistance exercise, which it initiated and co-hosted along with Malaysia and involved 19 nations actively addressing one of the region's most critical transnational threats. Thailand has also taken initiative to help us in terms of facilitating mil-to-mil engagement with Burma, which we have very limited ability to engage. We have very limited and calibrated mil-to-mil engagement with Burma, but Thailand has offered and has conducted a number of trilateral exercises and discussions with Burma, which has very much facilitated our ability to engage with Burma on the mill side. And Thailand is also, as Scott mentioned, Thailand has been a real partner on the Lower Mekong Initiative, something I was very involved in when I was at USAID. This was an effort launched in 2009 to really give more sustained focus to mainland Southeast Asia, so it includes Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and now Burma. And Thailand, really from the beginning, stepped up and was eager to become a real partner in that effort and become a real contributor, a real donor on a number of activities that we do under LMI rather than just being one of the recipient countries. So I think it's a real example of Thailand's initiative and support for U.S. multilateral engagement in the region. And Thailand has also demonstrated real regional leadership in a number of ways, most notably perhaps in recent years, as China's country coordinator, Thailand has played a lead role in convening the ASEAN governments around working towards a code of conduct in the South China Sea. So that's a role that we certainly support as well. And finally, let me touch upon the fourth reason that Thailand really matters to us, which is that we really rely on Thailand for important counsel advice and to get their perceptions and views of the region. The United States, of course, has long been engaged in the Asia Pacific, but there's no substitute for hearing firsthand from good friends, a real key ally, trusted regional partner, and DOD representatives in Bangkok, as well as senior officials here in Washington, have regular communication and an open line with their Thai counterparts. And this enables us to hear firsthand and to better understand regional dynamics, whether it's dynamics in ASEAN, with China, with Burma, whatever the case may be, we can always turn to our Thai friends and get their views and perspectives, which makes us ultimately much more effective in our security initiatives. Of course, we know that Thailand is in the midst of a political crisis. I wanna reiterate that the United States government respects Thailand's need to address its internal issues and find a path forward that works for the Thai people. But in the midst of the crisis, DOD commends royal Thai armed forces restraint and professionalism that they've shown throughout. It really demonstrates the evolution of Thai civil military relations in a positive direction. So as we stand by our ally during this difficult period, I'm pleased to say that our defense cooperation continues unabated, and in fact, it's really never been stronger. The important work that our two militaries do is wide ranging and far reaching, and it's a relationship that benefits not only Thailand, but the United States, and also advances our security throughout the Asia Pacific and beyond. Thank you. Thank you very much, Amy and Scott. The first panel, as you can see, sort of lays the foundation for our discussion today. And I think both speakers have very expertly outlined why Thailand is important to the United States. After this panel, we're gonna talk about putting modern Thai politics in context. We're gonna look at the crisis and how it's shaping future political order. And then our last panel over lunch, we'll look at policy options for the United States in response to the crisis specifically. But I'd like to open the floor to questions for Scott and Amy. Murray, you got the first question. So you could have a microphone up here. Yeah, and please just remember to introduce yourself in your organization. Hi, my name's Murray Heber from the Southeast Asia program. This is not a planted question. But Scott and Amy, thanks. I would like to ask you, Amy alluded to this at the end, but has the crisis affected bilateral relations and some of the regional stuff you're talked about at all? And if so, how? Thanks. Murray, I'll start. I would say that the relationship remains strong. We continue to do our regular work with the Thai government in all the areas we discussed. It's sometimes a challenge over the last several months. It's been a challenge for some Thai government agencies even to operate given what's happened. But in terms of the tone and the warmth of the relationship and what we're able to do, no. I mean, I think people in the Thai government will be able to give you a better idea of the extent to which it's constrained them on, say, foreign policy initiatives. Maybe there's something there. But in terms of our relationship, we're continuing to work in, I think, all the areas we were working with before. Yeah, I'll just echo that. On the defense side, the answer is no, it is not, you know, to date. It has not affected our security cooperation, our alliance activities, our interaction with the Thai armed forces. So we monitor the situation closely. We continually offer our positive feedback to the military for their professionalism and restraint, but it has not shaped anything that we're doing. Hank and then Andre. Thank you very much. Good morning. Hank Hendricks in the US Philippine Society. Amy mentioned that Thailand is a supporter of the rebalance and at the same time, China's assertiveness in the area and the region, particularly with respect to maritime territorial disputes. What if you could comment on how we see Thailand's approach on these disputes and in terms of the US position on trying to achieve some sort of a peaceful reconciliation there and solutions. Thank you. Yeah, Scott may have a better answer than I do for this. I mean, we don't engage directly with Thailand in terms of their reaction to disputes in the region on a regular basis. So we certainly work well with Thailand in terms of, you know, our Cobra Gold exercise and other exercises is a venue to incorporate China as an observer on some humanitarian assistance parts of the exercise, which is a way to, you know, begin to work with China in terms of laying down how we expect, how we like to work together, what our expectations are in terms of norms, principles, all that sort of thing, but we don't engage in a deep way in terms of their position within ASEAN on those disputes. Hank, maybe I just add a couple of thoughts. We do talk to the Thai and Thai Foreign Ministry and others as we do with all the ASEANs about the importance of maintaining principles and how the issues in the South China Sea are dealt with. We always have very good conversations with the Thai. They don't have a deep understanding of the issues. I would say our approaches are, you know, there's a lot of similarities. We tend to approach it not surprisingly in kind of an American way and they tend to approach it more of a Thai way, but also they play the role as ASEAN country coordinator for China where they have a very important behind-the-scenes role in trying to get the ASEANs and the Chinese to work on the code of conduct, and I think they've been quite effective in that role. Andre, in the red hat. Gee, thank you. I'm Andre Silverzo and I represent the Interstate Traveller Company in Vietnam. And as the panelists know, I worked a lot with Thailand from the East Asia Bureau and also for Ambassador Donohue during his tour there. I agree with everything you've said on the analysis of Thailand. I greatly respect Thailand. But my question is this. I was puzzled during the ASEAN ministerial meeting that Cambodia hosted. And it was the first time, as you know, that they failed to have a joint communique after about 44 years of having them and then they couldn't. And the reason was that, as I understand it, was that Cambodia, the host, would not agree to detail the Chinese violations of the exclusive economic zones of China in the Philippines and Vietnam and others. So my question is, what were the dynamics in Bangkok that they didn't seem to step up at all to take a position to help the Philippines and Vietnam? And after the meeting broke up, it seemed it was more Indonesia than the Thais that went around to try to pass things up. And that's my question. What were the dynamics in Bangkok that led to that inaction? Thanks, Andre. Nice hat, by the way. I like that. Yeah. You know, look, we weren't there. We weren't in the meeting. What we heard was, I mean, you know, ASEAN, it operates by consensus. And so I think there were a number of countries that were very concerned, wanted to come out with a stronger statement and at least one or more that were more cautious and clearly Cambodia fell into that latter group. I think, and as you said afterwards, the ASEANs were quite upset that they had not been able to publish or issue a statement, a joint statement. And I know former Minister Nalagawa did a quick tour of the region. Why him and not the Thai, you know, it hard to say. I mean, the Indonesian to just come out of being chair, as you know, and I think we're still, had some momentum from that. I'm not sure if that was the only reason, but I think you saw the ASEANs quickly try to get back into a position of unity, which is something, you know, their influence depends on their unity. ASEAN's influence without unity is minimal. So I think a lot of them recognize that. And I think the Thai recognize that as well. I'd just add to this. I think there's a lot of pretty bad analysis in the media lately on the ASEAN summit that says that the ASEAN statement, because it didn't, you know, call China out on the Vietnam issue somehow means ASEAN has passed on this issue. That's not true. ASEAN is actually, China, through its actions on the South China Sea, through its aggressiveness, is really welding ASEAN together at a rate faster than I think would have happened otherwise. And that's the truth. Sean. Thank you. Sean Tandon, I'm a journalist with AFP. You mentioned, Dr. C. Wright, you mentioned restraint, a plotting restraint showed by the Thai military. I wanted to see whether you think that that's a strategic decision that's been taken by the Thai military, whether you're confident that that's going to last, regardless of political developments. And how much you think the U.S. reaction to the 2006 coup factors into the Thai military's planning? Thank you for the question. Yes, we do think that the Thai military is being strategic in its restraint. And it's been pretty open about the fact that it has no interest in getting involved in terms of running Thai politics again. I think, so I think it's certainly reasonable to think that there were lessons learned from 2006. And so that that has shaped their thinking, but that is speculation on our part to some degree. Are we confident that they will continue to be restrained and professional in all of this? We are reasonably confident in the sense that we, I mean, look, it's a complex situation and a lot of things can happen. And we're monitoring, for that reason, we're monitoring it closely and keeping in close touch with our Thai counterparts. So I don't want to say we're overconfident about any outcome. I'm sure the rest of the day, today you'll talk about all of the various things, the various dynamics that are at play. But at this point in time, we don't have reason to expect that the Thai military will change their current stance. Mike Massetic, PBS Online NewsHour. Mr. Ambassador, you said that the Thais are going to work this thing out themselves. What signs or indications do you have at this time of any willingness to compromise or reach some kind of accommodation? And what kind of suggestions is the United States giving to the Thais these days or is it a matter that, given our own internal political dynamics, foreigners don't pay much attention to the American government when they suggest compromise? Oh, thanks. I think. What I meant is that in our view, like most internal political impasses in this case and divisions, it's not something that foreigners can come in and magically fix. It really has to be a Thai solution. And I think there are a lot of people in Thailand who are working. I mean, I think they, my experience when I've traveled to Thailand is a lot of Thai are very frustrated with the situation too. And so there are a lot of people trying. I'm not gonna make any predictions about how this plays out. I think it's very dangerous to make predictions. In terms of the role of the United States and others, we haven't sought to impose a US prescription. We don't think that would be appropriate. We've certainly, what we've said is, we care a lot about Thailand. We care a lot about its political stability and its democracy. And we very much hope that it's able to resolve these problems soon. And we've stressed that in our view, it's important that the problems, we're not saying this is how they should be resolved, but the manner in which to resolve it's important that it be done constitutionally and democratically and of course, peacefully. That leaves a lot of room, of course, which is the way it should be. So we're stood for basic principles. Some of our friends here from Thailand could comment better than I could on the extent to which our advice has been helpful or not. But again, what I would stress is we've tried to stick to some fundamental principles and support for the Thai nation and the Thai people rather than going in and try to prescribe a specific solution, which we don't think is what the Thai people want. This is the last question. Michael Yehuda from George Washington. In the last few years, a number of states in the region have sought to improve or establish new forms of bilateral relationships to meet China's assertiveness. This includes some allies of the United States as well. To my knowledge, Thailand has not openly participate in such activity, but nevertheless it seems as if leaders of countries such as Japan, Vietnam, and so on have sought to establish a new kind of relationship with Thailand. Does the United States take any view about these kinds of new, well, I wouldn't say alliances, but new attempts to work together in view of the increasing perceived threat from China? I guess the short answer is we're not, I mean, we generally, our position generally is to welcome countries working to improve the relations in the region, whether it's Vietnam and Japan or others, or with China. We're not trying to build networks or alliances against anybody and whether on South China Sea issues, for example, what we've said consistently is to highlight the importance of respect for international law and that all countries, all climates should avoid certain types of behavior that are provocative that raise tensions. It's not about being anti-China or anti-anybody else, but about trying to encourage certain forms of behavior. And what we do in our diplomacy is really work to try to build our own relationships with countries, all countries really in the region. We certainly welcome the different countries in the world, in the region working more closely with each other, but we're not trying to cobble together some network. That's how I would put it. Please join me in thanking Ambassador Marciel and Dr. Sira. Try it for that one.