I am so excited for what is about to happen. And to introduce you to what is about to happen, I welcome to the stage my dear friend and colleague in the Department of English, Phillip Bryant. Good morning. So, after 59 long years, we're doing this opening processional in a slightly different manner this fall. Trigger warning, there will be no Elgard, no tried and true pomp and circumstance, no Brahms Academic Festival Orbiture, or grand march from Act II of Giuseppe Verity's Grand Opera Aida. So sorry folks, no Egyptian chariots, no real live elephants. What we do have for the first time ever in the history of the Nobel Conference is a full bodied and vibrant celebration of America's greatest contribution to world culture thus far, jazz. So, when these, thank you, so when these particularly home grown saints that you see in the back there that are here among us today in the town of St. Peter come marching in, they will be led by modern dancers performing original choreography by my very able colleague from the theater and dance department, Melissa Rolnick and our great jazz ensemble playing an original composition entitled Flash Patterns by their director and leader in all things jazz, Professor Dave Stamps. This processional will employ two primary and essential elements of this African based black American musical form we call jazz, rhythm and dance intertwined to weave history and story and spirit into one. In this case, the story of our most important fellow beings here on this planet, the tiny little insects, but also in that intertwining of rhythm and dance weaving an essential story of our own true interdependent, interconnected human cells on this earth. The great jazz arranger, composer and tenor saxophonist Jimmy Heath called jazz music the true democracy of our creativity. Everyone has an equal voice in jazz. Everyone has an important story to tell to the world in this music. From the highest to the lowest, from the most powerful and manner born to the least ones here among us. No matter if you're born black, white or brown, jazz is to be felt deeply, spiritually, as well as to be heard and danced to. It embodies not only a distinctly American art form, style and tradition, but a whole way of life, a way of being, seeing and hearing. To paraphrase Walt Whitman, jazz is simply a cosmos embodying not just one person or one group, but multitudes. And in jazz, every improvised note and chord and song that belongs to me as well belongs to you. And as well belongs to all the other saintly living creatures of our shared and precious, very fragile world, both large and as we will soon learn, very, very small too. So after 59 years, let's all join in right now for something slightly different from this, for this year's Nobel conference. In this time of trial and trouble, let's all just try and walk together, children, to be a part of this number. And don't you ever get weary, because by and by, we're going to lay down this heavy load when all the saints, every single one of them, both large and small, come marching in. Insects, big impact. Dave Stamps, the composer and conductor, the guest musicians and members of the Gustavus Jazz Ensemble. Thank you to Melissa Rolnick, the choreographer, and our student dancers. Dave Ryan, our visual artist, and Professor Priscilla Briggs for helping to coordinate and the lighting team from heroic productions for that amazing opening. Once more, let's thank them for that rendition of insects. As a person who truly loves the outdoors, I really love the fireflies. Did you catch them in the video? What an incredible way to set the mood for these two days when we will wrestle with thought-provoking questions at the intersection of science and ethics. I am so pleased that you have joined us here on campus, and I also extend a warm welcome to our audience attending through the livestream. As we begin this Nobel conference, I would like to take a moment to pause and reflect on the fact that Gustavus Adolphus College is located on the ancestral homelands of the Dakota people, whose spiritual traditions include the belief that this land, along with the creatures and people living on it, are their relatives. The Minnesota River and its watershed are sacred places. These waters and lands are interconnected with Dakota culture, language, creation stories, spiritual rights, livelihood, and sustenance. As a college, we seek to honor Indigenous people and communities by telling the truth about the history of our presence on this site. Over time and through sustained dialogue, we are committed to building relationships and taking deliberate steps towards co-creating a better future for all. And now it is my great honor to call upon a member of the Dakota community, Everett Black Thunder, a Dakota language teacher who will offer a prayer and song as part of this conference opening. Everett. For that traditional Dakota song, what a stirring way to open our conference. We are grateful that Everett could be with us today. As we begin this year's Nobel conference, I extend heartfelt gratitude to our thoughtful and highly qualified speakers who will guide our conversation today and tomorrow. I look forward to learning from these experts. Gustavus is pleased and proud that we are the only institution in the United States authorized by the Nobel Foundation in Stockholm, Sweden to use the Nobel name in conjunction with an event. We are grateful to the Nobel Foundation board for their continued support of the Nobel conference. Also, we wish to take a moment to thank those who have helped to underwrite the cost of this conference. The Nobel conference has an endowed fund that supports a portion of the conference costs. Core funding comes from the generous support received from the late Reverend Drell and Adeline Bernersen. Other gifts to the fund have been made by Don and Ted Michael, Russell and Rhoda Lund, Drs. Robert E. and Susan T. Rydell, William Harvey and Peg Sutherland, the Mardag Foundation in memory of Edgar B. Ober and the United Health Group. This year, we give a special thanks to a recently secured intention from Steve Sether, a friend of the conference who is providing future endowment support. In addition, we are grateful to the RJ Foundation of Sweden for their funding to expand the digital reach of the conference. Special thanks to the conference planning committee led by Dr. Margaret Blokkasi, as well as the gifted team at Heroic Productions for their work in leading the sound, lights, and live stream. And now, let us continue with an invocation provided by Chaplain Betsy Huyum to bless our time together at this conference. Good morning. Thank you for this time to be together today to deepen our awareness and understanding of these tiny creatures, insects with their little bodies that make a big impact. As humans, our lives are inextricably linked with insects, and they have so much to teach us. From ancient times, people have been interested in this smallest life forms. In the book of Genesis, chapter one, God said, let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind, cattle and creeping things, and wild animals of the earth of every kind. And it was so. God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good. And then God said, let us make humankind in our image according to our likeness. God created them. The Bible, written thousands of years ago, mentions ants and gnats, fleas and flies, bees and hornets, spiders and grasshoppers. As a Lutheran college of Swedish heritage, we are rooted in the Christian faith and open to all. The Nobel conference is a time to come together and delve deeper into the relationship between science and religion. May this conference be a time of blessing. We give thanks for the conference presenters and you as the participants, for this time of learning to deepen our awareness and understanding, for the tiny creatures we are focusing on and for those who study insects, and for all who are gathered here in person and online with curiosity and wonder. Amen. Thank you, Chaplain Hoyam. It is now my great pleasure to welcome Nobel conference director, Dr. Lisa Helke, who will be our guide over the next two days. Lisa, thank you for your hard work and leadership of this conference. From the 17th century poet Basho, a caterpillar, this deep in fall, still not a butterfly? Actually, in an October like this one, I think they've got a little while to go yet, so maybe they'd be OK. So welcome to you all. So wonderful to welcome you to this conference. We've been planning for two years. It's a pleasure to welcome you both online and in person. Those of you online are going to have a special experience hosted by our alumnus and board member Tane Danger, who is this year joined by science journalist Maggie Kurth. Tane and Maggie, thanks so much for being here. So as I say every year, the program for this conference is kind of like your syllabus. It's a really fast two-day intensive course in insects. So please read your program to learn and take it home with you. And also, after your home, you'll want to dig into the conference website where you'll find lots of resources that maybe you didn't realize you were so interested in.  So the conference is organized so that there will be one or two talks and then a long discussion period focused on the talks that we've just heard. Please submit your questions as always. If you're in the hall with us, you can submit them on paper. Legible handwriting, please. And if you're online, you can submit them to Nobel Conference, one word, at Gustavus.edu. But don't just send them to us. Post them on social media, if you like. Or I don't know, do something crazy, like have a face-to-face conversation with someone at lunch about something you're wondering about. If you do use social media, we'd love it if you'd add the hashtag nobel59. Today, over lunch, you have an opportunity to go to some special breakout sessions, some of which are of special interest to Minnesotans about some of our indigenous insects, OK, and also ticks. And also some that really show the breadth of ways in which insects are relevant to the whole scope of the liberal arts college. In addition, and as always, as you can see, we have music. We have an art exhibit. We have spaces to go learn more, to contemplate, to walk in nature. Remember that the Nobel Conference brings together students, educators, and members of the general public together with the leading thinkers of our time to explore revolutionary, transformative, and pressing scientific questions, as well as the ethical issues that arise with them. We're exploring science and ethics in dialogue with each other through this conference. This morning, I was reading the Cambridge newsletter, and it noted that they have a new vice chancellor in America. And she said, what I think is the most important thing for our university to be practicing right now is disagreeing well. And I thought, what a wonderful phrase. Agreeing well is a wonderful thing. But in this time of challenge, I think learning to disagree with each other well in ways that deepen the conversation is really among the most important things we can do. So I invite you all to this two days disagree well with each other. Lots of people to thank over the course of two days. And I know that we're all dying to get to the first talk, so I'll try to make this quick. I'll start with the Nobel Conference Committee. Margaret Block-Casi, its chair. Priscilla Briggs. Mike Ferragamo. Janie Franson. Jos Hadjos. Lauren Hecht. Marissa Calbermatt and Yuta Kawalasaki. Sam Kessler. Amy Cusick. Pascal Chor. Katie Lehigh. Martha Ndakalako. Jessica Static, Dave Stamson, Colleen Stockman. So thanks to all that committee that has worked so hard over the last several years on this conference. And now, one more layer of the chrysalis. And that is Margaret Block-Casi, who is in fact a member of the Department of Biology. The mistake in the program is mine. I own it. She is not, in fact, a philosophy department member, although we would welcome her with open arms. She is in fact a member of the Department of Biology. And I welcome her to the stage now. Welcome to Nobel Conference 59, Insects, Little Body, Big Impact. I want to thank the Nobel Conference Planning Committee, my Nobel Conference planning class, the director, Professor Lisa Helke, and Associate Vice President of Marketing and Communication, Barb Larson-Taylor. For their work developing content, organizing and facilitating this remarkable conference. Without these people and many others behind the scenes, this event would not be possible. So why insects? Well, they have a much larger than their life role in our lives and on the earth. Insects affect what and how we eat, our health and well-being. And they tend to evoke very strong reactions from us. Insects also make their way in the world in a profoundly different way than humans do. We have a lot that we can learn from them. Like it or not, insects and humans resemble each other in some very important ways. Of course, we all need to eat and reproduce before we die. But deeper than that, these similarities have been largely studied in the fruit or pumice fly, Drosophila melanogaster. And what we've learned is that at the level of cell function, we're actually very, very similar. Even deeper within our genome, about 75% of the gene mutations that are associated with human diseases can be found in fruit flies. So we can learn a lot about how our own bodies function by studying insect bodies. While at the level of genes and cells, we share remarkable similarities with insects, their lives remain largely unknown to us. Insects are not humans. One major difference is insect small body size, which causes them to interact with their physical environment in very different ways than we do. Physical forces such as gravity, surface adhesion, that's just stickiness between surfaces, cohesion and friction all have equivalent effects on insect bodies. But at the human scale, gravity rains supreme. Because of this difference, insects can walk up walls. They can fall from very high distances without being harmed. However, they cannot coast when they fly, and they always risk death by raindrop. A second major difference between insects and humans relates to their sensitivity to their surroundings. Different types of insects detect and integrate vast amounts of visual, mechanical, and chemical information from their environment, often at levels far beyond what humans can detect.  Because of this, insects detect and respond to facets of our environment that we don't consciously recognize. It's pretty trippy stuff. We've organized the talks thematically. After insect appreciation 101, we will try to get into a bug's head to understand more about insect perception and its ethical implications. Then we turn to insect-human interactions, hopefully from a slightly different perspective, while exploring insects as a source of nutrition, as well as attitudes about eating insects, including, and then we will hear about the scientific value of collecting and cataloging insects, including documentation of insects precipitous decline. We will end the conference learning what social isolation in a fly can teach us about the health risks of social isolation in humans. Over the next two days, there will be many opportunities to explore insect experiences. I hope you will think about who studies insects and the tremendous value of welcoming a variety of voices and perspectives about insects. I also hope that you will challenge yourself to think about insects from less human-centered perspectives. While we cannot think or feel exactly what an insect thinks or feels, we can recognize ways that insects experience the world similarly to and differently from us. This is an experiment in radical empathy that can enrich our lives in multiple ways. Finally, I hope that you challenge yourselves to think about ethical implications of the many ways that we intersect with insect lives. Our lives are inextricably connected with insects. We cannot live without them. Sometimes we cannot live with them. Insects could live without us, but will they survive us? Welcome to insects. Little body, big impact. Enjoy. This is the last time, I promise. I'd like to welcome to the stage my colleague Hagar Atia in the Department of Communication Studies, who will introduce our first speaker.


Well, thank you everybody. Thank you for coming here. It's a great day, and the purpose of our meeting here is to hear the report from CSIS Excellent Report on US-Indonesia Partnership for 2020. This is a report that tries to evaluate what has been done in the course of the partnership between our countries and recommendations to move forward. So I'm so glad that we have a lot of stakeholders here from the government, from the legislature, from the NGO communities and other partners, and let's have great discussions today. And with that I would like to invite Ernie Bauer from CSIS to open up the meeting. Well, Dino, thank you. And I'd like to thank you and your staff for the warm hospitality. Indonesian hospitality is always warm and usually a little bit spicy, if you have some of the right kind of gado-gado. But it's great to be here at the Embassy. We really appreciate it because CSIS found itself in a bit of a spot. We actually have moved from our old building at 1800 K Street to a new building that our president and CEO, John Hammering, built with the support of all of you, the supporters of CSIS. And we actually moved over to that new building and it's beautiful but it's not ready for prime time yet. So when it is ready we would hope to be able to host Dino and the Embassy and many Indonesian events in that facility. We've got a real treat here today and that is because we get to talk about Indonesia for a good hour and a half. And I think we all know how important Indonesia is to the United States, to ASEAN as an anchor of ASEAN, which in itself is a fulcrum for regional integration and geopolitical strategy for the long term. So CSIS decided to do a study. As you know, the Southeast Asia Chair, the Sumitra Chair for Southeast Asian Studies at CSIS each year does three to four major research projects. And this is our second for 2013. It's called the US-Indonesia Partnership for 2020. I want to thank in particular Ted Oceas who was visiting us for a year at CSIS. More than visiting, you were with us. He was part of the family. We got him on loan from the State Department for a year and Ted really mixed things up. In fact, he's been involved as a key author of both of our initial research projects this year, the India ASEAN project and the Indonesia 2020 project. So Ted, thank you very much. I'd like to also recognize Murray Ebert, Greg Polling, and the other members of our team who have been leaders in pulling this report together. This is the launch of the report. It will actually be on CSIS's website as of... Is it up now? It's already there. Oh yeah, I forgot about that. We pre-launched it so you could do your homework and hit us, hit the panelists with really hard questions, if you would.  We decided to build a multimedia presentation that would pull in some of the key messages about what Indonesia is and why it's important. And then after that, I'm going to invite Ted Oceas to lead us through the findings of the report. And then we'll have an excellent panel who will provide some commentary and then I'll open up the floor to all of you so that you can ask the pertinent questions of the day. Again, Dino, thank you. And Greg, can we see the video, please? Indonesia is home to 250 million people, making it the world's third largest democracy and the largest Muslim majority country. Currently the world's 16th biggest economy with a 2012 GDP of more than $1 trillion, it's predicted to move up to 7th by 2030, driven by strong domestic demand and a young population. The U.S. State Department considers it a linchpin of regional security because of its geostrategic location in the center of maritime Asia. The two governments launched a comprehensive partnership in 2010, forging close ties on security and defense. Joint military exercises happen regularly as both sides work to modernize Indonesia's forces. Bilateral defense trade is up as the country increases military spending. Democracy building is also a key aspect of the partnership. 15 years after the end of President Suharto's authoritarian rule in 1998, Indonesia has become the most stable and vibrant democracy in Southeast Asia. All eyes are on the 2014 election. President Yudhoyono is term limited and will be leaving office. 12 parties will compete for seats in the legislature, which will determine the presidential candidates. The election may spotlight Indonesia's tendency toward economic nationalism and protectionism, which could present a challenge to efforts to improve overall trade ties. Indonesia is America's 34th largest export market, eighth largest for its agricultural products. However, the figure should be much higher, given Indonesia's rapidly growing middle class. Most U.S. investments are in energy and mining, poor infrastructure and governance issues, hamper investment opportunities in manufacturing and services. Indonesia's rise will shift the power dynamics in Asia. It has stepped forward as a leader in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN. Like the United States, Indonesia views a strong ASEAN as a key to a peaceful, prosperous Asia Pacific in the 21st century. As the country's cloud increases, it will become an important center of economic and strategic power, meaning the bilateral relationship with the U.S. will be more vital to both nations. It's one neither side can afford to neglect. Well, I don't know about you. That was my first time seeing the video. I really enjoyed it. And Ambassador Jalal said, why not put it on YouTube? I think that's a great idea. I think we should we should get it up and on YouTube as soon as we can. A few words of thanks. I wanted to thank Ernie for inviting me to CSIS for a year and for his leadership of a really great Southeast Asia team. Thank you, Ambassador Jalal, for hosting us today. And thank you especially for your energetic and deep commitment to this partnership. Thank you to my former boss, Ambassador Scott Marciel, who has ambassador to Indonesia built and strengthened this partnership. Thank you also to Everett Eisenstadt for joining us today. He's one of the city's top trade experts. And I wanted to give a special thanks to two great collaborators on this report, Murray Hebert, who not only wrote much of the report, but was the driving force behind the conference that we held last May on Indonesia, and Greg Poling, who's really the report's primary author and who also organized our visit to Jakarta last February. I have to offer the usual caveat. I'm speaking in my personal capacity, not on behalf of the State Department and not on behalf of my current employer, the National War College. As you heard in the video, it's a broad relationship. And we try to organize the report to reflect what are the three pillars of the comprehensive partnership. Political security cooperation, economic and trade relations, and people-to-people collaboration. And you'll see there's no sort of one silver bullet. There's no one thing that will thrust the relationship forward. It's going to be a combination of actions in all three of those areas. Many, when we went to Jakarta last February, many people took time to meet with us. And many more participated in our conference last May. Your thoughts, their thoughts, fed directly into this report that we don't hold you responsible for the report's findings. But as the participants in the conference did, what we tried to do in this report was to make it forward-looking. So what I'll do is focus on a few key recommendations. If you could go to the first set. Now there are 50 recommendations. If I marched through all of those, it would be like the baton death march. So I promise I'll just focus on a few sort of highlight recommendations. Now these are the first four I'm summarizing here, the first four of the political security recommendations. I think it's not surprising that we recommend sustained high-level attention to the partnership. And we also stress in the report that the more that governments can involve civil society, the private sector, academia, non-government organizations in developing the partnership, the greater will be its energy. The greater will be the commitment to the relationship, and the greater will be the resources that are available for the relationship. And that's not to mention that the best ideas don't always come out of the government. And implementing great ideas shouldn't always be up to the government. We highlight the importance of strengthening the ties between our two legislatures. Tremendously important, Indonesia's parliament is no longer a rubber stamp as anyone in the administration will testify. They'll go after members of the administration. But I'd like to dwell, and maybe we'll go to the next slide, I'd like to dwell for a minute on the one of the recommendations, one specific recommendation on what we'd like to call triangular collaboration with Indonesia on regional challenges. This is the fourth of our political security recommendations. Now, Indonesia has long treasured, has a very long tradition, which it treasures, of a free and active diplomacy. But in the past few years, as the video points out, Indonesia has also assumed a much greater international leadership role that's consistent with its economic growth and consistent with its rising self-confidence. I'd like to think of it as Indonesia's resumed its pre-1998 role as the diplomatic heavyweight within ASEAN. It helped broker a Thai-Cambodia border dispute. It's been providing leadership on South China Sea issues through Indonesia's Bali Democracy Forum. Indonesia promotes democratic values, and it determined that contributing to Afghanistan's transition by training Afghan police was in Indonesia's interest. Indonesia has also been actively sharing its experiences of democratic transformation with the countries of the Arab Spring. Now, during our CSIS conference in May, last, just last May, foreign minister Martin Natalagawa gave the keynote speech, and in it he boldly proposed a treaty of amity and cooperation, not just for ASEAN, but for all of the nations of the Indo-Pacific. And I think this exemplifies a new boldness, a new energy in Indonesian diplomacy. In Myanmar, former Indonesian Vice President Yusuf Kala engaged very constructively on the Rohingya issue, and foreign minister Natalagawa visited Rakhine state in order to help promote national reconciliation in Myanmar. If you look at the history of those two nations, Indonesia is in a unique position to help Myanmar during its shift towards democracy. The Burmese military already looks to Indonesia as a model for how it might ease out of politics and still remain relevant. I think we need to look at challenges such as Myanmar, the South China Sea, Afghanistan, and the Middle East as opportunities for the United States and Indonesia to come together. When we collaborate, we can produce much more than either nation can produce alone. For an American policymaker, it's very clear Indonesia is prominent among the members of the non-aligned movement. It's prominent in the Organization for Islamic Cooperation, and those, among other things, make it an ideal partner for the United States in dealing with countries and issues around the globe. Now, this triangular collaboration is made possible because our interests are converging and because we have a lot of values in common. Two large, diverse, pluralistic democracies share an outlook in many ways. Our goal is not full agreement. Heaven knows it's not alliance, but it is closer collaboration over time on international issues through consultation, through full and open discussions, and eventually through burden sharing. We didn't create this partnership just so that we could look at one another and focus on one another, but so our two great nations could make a difference in the world. Let's go to the next set of slides. In the econ and trade area, I already mentioned the importance of energizing government-to-government dialogues by including outsiders, or by you can provide much more energy if you're not just dealing with governments, but you're also dealing with the energy of the private sector and non-government actors. But I want to stress here the importance of our third recommendation, that Indonesia maintain an open trade and investment environment. As a member of the G20, Indonesia made significant commitments in 2010 in Toronto, in 2011 in Cannes, to avoid protectionism, to reinforce the multilateral trading system, and to roll back any new protectionist measures. If Indonesia is to be a credible leader on global economic issues, it can't afford to indulge in the kind of economic nationalism that's documented in Chapter 2 of this report. Now we also notice, note on the other hand, the importance of U.S. businesses taking a long term view of the opportunities in Indonesia. Let's go to the next slide. When we did a special event at CSS, particularly on this, it was focused on what can U.S. businesses do so that they're more effective, more profitable, have better success in Indonesia. If U.S. businesses are going to succeed, they should look at the example of other U.S. businesses that have succeeded. The businesses have done very well in Indonesia, are those who have invested, have done the foundational work of developing relationships, developing partnerships, and investing in their communities in Indonesia. The companies that have followed that formula are reaping significant rewards for their efforts. They're doing very well. Next slide, please. In our chapter on people-to-people collaboration, you won't be surprised that we focused first on education. Last April, CSIS invited Pak Putra Semperna to Washington so that we could examine in-depth his innovative ideas on how you could increase educational collaboration between our two countries. And I commend to you Putra Semperna's white paper, which is posted on the CSIS website. It focuses on what we can do to strengthen educational ties. And I think, is David Merrill here today? Well, Dave, the Yusindo is another institution that's really devoted itself to educational collaboration, put great effort into that. And Ambassador Merrill helped create the joint U.S.-Indonesian Council on Higher Education, an important element in that collaboration. In this part of the report, we also highlighted the importance of collaborating on health, on clean water, on urban planning, deforestation, climate change, science, and technology. But I'm not going to go through every one of these recommendations I promised you. So let me just go to two in this area. One, and let's go to the next slide, fisheries. We recommend establishing a joint U.S.-Indonesia Center for Sustainable Ocean Fisheries, a research institute in which scientists from both of our countries could explore and study the waters that house the world's highest ocean biodiversity. Ambassador Marciel devoted a lot of time to food security during his time as ambassador. And he and I think all of us here can acknowledge that food security isn't just about rice and grains. For the people of Southeast Asia, it's also about fish. Catch certificates should reflect where fish are caught instead of where they are processed, and that's something the U.S. could make a major contribution to. The next slide, please, and this will be the last recommendation I'll mention. But outreach to youth, we recommend increasing the number of private sector partnerships that exist with ad America. It's the U.S. Embassy's high-tech outreach center in Jakarta, and more partnerships with the private sector would enable ad America to enhance its capability to reach Indonesian youth and to show off the best of U.S. technologies. During the three years since it opened its doors, ad America has attracted 360,000 people. Eighty-five percent of them are young Indonesians between the ages of 15 and 30, our target demographic. But this is, as we all know, we're looking at October 1st. This is an era of limited government resources, and a facility like ad America cannot fulfill its potential without support and partnerships from the outside. So my final note of thanks is to you, our guests today, and following comments from the panel, we hope that you will pose questions to me or to Murray or Greg about this report or offer your thoughts on the ideas that are behind partnership 2020. And let me go to the last slide. This is where you can find it. If you didn't happen to click on it yet, when you got the invitation to this event, you can download the report. And I urge you to, if you would, look at the other 40-some recommendations, the one that I didn't march you through. Thanks very much. Thanks for your attention. I look forward to your questions. Thank you, Ted. And do I have to turn this on? Thank you very much, Ted. I appreciate the outstanding summary and the hard work that you put into making that document such a dynamic set of recommendations. And ones that we hope the White House will be, and Merdaka Square would be, looking at as they prepare for President Obama's visit to Indonesia in October. I think there's some good ideas there that both governments and, as you mentioned, private sector and civil society organizations could consider. I've got a real, it's a real treat for me to introduce this panel, two of the men who were absolute champions of bringing the US-Indonesia relationship to where it stands today and two very good friends. Dino Dijal is the ambassador, Indonesian ambassador to the United States. As some of you know, he will be headed back to his country in the next couple months. He has high aspirations for his leadership role. As do I, quite frankly. I'd love to see a man with his energy and vision leading his country as he has as ambassador, but in new ways. So, good luck to you, Dino. And again, thanks for having us here. Scott Marcel, as far as I know, is not running in 2016. But he is back. He's come back to his country with actually also high aspirations. And when we look at leaders in the United States who really understand Southeast Asia from their roots up, I think of Scott as a first among equals in that group. He's particularly coming back from Jakarta, particularly coming back from his leadership role at the US Embassy there in what were very critical years for Indonesia's, if you will, sort of coming out in the building of confidence there. And I think, Scott, we're really honored to have you here today. He's now the principal deputy assistant secretary for this region and the State Department's Office Bureau of East Asian Pacific Affairs. And finally, one of the best trade minds, as Ted mentioned earlier, in Washington, a man who's worked on thinking about how the United States relates to the rest of the world when it comes to trade. Everett Eisenstadt, he's the Chief International Trade Council in the US Senate Finance Committee. I will mention that Everett's comments, because he's in the Senate, have to be off the record. So for those of you that are in the audience and taking notes, particularly you members of the media or people who write blogs, Everett, we have to ask you to respect his requirement to be off the record. And when we produce the video of today's event, we will, I don't know, somehow North Korea-like cut him out of everything. So, having said that, let me hand it over to, we'll tee off right down the table, and I'll hand it to my friend, Dino Dujal. Thank you. Thank you, Ernie. And first, let me thank CSIS for producing this excellent report. Ted, Murray, Ernie, I've read the report and I'll read the recommendations, and I can guarantee you that, at least for my delegation attending the JCM from now on and continuously, the US Indonesia report produced by the CSIS will be a key reference for us in how to design the way forward for our relations. So thank you very much for this enormous intellectual and policy contributions. So, actually, I want to invite everybody to give them a big hand for this. And Ernie, thank you for your comments. But what will I do after the United States might stand in the United States? But to be honest, I'm a bit humbled by it because technically I'll be unemployed. So you'll see me a lot in the media in the next six, seven months because I'll be running for the presidency of Indonesia. But technically, I'll still be unemployed. So I'll be glorified unemployed person in Indonesia. When I came to the United States as ambassador three years ago, my aim is basically to let Americans know two things. One is when you think of Asia, don't think of just China and Japan or India. Think about Indonesia as the largest country in Southeast Asia and ask what someone would say the next rising Asian giant. And the second thing that I want Americans to know is the strategic importance of Indonesia with things which have been highlighted in the video and in Ted's presentation. And I think I can sufficiently say that after three years, many Americans have begun to understand and appreciate that. And this is reflected in the bilateral relations between Indonesia and the United States. The state of relations today is, I would say, very, very good. There's public perception in Indonesia about America being heavy-handed. But to be honest, in my dealings with the United States, my dealings with Lynn Pascoe, with Cameron Hume, with Scott Marshall, and others, we have a good debate. We have good back and forth, but I've never felt that the United States is heavy-handed. At the end of the day, there's always room to agree to disagree. And this is one thing that I appreciate most in my dealing with American diplomats. Comfort level is high now. Strategic trust is higher than before. We have structured relationships which we did not have for decades. Structured relationship means at least every year there's a joint commission ministerial with six established working groups dealing with different sectors. And the relationship is no longer seen as ad hoc or single-issue interest. Relationship now is comprehensive, which is why we call it comprehensive partnership, and structured. And there's understanding of the strategic importance on both sides of the equation. So the state of relations is good. Relations before used to be thin, but now it's getting deeper. Although not as deep as we want to be. There are two key figures in the U.S., in Indonesia's perception of the United States, there's always two key figures. One is who is the president? Who is the president of the United States? Because he's the one always in the media in Indonesia. And the second is the ambassador. The ambassador in Indonesia is a rock star. Scott Marshall is a rock star. Lin Pasco there is always on the front page in the way that I'm never on the front page in Washington Post. But it's a great asset. So if you want to see how the barometer turns up, look at who the president is, how he or she is being perceived in Indonesia, and who is the ambassador and how effective. So it's very important to have the right combination of the two. Now relations are very good now, but now the question, we're coming closer to the question of whether or not this relationship will be, will maintain its vigor and vitality after SBY is gone next year. My president, SBY has been the most active president in promoting U.S.-Indonesian relations. He's the one who first came up with the comprehensive partnership. He's the one who just put all his political and diplomatic capital into his relationship. He'll be gone in 2014. And President Obama will be gone in 2016. So our challenge is this relationship that was helped by the personal connections between the two and the fact that the two leaders have spent time in Indonesia as well as in America, can it survive the post-SBY and post-Obama era in the next two, three years? And our job is to make sure that it does survive. And I think it's wise, while we still have time until 2014, for both sides to take it as far as possible, as fast as possible. So by the time that we get to the post-Obama, post-SBY era, this relationship is very, very solid and irreversible. But in Indonesia, the question is being asked, at least for now, now that relations are very good and very strong, about sustainability and speed. My government is asking, my politicians is asking, sustainability. Is the pivot, after in the second term of Obama administration, is the pivot to Asia sustainable? With all this attention on the Middle East, some one politician even said, is there going to be time for re-balancing to Asia? Not re-balancing, but re-balancing to Asia. I thought that was a very interesting comment that he made. And speed. Speed means, yeah, we're going fast, but can we maintain that speed or even go even faster? So sustainability and speed is going to be quite important to watch. The next thing that we need to address in maintaining the relations beyond post-SBY or post-Obama era is strategic trust. Strategic trust is much better now than, say, 10 years ago, let alone 20 years ago. But there's still some challenge. In America, my challenge is really to convince the remaining members of Congress who still sometimes see Indonesia from the old eyes. Some NGOs who still see Indonesia from the old days. Maybe they need to go to Indonesia and see how Indonesia has really, really changed to be one of the most transforming societies in Asia, if not the world. But from the American side, I think there's work to be done in convincing the TNI, our military. As you know, there's embargo for so many years between our militaries. And there are still segments within the military where the discomfort is still there. There are segments in the military which are very open and up to speed with U.S.-Indonesia relations and military relations, especially those who went to NDU who were educated here and got into the IMED programs and so they understand that. But those who missed that 10 years, the discomfort is still there. I'm speaking about this very, very honestly. And we need to earn that strategic trust from that segment of the population. The third challenge is, I think, our relations are still below our potentials. I'm working very hard here. Scott is working even harder in Jakarta. But relations are still under the potential. Two quick examples. Our trade with China is over 52 billion. Our trade with the United States is half that, 26 billion. And 10 years ago, 20 years ago, you would see that when people in Indonesia talk about trade, in world trade, they only think about three countries, U.S., Japan, and Europe. But now it's China way ahead of the United States. So again, America is a bigger economy than China. And I think we are still below our potential. Even the students, now the students are, I don't know what is the number, I think around 7,500. Whereas a few years ago it was 15,000. And now it's back up. But we still need to double it. And we still need to reach that level. But catching up with the potentials is going to be our big challenge. The fourth challenge, I would say, is implementing programs. I'm very, very good in drawing things up on paper. Coming up with great ideas. And Scott also, everybody. But we realize, hey, we write this down and let's implement it. It's not as difficult as on paper. I admit, in my bureaucracy as well, you get great ideas. But not everyone in the bureaucracy is up to speed. Not everyone has adapted this new, vibrant, dynamic US-Indonesia relations. And sometimes easy issues that I said to Scott, hey, we get this done in one month. No, it takes a year or two. And you know what I'm talking about. So again, getting the bureaucracy up to speed is going to be very important in terms of how we promote our bilateral relations. And I think this goes back to my earlier comment that our relations is still thin and is getting deeper, but not deep enough. And that is reflected in the fact that sometimes these programs face bureaucratic resistance. It's also important personal relations. Relations between our leaders, between President Obama and President SBY is critical that they sit one another. They talk face to face, heart to heart, to maintain that is very important. But most important, in my experience, I'm sure Scott will agree, the relationship between my foreign minister and Secretary of State. I think in the last four years when Secretary Hillary Clinton was at State Department, she had a very good personal relations with my foreign minister. And it's a relationship based on trust and they can call anytime. And one thing that my foreign minister likes about Secretary Hillary, she listened a lot. She listened a lot more than she talked in any of their meetings. And she really wants to know what's the bottom line and what is at the back of their minds. And this is one thing that we need to continue between President Kerry and my foreign minister. I'm glad they're going to meet in New York in Friday. And I really hope that they're able to establish a personal friendship. Last point, I asked Ernie earlier, what is the purpose of our meeting here? Is it just to say I love you or to be honest about relationship and to be enlightened about relationship? And Ernie being the think tank person, say go for the second one, go for the second one. So I'm going to be honest with you. I don't know if this is going to be public or not, but I'll let you decide. There is one structural weakness and challenge in our relationship. Now what that is, and this is something that I don't think Scott and Lynn could do anything about, but it's a structural issue that you need to know about from our viewpoint. What is that? There's an impression in Indonesia that U.S. foreign policy is judgmental. Now what do I mean by it? There was a time just several months ago when in the course of just two, three months, I get four or five reports issued by the U.S. government about Indonesia, about different issues. I don't need to name them, but we appreciate this is congressionally mandated, but on the other hand, it's not easy for us. The analogy is like this, we were friends before, and then now we become best friends with the strategic partnership. Since 2010, that elevated our relationship, not just as friends, but as a comprehensive partner. But then, even though we're best friends every week, I say something about you, you know, hey, you know good, you know this, you don't not doing well in this, and you know, which is fine sometimes, but if it goes too often, then, you know, it reduces the comfort level, especially if it's been made public and worldwide, especially if the opposition reads it and use it against you, especially if the public reads it and use it to criticize the government. If it's just a close report, confidential report that we get to see, that is fine. But I need to be honest about this. This is a bit hard to take, you know, and this is a structural challenge in our relationship because you are congressionally mandated to say this, to issue these reports. And it may be easy on you, but it's not easy on us. Again, this needs to be said because this is the purpose of our partnership, being honest with one another.  Thank you. Thanks very much, Dina Scott. Thanks very much, Ernie. Is this on? Yeah, I think so. Thanks, Ernie. Thanks, Dino, first for hosting this at your wonderful embassy. And for your always, you know, very thoughtful remarks. Thanks to Ernie and Ted and Marion Gray and everybody for having this event, but more importantly for the effort to do this report. And Ernie, I have to congratulate you. You know, I tried to get Ted for two years to get the report done. They always said he was too busy. Just let him write what he wants to. That's the thing. I'm joking. Ted did a great job in Jakarta. And I'm glad you're here so you can answer the question about the congressionally mandated reports. And it's also good that former Ambassador Lindasco, one of my predecessors in Jakarta, is here. I guess, you know, at first I have to start as I usually do with these things with Dino. I mean, I absolutely agree with your comments. I mean, I think one of the reasons that the relationship is closed is because we see eye to eye, including on what the challenges are in the relationship. One thing I am a little bit concerned about is Dino's comment that Lin and I were not heavy handed. I'm not afraid if that gets known here, I'll be in a lot of trouble. I think seriously, I think this comprehensive partnership is really a great framework and a great vehicle for building the relationship. It was a fine relationship, but frankly, underperforming. We weren't doing as much as we could for a whole host of reasons. It's not necessarily, you know, appointing fingers exercised for a variety of reasons. We weren't doing as much together as countries as we probably could have or should have. And I think the comprehensive framework provides a great vehicle for changing that. I think, I agree with Dino, the goal for me in my mind to the comprehensive partnership was building a strong relationship that was durable, that could be sustained, and did not depend on who is sitting in the Astana and who is sitting in the White House. I mean, it's always nice to have that top cover and that high level support, but these relationships to be sustainable can't depend on individuals in the White House nearly so much. I think the good news is we've made a lot of progress under the comprehensive partnership. I think the governments are engaging together, working together, consulting, cooperating far more broadly and deeply than even three or four years ago. In addition to the traditional things like the diplomacy, of course, the military-military relationship has grown quite dramatically, but also working together in health, science and technology, entrepreneurship, environment. You name it, there's a whole host of areas where we're now working together very actively. Trade, as you and others have mentioned, and I'm sure Everett will touch on, has been kind of an underperforming part of the relationship and one that that's not easily addressed, but one that we have to keep working at with the support and the cooperation of both business communities. I think there's a lot more that we could and should be doing in that area. One positive note is Ted referred to the triangular cooperation. The idea that because we have shared values and shared interests in many places, the United States and Indonesia ought to be able to collaborate around the world and in third countries in a positive way. And we're already seeing that beginning to happen. Just a few weeks ago, Indonesia had another one of its very useful seminars on promoting stronger democratic institutions in the Arab world. And USAID was able to contribute some funding to that, which allowed it to be a little bit bigger and hopefully a better event than it otherwise would have been. And in a way, it's a good partnership. I mean, it was very much an Indonesian-driven thing with an Indonesian face on it, but we supported it because we also had a shared interest. And I think there's more of that coming our way. I'd like to spend a few minutes on what I think is the biggest challenge and opportunity for us and Dino and others have touched on it, which is, you know, in two democracies, this relationship, the depth and strength of this relationship does depend heavily on public support. And frankly, that's where we need to do a lot more work. And I would say the biggest challenge in the United States is not anti-Indonesian sentiment, but rather, you know, I was going to say, blissful ignorance. I'm not sure it's quite so blissful, but ignorance, lack of knowledge of Indonesia, it's changing, as you said. It's, you know, we're seeing more and more awareness out there, and programs like this are so important. It's astonishing to me that I can go talk to fairly sophisticated, what I consider, global people and their shock to find out that Indonesia is the fourth largest country in the world. I have no idea, which I find rather amazing. So we have a lot of work to do in forming the American people, certainly the business community, but also the academic community, et cetera, as well as our friends in Capitol Hill about the importance of Indonesia and all that's happening there. On the Indonesian side, I would say that people certainly have much more information about the United States. I'm not sure how accurate it is, but we have a huge challenge. There's a deep, deep skepticism about the United States in Indonesia. I think you had largely resolved it when you were there, but it's come back. And, you know, it's based on a lot of history. It's based on, you know, the colonial period, the Sukarno period and the Cold War. And then more recently, it's based on concerns about how the US views Islam. And so we have a lot of work. I think we have a very good story to tell, but it's going to take a huge effort over many years to try to reduce the level of skepticism and even suspicion that a lot of people still have about the United States and Indonesia. I do think we've made progress, but it's one of those things that we just can't afford to let up on. And so that's why I'm a huge believer in the importance of public diplomacy and outreach programs, bringing people together, whether it's students or parliamentarians or business people. Peace Corps program is a wonderful example of a very good program that's underway. At America, which Ted mentioned, a fabulous, fabulous diplomatic vehicle which, you know, faces funding threats, to be perfectly honest, is something we absolutely have to keep going. So it's a long-term effort, I guess what I would say, to summarize. I think we've made a really good start over the last three years, but there's a huge opportunity that's still awaiting us. And a lot of it is just, frankly, hard work. There's not a lot of easy magic bullets out there. It's just hard work every day, making sure that we're getting people together, getting the message out, working to solve the issues, and trying to build public support in both countries for what I think is truly a hugely important relationship. Thank you, Scott. Thank you. Everett, what's the view from the Hill? Thanks, Everett. Thank you. Well, I want to thank the panel. I thought we heard some very, very interesting and important guidance from some of the people who lead this relationship and think about it all the time. I heard some key messages. Is that a key? That was a key. That's the key. It's time to leave. Thank you. I heard listening is important, engaging, strategic trust, relationships, devoting time equals returns, and hard work. And I think if we look at the U.S.-Indonesia relationships and partnerships that have really excelled, they all have all those ingredients in them. And so we know that it's possible. I've been working on this relationship for about 28 years now. And I have to say that we've always had the discussion. And I'm sure David Merrill and Lynn and all of you guys have heard this. We've been sitting around for years, Barbara, saying Americans don't know enough about Indonesia. How many years? How many decades? But I think more Americans do. What I do think that we are at a point where Americans have to think about Indonesia. And I think that's probably a pretty good thing. A couple trends are happening that we track at CSIS. One, we're entering a period where it's a more multi-polar world. And power is a little more diffuse than it used to be. So we have to depend and build relationships with key partners who are so like-minded, as Ted mentioned. And I think that's important. I would also say, from the business point of view, American businesses are now looking for growth in Asia outside of China for a number of reasons that we can talk about if you want to. But they are all looking at Indonesia and they're looking at India. They're looking at big economies where they could really do well. And they don't know Indonesia. I will say that I was at a dinner a couple months ago with another ASEAN head of state. And it was a great dinner. It was just 12 people or maybe 15 people around one table. And man, we really got into it. We just kicked off and it was back and forth. Very comfortable. But you know what we talked about for 50 minutes? The first 50 minutes was China. When were you last there? And this was a dinner with some U.S. senators there, former U.S.T.R.s, former national security advisors, former Secretary of State, really high level Americans. And then the two B unnamed head of state sort of looked at me and I swear he kind of winked. And he said, let's talk about Indonesia. And honestly, you could hear the crickets outside the Jefferson Hotel. And the Americans were like, wait. No one had been there a week ago. People knew you. They knew Marty. They knew the president. And they all knew Rosa because she is the rock star in the room here. We all know that. But I think this is the thing. Henry Kissinger said, you know, when there's crises in Europe, I can close my eyes and see the face of the person that I need to talk to to resolve this crisis. I think a lot of American leaders now can close their eyes and they see an incredible ambassador. They see a Secretary of State and they see the president. But not much deeper than that. And I think that's a challenge to both of us, both sides. We need a more vibrant exchange of our leaders and they've got to talk to more people than just each other. And you've been good at that, Dino. But that's something that I think is really important. Anyway, I wanted to open the floor to more interesting observations and questions in my own. I can look out in this audience and see all sorts of fantastic people and experts. So I want to open the floor. Please just identify yourself and your affiliation and we'll get started. So let me start at the Margaret. I'd like to thank everybody. I'm Margaret Sullivan. The first time I came into this embassy was 60 years ago. So I guess I count as one of the old hands. I heard some very interesting things, but there was something I didn't see. And I, while I heard it sort of bad about, I didn't hear. I think if we are building constituencies, we have to start young. And I know that there is serious work that David Merrill and others are doing on university level education. I spent five years in Aceh, now and then, working on high school. And I think if we really want to build a long-term constituency for Indonesia, we need to do what has been done for the Japanese and the Chinese. And we need to get into mutually developed history and geography that goes into our middle schools and our high schools in both countries. And we need to begin to make it important to learn Indonesian in high school. Now that's a big deal, but I would suggest you start when you put that nice little film on YouTube by showing some of the reasons why Americans should know something about Indonesia and what the Indonesians are doing in this country. Because that looked very much like what Americans will do in Indonesia. And the other thing I would do is see who can do it. But if you've got lots of Facebook, you get kids talking to kids on Facebook. And that's as good a way of getting a bilateral relationship that could grow. I mean, we have you, Latino, because you came to school in the United States as a kid. You have people like some people. I am a parent of who are involved in this relationship because they were kids in Indonesia. But we've got to figure out how we bring that childhood thing into this relationship. I realize the importance of the high level thing. But I think we also have to go lower. But I think ask the panel for any comments on that. I mean, I'll start. I guess what I would say is certainly agree. The three years that I was in Jakarta, Ted and I, the top priority for our embassy was promoting educational exchange. Getting more Indonesian students here to study. More American students there to study. Other exchanges. Peace Corps is not quite an exchange program. But getting young Americans to Indonesia through things like the yes program, you know, where people, kids come in high school level and spend a year. Mostly were Indonesians coming here. Some increasing numbers of Americans going there. So it remains the embassy's top priority for exactly the reasons that you mentioned as well as many other exchange programs. At America is really, as Ted said, was really designed to reach out and get, reach out to young audiences. What we haven't... It's just in Jakarta. It's just in Jakarta. And we would be happy to build them in like 25 cities around the world if we could get the funding for it.  But what we haven't done well enough yet with Ad America, and it's for a variety of reasons, is use it to link young people there to young people here. We've done a great job of outreach there. Less of a good job linking the people. So I think we absolutely agree it goes to the whole point of it's building the grassroots support, starting with young people, a lot through education. And thank you for the recommendations on the video. Thank you so much for your comments and thoughts about increasing the balance of partnership between Indonesia and the United States in the future. My name is Seru Kurama Yuga. I'm a student at the Science and Science University. In the past three years before I came to science, I worked in the educational sector in Indonesia and focused solely on pursuing the goal within the comprehensive partnership that is to double the number of Americans in Indonesia and vice versa. But to be honest, the number of women reflect kind of balance in the bilateral relations. If you look at the number of Indonesian students in the United States nowadays, as somebody already mentioned, there's only around 70, 75 hundred students in America. But the number of American students in Indonesia is much, much smaller. Three, five hundred students. So there's also a need to increase the interest of to also reflect the balance towards Asia, not only from the U.S. State Department point of view, but also to export it, to transfer it to the educational point of view. I kind of reflect on a recent case on Syria and the response, and especially the people in the admissions on the Middle East and the studies within the notions, the balance, or Asia. They are trying to re-engage the U.S. policy to the region by accomplishing more papers. And we don't see a fight back from the scholars that are studying Southeast Asia and Indonesia on the ground. So there's a need for Americans in my point of view to know more about Indonesia. Since I already mentioned that it's something like three decades and it's still, you know, this is the creepiest side of the Jefferson politics. So, like, I also reflect on my point of view. I was a yes student back in 2004. I came here to pursue my higher education. But to be honest, if you see the global picture of the petition in higher education, the full brightness, as like the front-runner for the American community, because it is losing out to everybody else, you see the progressiveness, the outreach done by the Australian, the Korean, Japanese, the European, two Indonesian students, the effort and outreach by the U.S. universities. So this is also the outfit that you need to be looking to export this interest, to share this interest to the U.S. universities, to attract more students of Indonesia. And after the fact that maybe there's a decreasing number of funding from the U.S. third department to fund these programs can also involve the private sector. But one thing to be noted, one important thing is the Indonesian government is more and more responsive now to support the studies of Indonesia for all. So the U.S. because it's really interested to have more Indonesians in this country, there's a lot more to the students. Thank you. David, could we have some, I just want to ask you here, right over here. Appreciate if you have some questions for the panel and we could probably link together quite a few statements here. I think it's very appropriate to mention as the port does that the third pillar of the comprehensive partnership, the people-to-people is the relatively most underutilized one. We can take that further I think as the two presidents did in the joint declaration that actually this is at the core, as I said, of the comprehensive partnership. And it's also the pillar that is the most essential for what Ambassador Vino was talking about for the vitality and sustainability of the comprehensive partnership beyond the terms of the two incumbent presidents, particularly since it's increasingly recognized that the two governments, if they ever did, no longer have the funds to do what needs to be done. Two governments can do, I would estimate, invest less than 50% of what needs to be done. So we need to look specifically, I believe, at what can be done by non-government groups and public-private partnerships to actually implement new dimensions of the partnership between now and 2020 in cooperation with governments. A couple of ideas are, one is, and Vino has heard this before, I think Scott as well, greater attention to the structure of the government-NGO relationship and private sector relationship. As Vino, the structure that was devised at the beginning, was a series of working groups that's entirely consists of government officials. Although there have been a few interactions with non-government officials, that trend needs to increase, that needs to increase. There has been progress on this front. Last June in Jakarta, we organized together with the working group of the comprehensive partnership on climate change, the first interaction between the working group and the NGO, the private sector, the master of RCL attended. We need to do more of those. That shouldn't be such a hard feat to accomplish. I hope it can be regularized. The governments, I think, need to take the lead on that, although with the encouragement of the NGO. David, did you have a question for the panel? Because I think we should probably get to some questions. Well, those are a couple comments I have more. I thought the comments were also solid. Okay, thank you. Amitabh, do you have your hand first? Thank you very much. I really appreciate the CSI report, because as a professor of teachers in southern Asia and the northern powers, a few weeks ago, I was looking for many, many servers. And there wasn't really that much money in the ratio, especially because of the major relations. I found that it was not easy to get into the major relations, which I assigned to my students, because I had the major students in the past. So now they have things to actually have something that students can actually use. And that's really the key, because what we have in the US in the major relations is that, like, this is a knowledge gap, a community gap. And the only reason to know about the United States is that I'm able to know about the Middle East. And suddenly, I've had a level of graduate or graduate students. And I'm just going to, I can only suggest another question. In one of the suggestions recommendations, you say, the report says that, I haven't read the report, so I will look forward to reading that. But I saw that the US, so the report, they said, to leave off the commitments of our faculty, that it was taken on the G20. So G20 was mentioned. I'm not quite sure exactly how it was framed. But this is really one of the keys. The countries that get most likely to be seen in the world today are the so-called emerging powers, the rising powers. I just came back from a real conference on the brakes.  But I'm wondering if the United States would encourage the Middle East, and not just to accept a follow-up, but also to actually play a more active role in G20. And that's the kind of leadership which only the Middle East can exercise. And just to prove by giving you an example, there are really very emerging powers that you're not writing about, obviously emerging powers. In the Middle East, the emergence is very different from the emergence of any other country. At least, most of the emerging powers of Asia, like China, India, South Korea, and Japan, they are of course very significant in the Middle East. And they have influence. In the case of Indonesia, it's still not a very significant emerging power, or even an economic power yet, but it still has more influence, especially when it comes to the United Kingdom, Thailand, Cambodia, Borja, in Borba. No, no issue that we can do that, because of the issue that we're fighting. India cannot do that, China cannot do that. The moment they do it, there will be people who think, oh, they have a better interest. Only Indonesia is very different in a very different way than other Asian emerging powers. So the, I guess the question to the panel is, if I heard this right, can or should the United States encourage Indonesia to use this power? And Dina, would that be effective? Scott, do you want to share your wisdom? I'm going to stop. Thanks. It's a good question. I mean, I guess what I would say is if you went and talked to Dino's colleagues at Kemlu in Jakarta, they would complain that we're giving them far too many suggestions on things that they could usually do around the world.  And some of what we do is much more subtle than that. The fact is we're talking and engaging, whether it's Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Nadal Agawa tomorrow. My guess is, you know, what are they going to talk about? They're going to talk about Syria, Iran. They're going to talk about East Asia Summit. They're going to talk about South China Sea. I'm guessing, right? So this is happening all the time now. And we have had, you know, when I was in Jakarta, we had extensive discussions with the government on a whole host of regional issues. How could we work together to support reform in Myanmar? How do we deal with problems like Syria, North Korea? So this is going on, and we certainly do, as I said, probably offer the Kemlu more suggestions on things they could do than they would prefer. I think G20 is also new to us. I mean, tough. And I think our ambition, I hope I'm not wrong in saying this, is really not to lead it, right? We've been very clear that what we want is for the G20 to be the premier form for international economic cooperation that has been achieved. We want to make sure that the decisions reached in the G20 reflect the new international economic landscape and also reflect the interests of the developing countries. Indonesia has said that we're there representing the aspirations or the needs or the interests of developing countries, but also of ASEAN. And we want to make sure that the G20 remains relevant despite the fact that the crisis is no longer there, the 2008 crisis, and that it will continue to address pertinent international economic issues. So our ambition, to be honest, is not to lead up front, but to be part of the pack in helping to determine issues that will shape the world economy. Rich? Thank you. I'm Richard Cronin with the Stifton Center here in DC. I'd like to go back to the trade economic issues and ask a very simple question, and that is, we have ASEAN 2015 coming up, and a lot of developments of that are in the integration period. But I wondered if the panelists have any comment on whether ASEAN 2015, as you know it now, is going to help much at all with the issues that have been with the efforts of the public. So you are? Barbara, I saw your hand. Barbara Harvey, retired Foreign Service Officer, and a quick question for Scott. One of the reasons, as I understand it, that there was a decline in Indonesian students coming to the U.S. was immediately after 9-11, the U.S. tightened up a lot on visa requirements and restrictions. Has that been changed? What is the policy now on basis? It's fixed. It's fixed. We're giving them away. Ted and I stand out in the street corner. I think the problem, to the extent it existed, the problem has been fixed. When I left, we were approving 96% of student visa applications, which is high by any standards. But the perception problem hasn't been completely fixed. So that's something, we've done a lot of work on it. I mean, literally, every person I talked to in Indonesia for three years, I said, by the way, did you know that we're giving away student visas? But we still have more work to do because that perception is changing, but still part of the problem. Okay. There's a lot of questions left in only a little time. I saw Erin, and then we'll do one in the back there. Thank you. Erin Connelly from Albright's number two. I was very struck by what you said about the sensitivity of statutory reports the U.S. government has to understand. I think that all of us who work with the executive have more responsibility in the way that they address these issues. As long as we're strong, I wanted to ask you, it seems to me that one of the reasons that it is so important for the U.S. to reduce these reports, because many of the things that these reports are true, it does appear that the administration could have been doing more early past three years to address early silence, take more of a passionate position on trafficking in persons. And I think that one of the reasons that opponents of the administration in Indonesia use these comments against the administration is because they're for the U.S. government really making savings. And my question to you is, because we want this official partnership, what is the more constructive way that we could be going about addressing these issues? Does it have to be kind of closed doors in January? Are there other ways that the U.S. government or the U.S. either in general could be making a statement on these issues or trying to address cooperation in the U.S. government? Well, thank you for that. Look, I don't doubt that the contents of the report is important. Perhaps many of the points raised are true. I don't have beef with that. But what I am saying is this, when the reports are issued and we're not talking about one report, we're talking about many reports throughout the year, it puts us in a defensive situation. And when the report is coming out, the discussions internally with Jakarta is, okay, we fight back and we fight back hard. And then others say, no, don't just ignore it and so on and so on. But it disrupts the energy, the dynamism and the momentum. And we say, yeah, well, that's right, that point is right, that point is right, yeah. But then we get into a defensive mode, right? If you ask me how do we overcome, I don't know, I don't know. We need to think about it. But definitely it's something that the U.S. side needs to know and needs to know that it does put the relationship in an uneasy atmosphere. And if you ask me, do we prefer the reports to be conveyed confidentially and in closed door? If you ask me, I think it would be more effective. It would be, we would be more receptive to the message if it was given to us in a confidential and closed way. Because that way we don't respond defensively, right? But when we receive the report and it's public and it shoots all over the world, then that's when, as I said, we get into defensive mode. And then the tempo of the relationship is disrupted that way. Okay, I think we said we'd take one last question. Kumar, I think it was in the back there. I think the previous question is a different story, but I have a quick follow-up. Both countries, the U.S. and Indonesia, gave pre-order to human rights. Both countries gave human rights answers. But I did not see any discussion about human rights, except for the question and answer. One, obviously, the beside should decide human rights to target new process. Having said that, there were 50 recommendations. With the idea of a publication among the people that I just want to give you, that's my question. Thanks. Ted and Merhi, you want to share? They're not a specific one on human rights, but there are many that are related to how we deal with one another. And I think we wrote it in this, I think, acknowledging some of what Pacino has said, that sometimes we've found that we've been able to deal with these issues better if we were on the same side. And we work together to address these issues as a common problem, rather than confronting each other and saying, this is your problem, now fix it. So we try to address it as looking at these issues as a common challenge. I just have two sentences. Yes, please. We have one of the six working groups, some of the comprehensive partnership is Democracy Working Group. Or fundamentally, we talk about how we can work together on democracy and human rights issues, not only bilaterally, but more around the world. Well, I'd like to thank the panel and thank all of you. I'm tremendously optimistic about this relationship. I do believe we're headed in the right direction. Thanks to the work that you've done. I'd like to thank the authors of the report, Ted, Murray, Greg, Pauling. There's a lot of effort put into this from our team. Thank you all for coming and thank you for the warm hospitality. Good night.


Microtwist says, yeah, they're going to censor everything now. Clear bam, bam. There always has been censorship. Microtwist, it's just very obvious to see now. And you can say, okay, you can't, you know, I don't want someone to talk, if someone walks into your house, I don't want anyone to talk about religion. But you can't say, I don't want you to talk about anything that my master says you're not allowed to talk about. Then F you, that's not your house, right? That's what discord all these channels are doing, right?  But I'm pretty sure the people running these platforms, they began it because they wanted to have free dialogue, right? But the money is too sweet for them now, right? Even though they're killing their own business, the immediate money is too sweet for them all. Or the threat of execution by centralized power. You allow free thought, you're going to be out of the game, right? Whatever the reason is, now they're saying, okay, we built this thing, but we now have a master. And whatever the master says is the way it is. So when you come to see me, when you come to spend time at my home, I've built, right? Before you start speaking, I have to go check my master, right? My master says no talking about pistachios. Persian pistachios. Like, okay, when? How long is it going to take for us not to be able to talk about Persian pistachios? Well, I'm pretty sure Persian pistachios are not going to be censored right now, but they're censoring Russian cats, Russian athletes, Russian books, Russian literature, music, Russian history, right? The Western societies, our Western societies are cancelling anything Russian, right? They're even cancelling Russian bread for fuck's sakes, right?  Don't we know our history? They, in World War II, they cancelled the Roma, the LGBT community, some places the communists, some places the fascists, some places the democrats, some places the Jews, some places other cultures, right? In World War I, they were cancelling Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, the young Turks, right? There has been cancellation of societies throughout history.   End of story, right? End of story. We, as human beings, have to draw a line, okay? We have to draw a line as to how far we will allow centralized power to go until they actually, actually go into executing a certain culture, peoples from a certain culture. They're cancelling Russian children. Are you awake yet?


from San Francisco, extracting the signal from the noise. It's theCUBE, covering ConsulConnect Live 2015. Sponsored by Consul, there's your host, John Furrier. Okay, welcome back everyone. We are live in San Francisco for ConsulConnect 2015. This is theCUBE's SiliconANGLES flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signal from the noise. I'm John Furrier, the founder. I'm SiliconANGEL Jeff Frick, general manager of theCUBE. Our next guest is Shafiq Peck, lead engineer, network engineer at Zendesk. Welcome to theCUBE. Thank you, thanks for having me. So lead network engineer, I mean, you're the chief firefighter, right? Yeah, amongst us, I think, yeah. Yeah. Sass, obviously the cloud, changing everyone's business models. A lot of stuff going on, SDN, a lot of transformation, DevOps, applications being deployed, API, vacation, all that stuff, we cover that all day long. But there's a lot of underlying plumbing that needs to get re-platformed. Talk about some of the issues and what's going on at this event and why is this event so important in terms of this new next generation internet? Well, because it has nothing to do with the internet, frankly. So everyone knows, you know, there's a lot of malicious activity out on the internet, right?  And it's certainly not an issue if it's definitely an issue of one. So basically the reason that we're here is because we definitely recognize there's an importance in bypassing the internet and staying connected with your customers and also the applications that you use. And so the importance of this particular conference is it encompasses the importance of peering directly from business to business at the network layer. And so any chance that you're able to connect directly with the businesses that either you need to run your company or the other businesses that utilize your particular applications, you know, it's definitely a win, you know.  And also emotionally, you know, it hurts.  Like you're going to feel a little violated.  So there's a certain hope that, you know, that a lot of the malicious activity that's out on the internet is going to be significantly cut down by peering directly with these. So if you talk about the perspective from the service providers, we talk to customers all the time and they're putting in Salesforce and they're putting in Zendesk and they're using these tools, but you've worked on the service provider side, the applications that are delivering via the cloud. How have expectations changed? How important is this DirectConnect for companies like Zendesk, companies like Salesforce, because it's obviously revenue and customer service to be able to DirectConnect into your clients to deliver service? Yes, I mean, we exist on the internet, right? So if customers are unable to connect to us, then that's major problems for our customers, right? You know, we're certainly not going to be SLAs, you know, we're not going to be able to provide the top tier availability that we want to provide for our customers.  And do you provide any financial incentives or other types of incentives to your customers to say, hey, this is an option you should consider, you know, we strongly suggest it, or again, maybe there's either carrots or sticks to help encourage that, or is that unspoken, it's kind of there? Yeah, I mean, as far as any sort of financial incentives or anything like that, we really haven't. I mean, it's more, from my perspective, it's more for the benefit of, you know, connectivity for not only Zendesk, but Zendesk customers and the applications that Zendesk uses to keep the lights on. So if there is any sort of financial give and take anywhere, you know, that's probably the least of my concerns. I'm more concerned with providing performance. So talk about the internet, obviously it was an alternative for the old way. I mean, talk about the transition from the old end and architecture from the network 90s, back in the 90s.  And then now we're back to these secure connections. Talk about that. Why, what happened, cost? Was it cost was the issue? What was the driver between people moving from direct connections to the internet to now back? So I mean, what people, what enterprises we're using, you know, back in the 90s, I don't think can necessarily be compared to what we're doing today.  But then, you know, there's also the hiring of those team members to, you know, service that one application, blah, blah, blah. And then, you know, it was SaaS. I mean, the reason why it's such a big, big market these days is because it, for Zendesk at least, I mean, it takes an hour to set up the Zendesk.  So they're, you know, now, with that being said, there's now all of a sudden your enterprise has a huge reliance on the internet, right?   Effectively, your business is down, right? So what Direct Connect brings is it's not really a step backwards or, you know, revisiting the past or anything, it's just a new way of thinking and it's a new way of connecting to your applications.  Now you're still, it kind of gives you the best of both worlds because you're still able to use these SaaS applications, but you're still, the network is still, you know, somewhat under your control. Yeah, so it's... Talk about the trade-off. Some people will, some just played devil's advocate here. Yeah.  Internet trends is dropping, like costs are dropping really low. I can just off shift some of the savings into better engineering. So, I'm going to pass on console. What's the hidden cost in that shift? So in traditional peering, I admit there's a huge cost for it. So for companies like Zendesk that live on the internet, it makes sense for us to build into internet fabrics and peer with, you know, whoever we can peer with on these internet fabrics. And the cost is just the cost associated with doing business, right? So, but if you're an enterprise, I'll admit, yeah, it probably doesn't make financial sense for you to go and build into the various fabrics around the world, just to connect to these various applications that you use. What console is proposing to do is break down that barrier to entry for enterprises and make it cost effective for them to get onto these peering fabrics and peer with, you know, all the companies that they use on a daily basis. So give me an example of when someone qualifies as a direct peering connection. Is it API based stuff? Is it just joint application support, customer? I mean, what are some of the examples where the direct connection would be valued? I mean, if you're moving any amount of data on a daily basis to a particular organization, it makes sense to peer. I think the more companies that you can peer with, the better.  Like Dropbox is a probably a good example, right? I mean, hey, I'm using file sharing service. Yeah, yeah. Just creating SLA, why have it out in the cloud. Exactly. And kind of out in the wild. Yeah, and so for a company like Dropbox and for Zendesk, I mean, if we're able to connect over these, you know, these private lines to our customers, it's less that we have to worry about our SLA. We know that the network portion is one piece that can be taken out, you know, that it's just, you know, maintaining the application and making sure that our servers and services are running. You know, the beautiful thing about cloud, we cover the cloud stuff pretty heavily. And one of the things that the trend always seems to be pointing to is freeing up time for other innovations. So let's just take that point, okay? Let's just say, okay, hey, you know what? I've got a customer, we're sharing, you know, 50 megabits per second, staying per day, bigger customer. Now, what does that mean for your staff in terms of creativity? What do you guys do with all that? I won't say all that free time, but you know what I'm saying, where's the innovation side of it? The cost I get that in the security, the hidden costs and DDoS and all that stuff, probably pretty large and you can justify that pretty quickly. Where's the upside on the innovation? The upside on the innovation? I mean, it's exactly what you were just referring to. I mean, those points about DDoS and all that stuff. I mean, that's, we have a part of our team currently that, I mean, that's all they're working on is DDoS mitigation strategies, you know? Instead of being able to automate capacity builds and stuff like that, a lot of our time is spent on DDoS and firefighting.  And for the most part, a lot of our network outages aren't self-inflicted, you know? It's stuff that's going on the internet, it's security issues that we're worried about.  It's kind of a no brainer. Absolutely, absolutely, yeah, it just makes sense for us. How bad is the DDoS stuff out there? Give us some color between like, I mean, how freaking bad is it?  What's your take on it? It's bad, it's bad. And especially for companies that are multi-tenancy like Zendesk, I mean, it's few and far between that the hosting companies are actually the targets. It's usually their customers, you know? And we have a lot of customers from various industries and one of those industries that we host is the gaming industry.  And as collateral damage, you know, we feel the pain points. And it's increasing, you know? And it's, you know, when I first started working at Zendesk, you know, we get one maybe, you know, few and far between, once every six months or so. But, you know, as time is progressing, you know, it's happening a lot more frequently and enough so that, you know, I certainly lose sleep over it. And, you know, like I mentioned, we have guys on our team that are just dedicated to working on DDoS mitigation at this point. So, I mean, it's definitely affecting us. It affects our business, you know? Everyone in the entire organization is well aware of the effects of DDoS and... We love the term dev ops, but since it's an ops kind of show, it's ops dev that's how you look at it, right? Which side of the room you're on. So, the ops side is really critical in this whole new app developer market. What's your take on that? As you look up the stack and you see demand, right? Hey, I want programmable infrastructure. And you guys aren't against that, obviously. But people are like, hey, you know, if I take away free time, I got to create a programmable infrastructure. Does this help in any way with console, create more engineering around that? And what's your view about dev ops and ops dev? I mean, it's the whole dev ops thing. I mean, it's not a fad. I mean, even the largest enterprises are moving to the dev ops methodology. Just to, I mean, you get the software out quicker, you know, a lot quicker with the dev ops methodology. And so, and with all the automation stuff and APIs and all that stuff, you know, any bit that we can leverage to not have to manually go through any sort of process, you know, at any time we could click a button and fix something, you know, we're going to absolutely leverage that. Automation, service cataloging, all that good stuff that you hear about that. Yeah. Okay, well on dev ops, one thing is resilience. Yes. I mean, agile, I should say, agile's thing. Resilience is what network should be. Right. The way does this help with console and the conversations here at Console Connect make the networks more resilient? What specifically can you share that's more resilient about new features? So, I mean, with console, I mean, there's a, in traditional peering, you know, that you have to, there's a lot of manual intervention involved. You know, you have to figure out which color you're going to build into, which, you know, which customers or which applications you want to target to peer with, right? And then so you have to build into those data centers and it could take weeks, months to actually get, you know, your equipment in there and then you have to worry about private lines and all that stuff. With console, you connect to the IAX environment. I mean, you have an entire catalog of various customers that are also connected and you say, hey, you know, I know that we use this company. I want to peer with them. At the click of a button, you're on their social media page to get console. And so you can see, you know, exactly what the, you could actually see who the peer coordinator is that you're chatting with. You know, there's kind of a LinkedIn type profile on the engineers and the engineering team and also the company and what they do. And so you can just click on a button and say, hey, I want to peer with you. And once they accept, I mean, you're up and running. It's kind of like a social network means networking. Yes. Yes. Real networking. Real networking. Well, you know, you got some money on the other end, any kind of questions, obviously. Yeah. And so there's also a lot of built in data.  This is my bandwidth, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.  But, you know, with console, all that information is automatically populated for you. And you can obviously adjust it, but it just makes the interaction a lot easier. And with being able to see, you know, who was on the other end of this request, you know, it adds a human touch to it. Final question for you is, what's this event about? For the people who aren't here that are watching this video, what's the big, uh-huh, this event? Why is console Connect 2015 important? Why is it important? Because it lowers the barrier of entry to the peering world. And for businesses, as I previously mentioned, for businesses that rely on the internet to, you know, to run their business and provide services out on the internet, it's being able to peer without having to build out a peering infrastructure. I mean, that's paramount, you know. It brings down the cost, brings down the barrier to entry. You don't have to have an expert-level network engineering team to be able to peer with businesses around the world. It's just the old days of provisioning in Cirque, all that hard, plumbing that would have to be connected. Yeah, I mean, basically, you just have a connection to IAX and then from there, you're able to connect to whatever you want. All right, thanks for sharing your insight. We really appreciate it. Down the trenches, ops dev, one click of a button you're peering, social network of a network. Great stuff here at console. It'll be right back with more live from San Francisco in a short break.


How's it going, nurses? Justin, I'm about to do a trailer reaction to the brand new X-Men movie, X-Men Dark Phoenix. Or it's just called Dark Phoenix. They've dropped the X-Men out of the title. I wonder why? Maybe it's got something to do with Fox being sold by Disney or being purchased by Disney. That thing. We don't know what's going to be happening to the X-Men franchise when Disney grabs its tight little pause onto the X-Men franchise. But until that happens, we have Dark Phoenix coming out and maybe new mutants. Is that still coming? Anyway, so without further ado, let's check this trailer out. Three, two, one, go. The mansion. Young Jean. And this is the end of Fox. The lion was a fragile thing. Takes only the slightest tap to tip it in the wrong direction. Nice. Charles. What did you do? I had to keep her stable. I protected her. I love the X-Men movies and this is not going to be any less awesome. Oh, it's not getting near a face. That was awesome. I'm looking for answers. You feel like you don't belong here. I can't begin to call her again. Cyclops is my favorite X-Men character, by the way. She's changing. You're looking for answers. X-Men! Yes. She does that, like, that sullen, like, just, I don't know. Oh, new, misty makeup. Nice. Oh, Missy looks great. You're always sorry, Charles. And there's always a speech. And nobody cares. You always put the helmet on. Cyclops! I'm glad they're at a position now where we're looking and we're seeing all the X-Men characters like we used to. Like we want to. Look at that face. Oh, wow. Yes. I love the X-Men movies. It doesn't matter if they're good or bad. I still love watching them because I love superhero movies. I love super powered things. And they're just the coolest thing. So this being the brand new entry into the X-Men universe, I'm very happy. And what is a little bit sad is that are we going to lose this completely once Disney completely owns X-Men? Will they just slide these characters into the existing MCU or will they keep them separate? They're not going to keep them separate.  But I for one, very excited about this film. Anyway, enough about me. What did you guys think? Let us know in the comments below. Don't forget to like the video. Subscribe to the Movie Nerds channel. Follow us on Facebook. We've got an Instagram as well. Find us. We're everywhere except for where you don't want us to be. Except we're probably there too. Anyway, I'm guys. I'm Justin. And I'll see you nerds at the movies.