Thank you very much for the introduction and thank you guys for being here in this section So I will skip an introduction. Whoop. We are too far ahead in this presentation Okay, let me get back to the agenda back on track The plan is to basically talk a little bit about indicators of compromise which is a core component in cyber security and then we will describe our legacy infrastructure moving on to a more modern approach and explain why we we should use our leverage and probabilistic data structures to do efficient IOC search Before we start I would like to know if is anyone here familiar with probabilistic data structures. Can you please raise the end? Okay, that's great. So I hope in the end you get Some nice ideas to improve your own systems. Also another question very simple. Who is working in the cybersecurity field? Okay, that's the expected results actually so let's move on So we are part of Zimans more precisely the cybersecurity defense center and our mission is to monitor and also Identify threats so we want to protect Zimans from cyber criminals Since Zimans is such a big company and we have more than 500,000 hosts We have a lot of data. Therefore, we have a monopoly of technologies We run hybrid architecture part of the the systems are on premises other parts on the cloud and We need Running some of them in the cloud in order to scale for this huge amount of data, but I will go deeper next week Cyber security nowadays is a huge thing and because the cyber criminals are really very sophisticated and also well-motivated So a typical organization will care about these detection vectors such as in point security and they will run antivirus for example networking security with fire all and ideas and email or proxy Solutions from specific vendors with spam filters or DJ detection These three detection vectors are quite important But alone they are not enough to keep the organization Protected so it's paramount to combine all of them and Finally, it's also very important to collect Information from these different log source so that you can do post-mortem Analysis and that's the part I want to introduce you which is IOC search So for the ones which are not familiar with cyber security I'm sure you will not understand this so I'm going to give you a brief introduction To this concept and for that I'm going to use a simple analogy Since we are in Madrid. I decided to bring this TV show. I'm sure this one, you know Who knows the TV show of course most of you otherwise you can look into Netflix So these guys were very successful in Rob public organization hearings by an actually in Madrid Imagine now that you were given a task to protect another public institution from these same guys But you don't know if they will attack your institution when you really know nothing You just know what they have been in the past So you cannot also go after them. You can only react to some action You need to defend your organization So you need to have a surveillance system and decide when you will take some action or Alert someone in order to escalate some incident for example to the public authorities And that's basically your mission to do that you need to look into what they have done in the past and Identify these indicators of compromise which could be someone carrying a red jacket and a mask or Wearing already or carrying ropes and guns if you see someone inside your facilities with that or Nearby you can automatically trigger and alert the authorities so they can react in time That's basically the goal of indicators of compromise In cyber security, it's pretty much the same thing So it's evidence that your system or network was already compromised simple examples Ash values of files such as a PDF or a word documents domain names IP address There are more Another important fact that I want to share with you is that there are thousands of new IOCs per day They come from different sources such as public sources private Intel organizations usually now cooperate in order To get more information from different attacks or our in-house cyber professionals, which sometimes can reverse engineering malware samples this simple example There are a lot of suspicious process and one of them is actually encoded payload running in the power shell Security professionals can actually decode that this one is very simple. They just need to use Base 64 decoder and run some reward expressions. There are more examples complicated which they need to go through many layers of encoding but this is quite simple and in the end if you decode you will get plain text and You can extract information such as the domains why those domains are important because you know that the malware will connect to those domains either to extravigate your data or to pull Other malware or more capabilities So what can you do with these indicators? It's quite obvious. You want to pay attention to them every time you see them again You want to react? So you can think this as a twofold problem. You need to think in the future and also in the past If tomorrow I get a new IOC I want to alert someone and we run a streaming engine to take care of that However, this this talk we will focus in the patch in in the past. I'm sorry Okay, we will focus in the past in the past and for that You just need to be to be able to collect and store your historical data And then just run a simple query and try to find if the same URL or domain is there Okay Now I'm going to describe how we were doing this in the past in terms of Infrastructure and why is it was a bad idea and how we involve our infrastructure early 2014 we were running three deployments of a massive parallel database from a specific vendor and This solution was not ideal because We could just handle few days of data if we tried to scale to a couple months It was really hard and was overwhelming our devops because they were investing a lot of engineering time to keep this database Only one more day alive on the other side our stakeholders the security analysts They were not very happy in waiting for queries taking hours so early 2018 we decide to move into the cloud and First step quite obvious is to build a data lake And this is super simple We decide to go with Amazon and there is only two technologies that you really need which is a 3-4 storage and then a computation such as the Amazon Athena so that you can query your data By deploying this solution in terms of implementation super easy. No we no longer have Operations we outsource everything to Amazon basically because we run these fully managed services And our queries are much faster We could also store four times more data, but there is one caveat to that the computation and the pricing model for this computation scales on demand so Every terabyte of data that you scan you will pay $5 so if you do many queries you can go into a problem and In IOC search that's actually a problem because if you just receive one IOC Let's say yesterday and you care you query our data. Let's say your last 90 days You get you get a result. That's fine But as I said before you receive thousands of them and for each one you are querying the same exact data for the same exact time range and this is duplication you can see already here a pattern or a Point that you could potentially improve Worst than that is that you expect your queries to return no values at all meaning that a your Organization is safe or B. You are doing a bad job with monitoring Only a few will return values and you need to take action on that Doing a quick math to get some intuition of the pricing For one IOC 90 days and have a daily average of half terabyte. You will pay 200 dollars But if you have 100 use you will scale linearly to More or less 22k and if we do the math for entire year, that's 80 millions Okay for our big organizations That's nothing because cyber security is one of the first things to worry about and the loss can cause billions of losses, so it's priceless, but still there is There is room for improvement and we decide to move to a third phase which is create specialized layers on top of our data lake to answer these Very specific and well-defined use cases. So we know the pattern. Maybe we can improve naive solutions on one end a naive solution would be to just Change the starting system within Amazon for example for redshift But you are going back again to the same problem of coupling storage and computation So it won't be a good idea and also very mind. We have a petabyte Data lake so a petabyte in data warehouse is extremely expensive Another naive option is why we don't move to another cloud provider such as Google. I heard about something like be query Yeah, those cloud providers are super competitive in terms of pricing So they do exactly the same as Amazon as we're the same So there is no really big app that you can exploit and the final naive option is Starting this information in a key value storage or for example a hash map But these since we have thousands of IOCs per day it will scale linearly and you will run out of memory or storage to query these structures So a better option and in my opinion something that suits very well This use case is using probabilistic data structures And now I'm going to hand over to my colleague John, which will explain you what it is and how you can weather jet Hello, can you hear me? So let's talk a little bit about probabilistic data structures But first let's walk through some notions of big data so Gardner defines big data with the sentence you see on your screen and I would like to point out The highlighted words which define big data dimensions But why do these dimensions matter because? Because okay, sorry. Thank you Okay, so sorry, why do these big data dimensions matter? Because they present technical challenges to our big data use cases There are a lot of parallel computing frameworks that address this technical challenges although has scalability rises in our problems these Frameworks quiver to meet that the big data demands So how can we continue improving our knowledge of the data? How can we continue to learn from it? Well, you have we have to accept a trade-off We need to lose some data, but continue our alert our learning through time And this is exactly what probabilistic data structures are to big data They are they provide fuzzy views fuzzy representations of our data Let's walk through a little bit these dimensions First we have the volume Volume defines the huge amounts of data we generate every day and the volume dimension has problems like membership and counting Membership is just knowing when an element is in the set and counting is just counting the distinct elements in a set For membership we have for instance bloom filters, which we will talk later and for counting for counting cardinality We have hyper log log For variety variety refers to the different data sources and data types. We have in big data Variety dimension has problems like similarity So we measure the similarity between two data sets. We have sim hash and mean hash algorithms for that and finally velocity Velocity refers to how the speed with which we generate Process and analyze big data The velocity dimension has problems like frequency and rank For frequency we can use common sketch When I say frequency I mean counting occurrences of elements in a set And for instance, we can use q digest to address rank with q digest We can estimate statistical quantiles for our data and then sort it out So given this let's talk about a specific structure count mean sketch with cut mean sketch We can efficiently estimate the element frequency in our set this structure is Compressed comparing for instance with other structures with for instance a python dictionary for example This structure is compressed because it uses ashes to store the values a Count mean sketch in a way is similar to a regular hash table because they are both two dimensional arrays But in the content sketch case we think we store sorry fixed size integers in our entries Given this this makes our structure constant in time and space Whilst in our stables The the space complexity is linear so it grows with the elements we are inserted So as you can see count mean sketch seems a very promising option to estimate our element frequency But let's see Let's see how count mean sketch works As I said we have here a two-dimensional array and The dimensions of this two-dimensional array control the accuracy of our counts The number of rows. It's just the number of hash functions. We will apply to an element to generate hash values to Map to the columns of this matrix. So the columns are the range of these as values So, let's see how this works We apply our hash functions to our element and generate hash values in this case the ash values This ash values will map to entries in our matrix Which we will increment in order to insert that element is in our structure in order to query the this structure, it's Basically the same way we grab our ash values and map These two entries in the matrix we retrieve the final value has the minimum of these values And it's the the name of the structure, which is count mean sketch Now, let me present to you a little bit of code Just to show you how easy it is to interact with account mean sketch I am here creating an object with a certain width and depth I am inserting this universe of elements and then I'm checking their counts in the end Let's see what the common sketch gives us and it gives us the correct answer We have seen four times Google.com and two times Facebook.com But now let me present to you a particular behavior with count mean sketch Specifically with near zero Frequent elements so rare elements or non-scene elements Let's say I'm introducing Google.com in our structure Incrementing these entries Then I will insert Facebook.com Incrementing these entries so the final state of the matrix will look something like this and now I will query the structure With some domain.com an element that was never seen before And if the ash values of this some domain.com map to these entries Then count mean sketch will say that some domain.com was seen before when in fact it wasn't This is a behavior. We do not want for our use case because we need low positive rates But this brings us to another probabilistic data structure, which is bloom filter Bloom filter Efficiently estimates membership problems. So efficiently estimates if an element was seen in some set Whilst count mean sketch was a bit to dimensional structure the boom filter is just a bit array Whose length and number of hash function define the bloom filter So those parameters control the probabilities of error in the bloom filter this makes As the as count mean sketch The bloom filter constant in space and time once again comparing with a regular hash table The good thing about the boom filters is that you can tune the false positive rate With the number of hash functions with separate that parameter that Controls the false positive rate Furthermore, we have impossible false negatives. So if you insert an element in your structure, you set its bits to one If you query again for that element, it's impossible that the structure will say that Element has not been seen that is impossible that would be possible if a delete operation was would be possible but The delete operations are not possible in bloom filters because in order to delete an element you need to inset its bits and That might temper the structure because other elements might map to the same entry and you are corrupting the bloom filter So delete operation is not possible within bloom filter now bloom filter Works regularly the same as count mean sketch You have an element You pass it through your hash functions and these map to entries in your array. You set those to one In order to query the same thing you grab your hash values map the entries and return a bitwise end So return one if all val if all values are one zero otherwise now as the same similar snippet of code Regarding bloom filter In order to show you again that is fairly easy to interact with these structures, so I am creating a bloom filter With a certain capacity and error rate The capacity and error rate will derive the dimensions of the array I'm inserting this universe of elements, which is google.com and facebook.com And you might ask why am I inserting google.com two times? Well in the insert operation bloom filter We have hidden potency So if we insert the same elements well same element twice we'll have the same outcome because we are just Setting bits so if we insert google.com we set its bits to one and if we insert again We just setting the same bits to one so the outcome will be the same and in the end I am querying for google.com and facebook.com that we know that we saw and some domain some random domain That was not in our universe So the bloom filter answers this which is correct according to the universe of elements we saw before Now that I've introduced Introduced sorry a little bit the probabilistic data structures Let's talk about how we leverage them to our use case In terms of hardware, what did we chose and why? Well, we wanted a cost-effective solution We wanted to save money So to do this We committed ourselves to serverless architecture and when you talk about serverless architecture Cheap compute services in the cloud, especially in AWS. You talk about AWS lambda functions Although lambda functions have limited storage So we need to be careful when designing our probabilistic data structure back-end But let's see the facts of what we learned so far bloom filters can answer With a 100% accuracy if an element was not seen and Can answer with a high probability that an element was seen in this case an IOC The common sketch can estimate how many times that IOC was seen Well, why won't we just join these two structures and leverage the best of them to our use case? By doing this, we can even only store one at a time at the lambda storage device Meaning that we can increase our structures in such a way that we only want to fit at the time in the lambda storage device So given this let's see how this would work Let's say I'm asking how many times when was some IOC seen sometime somewhere ago Somewhere some time ago Well, let's first ask the bloom filter and the bloom filter will state if it was seen with a probability of 99.9 percent If the boom filter answers negative, well, there's nothing else to do We just return where I haven't seen this IOC But if the answer is positive, well, just ask the count mean sketch How many times approximately this IOC was seen and by having this architecture We only need one structure at a time in our lambda function But now How can we dimension our structures? We have our back end, but we need dimensions for the bloom filter and the cut mean sketch For that we need to know a little bit about the cardinality of our IOC's and The only ground truth. Let's say like that. We have for this. It's our data lake So in order to correctly estimate the cardinality of our of our IOC's Let's use our data and query values of cardinality for some representative days representative days can be something like Days with huge traffic in order to have a bigger upper bound for the cardinality With these values we compute the average and the standard deviation and after that we leverage Property from normal distribution, which is the 68 95 99.7 rule and you ask what the hell is that? Well, it's just a rule that states that Percentage of values is within a band around The mean what I mean is for instance in the image you have 68 point two 27% of the values are within the average minus standard deviation and the average plus a standard deviation so let's lever this leverage this for us and estimate our cardinality a cardinality to be Average plus three times the standard deviation with this We cover a huge range of possible cardinality values and we do not saturate our probabilistic data structures If for some reason this this value generates Probabilistic data structures that might not fit our lambda storage Well, just decrease the factor and we'll still have approximately 95.45 percent After that we just perform a benchmark to see the correct dimensions to check the correct dimensions for our desired accuracy Now we have our back-end we know how to dimension our structures now we need to know how to scale them Our data lake is partitioned by day in order to serve serve the queries in WS Athena since we are Representing our data in a fuzzy way. Well, let's do the same. Let's partition them by day and by doing this We can paralyze operations. We can scale limitlessly because we have a structure each and every day The probabilistic data structures do not saturate because each day is a new probabilistic data structure And if for some reason they might saturate we can always estimate again the cardinality and the dimensions and Adapt and that from day from that day one the structures will have adapted dimensions to the new IOC cardinality now given the Theory and what we use about probabilistic data structures. Let's present an architecture Diagram has protocol demands. So we have two phases in our architecture query time query phase and update phase This works like this the client calls the API which is which was built using API gateway and This API gateway calls an entry point on the function that will trigger the logic to query to To query the probabilistic data structures all that logic of asking first the bloom filter And then the count mean sketch is within our orchestration service Which is a double step functions that is the surface that coordinates the application logic in order to serve the query If for some reason Consulting the probabilistic structures fail. Well, then we just fell over to Athena as before for reliability of our application In the update phase since we have a fuzzy view of the data We need to be synchronized with it at least in time So as we ingest data we synchronize our probabilistic data structures with that ingestion using again an orchestration service With this logic to update the probabilistic structures so after this Presentation of what we Designed and implemented. Let's see what outcome did we have of this? Well, this is these are metrics regarding our service we have data scan the cost and the requests and We have three months of the yield implementation We have a migration period and the go live period and as you see as we deployed this new Implementation our costs and data scans started to decrease More precisely they decreased each 24 times Furthermore in order to achieve this cost reduction reduction We did not need to limit our service limit our service requests We did this without any service downgrade Now in order to finish the timeline we saw before We designed a specialized solution to this use case Which is the IOC search using probabilistic data data structures Which resulted in? Lightning lightning fast queries. So we query in less than a minute petabytes of data and In terms of overall costs we reduced nearly 75% our costs our costs per year So in overall we are very happy of the outcome with the outcome of this Implementation so in order to finish let me show you what did we take away during this journey? probabilistic data structure fit a wide range of big data use cases Because they tackle the technical challenge the tail challenges that the big data poses In order to use probabilistic to the structures and answer more complex questions you can assemble probabilistic data structures and Target your demands in terms of use cases. That's what we did in ours and Finally probabilistic The structures are space and memory efficient So to finish and to the big lesson we took from this is that if you smart engineer your Applications you can save a lot of money in big data and cloud realm. Thank you very much If you have any questions We are here for you, please Yeah, thank you for the for the chat. It was very interesting Sorry, oh sorry Can you tell us? How do you store the pds in Amazon like in which data structure like Dynamo DB or SQL or something like this. No, we sort in the in the lambda storage device I said you in the long itself in the long itself. Yeah. Yeah To be more precise They are on S3 and then you pull into the lambda container when you want to query them because you also need to update them So you need it needs to be available for both cases. Oh, it makes sense. Thank you and just some values in terms of storage these Representations as wrong was saying these fuzzy representations. They are like around 200 megabytes. So that's enough to represent a huge cardinality for a specific day or month So I may have a final question. Sorry if I may anyone with good ideas to implement on Your organizations or pets projects, whatever can you please raise the end? Okay, I see some hands Cool. Cool. Thank you guys. Thank you very much guys. Bye. Thank you


Hello friends. I am Sanjay Gupta. I welcome you on Sanjay Gupta Tech School. So in this video, I'm going to demonstrate you how you can create pick list in Salesforce. Before starting, you can also know like how you can search me on YouTube. You can type my name. So here you can watch a series of Salesforce related videos. So in this video, now we have to create pick list. So I'm going to demonstrate you how to create pick list for both custom as well as standard object. So first I'm going to search custom object. So for this application, which is university, I have two objects employee and student. So I'm clicking on student scrolling down.  So the student is a custom object. So on this custom object, we're going to create a pick list. So pick list is basically a collection of values. So here you can read this description. Pick list allows users to select a value from a list of defined values. So we can define certain values from those collected values user has to select a particular value. So I'm selecting pick list clicking on next. So here I have to provide the label. So free label is course. Now here you can see we have two options use global pick list value set, or you can enter values at your own. So in my another video, you can learn how we can use global pick list or how we can create global pick list and use that use that global pick list in this pick list. So right now we are going to create our own values for this pick list. So here we need to choose the courses that student can choose. So I'm entering first option is the tech M tech BBA MBA. Bcom BSC MS. So these will be the available values for this pick list. Now here you can see the option display values alphabetically, not in the order entered. So if you want to show these values in alphabetical order, so you can choose this option. So I'm choosing this one. Then use first value as the default value. So if you want to choose the first value as default, then you can click on this checkbox. We can also see the help text. If you enter a valid default value formula, it overrides this setting. Right. So right now I'm unchecking this option. The next option restrict pick list to the values defined in the value set. So it is by default selected. So it says enforce data integrated with restricted pick list. These setting limits the field to accept only values from your pick list, even if the field is updated to the API. So we are restricting this pick list that we need to choose the values from the defined values. We are not allowing pick list to have values other than these defined values. Then this is the field name that will be known as API name. Then in my previous video, I already explained you about the description and help text. So you can write certain description related to this pick list field. And if you want to show any help text related to this field, you can also enter. And this option is for required. Like if you want this pick list will be required for each record, then you can mark it as required. Otherwise you can leave it as unchecked. And you can also mention the default value. Now I'm clicking on next. So here you can see we need to set the field level security for the different different profiles. So we have various profiles in Salesforce as per the requirement, we can set the visibility of this field. So here we have two options visible and read only. If we choose visible, it means this field will be visible as well as you can edit the values. But if you choose read only as well. So it means this field will be read only for this particular profile. That is analytics cloud integration use. So right now I'm choosing visible for all so that it will be visible as well as editable for all the profiles. Clicking on next. Here it is asking for the pace layout. So we want this field to be available on the student base layout. So now I'm clicking on save. So we have created a pick list field. Here you can see the data type API name label. So this is available. Now we need to check it by creating the record. So I'm clicking on new. So here you can see. So if you remember the uncheck the default as first value, so it is showing none and all the available or defined values are in sorted form by default. Because we checked the particular checkbox, which was available by creating this pick list field. So you can choose a particular option from this checklist. So friends, I hope you understood how we can create pick list field for custom object. Now I'm going to create pick list for this. Sorry, I'm not going to create new pick list. I'm just going to edit existing pick list that is available for this account object. And later on, I will also tell you how you can create a list for this standard object. So again, we need to move to setup. Now we need to type account. So here you can see account related fields will be available. So these are the standard fields. Now we need to search for the pick list. So here you can see it is a standard pick list that is available. I'm opening this one. If you want to check the value, so it has these active values and these are the inductive values, right? So it is having only five values. So let me open this account tab. In another tab, if we click on new. So we need to search for account source. Right now it is not placed on the layout. So let me choose another one, which is available. Let's say rating. So here it is. So rating has three values, hot, warm and cold. So if we see here, three values are available. Now I'm canceling it. I want to add one more value. So I'm clicking on new. So I'm entering so-so. So you can see this value is available here. Now let me refresh this. So I'm clicking on new. And here you can see fourth value is also available in the rating. So this way we can modify standard pick list, which are available for standard objects. Similarly, you can also modify the custom pick list that we created for custom object. Now, if you want to reorder these values, so you can click on the order. So you can choose and you can change the order. You can also select the default values like you want hot as the default value for each record. So you can choose this. If you want to display values alphabetically, you can click on this checkbox. So it will be automatically ordered as alphabets, not the order which you defined. So I'm clicking on save by choosing none as default value. So now if I refresh, you will see the changed order. Cold is last and so-so is the second last value. Now if you want to deactivate a particular value that you don't want to use. So you can click on deactivate and you can click on OK. So that value will be deactivated. It will not appear in the pick list. But later on, if you want to add or if you want to activate this value for the pick list, you can click on activate. Right. So if I again click on refresh, you can see that value is not available here. So this way you can choose various options which are available here. You want if you want to add it or delete a particular pick list value, you can do so. You can replace values. Right. Then if you want to apply any validation rule, any field dependency on this pick list, you can also do so. So that I will demonstrate in my another video. So I hope you understood how we can modify existing pick list that is created for a particular option. Right. Now if you want to create any new pick list for a count, so you can go here. You can click on you. So count is a standard object. So you can create custom pick list for standard objects as well. So you can click on pick list and you can follow all the steps that I demonstrated in the beginning of this video. For a stamp for custom object. So I hope you can follow that those steps to create pick list value for standard objects as well. Right. So I hope you understood how we can create pick list to select a particular value from the defined value set. If you want to learn about multi pick list, you can follow my another video. Thank you for watching this video.


Police have been busy handing out more than fines, Inspector Claus and his merry officers spent the morning donating hundreds of gifts to residents at nursing homes and also sick children at the hospital. Forget the Christmas colour scheme, this centre's sleigh is decked in red and blue. Acting Inspector Ben Carroll swapped his gun and badge for a beard and boots, surprising residents at the North Rock Hampton nursing home. Well, I didn't know whether I was going to be arrested or get a smile. Luckily their visit was on other matters. They have been good. We're going to be issuing some lovely presents to them today on behalf of all the men and women at the Queensland Police Service. They served dozens of gifts to many grateful residents. I think it's a wonderful thing. It's just brightened everyone's spirit and really put the Christmas spirit into the week for us. The halls were decked at the hospital's children's ward where the festive cheer was spread to several sick kids. It's going to go a long way towards making the kids in hospital a little bit happier this Christmas. David Forster scored a box of chocolates and a selfie with Santa. A little bit lost for words. Luckily those words were found elsewhere. Thank you so much from all the staff and all the kids from the bottom of the house. Tom Hartley, 7 News. Lovely gesture. Thank you very much.


My name is Victor Cha. I'm Senior Advisor and Korea Chair here at CSIS, as well as a professor at Georgetown University, and we're very fortunate today to have a topic, a very timely discussion, Korea's interest in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and we have really an all-star cast to talk about this today. Before I go further, I've been instructed here to do a couple of things. The first thing I wanna do is welcome you all to the new building. For those of you who haven't been here before, this has been long in the making by John Hamry, and I don't know if some of you noticed, but we have a global chandelier out there in the back that was very expensive. But one of the things that it does is, it flashes lights according to geographic themes. And for today, this morning, if you stand under it, you will see that it displays a lighting pattern that is a figure of the Korean Peninsula. Is that right? Yeah, yeah. So, so. Money, well spent. All right, money, well spent. But again, it's a pleasure to have you all here today. Let me properly introduce our three speakers. Ambassador Ahn, Ahn Ho-Yong, is, as you know, the Republic of Korea's ambassador here in the United States. He joined the foreign ministry in 1978 and has held a number of postings throughout his career, most recently as first vice minister of foreign affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Prior to this, Ambassador Ahn served as Korea's ambassador to Belgium and as head of the Korean mission to the European Union. He was appointed deputy minister for trade at the ministry from 2008 to 2011, during which he also was the president's surpa for the G20 and G8 outreach meetings. He has served as director general of the Multilateral Trade Bureau and as director of the International Trade Law Division in the office of the minister of trade. And he was director general of the Economic Cooperation Bureau at the Ministry of Finance and Economy from 2004 to 2006. He's also been a professor and is a graduate of Seoul National University as well as the Edmund A. Wall School of Foreign Service at Georgetown. Wendy Cutler became acting deputy US trade representative in June of 2013. She is responsible for US trade negotiations and enforcement in Asia and Africa. Her specific responsibilities include the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the US-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum, US-India Trade Policy Forum and Trade and Investment Framework Agreements. She also directly oversees engagement with Japan in the TPP as well as the bilateral negotiations with Japan parallel to the TPP. Wendy joined USTR in 1988 and over the past 25 years has held a number of positions working on both bilateral and multilateral issues. Most recently, she led the US-Japan TPP consultations. As many of you know, she was chief US negotiator for CORUS and was the lead US official for US trade and investment agenda in APEC. Prior to joining USTR, Wendy worked on trade issues at the Commerce Department. She received her MSFS degree from Georgetown. So there's a slight bias in terms of our presenters today as well as her BA from George Washington University. Scott Miller is a senior advisor and holds the William M. Scholl Chair in International Business at CSIS. From 1997 to 2012, he was director for Global Trade Policy at Procter & Gamble. In that position, he was responsible for the full range of international trade, investment and business facilitation issues for the company. He's led many campaigns supporting US free trade agreements and as a member of numerous business associations, he has been a key contributor to international trade and investment policy. He advised the US government as liaison to the US Trade Representative's Advisory Committee on Trade Policy and Negotiations, as well as the State Department's Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy. Scott was the founding chairman of the Department of Commerce's Industry Trade Advisory Committee, investment working group and earlier in his career, he was manufacturing, marketing and government relations executive for Procter & Gamble in the United States and Canada. This is what we call, this is a joint endeavor by both the Scholl Chair and the Korea Chair. For us, it's part of our Korea Platform Series and we're very grateful to Samsung Electronics America for supporting the Korea Platform. We will begin the discussion first. What I'd like to do is have each of our distinguished panelists to start out with some opening comments and then we'll have a little bit of a discussion. I have a few questions I'd like to ask. Not that I'm a trade expert, but I think there, I can ask questions that don't have to do with North Korea. And then we'll have a discussion with the audience. So Ambassador Ahn, would you like to begin? Right, right. Well, first of all, thank you so much for holding this. Well, Victor, you just called it very timely seminar and I totally agree with you. This is a very timely seminar. In the sense that we have just declared our interest. Korea has just declared our interest in participating in the TPP. And then where else would it be the better place to be holding such a seminar than at the CSIS? So thank you so much. Thank you. And then coming over here, my impression is that, well, Korea, of course, it has declared its interest in TPP. And then are we the new kid on the block? Or are we the old kid on the block? I think we are in hybrid. In the sense that we are new so far as TPP is concerned. But at the same time, we have been dealing with, well, trade and investment issues with almost everybody who is, who are participating in the TPP for the time being. So, well, hybrid candidate would be the expression.  But at the same time, we have been dealing with almost all of those countries for quite some time. And in a very extensive and intensive manner. So as a hybrid candidate, I should be making about three observations. And then the first observation would be, well, Korea has been a very firm believer in the benefits of trade liberalization. And one example would be this, which is that, well, of course, Victor Chah has been a boring you with many of the things I've been doing before. And one of the things I've been doing before was to coordinate Korea's accession to the OECD. So we joined Korea's, we joined OECD back in 1996. One year after that, 1997, then what I came to find was that the OECD as a group was involved in a major, major study, which was called Benefits of Trade and Investment Liberalization. And I came to find that OECD was spending so much resources on that particular project. And then I couldn't understand why. So I came to talk to Director of International Trade at the time, certain now, Mr. Able. And I told him, well, the major project you're working on that's benefits of trade and investment liberalization, but hasn't that question been answered already more than sufficiently 200 years ago by Mr. Adam Smith? That was my question. And then he looked at me and then he said, well, maybe that has been answered at the time. Maybe there is not a big question in your country, in Korea, because you are a firm believer in the benefits of trade liberalization. But somehow that position is being questioned again and again in other parts of the world. So that was the answer. But anyhow, since then or even before that, Korea has been a firm believer in the benefits of trade liberalization. So that's the first point I wanted to share with you. The second point I want to share with you is, Korea has been not only a firm believer, but also a practitioner of something called competition liberalization. And of course, all of you, many of you, would be familiar with this concept of terminology, competition and liberalization. Wendy would be very familiar with it. I guess the author was Mr. Robert Telly, wasn't he? And then where competition and liberalization, when I first heard the terminology I said to myself, it's like black cat and white cat. That's to say, whether it's black or white, if you catch the mice, then there's a good cat, right? And then what I thought was that what Mr. Robert Telly was trying to say was, whether it is bilateral, unilateral or multilateral, if it is good for liberalization, then that is good. That I thought was what Mr. Telly was trying to say. And then in fact, when I say, Korea has been a practitioner of competition and liberalization, we really have been doing it through all different channels. For example, unilaterally, what Korea tried to do was, back in the mid 1980s, we started something called five year tariff reduction plan.  So we did it for 10 years. As a result of which, the average tariff of Korea, which used to be around 30%, it came down to 8% by mid 1990s. And then we did it without any further consideration, then the fact that we wanted to reduce our tariffs with a firm belief that at the end of the day, it in fact would be in a sense strengthening Korea's competitiveness. That was the only reason why we did it unilaterally. And I told you, it started by the mid 1980s, and then it was completing by mid 1990s. And then mid 1990s, of course, that was the time when Urga round was wrapped up, when WTO started. So multilaterally speaking, then the fact that we have been reducing our tariffs for about 10 years, it made it rather easy for us to adapt our system, whole system, to the start of the WTO multilateral system. So we have been doing it unilaterally, you have been doing it multilaterally. And then up until 1998, we were up to view that multilateralism is a far better alternative than bilateralism. So that is the reason why we have been intentionally keeping away from bilateral FTAs. And in fact, back in 1996, when we had that WTO ministry meeting in Singapore, one of the major issues on our agenda was to how to keep bilateralism at bay. That in fact was the major issue for Korean trade policy by the time of boss WTO ministerial in Singapore in 1996. But after some time, we came to find that, well, it was not happening. That is to say, even if WTO had started, then somehow there was a proliferation of all those bilateral arrangements. So we had to change our position. So if we cannot beat it, then you join it, right? So we changed our trade policy. And by 1998, we began to negotiate our FTAs with a large number of trade partners. And by now we have bilateral FTA with more than 30 countries. So we have been doing it unilaterally, multilaterally, and bilateral, bilaterally as well. But by now, of course, TPP is a new approach that we should be joining. And then we are approaching it in the same spirit. That is to say competition and liberalization. So that is my second point. My third and last point would be this, which is that in our relationship with the United States, then of course we have a very important partner in every sense of the word for the past 60 years. And then when it comes to international trade, then of course we have chorus FTA behind us, Korea, US, FTA behind us. And so the third point I should be sharing would be we have been a partner in many different areas. And then in the area of international trade, chorus is there, providing a phone basis upon which we can continue to further strengthen this very important economic relations between Korea and then the United States. When you think about bilateral relationship, economic relationship between Korea and then the United States, I think we should be looking at three different areas. First of all, trade in goods, trade in services and investment. And when it comes to trade in goods, several weeks ago I was in California. And then I was speaking to business council in one of the cities in California. And it was a very impressive meeting in the sense that there was an orange girl who said, well, my export of orange to Korea, it increased by 50% last year. And there was another gentleman who said, well, I grow almonds and my export of almonds to Korea, it increased by 70% in the past year, et cetera, et cetera. So in totality, export of agriculture products from Korea to, I'm sorry, from United States to Korea, from the state of California, it increased by 12% last year. And then it is increased by another 12% this year. So in other words, the products covered under the FDA, they in fact are enjoying this improved market access in a very significant way. Then I was very encouraged about that. And then when it comes to trade in services, then of course we have to admit the fact that, well, US service providers, you are the most competitive service providers in the whole world. And then when it comes to investment, back in 2005, 2006, interesting thing began to happen. That is to say, up until that time, there was more investment being made from the United States into Korea. But beginning from 2005 to 2006, the direction changed. In other words, now there is more investment being made from Korea into the United States. So far as the flow of investment is concerned, United States is the net benefit for investment coming from Korea into the United States. And in that context, I should be telling you this, which is that when it comes to trading goods, it is just the goods which cross the border. But when it comes to trading services, or when it comes to investment, you need more than that. In order to promote trading services or investment, what you have to say is movement of character, movement of technology as well as movement of people. And then when it comes to capital or technology, there is very little barrier for the cross border movement of capital or technology. But when it comes to professionals, when it comes to the movement of people, then there are barriers. So that is the reason why for the time being, we are working rather hard in order to have more, say, professional visa for Korea so that we would be able to have more professionals to come from Korea to work in the United States, which I think will help for the promotion of our trading services as investment between our two countries. So let me try to wrap up. We are a hybrid candidate for the TPP, but at the same time, we have all of these behind us. That's to say, we are a firm believer in the benefits of trade liberalization. And then we have been a very active practitioner of competition liberalization. And then, of course, we have been benefiting enormously out of our bilateral trade arrangement between Korea and the United States. And then with all of these background, I'm pretty sure that we can be a very meaningful participant in the TPP negotiation as well. Thank you. Thank you very much. Wendy. Well, thank you very much. First of all, it's an honor to be here in your new headquarters. I have to say this morning, I was heading over to 1800 G Street and then realized that you moved. And it's really great to be in a panel with three colleagues who I work with throughout my whole career. Victor, I love to tell the story when he was in the White House and he was working on North Korea issues. I was working on chorus issues. And periodically, we would look at each other and ask each other, who has a tougher job? Ambassador Ahn and I go way back. We went to Georgetown University together many years ago. And since then, we have worked together both in OECD matters, WTO matters, and bilateral matters. And so it's a real honor, but also a bit of an intimidation to be on the stage with him because I always think that I know a lot about trade, but when I hear Ambassador Ahn, I always realize I have a lot more to learn. And Scott Miller, we go way back through working on various issues, both bilateral, multilateral, and regional. So Korea TPP. Let me make an offer, a few remarks this morning. First of all, I'm just back last night from our meetings in Singapore, where we concluded a very successful TPP meeting at the minister's level. There were four days of intensive discussions among the 12 TPP ministers. They made excellent progress in terms of really identifying what we call in the trade world, landing zones on a number of the key outstanding issues. They reaffirmed the commitment of achieving a high level comprehensive agreement, even if that meant taking a little more time to achieve such an agreement. And they agreed to meet soon after the new year again. So we are very encouraged by the progress made in Singapore. There are clearly some tough issues that still need to be worked out, but even on the tough issues like IPR, environment, and state-owned enterprises, we made a good deal of progress. And coming out of that meeting, we feel that we have a lot of momentum going forward to moving towards concluding a high standard ambitious agreement. Adding to the momentum is Korea's recent announcement of its interest in joining TPP. And since then, Korea has entered into concerted consultations with a number of TPP partners with respect to its interests. We understand that this issue is under extensive debate in Korea, while Koreans are debating the benefits of joining TPP, but also expressing concerns with respect to what more does it have to gain from TPP since it has free trade agreements with a number of the TPP partners. There are a number of concerns being expressed in various sensitive sectors in Korea. And there's also a feeling that maybe there's some FTA fatigue in Korea. But for our part, we believe that Korea's expression of interest is something to be welcomed, that Korea through the chorus agreement has shown that it is prepared to negotiate a high standard and comprehensive agreement. And that Korea's addition would really add to the political and strategic weight of TPP as the vehicle for regional economic integration and a basis for free trade area of the Asia Pacific. That said, and I'll get to this shortly, through the TPP bilateral consultation process, we will have a number of issues to work through with Korea as we consider Korea's interest in joining TPP. The first order of business among the 12 TPP countries now is to complete the negotiations, which are in the final stage. And there is a process for joining TPP once a candidate country announces its interest in joining TPP. First, each country needs to reach its own decision and its own conclusion with Korea or any candidate country with regard to its support for that country joining TPP. For the United States, this means that we undertake bilateral consultations with the country in close consultation with our Congress and with our stakeholders, soliciting input from them and then working through with the candidate country a number of issues. Our consultations with potential TPP partners typically are too tracked. First, we focus on the country's readiness to live up to the high standards of TPP and to indicate that it's prepared for the comprehensive tariff coverage of TPP. In addition, we look at bilateral issues of concern that we develop based on extensive consultations with our stakeholders and with Congress. With respect to the first aspect, as Ambassador Ahn mentioned, chorus is a gold standard agreement and in many respects, what we're negotiating in TPP is very similar to chorus. There are new issues, new chapters like state-owned enterprises, supply chains, small and medium-sized enterprises, issues that were not fully addressed or addressed at all in chorus and those are issues we'll need to consult with Korea on to make sure that it's ready to live up to those high standards in those areas. There are also certain areas that were addressed in chorus but in TPP we're building on the chorus commitments and for example, the issue of the environment comes to mind, that's an area where we had a strong chapter in chorus, there's a strong chapter in environment in chorus but in TPP we're looking to go beyond the chorus commitments in that area. In addition, with respect to the bilateral issues of concern, this is something once again, we'll need to work out in close consultation with our stakeholders and with Congress and that's something that will take a bit of time but that said, I thought I would just mention a few issues that were the subject of my recent trip to Seoul, issues that are many or tied to chorus implementation and issues that are coming up with respect to chorus that will need to be addressed regardless of Korea's interest in the TPP but before I get to these issues, I just wanna underscore something that Ambassador Ahn said that overall in chorus, we've had good implementation of the agreement, we have a huge and growing bilateral trade relationship and it's only natural that we'll have differences and issues to work through with any large trading partner like Korea and through the FTA, we have a lot of committees and structures to deal with emerging issues and emerging issues of concern with respect to chorus and we have been using the committee process I think very effectively to head off a number of issues that could become potential irritants in our trade relationship. When the vice president was in Korea just a few weeks ago, he did underscore the importance of chorus implementation and today I would just like to highlight a few issues that we're working with Korea on where we're looking for progress to be made once again regardless of Korea's interest in TPP. The first issue I'd like to highlight is the issue of with respect to customs origin verification. This is an issue that has really been lingering for a while, we had hoped that there would be a technical solution to this issue but we are concerned with this issue as growing as more and more of US companies are telling us that excessive origin verification requirements by Korea have the potential to undermine a number of the tariff benefits that we negotiated hard for in the agreement. So we look forward to Korea quickly addressing this issue. Second, on the second anniversary of chorus which will be next March 15th, a number of important commitments will come into effect with respect to the financial services chapter dealing with data transfer issues. We've made some progress in that area but we are working with Korea to ensure that upon the second anniversary of chorus that these commitments will be fully implemented. Third, in the automotive sector we continue to experience a number of issues with respect to not only the letter of chorus but also the spirit of chorus. As many of you remember, this administration has placed a high priority on the health and the growth of the US automotive industry and we worked hard with the Koreans to agree on additional commitments in the automotive sector in 2010. Since that time there have been a number of issues have surfaced, we've worked through a number of them but the latest issue of concern to our companies deals with the bonus malice system that Korea is looking to implement in the near future. And finally, an issue that's on our minds but not addressed in chorus is the issue of organics and specifically come January one, Korea is set to implement a new certification program on trade and organics goods which has the potential to disrupt trade from the United States. We are seeking to work with Korea on what we call an equivalence agreement which we would then each mutually recognize each other's certification systems in these areas. We recently concluded such an agreement with Japan and the EU. So we look forward to concluding such an agreement with Korea. And now then if I can just move on to TPP. But if I can just say all those issues are really important and we need to work with Korea to resolve them. As we look to TPP then we look forward to working with Korea closely as we seek to pave the way for their membership in the TPP. We believe that Korea is a natural partner for the TPP. It is a lot to offer to the TPP with respect to being a country that not only agreed to high standards with the United States and our FDA but in fact in its negotiations with other countries around the world both TPP countries and non-TPP countries has been insisting on such high standards with other countries. And so we think that's very important. And so looking ahead we are hopeful and we look forward to working with Korea in our bilateral TPP consultations to pave the way for their membership in the TPP provided that we have the certainty that high level and comprehensive standards can be adhered to and also that we can work through the bilateral issues of concern. Thank you. Thank you Victor. I'll be very brief as I wanna get to your questions and Victor's questions which says he's not a trade guy but he'll ask some good trade questions. My first reaction when I read the news of Korea's interest in joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership was what took so long. It seems a very natural move and I applaud the government of Korea for moving forward but if you look at this you look at the existing 12 parties of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Korea has already concluded free trade agreements with eight of the 12. It's negotiating them with three more Canada, Mexico and New Zealand. And so that leaves only Japan where there's not an existing FDA or an ongoing negotiation. So from that standpoint, Korea is a very natural partner to the TPP. From the standpoint of strategy, I think becoming a member of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is totally consistent with and quite logical fit with the Korea's strategy of FTAs that they've been implementing very diligently since 2002 or 2003. So this fits strategically. In terms of the benefits of the agreement, most obvious ones are the market access in Japan. Japan remains a top five trading partner, both imports and exports for Korea. And with the exception of China, with Korea is already negotiating a free trade agreement with China, it would be the biggest remaining trading partner on which the trade terms were MFN rather than preferential. So there's a win there given the existing trading relationships. In terms of the text itself, in terms of the commitments in the text and the obligations in TPP, in my view, our best effort before TPP was the US-Korea free trade agreement. And those obligations from 2006 will be improved and modernized, but not particularly burdensome to Korea. So my suspicion is this will be a fairly straightforward entry. Now, if this is such a natural fit and if there are already these existing free trade agreements, what's the benefit for Korea? Let me pick up on the ambassador's comments because I think he identified the areas which were most beneficial for Korea's entry with the Trans-Pacific Partnership and that is services and investment. If you look at Korea's position in the world, Korea is a big trader, interestingly, and a growing trader, astonishingly so. Korea's trade, totally important in exports and merchandise trade is a little over a trillion dollars for economy the size of Korea. That's massive trade and a big footprint in trade. And keep in mind that is a thousandfold increase in 50 years. You go back to 1965, Korea had a million dollars worth of merchandise trade. It went from a million to a trillion. Very impressive progress and it has benefited the Korean economy to do so. However, the areas of investment and services are both major opportunities. If you look at Korea's investment profile, the Korean economy and Korean firms are major capital exporters, including to destinations like the United States. But Korea attracts the smallest share of inbound foreign direct investment of any OECD member. So there's an opportunity there, whether it's because of regulation or closed sectors or whatever it might be, there's a major opportunity for Korea to benefit as a recipient of foreign direct investment, not just a capital exporter. A lot of those opportunities will be in services. And I think if I were an armchair economist looking at the Korean economy and how to generate growth, the thing I would focus on the most is efficiencies in services. Korea has a spectacularly efficient manufacturing sector, but services productivity is less than half of manufacturing productivity for Korea. And in fact, total factor productivity in services in Korea are declining. So this is an opportunity both for domestic regulatory reform, but also for engagement with world-class service providers in the economies of the Trans-Civic Partnership. So for those reasons, I think that despite this appearing to be an easy lift, there's some really beneficial work to be done in services and investment. I'm delighted to see Korea sign up for this because I think the Trans-Civic Partnership is the place to do the best work in reform for services and investment. Let me close by asking a question about next steps. I wouldn't speculate to know what the US government has in mind or what the Korean government has in mind, but for me, next steps are a little bit complicated. We probably ought to talk about it today. There are, in some ways, a binary choice. Does Korea join the Trans-Civic Partnership before the agreement is concluded or after?  If Korea joins before the TPP is concluded, it will reflect a decision among the Trans-Civic Partnership parties, the current 12 parties, to continue the talks for somewhere between six months and a year. And I'm just basing that on what's happened. Mexico and Canada express interest in joining the Trans-Civic Partnership at Honolulu's APEC meeting in November, 2011. The first time they sat down at the negotiating table full-time was December, 2012. It takes time. Japan was a little faster, but not much, okay? Japan expressed interest in March of 2013 and made its first negotiating round in August, 2013. And based on the comments made by Ambassador Froman and others, there's a lot of remedial work to be done with Japan right at the moment in terms of catching it up to the rest of the negotiations. So with that said, joining now would mean a, probably just speculating a late 2014 completion of TPP, which may or may not be acceptable to the parties given the progress that has been made. The other alternative is for Korea to join after concluding the agreement, in which case the parties that conclude the agreement have to figure out what the Assession Protocol looks like. I can easily imagine an Assession Protocol because TPP, at some level, looks a lot like the WTO where if you want to accede to the WTO, you accept GAT 94, which is the text, and you negotiate schedules on all the products in terms of entry with all the members and that gets consolidated. Now WTO is a different animal. It's been handling Assessions since its creation. It has a secretariat, TPP doesn't. So there are unanswered questions here, but that's what, not only is joining now complicated, joining later is complicated. And with the, I've done my usual of identify a problem and not a solution, but perhaps that's a good place for me to stop. Thank you. Victor? Great, thank you. Thank you, Scott. So thank you all for both concise and very informative presentations. Let me start by quid with Ambassador Ron and sort of picking up where Scott left off. And I guess one of the questions is, if Scott put it so eloquently, why it takes all the time. But I guess the other question is, so how does this pronounced interest in TPP on the left of him? So it's a new building, but we do have it on the left. So I guess one question would be why did it take Korea so long? But then the other is, given this pronounced interest in TPP, how does this effect reflect on the country's interest in the free trade negotiations with China as well as our set? Well, why it took so long? Well, I think when Mr. Miller has just mentioned the fact that out of 12 countries which are participating in the TPP negotiation for the time being, Korea already has an FDA agreement with at least 10 of them. The only two countries with which Korea does not have an FDA for the time being is Japan and Mexico. Maybe there is, well, there are a large number of explanations for at the same time. That may be the single most important explanation about why it took so long for Korea in the sense that when you have FDA already with 10 of them, I think maybe, and then of course it takes a lot of time and efforts in order to implement them as well. And then, well, of course, KOROS FDA, it was such an important FDA for Korea and then certainly it took some time and efforts on our part to digest it to implement it in the correct manner. So that would be the single most important reason why it took so long. But what we have done just now is expressed our interest in participating in the TPP. So this is somewhere in the middle in the sense that we are not participating in the negotiation yet. So we have just expressed our interest. But at the same time, I think we, in fact, are beginning to think about what would be the additional advantages of participating in the TPP other than having had the collection of bilateral FDAs. And then one of them would be, again, Mr. Miller was quite correct when he said that where, when it comes to manufacturing sector, Korean business community, it is already up to certain global standard. But when it comes to services, I think there is still a long way to go. And at the same time, there would be far, far larger number of additional benefits which can accrue from participation in the TPP. Like, for example, rules of origin, Wendy has just mentioned about the rules of origin. And then one big advantage of participating in an arrangement like the TPP would be cumulative rules of origin which would make it far easier for us to benefit from the FDA arrangements. So I think there are many, many, say, economic, as well as non-economic reasons why we should be joining the TPP. But as I have just mentioned, we are not there yet. We are not there to have the negotiation yet. What impact it will have on our bilateral FTO arrangement with China as well as I said. Well, one of the reasons why I, in my opening statement, was mentioning about competition and liberalization, I think it is there in the sense that when there is important activities we are taking in the direction of participating in the TPP, then, of course, it will create no momentum in Korea's efforts in our negotiation with China as well as with the RCEP. So that, I think, would be additional benefits of Korea participating in the TPP. Wendy, thank you again for your presentation both on chorus and on TPP. If I could take you to the 1,000 foot level for a second. And we hosted recently a talk by Susan Rice at Georgetown. And one of the things that struck me in her discussion of TPP, I mean, clearly TPP is a very important part of the pivot. In fact, some would argue it is the pivot and the second term is TPP and TPP is the pivot. But one of the things that I thought was very striking about her presentation was in speaking about TPP, she both invited and seemed to challenge China to look at this seriously in the future. And I wonder if you have any comment. I mean, I guess talk to trade folks. It's always been somewhere in the picture as we think about FTAF and all this, but to me that was a very upfront statement and it struck me. You know, it's interesting for until recently when you read the press reports about how China was viewing TPP, they were quite negative and looked like the US was trying to dominate this group of 10, 11 countries. Containment, ghost of George 10. But that line has changed recently and China's been much more interested in TPP. We have launched talks with them under which we are updating them on TPP and TPP does come up at all levels when we meet with the Chinese. TPP was always conceived as an open platform agreement where all countries of APEC that were prepared to live up to the high standards of the TPP were welcome to express their interest. And so, you know, the door is open for that. Right now once again, and this gets to I think an issue that Scott was raising, our focus now is really concluding this agreement with the 12 countries. We are in the final stages. We think we are in the end game and particularly coming out of Singapore. There's a lot of momentum and a lot of enthusiasm among the 12 towards concluding this agreement very, very soon. So with respect to the timing issue that Scott mentioned, I think it'll be very, very difficult for any country including Korea to join the ongoing negotiations. If you just look at the timetable and the clock, because even if we were to quickly conclude our bilateral consultations with Korea and the other 11 TPP countries could do the same, in the United States we would need to notify our Congress once we were concluded with these negotiations and a quote unquote 90 day clock of consultations with Congress then would commence. So if you just look at a calendar, it's very difficult to see how any new country could join the ongoing negotiations. That said, we look forward to consulting with Korea working through all of these issues and having them join the TPP at the appropriate time. I mentioned that Korea through CORAS has already achieved high standards of liberalization and obligations. And I would also mention that in our tariff schedules with Korea, we have a comprehensive agreement that addresses a lot of sensitive sectors for Korea for the United States with respect to Korea in the agriculture sector. For example, we have a schedule of commitments that address Korea's sensitivities but also provide for comprehensive liberalization sometimes using very long staging periods but also providing meaningful market access in the interim. So I wanted just to add those comments. The other thing just based on one point that Scott made just to make clear from his recollection, I think you were saying that Japan entered the negotiations very quickly from March to July. In reality, Japan also announced its interest in interest towards joining the TPP in Honolulu when Canada and Mexico announced. So those consultations actually took longer than they did for Canada and Mexico. Thank you. Well, I mean, I take your point about momentum. I clearly, Mike Froman's statements yesterday really gave a sense that you guys felt like you were in the final stage, the final push. And again, speaking as a former White House staffer when they've said out that the president's gonna be there in the spring, it's gotta be done by the spring for sure. So, but that actually raises a question that I wanted to ask Scott having to do with what's going on back here at home. And that is the whole question of trade promotion authority, right? We have this strange constitution which we gave the president the power to not negotiate international agreements, but not to regulate commerce. And thus we had FastTrack and TPA. What is your view of where we stand on trade promotion authority? Can the administration reach an agreement on TPP without TPA? What do you think? Sure. Well, for those of you who aren't trade policy wonks in the audience, since 1974, most presidents have relied on an agreement with Congress that creates expedited procedures for the approval of trade agreements and including that they be voted straight up or down without amendment. It used to be called FastTrack since 2001. It's been called trade promotion authority. But it's an agreement between the executive and legislative branches for which the constitutional authority for trade is divided. Congress has authority to regulate foreign commerce. The executive has authority to regulate treaty to negotiate with foreign governments. So it's been a practical solution to a difficult constitutional problem. It doesn't exist now. It expired in about the time that Korea, actually within about 15 minutes of the Korea free trade agreement being presented to the Congress. And somebody was watching the clock, I remember. So it's not in existence now. And TPA is not a foolproof process. Ask anybody from the government of Columbia how it can not work. But it's better than having it, having it than not, because you face renegotiation pretty decisively with an uncooperative Congress absent the authority. In terms of the status, I'll start with yesterday's headlines, which is chairman of the Waste Means Committee, Dave Camp, Michigan, made a very clear statement. He said two things. One is, we're ready to go, meaning there's a bill that's been agreed and it's been a long work process with the Senate Finance Committee, that there's a bill that they think does right and is certainly bipartisan in the bill in the Senate. Mr. Hatch has been working, Senator Hatch has been working very closely with Chairman Baucus. So there's a work product they're ready to introduce. But the second thing he said is, we can do this quickly if the president engages. And I think that's, the recipe is simply, it's just that simple, that the authority is available. This situation reminds me of the year 2000 following the agreement with China to enter the WTO. When President Clinton, Democratic president, with the Republican Congress, faced the need to change US trade law in a pretty controversial matter called a permanent normal trade relations with China. There was no trade promotion authority of fast track at the time, but there was an impressive, extensive legislative initiative by the White House to get it done. And the ultimate success was that it was a bipartisan passage in the House, including over 70 House Democrats voting for Russia, excuse me, China PNTR, and the Senate through some really impressive work with Senate legislative errors and the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee, the Senate passed a bill that agreed without amendments. They passed the House bill without amending it, which is really rare. That's essentially practically what you'd get with TPA. I think it's very important for our negotiators to have clear red lines. So I'd like to see TPA in hand now and certainly sooner than later. I do not underestimate the challenge associated with getting it in our, but we've had divided government before we've done it. We've had dysfunctional government before and we've done it. So if our divided dysfunctional government could work again, that'd be good for trade. Okay, and I'm sorry, Ambassador, if I could just ask you one more question before we go to the audience, and that is in the discussions about Korea and TPP, the question came up or the comment came up about how Korea is discussing this domestically. I mean, and there is a degree of FDA fatigue a little bit. I mean, could you comment a little bit on sort of the domestic challenges for your government in terms of, I mean, it's still early on, but selling TPP to a domestic audience? I mean, there's a big picture of arguments about this is good for reform more broadly and regulation and services and industry, but that really doesn't sell domestically. I mean, what are the challenges here? Well, one of the things which I've already mentioned was that Korea already has an FDA with the more than 30 countries. And then in the process of negotiating all those FTAs, bilateral FTAs, then there has been rather clear, say, lineup for domestic actors, in our domestic consultation. And then the clear lineup was, well, business community, they were mostly behind the idea of entering into FTAs, whereas agriculture sector had far more reservation with respect to entering those FTAs. So I think maybe in our domestic consultation about the discussing about the advantages as well as downsides of joining TPP, I think we are going to see the repetition of the same lineup of voices, well, according to that same topography of domestic actors where they stand. But at the same time, I think when it comes to the TPP, as I have already mentioned that there is the case of Japan and then Mexico. And then with respect to Japan, then of course there has been a lot of discussions. And then that lineup has not been as clear as it has been the case with other FTAs. So that's one additional background. But the Orinor, I think there will be broadly speaking, there will be a firm support for Korea's accession to the TPP, participation in the TPP. But we are not there yet. So we are walking for that. And then for us to be there, I think it would be absolutely necessary for us to get good consultation with all the countries participating in the TPP. But first of all, with the United States. We really look forward to doing it. Me too. Right. Korea could actually be, I mean if we're talking about, in terms of timetable, as Scott mentioned, after an agreement is reached, Korea could actually be a model for how, right? Other countries that dock onto TPP after an agreement is reached. So still be blazing a trail in that sense as well. Yeah, well that's the point which has been read by Mr. Miller and which has been partly answered by Mr. Cutler. But the thing is, where we are talking about tier one, or tier two, well maybe there could be a status somewhere in between tier 1.5. But at the same time, I think it is too early. There are so many factors which will be in a sense affecting Korea's status of joining the TPP. So let us just think about the overall general direction where we are going and then let us see how all those related factors play in and then see how it all plays out at the end of the day. Very good. Well tier 1.5. So I think we have time for 1.5 questions. Tammy. Well I think a mic is coming in. Thank you. Thank you. This has just been an outstanding presentation by each of you. I'd direct my question to Ambassador Cutler. Thank you for the update on TPP and particularly on the core of implementation front. I wanted to ask thank you for raising the several issues that you did and alluding that there might be a few more. We recently had a meeting of our US Korea Business Council and we did a stock take on the core of implementation and we have quite a few companies who would like to raise issues and I wanted to ask if you could share anything on the process of how we can get our information and how we can engage with you and Ambassador Anwar, eager and ready to do the same with your government as well. Thank you. And as I mentioned, consultations with both Congress and our stakeholders are a key feature of our domestic consultation process with respect to considering Korea or any new candidates candidacy for the TPP. So we really look forward to consulting with our stakeholders and Congress soon as we develop our agenda for our consultations with Korea. I think most people know where to find me. On the plane. Yeah, right, on the plane. On the plane. In an airport land. Yeah. Claude. Claude Barfield, the American Enterprise Institute. I'd like to go back to a question that, or very interesting question that Victor asked and maybe he's the one to answer because it could be a little difficult for the government people. And that is, how do we explain Korea? He talked about it took too long. How do we explain Korea's sudden change of heart? The last couple of years, if you talk to academics, you talk to government people in Korea, I remember talking with Theo Barker a year ago, there's a very hard nose look at the economics. They said, their point was, we've got all these FTAs, we've got chorus. We don't have to really worry too much about the economic side.  We need that FTA. My own, this is a question as well as statement, my own guess would be that what really has changed this is the deteriorating security and diplomatic situation and that somewhere at the top of the Korean government, there's this decision that we really ought to seek shelter a bit. So it's really beyond the economics. Well, I'll let Ambassador, but let me just say that I had very similar experience. I mean, on the one year anniversary of chorus, I was actually in Korea for a conference and was sitting at a dinner table with some very former high level officials that were quite involved in the chorus negotiations and I said to them, so one year anniversary of chorus, what's next? TPP, right? And their response was no, China, Korea, FTA. And they gave me all the arguments about the economics of this. So there is a shift. I mean, I think if you had to point to one of the reasons, I think was the one that Scott raised and that was before Japan was a part of it. And when I talked to Korean officials now, I mean, TPP, the Korea, Japan, FTA negotiations have long since stalled. And whenever you raised TPP with Korean trade officials, they were very focused on, once Japan was in, they were very focused on how the United States treated Japan in those negotiations on non-tariff barriers, particularly in market access. So I think that could be one reason, but I think certainly the trade negotiation is never just a trade negotiation. The trade strategy is not just a trade strategy, it's a broader geo-strategy. And I think for Korea, they see this probably as the most important thing going right now in the region and something from which they can benefit in not just economic terms, but also what they call geo-strategic. That's Ron, I don't know how you deal with that. What TPP started with four countries, Singapore, Brunei, New Zealand, and Chile. And then I think the status of TPP has drastically changed when United States has decided to be a leading country for that whole process. And I think the status of TPP changed again when Canada and Mexico joined and then when Japan joined. So getting back to your point about why Korea has changed its position, if it is because of the deteriorating security environment. I just wonder if I necessarily agree with your assessment of security environment at a deteriorating. So that I think would not be the definitive answer for the change of what improved or advancement of Korea's position on. I wouldn't call it change, I would call it advancement of Korea's position on the TPP negotiation. But at the same time, the point you have made and then the point which has been echoed by a victim, which is where TPP, of course, economics is important, but it is not necessarily economics. I wholeheartedly agree with that. Thank you. Thank you. So I'm sorry with SPS from Korea. My question is directly to Ambassador Wendy Cutler. And I understand that the United States eased its own restriction on beef trade, the beef import in terms of the progress and transatlantic trade negotiations. Do you believe or does the USTR believe that Korea, South Korea also need to take the measure the US has taken? Does two countries need to work on that issue before? Korea joins the TPP negotiations. I guess that's for me. Yes. Beef trade has been a discussion between the United States and Korea for some time. We have a beef protocol in effect. It's been operating very smoothly. Our trade and our exports of beef to Korea have been increasing. And I'd just like to leave it at that. Great. Well, Wendy, I know you literally- Very nutritious also. You literally just got off the plane. If you want to comment. Do you want to comment on it? No, I don't know. All right. Okay. Sorry. Wendy has been judicious enough. Okay, very good. Okay, well, I know that Wendy's just gotten off a plane literally from Asia. And Ambassador, I want to thank you for taking the time this morning. I'm afraid that's all the time we have. On behalf of Scott Miller, the Shoal Chair and the Korea Chair, thank you for attending. And please give our guests a warm welcome. Thank you.


Penguin Random House Audio presents. Little Family by Ishmael Bea. Read for you by Dion Graham. For those who have no voice, silence remains the unbroken truth. And every so often, that silence is torn by a roaring. Mende proverb, Sierra Leone. If you are to walk toward a field that lies at the edge of the small town of Falloyah when the sun is awake in the sky, you will hear the breeze whistling through the grasses, parting the dry and green strands as it makes its way to you. Or maybe you will think it is the rustling of someone hiding under the vast shrubs. At the end of the field, your eyes will light upon the face of a boy among the grasses, peering intently at something. You try to see what it is by following the trail of his gaze, but you see nothing. Hello, you say. The boy does not respond, only narrows his eyelids against the wind. You stare back at his face, in which youth is steeped in something serious and old, in stories you want to know. You try your luck again. Good morning. You do not know what else to say. Caution trumps curiosity. You sense that you should not move closer. He does not respond. In fact, nothing about his demeanor suggests that he is even aware of your presence.  Then you give a sigh and continue on your way. Yet as you go, you glance back, still hopeful of an answer, and then, just as you have given up and turned your full attention to the road ahead, you hear him whistle. Immediately, several answering whistles fill the air. You become confused. Should you move on ahead or go back to the boy? You are more aware of your fear now, but at the same time, your belly burns with cautious excitement. You do not know which feeling to pursue. While you hesitate, the shrubs begin a vigorous dance, but when you look again to see where the boy was sitting, he is gone without you having heard him leave. You set aside your fear and try all the pathways that are visible to you, but none goes any distance. Each time, you find yourself returned to where the boy was sitting, the smaller plants stretching to regain themselves in the wake of his human weight, one. Kapindi brushed his hands against the low-hanging branches of the tree under which he sat, the morning dew on the leaf. Sample complete. Ready to continue?


Hello friends and welcome back to another Pokemon how to guide here on the channel. My name is Lee also known as Osiris And in today's episode, we're gonna be looking at a brand new training Facility that has just become available with the release of the Isle of Armour expansion pass. So without further ado Let's hop into this one today Now with the release of the Isle of Armour, we've been exploring now like crazy over the last 24 hours Just discovering new Pokemon and new additions to the game and new facilities But one of the best facilities that I personally feel that we now have available is the ability to Completely remove EVs from any trained Pokemon now Previously what we've had to do in Sword and Shield is go and collect EV reducing berries Which is a little bit tedious and definitely a huge grind and something that you could probably do without Having to waste time on especially when you're retraining your Pokemon You've tested it and you want to just get rid of the EVs that you've got and give it a new EV spread Now this can be time-consuming, but as I say with the release of the Isle of Armour We do have a brand new facility There is an NPC character on one of the islands off of the shore of the Isle of Armour Where you can go visit her and for a price of armourite ores She will completely remove all the EVs that have been given to that one Pokemon So let's have a look in-game and see where we can find it So to start this guide we're gonna begin at the dojo, which is one of the main facilities within the Isle of Armour I'm sure you guys will know where this is. It is at the very beginning of the DLC game So once you're here, you want to do is head across this bridge directly in front of The dojo and head towards the ocean taking a left as you come down here Now what you want to be doing is heading out towards the island with the three trees in the distance And there'll be a tiny little island just in front of that as you can see we are approaching it now And as you approach there will be an NPC character that you can see on your screen right now And this is the lady who will be able to reduce the EV training on your Pokemon So what you want to do is grab any say Pokemon for this example We're gonna use that x-cadrill you can see here that it has been maximized in its attack and speed EVs You can tell by the the twinkly stars on the status screen of this Pokemon So what we're gonna do is just talk to this NPC character here when you touch clear clean sand It can help cleanse your memories of the toil you've been through if you want to clear away a Pokemon's EVs Etc you can give me 10 pieces of armorite or and I will do that basically that's the gist of what she is saying So we go in we select that x-cadrill We've just seen it is maximized in attack and speed EVs will give her the 10 armorite ores And they can see x-cadrill's training has been completely cleared now if we just go into our party And we go and check our x-cadrill that we've just cleared you can go back over to the stats screen Check and yet it's got no EVs at all. So this is a huge time saver for us as competitive trainers just casual trainers and you know It means that you're not having to either farm for those EV reducing berries are even worse There's been times when myself I've not had enough of them So I've had to breed a completely new Pokemon because it's a lot easier to give the Pokemon EVs than actually take them away So this facility now is a huge game changer makes things so much easier for training up Pokemon and Customizing them going forward. So I hope you found this very quick guide very useful And I'm gonna wrap it up there I don't think there's very much else to add to this guide But hopefully this saves you guys a lot of time in future And at least now you'll be able to find this EV remover in the Isle of Armour and make use of it So thank you so much for tuning in to the episode if you have found it useful Please drop a like on to the video if you're new to the channel as well Make sure you do subscribe so you don't miss any of these guides that we'll be doing and covering on the Isle of Armour as well As I put on news competitive play and all sorts of other content that we do here on the channel Thank you so much for tuning in guys Take care of yourselves have an awesome day, and I will see you all for the next one So until then take care and bye-bye


We begin tonight with news of a fatal house fire in North Home. The Kuchachen County Sheriff's Department says two people were found dead early Wednesday morning in a home located at 12233 Highway 71 in North Home. Deputies from the Sheriff's Department and the North Home Fire Department responded around 1227. Two people were found dead inside the home. Their names have not been released. The cause of the fire remains under investigation. We hope to have more for you tomorrow on this story. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Hello everyone and welcome on the video. Today I'm going to talk about the things I'm excited for in 2022 and Formula 1. There's going to be, you know, new circuits, some good on track fights, new rules, a lot to talk about. So let's start right now. I think, I think there's one thing we need to talk about 2022 and probably because I live in Miami, it's even more. It's the Miami Grand Prix. Everyone in the city talks about the Formula 1 coming to Miami. I think it's going to be third race of the year. Tickets were sold within one hour. It's going to be a huge event. Everyone is talking about it and I can't wait to see happening in my city. Another thing we need to talk about is we're also into a new area of the sport. New cars, new regulation, new look, new size of the tyres. Formula 1 has been running 13 inch tyres since forever. I know we're going to the 18 inches and the car is going to be looking differently. So that's going to be, that's a big change in the sport. You know, it's almost like coming from the V8 to the V6 to the hybrid area. We are going into a new generation of cars and a new way of going forward and seeing how the racing is going to be. That's two out of five things that I'd like to talk about. Maybe you can tell me what's your top five of the things you're most looking forward to see in 2022. So I told you about Miami, told you about the new area of Formula 1, third in the top five and it's not in order by the way. It's Ferrari. We're going to see a Ferrari winning the Grand Prix. Ferrari is such a huge brand worldwide. It's so well known. It's the red cars.  It's always good for Formula 1 when Ferrari wins and I hope we're going to see them winning. They have been through a rough 2020. They did a really good step in 2021. Let's see if they can go and challenge Mercedes and Red Bull at the front to win some races. Force is going to be George Russell. George Russell wins Mercedes. Last year into my top five of the drivers I did put George in. I think he's an amazing driver and I'm actually very much looking forward to see how he does with the Mercedes alongside Lewis Hamilton. I think they are going to push each other really hard. They're going to make themselves better. I think George has got that used feeling energy. Lewis, obviously incredible drivers, got the experience. I think it's going to be a duo that we want to keep an eye on. I'm pretty sure Mercedes is going to manage that really well. They've had the experience with Rosberg and Hamilton back in 2016, but I think things are going to be differently right now. Talking of Mercedes and Lewis Hamilton, the revenge of Lewis. He straight from the first day of winter testing. It was like if you think you've seen a good Lewis last year, wait for this year. He said a message here. He's, as I told you, when he sent his tweet, I am back. We were pretty sure 99% sure he was coming back to racing and he was back for more. He was back to revenge, to not give anything to anyone. I think that's how Lewis is going to be. He's going to want to win every pole position, every race, every fastest lap and not give anyone the chance to get a run at him for the championship, for his eighth world championship. Yeah, so that's the five thing that I wanted to talk about today. Ferrari, Miami, Mercedes, Russell, Mercedes, Lewis and the new area. What do you think about it? Is there anything else you're looking for in 2022? As always, please leave me a comment. We can talk about it next time. Make a video around it, like, subscribe, looking forward to see your comment. Thanks!