he's been the strongest voice in the philippine government, speaking up for the philippines territorial claims and protecting them and he hasn't always been particularly strong on there. given the duterte's government, he's been sort of the strongest voice in maintaining you as alliance and protecting philippine territory, maritime claims. so having him come out and the cimber and with the series of statements continuing into last weekend, calling for a review of the mutual defense treaty with the united states, and questioning openly questioning its relevance now and think that you know, that the philippines should sit down with the united states, reviewed the treaty obligations. if it's no longer relevant, it's an option. in his words. so that obviously is concerning and surprise a lot of people. but i think if we step back, i think what this is about is a real legitimate, in my view, concerned that the philippines have about what exactly are the commitments that united states sees in the mutual defense treaty? success of the administration's have been rather vague on that question. c

law, you know, paying taxes to the philippines, essentially recognizing philippines, awesome. i don't see evidence that beijing is going to be willing to make that concession. i suspect in november this is going to be delayed again then you have the oil and gas side where you did have an agreement in december 2017 between china and asean to declare a decade of coastal and marine environmental prek protection miss the south china sea and pledged to follow that up with concrete negotiations. over a year later, as far as i know, there have been no concrete negotiations. again, it's run into the same problems, geographic skill, et cetera, than the others. so i don't have a whole lot of faith, though if there's a crack, i suspect it with be an marine -- >> bea, in the u.s. commitment to the philippines and south korea. talked ant this in the last panels as regards to the philippines. greg just co-authored a terrific peace with eric sayers, war on the rocks, this issue, which i commend to you. so, quickly, greg, what do you think of the prospects from your perspective of the u.s. ma

/philippine alliance. that kind of verbage has gotten on the for the philippines because they understandably want to know what will happen if they are caught in a real escalatory kind of conflict with china. what would the united states do? scarborough shoal is not a particularly reassuring episode in the u.s./philippine alliance. so i think what he may be up to is really just trying to force the conversation that, again, previous administrations have managed to avoid to get more of a clearer and public sense of what u.s. -- how far the u.s. really will go in a potential conflict. and frankly, i think it would be relatively easy for the trump administration to come up with a formula, a clarification of obligations that might just sort of settle this whole thing rather quickly. so we'll see. >> so amy, the dilemma is complicated by duterte himself. first of all, because the new secretary of defense may be convinced to give a more explicit security commitment, something closer to what we've done with japan o

is not going to recognize philippine sovereignty over the nine features that the philippines currently occupied. we will see where that goes, but i do think it is likely that we do reaffirm the position that it -- been secretary of defense william:enforced in 1990, which is an attack on philippine armed forces, public vessels are planed anywhere in the pacific includes the south china sea. if that doesn't happen, there are only two possibilities. one, the philippines new wall. they decide the tree does them no good. i think they are dead serious about that, with good reason. it will not consummate much of the u.s. thinks it will. philippines gets thing that is special is a guarantee against external attack. we do all of that with indonesia, malaysia ifand vietn. the only thing the philippines gets that special is a guarantee against external attack and if we don't offer that what's the point? that will prompt them to seek a better deal. he can sell the alliance and convince the chinese he's serious. turnaround the americans are there and that's extremely negative for the security . >>

and then there was the philippines. when the spanish sued for peace after three months of that war, he basically said fine. i am more than happy to negotiate a peace treaty. but here's the deal. spain has to leave cuba. we will take it temporarily but it will be independent. spain has to leave puerto rico. that came out of nowhere. spain has to give us an island in the pacific. it turned out to be gone -- guam. that has to happen before we will even enter into negotiations. that is really tough diplomacy. then he said as for the philippines, which we had essentially required, we took deweyuzon after admiral destroyed the spanish fleet in manila bay, he said this was part of the negotiation. thank you, the spanish are saying. ambassador asked to negotiate. said you cannot get more glory than you have already gain in this war of yours. so i am assuming you will be very generous. he found out that mckinley was not generous as -- at all. but then the question was what he was going to do about the philippines. while negotiat

iwo jima in february, and then okinawa, then the philippines, landing 10 was resulting in the capture of -- or the liberation of manila in march 3 of that year. one of the controversies that operations these , in thek place philippines at the time, this is the sixth army area and below .he line is the eighth army there has been ever since questions about why mcarthur was allowed to conduct operations -- torate basically all liberate basically all of the philippines. these operations were costly and debilitating to the troops. they depleted the manpower that would be needed for the invasion. mcarthur said all the philippines had to be liberated in part for political reasons, but he also could a sized admiral nimitz in the pacific for trying to take okinawa when mcarthur said he should have just taken the top third, which they could have used for the airfields and let the japanese come to them. this seemed to be contradicting argued --at we have when i say we, i'm not saying the royal we -- i refer to aldo -- waldo heinrichs and and myself. general marshall let macarthur becausethese op

macarthur said that all the philippines had to be liberated in part for political reasons. but he had also criticized admiral nimitz in the pacific for trying to take all of okinawa instead of the top third for use for air fields and let the japanese come to them. so this seemed to be contradicting himself. what we have argued, and when i say we, i am not using the royal we. i am referring to waldo heinrichs and myself. what we have argued is that general marshall let macarthur conduct these operations because he realized that the harbor at manila could not handle all of the troops and equipment necessary to stage for the invasion of japan and that if by conducting these other operations macarthur would be taking control of the smaller port cities in the central philippines that might allow for the staging of individual divisions for the invasion. so there seemed to be some military purpose for that as well. but as i said, these were all debilitating and weakening, sapping the strength of those divisions. all of these operations of course were a prelude to of the invasion o

you go to china, their neighbors are north korea, south korea, philippines, japan, indonesia, afghanistan, india and russia. they don't have -- so many people in poverty. they don't have a rule of law. they don't have institution, you have the depth and transparency of this. they don't have the university we have we. they have a long way to go. this notion is automatic success, it's not right. working with them together to make it a better planet for everybody. they've never been expansion. you go back to thousand years, china was never invading its neighbors. that was not true of italy, greece, european nations, that's not the way they are. i think it can be worked out. >> the current slowdown in china. >> it is a slowdown. you had goldilocks, we are going through percent. the feds raised gently. your brain, europe and china, never slows down. it's probably a slowdown as opposed to on our way to a recession. down from three and a half. those are probably production. japan's going in a little bit, china is probably the most serious one. more ramifications for this, china grows to 5%. $600

the philippines -- so the philippines may be concerned about its economic relationship, economic and political relationship with china under the current president. taiwan hasex-supprepressing strongly to join tpp and tpp-11 members may be concerned about possible conflict with china. you remember in the case of wto entry, china insisted that china should enter the wto first, and then taiwan. okay. now, china and eu may be good candidates, but is it really a good idea to invite them in the absence of the united states? so there are many, many issues to think about. now prospects for rcep, the regional comprehensive economic partnership, this is an asean centered fta among the asean member states, plus japan, china, korea, india, australia, and new zealand. so rcep is not as ambitious as tpp or tpp-11, but it's a very important mega fta because it does include china and india, china, india, and also a large country like indonesia. differences among the major countries are large, initially between japan and china on the level of tariff reduction and trade and investment rules, but after

wonderful case, as a result of barnette, the supreme courts in argentina, canada, costa rica, ghana, the philippines, and rwanda all followed barnette, and all ruled in favor of schoolchildren in those countries. for example, in canada in 1945, witness children before the canada supreme court ruled in favor of them had been sent to foster homes, and some witness parents were sentenced to jail. in argentina in 1979, the supreme court handed down a decision exonerating in favor of jehovah's witnesses for their refusal to salute the flag. you know what is interesting? at the time the supreme court handed down the decision, the worst was under ban, so even though it was illegal to be jehovah's witnesses, if you happen to be one of the jehovah's witnesses, state cannot obligate you to salute a flag. that case not only resulted in a favorable ruling for alejandro wilma but over 1000 other jehovah's witnesses who were facing trial in argentina because of their beliefs. i will wrap up, and i really hope you listen to me. there are 8.5 million jehovah's witnesses around the world, and it is not easy being on

including a general, japan army of imperial with the invasion of singapore and who was the defender of the philippines. also, tried and convicted was general holm, who was responsible for the baton death march. others were sentenced to life in prison, 16. two were sentenced to 20 years and seven years. clearly, there are lessons still to be learned about justice and injustice after war, as we have struggled since 9/11. however, important lessons can be learned from the reconstruction period. as always, reconstruction dealt with the original sin of our nation -- slavery. the reason for such inequitable justice is race, with the theption of white men of confederacy seem to be treated fairly, if not favorably. african-americans saw little in terms of lasting justice. the kkk and other hate groups flourished during and after reconstruction. african-americans for several years were able to be elected and vote and have some security, but before long, they were systematically disenfranchised of almost everything. it would take over a century for us to do the right thing and use the 1960's as a method of civi

augustus calzone a immigrant from the philippines, i've been around since 1955. my question is this. how would this, with all the discussions you all just had and i guess those conversations for today's conference, how would the subjects throughout today be any different had hillary clinton been elected president of the united states? >> i'm not gonna touch that. [ laughter ] >> i'm sure we would've had a totally different set i don't think it would be sunshine and rainbows, there would be quite the opposite examination about whether enough had been done to reveal information about her campaign and hold her accountable. so, i would be very surprised, had to become president that she chose to respond to challenges from law enforcement or challenges from congress or the intelligence community by attempting to suggest they are illegitimate organizations that were just out to get her. i do think that there is some part of this that is a distinct feature of trump. i don't know how much that answers the question but that in terms of the counter facts, i imagine we woul

and the same is true of the philippines. we are aware of our own motivations. if you travel abroad and work from abroad, a lot of those folks ponies there. nobody likes to be dependent on somebody else. it is critical and at the same time desired. >> mark kramer a key player that continues to come up. >> dean rusk started out as secretary of state under president kennedy and was one of the few holdovers who stayed throughout the johnson administration. there were others like mcnamara and others who served under kennedy. very few of them stayed until the end and that included mcnamara left. dean rusk was a very capable figure, a southerner like johnson. he had a very close relationship with johnson and also johnson's national security advisor during this time in 1968. that means that dean rusk on the one hand was committed to the vietnam war. he wanted to help johnson in that effort. but was also increasingly conscious, i think that things were not working out very well there. that did not diminish his support for the war, but it did mean that he began to look f

. >> good morning, immigrant from the philippines i've been around since 1955. the question is, how does this, with the discussions that you just had and for those with which will call for the rest of today's conference, how did the subjects and your tenure, what are of the discussions being held today be any different had hillary clinton been elected president of the united states? >> i am not going to touch that. [ laughter ] >> i am sure we would've had a totally different set of debates, i don't think it would have been sunshine and rainbows right now. it would have been the opposite examination about whether or not enough had been done to reveal information about her campaign and sort of hold her accountable. so, i would be very, very surprised, had she become president, if secretary clinton had chosen to respond to challenges from law enforcement or challenges from commerce and the intelligence community to suggest those were illegitimate organizations that were just out to get her. i do think that there is some part of this that is sort of a distinct feat

the second half of our semester we will talk about the war in the pacific read and when the philippines falls in 1942, both you haved corregidor, army and navy nurses who are there who get captured, about 79 women captured by the japanese. they are held as pows 437 months. for 37 months. this is a couple of women who survived, eating chocolates. you can see how thin they are, starvation rations and all of that. so when we are talking about who is in combat and who is not, the line gets blurred, especially , who iscomes to nurses captured, who is not. what happens to women as pows, what happens to men as pows, so that is important to recognize these nurses. in a number of different parts of the military. could you get more girl next door? she is perfect, but she is a good soldier. when you think of a soldier, do you think of this? is that the image that pops into your head? >> not typically. .> my grandma was a wac prof. landdeck: your grandma was a wac? that is good. that is good. so this is something you have to to,the american public used say you have these images. there is a huge cam

we still haven't done a great job of connecting reservation policy and administration with the philippines, for example. there is a lot of work to be done there. there always to trace these ideas from 1865 on, and even aiti and other places. mares, -- maurice, to be contrary in, or play the coyote, there are some things that are crucial to understanding the history of indigenous groups. --they have noer mention of the civil war, so how do we balance that? the civil war didn't matter just in groups, or they didn't care? speak to this and everyone else can chime in. that argument has been articulated several times. some other historians believe the work we are doing is overemphasizing the west. they say there were not laugh -- there were not enough soldiers engaged in the west, that these battles didn't matter and --ention to native american taking part in the war in certain ways and incarceration and removal didn't matter. >> [indiscernible] >> no, no, no. this is part of the argument. by emphasizing this far western theater and trying to reinsert it, or insert it into the civil war narrati

the author describes the president's role in the spanish-american war, obtaining hawaii and the philippines, and liberating cuba from spain. this was recorded at the kansas city public library in 20

and when the philippines falls in 1942, both manila and corregidor, you have army and navy nurses who are there who get captured, about 79 women captured by the japanese. they are held as pow's for 37 months. this is just a couple of them who survived, eating chocolates. but you can see how thin they are, especially the woman on the left. starvation rations and all of that. so when we are talking about who is in combat and who is not, the line gets blurred, especially when it comes to the nurses because they are so close who is , captured, who is not. what happens to women as pow's, what happens to men as pow's, so that is important to recognize these nurses. women serve in a number of different parts of the military. right? could you get more girl next door? she is just so perfect, but she is a good soldier. when you think of a soldier, do you think of this? is that the image that pops into your head? >> not typically. >> my grandma was a wac. prof. landdeck: your grandma was a wac? that is good. that is good. this idea of women serving in the military, women being soldiers, is somet

people waiting in line for 10, 15 -- at least there were when i last looked at it, you know, in the philippines, for example, for over a decade waiting patiently, law abiding people who want to come here and have family here and other things like that, and just to allow people to come crashing in, be told that if you say this you will be treated as an asylum and then you don't have to reappear for your hearing or whatever, it's just an abuse of the system and it's unfair. i mean, all of us have been standing in lines, long, long lines and someone just walks up to the front, that's unjust. that's unjust. i also think that without control you have unsafe conditions and uncontrolled conditions on the border, which create, you know, serious safety problems for everybody on both sides of the border. so it creates uncontrolled access to the country as a national security threat, you know, there are people around the world that are coming into latin america for the purpose of coming up through the border. so these are -- you know, these are the reasons why i think it's important that we enforce -- we

my father was a platoon sergeant in the philippines and in the pacific during world war ii. came home and never talked about the war. he went to help. kept his mouth shut. died. worked until the day he died at 83. never asked the government for anything. he never got the g.i. bill, never got medicare. i think the vietnam vets and the vets should just shut up and do their jobs. and go to work. just like my father did, the greatest generation. >> anything from the last couple of callers to respond to? >> well, i think what we can see already is that there are many versions, we all have our own narratives and they don't always line up. it is a big country and a lot of variety of experience. i think on the one hand, it is true that sometimes especially if soldiers came home later on in '69 and 70 it was painful and difficult. they were sort of targeted and combined to what was happening. but then also many soldiers and veterans the came home and went about their lives. one of the great legacies of the vietnam generation is that they didn't keep quiet. in a way. so they demanded

north africa, philippines, we have seen that take place, isis claiming credit for that. isis will continue to be a threat to the united states. we'll have to keep our eyes on that and our interests in the realization that this terrorism threat is going to continue for some time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for welcoming me to the committee. i apologize for being late. i also want to say what a privilege it is to hear your testimony this morning and to know that the agents and officers who work with you when partisan politics can't keep our government open. you guys are still doing your work and it's an inspiration to me. i hope to the people that whoever is watching this at home. in that spirit actually, director coates, i wanted to start with something that you end ed with. an observation about concerns that the ic has about political uncertainty in europe and the ability for european democracies to pushback on what you described as autocratic tendencies. could you say a little more about that? >> clearly, europe has seen russian aggression in hybrid ways. sig

we see the tentacles of isis and al qaeda tactics in different places in the world, north africa, philippines. we have seen that take place. isis claiming credit for that. so isis will continue to be a threat to the united states. we're going to have to continue as director haspel said, to keep our eyes on that, and our interests in the realization that this terrorism threat is going to continue for some time. >> thank you. >> senator bennet. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your welcoming me to the committee. i apologize for being late. but i also want to say what a privilege it is to hear your testimony this morning. and to know that you and the agents and officers who work with you are at their posts, keeping this democracy safe. and it is a reminder to me what's at stake when our partisan politics can't even keep our government open. and you guys are still doing your work, and it's an inspiration to me, and i hope to the people, whoever is watching this at home. in that spirit, actually, director coats, i wanted to start with something you ended with, which was an observation abo