I think our people should be broad brush enough in their backgrounds that they could consider those things, but I would come down more on the side of the traditional approach to national security with a smaller group so that we can focus on the core issues and consider those other things but not have those drive the problem or not have the group get so big that it becomes very bureaucratic or very cumbersome. Getting very crisp recommendations in a process allows us to address real national security issues. Only America and its military force really has in some cases logistical capability to move things, to move people, to move equipment, whether it's humanitarian equipment, things that make water, we are the only one that really has the capability to move and do those things, and so I think we will always be faced with a choice and it will probably come down to each individual situation being the choice the president will have to make. It's something that only we can do. Our conscience says that we should get involved and we'll have to make that decision on a case by case basis.
China looms large in America's strategic calculations.
No I don't. I think that if we make that assumption, it could become a self fulfilling prophecy. I think the real challenge for us is to find a way to continue to engage China, to look at the areas where we have common interests and try and work together. To look at areas where we have very honest disagreements and try to work those out. But I think that it would be in our best interest, and the best interest of Asia and the world, for China to be a responsible member of the family of nations, to play by the rules economically and politically, and move forward in a way that.