Vice President JD Vance speaks at a Munich Security Conference event in Washington, D.C., months after his blistering speech in Munich.
Category
đ
NewsTranscript
00:00Thank you very much.
00:30How are we doing?
00:40Good morning, everybody.
00:43Wow, what a crowd.
00:44What a crowd.
00:45Mr. Vice President, we're so happy to have you here this morning.
00:49This is obviously the highlight of our Munich Security Conference meeting in Washington, D.C.
00:55I hope not.
00:56I hope not.
00:56It is the highlight.
00:57It's really a great honor to welcome you here this morning.
01:02Actually, for those of you who have not been regular participants in Munich, this is the third time already that the Vice President is participating in a Munich Security Conference event.
01:13When you came to Munich last February, your speech kicked off a pretty controversial debate about fundamental values, unlike anything we have ever had at the Munich Security Conference.
01:28And actually, we published a brochure, a copy of which you'll have on the way out, about the speech and the reactions to it from around the world.
01:40This intense debate about how fundamental values, how the freedom of speech, the rule of law should be interpreted and applied continues to this day.
01:54But when we prepared for this meeting with your team yesterday, we agreed and they agreed that today we should try to focus on current challenges of foreign policy, which confront us together.
02:12So thank you again for making yourself available.
02:15We don't have a great deal of time, so I'll not come up with a long introduction.
02:22And I just want to get us started.
02:24The first time you came to Munich, you were still a senator from Ohio.
02:29What I associate with Ohio is the Dayton Agreement, 30 years ago, in 1995.
02:38I was at that time actually the German negotiator.
02:41So I actually lived in Dayton, Ohio for one entire month.
02:46And why is this important?
02:48And because it was through U.S. intervention, it was through U.S. intervention, that peace was brought about in Europe, in the Balkans at that time.
03:02So if I may, let me ask my first question about the U.S. and Europe.
03:10A distinguished former U.S. diplomat, Richard Holbrook, wrote almost exactly 30 years ago in a foreign affairs article that the United States is and should remain a European power.
03:30Today, 30 years ago, my question is, do you think that the United States should continue to see itself
03:38as a European power?
03:41In Munich, remember, you actually said, and I quote, we are still on the same team.
03:48Are we?
03:49And what does that mean for the U.S. presence in Europe and relationship with Europe?
03:54First question.
03:55Sure.
03:56Well, first of all, thank you.
03:57And I'm sorry, my microphone apparently is broken, but we have another one, so that's good.
04:01So everybody can hear me now, right?
04:02Everybody can hear me?
04:03Great.
04:04Good.
04:04Yeah, so first of all, thrilled to be here and thrilled to have this conversation.
04:10I've been looking forward to it.
04:12And yeah, I do still very much think that the United States and Europe are on the same team.
04:18And I think that this is, you know, sometimes I've been criticized as a hyper-realist, right?
04:23I think of foreign policy purely in terms of transactional values.
04:28What does the America get out of it?
04:29What do the, you know, rest of the world get out of it and try to, you know, focus so purely on the transactional value of it that we ignore sometimes the humanitarian or the moral side of it?
04:40And I think at least with Europe, that's actually not a full encapsulation of my views because I think that, you know, European civilization and American civilization, European culture and American culture are very much linked.
04:53And they're always going to be linked.
04:55And I think it's completely ridiculous to think that you're ever going to be able to drive a firm wedge between the United States and Europe.
05:02Now, that doesn't mean we're not going to have disagreements.
05:04And, of course, you know, you brought up the speech earlier.
05:06It doesn't mean that Europeans won't criticize the United States or the United States won't criticize Europe.
05:11But I do think fundamentally we have to be and we are on the same civilizational team.
05:17And I think obviously there's a big question about what that means in the 21st century.
05:22I think, you know, obviously the president and I believe that it means a little bit more European burden sharing on the defense side.
05:29I think that it means that all of us, frankly, on both sides of the Atlantic have gotten a little bit too comfortable with the security posture of the last 20 years.
05:38And that, frankly, that security posture is not adequate to meet the challenges of the next 20 years.
05:42So there are a lot of ways in which this alliance will evolve and change in the same way that the alliance evolved and changed from 1945 to 1975 and from 1975 to 2005.
05:53I do think that we're in one of these phases where we're going to have to rethink a lot of big questions.
05:59But I do think that we should rethink those big questions together.
06:01That is a fundamental belief of both me and the president.
06:04And, you know, you mentioned this is my third time speaking with the Munich Security Conference Group, obviously the first couple of times we're in Munich.
06:12And I always remember very fondly, of course, that the very first time it was as a United States senator representing Ohio.
06:19And I'm glad you got to spend a month in Dayton.
06:21I love Dayton.
06:21It's kind of the closest big city, if you can call it a big city, to where I grew up.
06:25But on that first panel, I was on that panel and also David Lamme, who at the time was a loathly member in opposition.
06:33And, of course, now is the great foreign secretary of the United Kingdom.
06:36And he and I have become good friends.
06:37And so I still think that this European alliance is very important.
06:42But I think that for it to be important and for us to be real friends with each other, I think that we are very much real friends.
06:48We've got to talk about the big questions.
06:51And I know that's an important part of what this entire group does.
06:54So I'm glad to be here.
06:55Great.
06:56Thank you so much.
06:56And I think the message has arrived in Europe that we need to carry a significantly larger share of the burden.
07:05As you know, we are all trying to spend more.
07:08Some are spending really a lot more.
07:11Others are lagging behind a little bit.
07:12But we're moving in the right direction, I think.
07:16Let me turn to a really concrete, urgent issue, Ukraine.
07:22Again, the Trump administration, from what we have seen in the media, et cetera, seems to agree with most of us in Europe that, unfortunately, Russia does not seem to be really willing to end this military confrontation.
07:42If that's the assessment, if that's our collective assessment, could you talk a little bit about U.S. strategy going forward?
07:53We all want this war to end.
07:55And let me say as a very personal comment, I think the Trump administration did the right thing by starting this process of talking to the Ukrainians, talking to the Russians.
08:06But the Russians seem not to be interested in the kind of, quote-unquote, deal that could be offered to them.
08:15So talk to us a little bit about how you see the next steps.
08:19Yeah, so let me say a couple of things about this.
08:21First of all, I appreciate your kind words about the administration.
08:25Obviously, I think it was the right thing to do for us to start the process of negotiation.
08:29I think for too long, the Russians, the Ukrainians have been fighting.
08:33Obviously, there's been a lot of people dying on both sides.
08:36There's been a lot of innocent loss of life.
08:38And our view is it's absurd that you've had this war go on for so long, and the two sides aren't even talking constructively about what would be necessary for them to end the conflict.
08:48And I think that one of the things that President Trump has always been very good at, and he's gotten a lot of criticism, unfair criticism, in my view, from both the American and some of the European press,
09:00is what I would call a strategic realism or a strategic insight.
09:04In other words, you don't have to agree with the Russian justification for the war, and certainly both the President and I have criticized the full-scale invasion,
09:14but you have to try to understand where the other side is coming from to end the conflict.
09:18And I think that's what President Trump has been very deliberate about, is actually forcing the Russians to say,
09:23here is what we would like in order to end the conflict.
09:27And again, you don't have to agree with it.
09:29You can think that the request is too significant, and certainly the first peace offer that the Russians put on the table,
09:35our reaction to it was, you're asking for too much, but this is how negotiations unfold.
09:41And I wouldn't say, I'm not yet that pessimistic on this, I wouldn't say that the Russians are uninterested in bringing this thing to a resolution.
09:49What I would say is, right now, the Russians are asking for a certain set of requirements, a certain set of concessions, in order to end the conflict.
09:58We think they're asking for too much, okay?
10:01And then obviously, the Ukrainians matter a lot.
10:04They're the other side, they're the other party, at least to the direct conflict.
10:07And we have to ask, what is the Ukrainian, what do they need in order to bring this conflict to a successful completion?
10:16And we're going to continue to have that conversation.
10:18Now, what the President has said is that he will walk away if he thinks he's not making progress.
10:23And I think that, you know, about once every four or five weeks, you will hear some American official, or sometimes multiple American officials, say,
10:32this is a week where we need to make another step.
10:34And in particular, the step that we would like to make right now is we would like both the Russians and the Ukrainians to actually agree on some basic guidelines for sitting down and talking to one another.
10:47Obviously, the United States is happy to participate in those conversations, but it's very important for the Russians and the Ukrainians to start talking to one another.
10:54We think that is the next big step that we would like to take.
10:58And why does that matter?
10:59The reason it matters is because, again, I mentioned the Russians, but also the Ukrainians have also been sort of, they've put a piece of paper in our hands that says,
11:09this is what we would need in order to bring this conflict to a successful resolution from our perspective.
11:14And there's a big gulf, predictably, between where the Russians and the Ukrainians are, and we think the next step in the negotiation is to try to close that gulf.
11:23We think it's probably impossible for us to mediate this entirely without at least some direct negotiation between the two.
11:30And so that's what we focus on.
11:32But I'm not yet a pessimist on this.
11:34I mean, obviously, you know, the Russians and the Ukrainians are not there yet because the fighting is still going on.
11:41You know, the Ukrainians have said they would agree to a ceasefire, a 30-day ceasefire.
11:46We appreciate that.
11:47What the Russians have said, again, you don't have to disagree with it, but it's important to understand where the other side is coming from.
11:53What the Russians have said is a 30-day ceasefire is not in our strategic interest.
11:58So we've tried to move beyond the obsession with a 30-day ceasefire and more on the what would the long-term settlement look like.
12:06And we've tried to consistently advance the ball.
12:08One final point I'd make about this, I think it probably wouldn't surprise anybody in the room, but there are a lot of people watching who are not in the room,
12:15is a frustration that we've had, frankly, with both sides, is that they hate each other so much that if you have an hour conversation with either side,
12:26the first 30 minutes are just them complaining about some historical grievance from four years ago or five years ago or ten years ago.
12:33Look, I understand it.
12:34I understand that people don't fight wars against each other without a lot of grievance and a lot of problem,
12:40but we're trying to, as much as we can, play a constructive role in advancing the peace conversation forward.
12:46What I'll say, just to echo something that President Trump has said many times, but I think it bears repeating,
12:51is our strong view is that the continuation of this conflict is bad for us, it's bad for Europe, it's bad for Russia, and it's bad for Ukraine.
13:01We think that if cool heads prevail here, we can bring this thing to a durable peace that will be economically beneficial for both the Ukrainians and the Russians,
13:11and most importantly, will stop the end of the destruction of human lives.
13:16I think people underappreciate this about our president here in the United States is,
13:20he has a genuine humanitarian impulse about this.
13:24He hates innocent people losing their lives.
13:27He hates even soldiers losing their lives in unnecessary conflicts.
13:31He just wants the killing to stop, and that will continue to be America's policy.
13:37But obviously, as all of you have seen, we'll navigate that policy and react as the parties bring their grievances to us.
13:43Great. Thank you very much.
13:46If I can just offer two footnotes to that.
13:49I think for us, Europeans living as neighbors of Ukraine, and if you wish, also as neighbors of Russia,
13:59we have begun to understand that what we're looking at here is not just the defensive war by Ukraine against the Russian aggression.
14:09It is also a confrontation that puts at risk all of European security.
14:18In other words, it's indirectly our defense also.
14:22It's not just Ukraine.
14:24And this is why we're so desperately interested in seeing that this comes to an end, hopefully.
14:30And I think the real trick for negotiations and for a conclusion of this is going to be that it's going to be lasting
14:38and not broken in the next three, six, or nine months again.
14:45Let me, Mr. Vice President, since we have so little time, there are so many issues.
14:50If you allow, let me turn to another issue, China.
14:54That's a key, as we understand, a key challenge for the United States, for your foreign policy.
15:03It's also of tremendous interest for us in Europe.
15:06So the United States has defined China as the key strategic challenge going forward for coming probably many years.
15:17This has also been the justification, the reasoning, when American staff members of yours tell us the United States must be much more present in Asia
15:32and will therefore need to reduce their presence, their strength, et cetera, in Europe.
15:41But now there are some signals in the media that you, that the United States government, that the White House might actually be interested in a strategic deal with China,
15:53maybe even including on Taiwan.
15:55Could you talk a little bit about the China strategy of the Trump administration?
16:01Yeah, so I haven't seen those reports that you mentioned, a strategic deal on Taiwan, so I wouldn't speak to that.
16:06I certainly would say that there has been no conversation between our governments about a strategic deal on that particular question.
16:13What we have talked about, of course, is that we cannot absorb the producer surplus of the entire world.
16:21That has been the role of the American economy for the past 30 years.
16:24In some cases, vis-a-vis Europe, and by the way, we don't blame, for example, the Germans for pursuing a policy that makes their exporters strong.
16:31We just wish that American leadership had pursued a policy that made our exporters strong, because now we find ourselves in a very precarious place.
16:39And when I say we, I mean the entire West.
16:41I mean the NATO alliance.
16:42I mean the United States and Europe, which is that we become, in a world of hyper-complicated, hyper-globalized supply chains,
16:50we find ourselves more and more reliant on countries that may not have our best interests at heart.
16:57And even if they're halfway decent trading partners, it's still a little bit risky to put all of your eggs in one proverbial basket economically.
17:06And what the president has said is we must rebalance the global economy vis-a-vis China.
17:11We cannot absorb hundreds of billions of dollars, close to a trillion dollars per year in annual surplus, most of it coming from the People's Republic of China.
17:22And what that's going to mean in the rebalancing is that we think that the PRC is going to have to, frankly, let their own population consume a little bit more.
17:32They've held consumption levels down in order to increase these massive exports.
17:37It means that American manufacturers are going to have to be treated more fairly in some of these global trade deals.
17:43It means we're going to have to cut some new trade deals with some of our friends in Europe, but also with some of our more adversarial nations.
17:50But that also, you know, we have to be careful here because while we want to rebalance global trade, and that has certainly been the explicit goal of our policy, we also want to make sure that we do this in the right way.
18:03And, yes, you've seen media reports that the Chinese reached out to the United States.
18:08Of course we're going to sit down and talk to them.
18:10I'm not going to divulge too many details or prejudge the negotiations, but we want to rebalance trade in the interests of American workers, in the interests of American manufacturers.
18:20That is our policy.
18:21We think that we can do that while preserving at least an open dialogue with the PRC and with a lot of other nations all over the world.
18:29But that doesn't mean the old way of doing business is going to be stable or that it's going to persist.
18:35It simply cannot.
18:37It was not sustainable 10 years ago.
18:39It was certainly not sustainable four years ago.
18:41And we're very, very committed to changing it.
18:44But we're open to having conversations with both, again, our friends and more adversarial nations about what that rebalancing ultimately looks like.
18:52And people have to remember, you know, Liberation Day, which was where the president announced this fundamental change, I think, in the global trading system,
19:01that was almost exactly 30 days ago.
19:03So we are in the early innings of a very significant shift.
19:08I think that shift is going to really inure to the benefit of both the United States but also of Europe.
19:14But it's fundamentally it has to happen, and it's going to happen under President Trump's leadership.
19:19All right.
19:20I think it's great if there are beginning discussions between you and the Chinese.
19:28Could you expand a little more on what would your expectations be for an EU-US successful discussion of these trade issues?
19:40Is there any message that we can take home to our friends in Brussels?
19:45Because that's also, from our point of view, obviously, a very urgent issue.
19:50Yeah, so to put it very simply, and we've obviously had great conversations with a lot of our European friends at the very senior levels between, you know, the president and heads of state,
20:02between me and officials in European governments, but also with trade representatives and also the very nitty-gritty technical details of a trade agreement.
20:11So these conversations are ongoing, but I'll throw a few general principles out there.
20:15I think the first is that, again, America wants its exporters and, by implication, its workers to be treated much more fairly.
20:24We want American markets in the same way that American markets have been open to a lot of European goods.
20:31We'd like a lot of European markets to be open to American goods.
20:34Now, there's an agriculture component to that.
20:36There's a value-added manufacturing component to that.
20:39We think that we have, in both the software but also the more harder technology side, we have some great defense technology firms where, on the one hand,
20:48we have our European friends saying, we want to actually build up our defense.
20:54We want to do more burden sharing.
20:56But on the other hand, it seems like some of our European friends are less open for business if the people selling software and hardware are American firms.
21:05Well, we think that's inconsistent.
21:06We think that we have some of the best military hardware and software in the world, and we think part of being good allies is, yes, we obviously want the Europeans to take a bigger role in the continental defense.
21:16But we also think that there are a lot of great American companies that they can work with.
21:20And so, again, this doesn't have to be a zero-sum dynamic.
21:23This can be a very synergistic relationship.
21:26But the fundamental principle is we think that most nations, most nations in the world have been way too hard on American exporters and American firms.
21:35We want to make the entire world a little bit more open to the products built by American workers.
21:40We're obviously biased.
21:42We think that they're the best in the world.
21:44And we think that we can have a much better trading relationship with a lot of our European friends if they just drop some of those both tariff but also non-tariff trade barriers.
21:55There are regulatory barriers.
21:56There are sometimes you have an official at the Ministry of Defense completely disconnected, as far as we can tell, from an actual law or regulation who will just say, we're not buying American products.
22:08Sometimes you have officials in Europe who will say, well, we're going to penalize American technology firms in a way that we would never penalize European technology firms.
22:16We just want a little bit more fairness or, to use the president's favorite word, reciprocity.
22:22And again, with Europe, we think that's a very, very easy conversation to have.
22:27We hope our European friends agree.
22:29Great.
22:30I get signs from my friend here that we're quickly running out of time.
22:36I'm having fun.
22:38Okay.
22:39And we can take a few more questions.
22:40Okay, great.
22:41Wonderful.
22:41My team over there is very nervous.
22:43You guys can't see them behind.
22:44We'll be brief.
22:46Please.
22:46So thank you very much.
22:50We've heard that there is, in coming days or next two weeks, a presidential trip to the Middle East coming up.
22:57Sure.
22:58Among the many unresolved issues of that region is the issue of Iran and their nuclear ambition, et cetera, et cetera.
23:06Could you talk a little bit about the region?
23:10I mean, there's so many unresolved issues, the Gaza issue, but also Tehran.
23:14What would your expectation be?
23:18What would the goal be?
23:19Would you go for zero enrichment by Iran?
23:23Some people have suggested that.
23:24Or are we looking at a replay of the earlier, you know, agreement that was reached 10 years ago?
23:34Yeah.
23:35So there are a couple issues with the earlier agreement.
23:38The JCPOA, as it's called here in the United States, and I assume in Europe.
23:43But the two big issues with that agreement are, number one, the enforcement or the inspections regime was incredibly weak.
23:52And I don't think that it actually served the function of preventing the Iranians from getting on the pathway to a nuclear weapon.
23:59That's one thing that must be different.
24:01And then second, yes, we believe that there were some elements of their nuclear program that were preserved under JCPOA, that, yes, they weren't nuclear weapons.
24:10Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon.
24:12But allowed Iran to sort of stay on this glide path towards a nuclear weapon if they flip the switch and press go.
24:19And we have to think about this not just in terms of Iran, which, again, the president has said this.
24:23We think that there is a deal here that would reintegrate Iran into the global economy that would be really good for the Iranian people, but would result in the complete cessation of any chance that they could get a nuclear weapon.
24:36And that's what we're negotiating towards.
24:38And as the president has said, that's option A.
24:40And option B, if option A is very good for the Iranian people and even, you know, some of the folks, the leadership in Iran, option B is very bad.
24:49It's very bad for everybody, and it's not what we want, but it's better than option C, which is Iran getting a nuclear weapon.
24:56That is what is completely off the table for the American administration.
24:59No ifs, ands, or buts.
25:01Now, there are a couple of other things that are worth thinking about because this is not just about Iran.
25:06If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, which country then next gets a nuclear weapon?
25:11And then when that country gets a nuclear weapon, which country after that?
25:14We really care not just about Iran but about nuclear proliferation.
25:18And, you know, the president said this in an interview a few weeks ago.
25:21It's one of these things that in the, in the maelstrom of the media, the signal and the noise, this was very much signal, but it got lost in the noise.
25:30The president hates nuclear proliferation.
25:33I hate nuclear proliferation.
25:35And I, I think that the president would be very open to sitting down with the Russians and the Chinese and saying, look, let's get this thing in a much better place.
25:44Let's reduce the number of nuclear weapons that are in the world writ large.
25:48That's obviously not a conversation for tomorrow.
25:50That's a conversation, God willing, for a few years from now.
25:53But there is no way you get to that conversation if you allow multiple regimes all over the world to, to, to basically enter this sprint for a nuclear weapon.
26:02And we really think that if the Iran domino falls, you're going to see nuclear proliferation all over the Middle East.
26:07That's very bad for us.
26:09It's very bad for our friends and it's something that we don't think can happen.
26:12So without, without prejudging the negotiations, I will say so far so good.
26:17We've been very happy by how the Iranians have responded to some of the points that we've made.
26:23We've been very happy that some of the intermediaries and some of the folks who are in the room, the role that they played, the Amanis in particular, have played a very positive role.
26:31And we're very grateful to that.
26:32So, so far, we're on the right pathway, but this is going to end somewhere.
26:38And it will end either in Iran eliminating their nuclear program, their nuclear weapons program.
26:44They can have civil nuclear power, okay?
26:48We don't, we don't mind that.
26:49But let me ask this basic question.
26:52Which regime in the world has civil nuclear power and enrichment without having a nuclear weapon?
27:01And the answer is, no one.
27:04No one right now has a civil nuclear program with their entire enrichment infrastructure that can enrich to the, you know, 90 plus percent needed to get to fissile material and a nuclear weapon.
27:15So our, our, our proposition is very simple.
27:18Yes, we, we don't care if people want nuclear power.
27:21We're fine with that.
27:22But you can't have the kind of enrichment program that allows you to get to a nuclear weapon.
27:28And that's where we draw the line.
27:29Great.
27:30I think we, most of us would totally agree with that.
27:34And especially, I think, speaking on behalf of a non-nuclear country with the goal of maintaining the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
27:44Yes.
27:45That's very important.
27:46That allows me to turn to my next or last question on NATO, because most people don't understand that the fact that we've had NATO under U.S. leadership for the last 70 years, that has been an essential instrument of international non-proliferation.
28:07If we had not had the U.S. nuclear presence in Europe, I would be prepared to give you the, at least two, three, four, five countries in Europe that would have gone nuclear if they had not had this reassurance.
28:24So NATO has played a big role in nuclear non-proliferation.
28:28In six weeks' time, we have a NATO summit coming up.
28:33And, again, there are many, many issues.
28:36One will be the continuing issue of defense spending.
28:39As we mentioned earlier in our discussion, Europeans are doing more, but we have also listened to demands coming out of the administration that are even more ambitious.
28:56So could you talk a little bit about your level of expectation?
28:59What would be your desired outcome of that NATO summit in terms of defense spending, in terms of how much Europe will need to do on its own in order to relieve the United States more in Europe?
29:14Yeah, so I think there are two â there are a couple of different components to this.
29:18So, first of all, what the president has said is he'd like to see 5 percent spending on defense in NATO.
29:22And he thinks that that is consistent with what our European friends are telling us about how much they fear some of the threats in the world.
29:31And, you know, given, unfortunately, that a lot of European militaries have not kept pace over the past few decades, there's a bit of catching up to do.
29:42And so that is the goal that the president has set.
29:44Obviously, European countries are going to make their own determinations, but that's what we think is a reasonable goal.
29:48But it's really not just about the spend itself.
29:51It's also how the money is spent.
29:53And it's, again, there's this fear that we have when we look at some of our European friends â and I made this point at the first Munich security conference I ever went to â
30:02that when I looked at Germany 10, 15, 20 years ago, one of the things that the Germans were very good about is that they had kept the industrial strength of their economy consistent with the first world standard of living.
30:15But now what we see in Europe is a lot of our European friends are deindustrializing at the very moment where we're all seeing the hard power underpinning or the economic underpinning of real hard power requires very strong and powerful industry.
30:30And so it's not just spending money, as important as that is, it's making sure that the same economic engine that powered first world living standards is actually geared towards producing, God forbid, weapons of war if those weapons of war are ever necessary.
30:46And so I think there's both an economic component to this that's completely divorced from the spending levels, and then, of course, there's the spending levels, too.
30:54But we really want and we really care about Europe being self-sufficient.
30:59I gave an interview a couple of weeks ago where I actually tried to make the point that, yes, we're going to have disagreements with Europe, and Europe will have disagreements with us.
31:07Sometimes, you know, I would harken back to 2003 United States policy in the Middle East.
31:15I frankly wish we had listened to our European friends.
31:18But I think this is an area where we're fundamentally right, and I think it's gratifying to see so many of our European friends recognize that and recognize that Europe does really have to play a bigger role in continental defense.
31:31I think we're all aligned on it.
31:32It's just a question of getting there and, most importantly, getting there quickly.
31:35There is a glimmer of hope in our country, in Germany, as I'm sure you've seen.
31:41We've eliminated the so-called debt break when it comes to defense spending.
31:49So there is now the opportunity for the incoming new government in Germany to spend significantly more.
31:55In other words, I think we're in good shape in terms of responding to what you have just said.
32:00Ladies and gentlemen, that brings us to the end of this wonderful discussion.
32:06I'm really grateful to you that you allowed this to be a Q&A session.
32:11Sure.
32:13We could continue this, I'm sure, for the rest of the morning, but I know you have other things coming up.
32:19May I simply conclude by saying that we hope very much, my team and I, that you will be willing and prepared to continue this young tradition that the United States at major Munich Security Conference events will be represented at your level.
32:41You are not the first vice president of the United States who has come to the Munich Security Conference, but we are extremely grateful that you came in your new position.
32:51Please come again to Munich next year.
32:53Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President.
33:04If I may just say a few things in conclusion.
33:06First of all, I appreciate the kind words and I appreciate the invitation back.
33:10I wasn't sure after February whether I'd get the invitation back, but it's good to know that it's still there.
33:15Well, we thought about it.
33:16Second of all, since you brought up Germany, I wanted to, of course, from the president, issue our congratulations to Chancellor Mertz.
33:25And I know that we'll have a conversation with him in the next couple of days, but we're looking forward to it.
33:30And the final point that I'd make is not to rehash what's in that document.
33:37But one of the things that I said in that speech that didn't get as much airplay but I thought was just as important is that everything that I said there applied as much to the previous American administration as it did any government in Europe.
33:52And I think that this, I mean this from the heart and as a friend, that there is a trade-off between policing the bounds of democratic speech and debate and losing the trust of our people.
34:08Every single country, and we're all going to draw the lines a little bit differently, every single country says there are things that are outside the realm of political debate.
34:15I understand that, I accept that, and I'm fine if one country is going to draw those lines a little bit differently than the United States.
34:22But I think all of us, including especially the United States, we have to be careful that we don't draw the lines in such a way that we actually undermine the very democratic legitimacy upon which all of our civilization rests.
34:36And I think that is fundamentally the point here, it's not Europe bad, America good, it's that I think that both Europe and the United States, we got a little bit off track, and I'd encourage us all to get back on track together.
34:49We're certainly willing and able to participate in that work, and I think all of you all too.
34:54God bless you.
34:57Great.
34:58Thank you so much.