The Indo-Pacific has long been a region of strategic importance to the United States. What do you see as the most pressing security challenges that remain unresolved today?

The greatest challenge facing all of us, not only in the Pacific but beyond, is the People's Republic of China. I believe that China seeks hegemony, not only in East Asia, but well beyond that. China is weaponizing debt, it has this preposterous claim to the entirety of the South China Sea, which has been formally rejected by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Despite all that, they continue their activities unbridled.

The U.S. has framed a free and open Indo-Pacific as central to its national security strategy. What steps have been taken to ensure that allies like South Korea and Japan remain fully engaged in this effort?

The United States has only five bilateral defense treaties in the whole world, and they are all in the Indo-Pacific. These are with Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Australia and the Philippines. The key to peace and stability in Northeast Asia and the key to that whole security dynamic are our security treaties in general, and our alliances with Japan and South Korea particularly. The bilateral relationship, though, between Japan and South Korea is one that's fraught with history, and it's all bad history. Therefore, the challenge is to get them to improve their bilateral relationship so that we can have a good trilateral relationship with them. We have a great bilateral relationship with South Korea and with Japan, but what we don't have is a good trilateral relationship because of the bad bilateral relationship between Seoul and Tokyo. I'm not talking about a trilateral alliance because all of our alliances in the Pacific are bilateral, but I am talking about a relationship that must be improved in order to be effective. I'm happy to report to you that President Yoon in South Korea, before he was impeached, and former Prime Minister Kishida in Japan worked very hard to improve their bilateral relationship. They recognized the importance of that relationship. Despite very poor polling in Japan and in South Korea on this issue, these two leaders forged ahead and did the right thing, which defines statesmanship in action. So, the three capitals must work at it every day to get this relationship in the right frame so that peace, stability and prosperity can grow throughout the region.

The Quad (U.S., Japan, India, Australia) has gained momentum in the Indo-Pacific in recent years. How do you see this group evolving, and what opportunities does it present for addressing regional challenges?

I'm a big booster of the Quad. I called for its resurgence at the inaugural Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi in 2016. The idea of the Quad had started sometime in the early 2000s, and then it languished in about the 2008-2009 timeframe. In 2016, I was the commander of the United States Pacific Command, now the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, and I called for its resurgence at the inaugural Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi, and I repeated that call at Raisina Dialogues 2 and 3 in 2017 and 2018.  The Quad had been called the foundation upon which to build a substantial U.S. policy in the region.  But it's not a military pact like NATO. It is a relationship between likeminded democracies that are trying to improve conditions throughout the region over which they have some influence. For example, one of the first things they did at the leader level during COVID was to use the power behind the Quad to figure out a way to distribute vaccines more efficiently and globally. That's an example of the kinds of things that the Quad can go after. I also believe that the Quad can and should be expanded. We should consider including countries like South Korea, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and even the UK as well. It doesn't have to be limited to the Indo-Pacific region. However, there's no formal mechanism to do that. There's no Secretariat to what issues the leaders should take on and now new countries could join. Hence, I've called for the establishment of a Quad secretariat located somewhere in the region in one of those countries (but not the U.S.). In American college football, the Big 10 used to have 10 teams, and now it has 18 teams. Still the Big Ten.  So, despite the name, there's nothing that says the Quad has to have only four teams.

How has the U.S.-ROK Alliance evolved to address emerging security challenges in the Indo-Pacific, particularly regarding China’s growing influence?

The Alliance will be 72 years strong this year. It's withstood the test of time. All kinds of challenges have faced the U.S. alliance with South Korea, but we are still at it. Most of our alliances had at its core an over-arching anti-Soviet (USSR) dimension, like NATO, our alliances with Japan and Australia and so on. But the U.S.-ROK alliance has at its core North Korea, and the fact that the Korean War never ended. Even today, in 2025, there remains an armistice with North Korea.  Despite political vagaries in South Korea and Washington across the decades, in 2025, our alliance with South Korea is as important as ever, and I believe it is as strong as ever. I was proud to be a part of it, both on the military side and on the diplomatic side.

Having served in both senior military and diplomatic roles, how do you see the intersection of defense and diplomacy in addressing Indo-Pacific challenges?

Diplomacy and diplomats matter. The ambassador who understands the intersection between soft and hard power will be better for it, especially an ambassador in a country that has a large American military presence. Vice versa, when U.S. military commanders understand the role of the ambassador and the role of the country team and embassy staff when dealing with, and within, foreign countries, they benefit. This is true whether they're commanding at the four-star level or at the at their Colonel or Navy Captain level, or even lower. Those leaders who better understand each other across the political-military divide, are themselves better at their jobs.

Reflecting on your career, what leadership lessons stand out to you the most?

For me, the fundamental lesson is that people matter the most. We are living in an increasingly AI driven, technocratic, machine-learning society. However, at the end of the day, women and men are on the front lines, whether they are in the clandestine services, the uniformed services, or the Foreign Service. People make the difference. When I say “people matter” that translates to “leadership matters.” Leadership matters and leaders who understand that, who understand the things we've already talked about, are more effective. And leaders who appreciate the work that's being done by their people, who support them and who create opportunities for them, are more effective. That is the fundamental lesson.