Ben Cardin

That is encouraging. I would just point out that, with mental health needs, a large percentage go untreated...

Build on the successful models. We have a lot of successful models out there that have been done.

The United States stands ready to work with our GCC partners to determine urgently what action may be appropriate, using the means at our collective disposal, including the potential use of military force for the defense of our GCC…

The United States is prepared to work jointly with the GCC states to deter and confront any external threat to any GCC state's territorial integrity that is inconsistent with the U.N. Charter.

We will not give up on diplomacy. We are not the Armed Services Committee. We are the Foreign Relations Committee.

It would be a destabilizing and problematic act were China to move in that direction.

The President and Vice President and senior officials made clear almost instantly after China's unilateral claim to have created an ADIZ in the East China Sea that we do not recognize it, and we will not accept or abide by it.

The United States has been the guarantor of peace and prosperity in the region for generations, and we cannot remain complacent in light of these very serious challenges.

I wish I had you as one of my professors in college grading my papers. I think you are being pretty gentle.

If we were to ratify it, we might be able to use that mechanism more effectively with China.

Provocative conduct is not helpful at all, and we have seen more and more of these provocative incidents.

I do not think much is going to change.

China is accomplishing its mission by what it did because they are, in fact, establishing a claim that is not legitimate but making it legitimate by time?

I very much hope that the committee would give that some consideration.

The more fundamental point is that China has already made a commitment; made a commitment to avoid and refrain from provocative actions that complicate these issues or make it more difficult to resolve them in 2002, in the declaration of…

The relationship between the United States and China is critically important to this country. It is a complex relationship.

I leave here as disappointed as I was a year ago about the fact that we do not have a policy.

It does seem to me that this committee is concerned that there are a lot of risk factors in the China seas.

These activities are contrary to China's own, to their very own past pledges and are possibly violations of international law.

I think that the foot-dragging on the code of conduct is a problem, and that is something that we shine a light on and encourage the parties, and particularly China, to get serious about resolving.

I do believe that the United States has been a leader in maritime security issues.

Unilateral action by China caused a major problem at the time that could have escalated even more than it did.

If the concerns cannot be alleviated, we should disapprove the agreement.

Can you give us any assurances that this 123 agreement will not end up costing us our domestic jobs in this area because we may instead be inadvertently accelerating the Chinese ability to compete internationally using American technology?

Is it your view that the successful completion of the 123 agreement will end up making China more sensitive to and more effective in blocking the export of dual-use technology?