Transcripts For CSPAN Reagan National Defense Forum 20171205

With fox news at the Reagan National defense for. They talked about north korea, Cyber Security then President Trumps use of twitter. This is about one hour. [applause] thank you. Thank you very much. Great to be with you, gentlemen. Said just a they call them to italians. I think i will go with cia director mike pompeo, former cia director, former secretary of defense and former white house chief of staff leon panetta. Before we begindirector, formerf , i want to tell you we will have questions from the audience at the end of this session and you can ask them by going to the app, www. Rndf2017. Org. Twitter is rndf. We will take some of the questions from there at the end of this session. We will hear from you. Had carte that i blanche to ask anything. [laughter] dont forget, you, i want tol you we will have got two italians. [laughter] i was also told i can refuse to answer any of them. If you were secretary of state for the trump administration, how would you handle all right, all right. My former friend brett. Understanding what the eted,dents we did twe have you had talks about another job . Very focused on doing what i am doing. In spiteeted, have you had talks about another , it ismer dci all of that, i am incredibly focused on that. I have been privileged to do this for 10 months and serve espionageinest service in the world and look forward to continue to work at it. Lets do an opening set the table with the state of the world, the title of this is impacting defense from outside the pentagon. Give your sense of where things stand and i will get you to weigh in as well. Thank you for being here. Great to be with you. He reminded me. I called all of the then living. It is great to be here. Nominated, he reminded me that the last time we met he was a witness at the benghazi hearns. At the benghazi hearings. [laughter] great to be with you again. Look, one of the things i get asked is about being the director. I have the same experience as secretary panetta. It is an incredible mix this between what we do. How we form the department of defense. The sum of the parts working alongside our dod partners in lockstep. So they can form their function and make good decisions. The cycle comes back to the information on the ground that feeds our intelligence and there are places where our Paramilitary Forces and dod works handinhand. We could not do what we do in our Intelligence Department without enormous help from secretary mattis. Wanttary panetta i also to thank the Reagan Library for holding this briefing and form. A lot of very distinguished speakers. I had a lot of former colleagues here from the cia as well as defense who are now using their experience to make a buck. I understand that. [laughter] secretary panetta i also want to pay tribute to h. R. Mcmaster because he presented some lunch withoints at regards to strategy and things we have to look at in todays world. We are looking at a world that at least in my experience, i have never seen as many flashpoints in the world probably since world war ii. Consider we are fighting a war on terrorism. We have field states in the middle east. We are dealing with iran, north korea, russia, china, dealing with what i call the battlefield of the future which is cyber and the potential for Cyber Attacks that could paralyze this country. So there are a number of platforms out there and the reality is you cannot deal with these crises without good intelligence. That is the bottom line. If you do not have good intelligence you cannot conduct effective military operations and you cannot implement effective diplomatic relations. You have to know what the hell youre talking about and you have to know what you are going to see in trying to implement the mission so intelligence is critical. In living in a time the past intelligence was important but it is critical today. The relationship between intelligence and military, that partnership is more important than ever. Prior to 9 11, it was more stovepipe. Everybody did not think. After 9 11 there was a wrecking issued you have to Work Together will stop to Work Together. Wasave after 9 11 there the consensus that you have to Work Together. Provided intelligence on targets, military one after those targets. We were doing paramilitary operations in iraq, and afghanistan, and i am sure they are doing the same thing. I will tell you probably the height in my experience of watching that relationship work was on the bin laden operation because we put together the intelligence, we did all of the backup work, we looked at the compound, and we knew in order to conduct that information we seals to doilitary that. They didnt based on our intelligence and they did a great job. That is great example of the partnership that is essential for these flashpoints. I know you cant get specific but can you explain how the cia is ramping up operations against terrorists . Inherited aneo i operation that has been at this for a long time. 15 plus years after 9 11. In the machine. The counterterrorism machine was well in place, no doubt about that thanks to the good works of my predecessors. But that fight has changed in material waste. Syria and iraq held a lot of real estate. Different than what weve seen before. Worked to continue to build that team to deliver so that partners around the world, department of defense and international, could continue to take down terrorists wherever we find them. It is also the case the president made the decision to have a commitment in south asia, not permanent but to recommit to being there until weekend bring them to the negotiating table in a way that would not make them think they can win and on the battlefield. Our partners can deliver that to secretary tillerson. You mentioned afghanistan. Obviously the president has committed more troops there the real pressure is to get past and to move the ball and affect the taliban. Had you do that effectively . Will you continue strikes on terrorist groups inside pakistan . How do you move that . Their begin by seeking assistance. Secretary mattis is traveling to the region before too long and and deliver the message that says, we would love you to do that. That is, that safe haven inside pakistan has worked to the detriment of our capacity to do what we need to do in afghanistan. In the absence of the pakistanis achieving that, we will do whatever we can to achieve it. You dealt with that as secretary of defense. I was talking to secretary schulz earlier. I went to recognize secretary schulz in the front row. It is great to have you here, sir. [applause] and, he was telling me about , youfghanistan is treated know, as a whole country but in reality it is controlled as we know by these kind of warlords in different pockets of afghanistan. Talk about the challenge of dealing with place like afghanistan. After all the years, it is the longest war with had with america. A challenge and frankly that is the reason were still there and still plagued because it is not easy. It is not easy. It wasgot afghanistan the place where al qaeda came together and developed plans for 9 11. We drove into afghanistan and the leadership from al qaeda made its way into the tribal areas and pakistan so we then had to take them on an pakistan and thanks to the agency that we were involved with, i think we did one hell of a job going after their leadership. At afghanistan remains continuing challenge. For a lot of reasons. First of all, the challenge of being able to go after the television effectively the the taliban in a way that not only goes after the taliban but then we have worked with the military in afghanistan. We have worked with Intelligence Forces to develop their capability. I think theyve gotten much better at the job they are doing. I think they really have improved a great deal. At the same time they need to have u. S. Support in that effort. Otherwise if the u. S. Is not there assisting them they are not going to do the kind of job that needs to be done. Thats why its important that the u. S. Be involved. Thirdly it remains a country that continues to have a lot of corruption. And the Central Government as a result of that corruption doesnt have a lot of sway with the tribal leaders and the various other leaders in afghanistan. Until they get that act together youre going to be dealing with different tribes who have different approaches to dealing with the taliban and the enemy. Lastly, its pakistan. Pakistan has always been a problem. It is been a safe haven for terrorists to come across the border and attack in afghanistan and then go back into pakistan. And we have made every effort possible during the time i was there to convince pakistan to stop it. But pakistan as mike knows, pakistan has this kind of twoedged approach to dealing with terrorism. On the one hand, they dont like terrorism or the attacks from terrorists and their country. But at the same time they dont mind using terrorists as leverage to deal with afghanistan and to deal with india. Thats the policy that they have been involved with. So pakistan has always been a question mark. I hope that mike and jim mattis are successful in making clear to the pakistanis that theyve got to be able to seal their border and they have to be able to go after the terrorists within their own territory. Unless that happens we are going to continue to have problems in afghanistan. Has something changed significantly in recent months on that front . Not yet. Period. [laughter] ok. [laughter] while you are so forthcoming, lets talk about north korea. [laughter] we spent a lot of time talking with general mcmaster about the threat from north korea and historically our intelligence is not perfect in north korea. Is there a sense do we know how close north korea is to mastering reentry technology for their icbms . We do have a pretty good feel for that. I cant talk a whole lot about it other than the closer every hour every day that goes by their working diligently to achieve the capacity to hold the United States at risk. Our intelligence on that is good. I think we have a pretty good understanding of the scope and scale of the program and how far they are making progress towards being able to reliably deliver that system against the United States. I mean these are ominous statements. That we are closer to some kind of military action potentially with north korea. Its entirely possible that diplomacy doesnt work as we have seen it unfold and that china wont or cant control kim jongun. The question is is america prepared militarily and politically to go to war with north korea to protect the u. S. And our allies in the region . The president has been pretty clear about the mission statement. It is to denuclearize north korea. He has been unambiguous about that. Our efforts are economic and diplomatic to convince them. We in the Intelligence Community have said that kim jongun is rational. Its also the case that we dont think he has an understanding about how tenuous his position is. Domestically and internationally. If those around him are not feeding him the truth about the place he finds himself and how precarious his position is in the world today. Its probably not easy to tell kim jongun bad news. [laughter] family members can attest. I have learned the art of nuance in my 10 months. Suffice to say we are hopeful that this economic pressure and that china will exert its power and we will be able to resolve this in a way that doesnt require the military outcome that no one is excited to advance. I talked to a bunch of people and there is this fear that we are getting closer. Your sense of all of this . I think the National Security director was right. Its probably the most dangerous threat in a series of dangerous points in the world. Its one of the most serious threats we are facing right now. Why . Because its pretty clear that north korea is focused on getting that icbm, developing that miniaturize Nuclear Weapon that would go on top of the icbm. The bottom line is they continue to improve the flight of those icbms and they are i think very close to being able to develop an icbm that can reach the United States. Thats a direct threat to the security of the United States. And admittedly there arent a lot of good options here. We have developed all kinds of military options and im sure that jim mattis has done exactly the same thing. The problem is there are risks involved. And the risk is destroying seoul and killing a Million People in a nuclear war. Thats why its not easy to figure out how do we do this. Youre left with frankly containment and deterrence whether you like it or not. Its containment and deterrence. That means essentially weve got to continue to strengthen our position. Weve got to continue to strengthen our military. Weve got to continue to strengthen the south koreans. I would deploy more thads. The same with the japanese. At the same time you have to improve the intelligence capabilities of both south korea and japan. As well as our capabilities. Mike knows more about this he probably cant tell you. The reality is its a hard target. North korea is tough. Not easy to get inside and try to figure out what this guy is going to do. I think we have had some success at trying to penetrate it but its tough so we need to constantly improve our intelligence and continue to squeeze on the sanctions and put pressure on china to try to convince north korea to come to the negotiating table. Also delivers weve got right now and we have to keep pushing. I do think one of the most important things we have to do is develop a missile shield. An effective missile shield. Not only using south korea and japan but obviously our own capabilities so that these missiles that take off we have the capability to hit them quickly. And make sure that we can do an effective job. I think at some point they have to pay a price for this kind of constant testing that they are involved with and the only way were going to do that is if we improve our missile capability which i think is absolutely essential to our ability to protect our own security. Speaking to a home crowd, Missile Defense at the Reagan Library. Long history. Yes. I think secretary panetta is right about this idea. We shouldnt forget its an enormous conventional power as well. To the extent kim jongun gains the capability to hold america at risk it may be the case that he not only uses that as a shield we often talk about his imperative to be maintenance of the regime. He may well use that in a way that was offensive. He may use the Nuclear Umbrella as a conventional sword to attack other places to gain control and exert greater influence. Its not simply the threat of the use of Nuclear Weapons but kim jonguns capability to use any Nuclear Capacity he has to further other things besides Just Protection of the regime that you may have on his mind. I asked general mcmaster. In this environment is it ok to go to the olympics . Yes. Of course. [laughter] you just have to run fast. Lets turn to iran. In congress you are one of the congressman who was spoke out about iran a lot to end all of the things they were doing beyond just the nuclear deal. Their support of terrorism around the region. If President Trump ask you today is iran in whole Technical Compliance with the iran deal what would you tell him . I would tell him the intelligence we have seen to date indicates they are in substantial compliance with the nuclear provisions of that agreement. Indeed i have told him that. As far as the other things iran is doing it has only increased in your eyes . Theres no doubt about that. You need to only look to the past few weeks and the efforts of the iranians to exert influence in Northern Iraq as well as other places to see the effort to be the hegemonic power throughout the middle east continues to increase. There was a news story. It didnt get a lot of attention here. I sent a note because he indicated that forces under his control might in fact threaten u. S. Interests in iraq. The head of the kurdish force. His commander has also indicated an increased willingness to potentially attack u. S. Forces that are in iraq with the consent of the Iraqi Government. He refused to open the letter . It didnt break my heart to be honest with you. What we were communicating to him is that we will hold him and iran accountable for any attacks on american interests in iraq by forces under their control. We wanted to make sure he and the leadership in iran understood that in a way that was crystal clear. We are there on an Important Mission on behalf of the Iraqi Government and we intend to stay as long as the Iraqi Government wants us there to perform that Important Mission. When dealing in the region like that doesnt the situation in syria working with russia which is essentially providing cover for iran make it more complicated . It seems like threedimensional chess. I will leave some of the policy issues to others. But yes. Its incredibly complicated. From an intelligence perspective what we want to ensure that we can continue to do is to be in the places that we need to be so there is an understanding of the russian intentions, iranian intentions, Syrian Regime intentions, Opposition Forces intentions, kurdish intentions. We want to make sure we can deliver for the president and secretary mattis and tillerson the information they need so they can resolve this issue in a way that benefits america. This is one of the biggest changes in a geopolitical sense between administrations. The Obama Administrations focus and central focus on iran in its foreignpolicy and this administrations focus on the gulf states and a different position on iran. Do you want to comment on that . I think as mike has pointed out they are abiding by the Nuclear Agreement and i think thats pretty much recognized. I had serious concerns about that agreement and im sure mike and obviously the president had serious concerns about that agreement but the reality is that if they are abiding by it at least with regards to the issue of developing a Nuclear Weapon that is something we ought to continue to focus on to ensure that we are enforcing that and that they are abiding by it and i think thats absolutely essential. At the same time we do have to address these other areas and i think it is important that we put pressure and we continue to put pressure on iran with regards to their support for terrorism. With regards for their missile development. With regards to their undermining of regimes throughout the middle east. I think they are involved in developing an axis of influence in the middle east from lebanon to damascus and syria to iraq. Im glad and the Intelligence Forces a im sure on top of this. I talked to a former leader in iraq the other day and the one thing he expressed real concerns about is that weve been successful obviously in going in and defeating isis. And being able to go after the caliphate. But what happens is that if we begin to reduce our presence in iraq we went through this before. If we reduce our presence there, iran will take advantage of it and they already are. This individual said wherever you go you see Iranian Forces trying to play a role in iraq. I think it raises a lot of concerns for the United States to make sure that doesnt happen. Iran wants to be a nation even for all of their divisions, their tribal differences which we have been through. The reality is they want to have a nation but in order to have a nation we got to be able to be there to support them and to try to make sure that they develop the kind of parliamentary and governmental approach that allows each of the segments whether it is sunni, whether it is kurds, whether it is shia to participate in the government. Thats the only way iraq eventually is going to be able to find security. Two other thoughts. We always dont know what we dont know. You asked are they in substantial compliance with the iran nuclear deal, we always dont know what we dont know. We do our best to deliver that intelligence to the community and the related issue as an example. 40 plus missiles and rockets fired from yemen into saudi arabia. Its remarkable to see how the iranian pr machine hasnt been held accountable for the fact had they done that anyplace else another nationstate providing Technical Assistance to another country and firing rockets putting them at risk, this is classic terrorism. The president has directed very clearly that we are going to work to deliver intelligence. You mentioned saudi arabia. We are likely going to see a new king there very soon. The crown prince has taken control of a lot of different decisionmaking and its changing the dynamic. Can i get your thoughts about where the kingdom stands and what it looks like in the region . Sure. A big question. Im trying to figure out where to put my pick in to begin. Some of the transformation you are seeing take place in saudi arabia are the kinds of things america has been asking saudi arabia to do for decades and they are now beginning to do it and we should applaud that and encourage it and support it. They also have been prepared to work alongside our golf partners. We have seen them work with the israelis to push back against terrorism in the middle east. To the extent we can continue to develop those relationships and work alongside them the broader middle east will likely be far more secure. Secretary panetta . I think thats correct. Saudi arabia, we have been asking them for a long time to deal with the issues that the crown prince is trying to deal with in terms of developing a diversified economy, trying to control corruption within the saudi society. Trying to basically build a strong nation from the inside. Whether his tactics are the right tactics remains to be seen. But i think his objectives are probably the right one. It is important saudi arabia is a key player. I mentioned this to mike before we came on. I think that its incredibly important that in the middle east where you have failed states, weve got to develop a Stronger Coalition of countries that are willing to Work Together to confront these challenges. United states can do it on our own. Obviously the saudis cant do it on their own. These other countries cant do it on their own. Together in some kind of coalition of countries, of arab countries working together with the United States, working with israel and turkey, to build a Strong Coalition that can operate i think frankly with the joint military headquarters that can target the terrorists in that region. That can basically Work Together to try to provide stability where its necessary in these countries. The arab spring produced a lot of convulsion there. We never developed a formula for how we achieve stability in that region. The had states cant do it but certainly the arab countries that are there have a better sense of how you work to establish stability. I think the development of a Strong Coalition to deal with the challenge from iran and to deal with the challenge in dealing with isis and al qaeda is extremely important and the saudis very frankly are incredibly important to that ability to have that kind of coalition. Director pompeo, you mentioned President Trump and delivering intelligence to him. We have talked before about how you do that. Im wondering if you could share that how you deliver the intelligence and how the president receives it and kind of his interaction. When im in washington and the president is there i deliver the intelligence briefing to him nearly every day. Ive become an amateur historian about how president s receive their intelligence. Different president s have chosen to do it very differently. Some have chosen to do it one way at the beginning and have changed over time. I come in and i bring one of my officers with me. The Vice President is there nearly every day. General mcmaster is there every day. Director coates is often there as well. We deliver the set of things that happened overnight, the set of things we think its important for him to know in the weeks ahead. And then we use a portion of that time to share with him things that we believe are strategically important so that we can begin to plan our intelligence lay down for the month and years ahead. We have a half hour to 40 minutes every day. He asks lots of hard questions. As any good Intelligence Consumer would. Hes engaged. He is engaged and very appreciative of the information we deliver to him. I have seen him rely on the information we provide him to inform his decisions. So when you see the stories that hes losing it or that hes not with it or that hes totally checked out what do you think . Its absurd. [applause] i will put in washington terms. Its demonstrably false. [laughter] i am a kansas boy. It is just not the reality of my experience. Im literally with him. We are working hard. He gives us instructions. We take them back. We try to provide the information that he needs. He is incredibly engaged. We have taught him things. He was a new York Real Estate guy when he came in so he hasnt spent a lot of time staring at these things. He has taught us a lot of things to. A lot of things, too. Have to think about economics and how these decisions will have impact across the world. Thats precisely how Intelligence Consumers ought to interact with the Intelligence Community. Just to be clear, its a backandforth. Almost every day. Almost every day. Secretary panetta, you were on television after the president retweeted those videos and you said that between the Muslim Videos was like living with fire. Talk about that. Well, it is dangerous. Its a dangerous thing to do. I will go into this. By the way, god bless mike pompeo for the ability to sit down and brief the president and have the president listen to the intelligence reports. That is damn important and i was a little worried about that at the beginning. If mike is doing that and the president is engaged that is extremely important to the president able to do the job. The president cannot operate without intelligence. You got to know whats going on in the world. So thank you for the ability to develop an approach that obviously is one that is working and i appreciate that. The problem of suddenly tweeting and antiMuslim Videos like that an antimuslim video like that. Once it goes out, it in flames people that are out there. We had the same experience in the time i was there when there were koran burnings that made their way to video. And when those go out on a video it resulted in several demonstrations taking place at various embassies. The problem is that lives can be jeopardized. I just think its really important that the president understands. Im not sure he fully understood may be the implications of what he was doing. But it is clear that its not something he should do because when you do that, when you tweet Something Like that out there you dont know what the consequences are going to be and the consequences could involve lives. Better not to do that. Twitter makes your job harder. We use twitter for lots of things in the Intelligence Community. [laughter] there are days we have good days and theres days that we use it in ways let me rephrase. I know what question you are going to ask. One account on twitter makes your job harder. [laughter] i dont know that that is the case. I have actually seen it help us. I have seen things the president has put on his twitter account actually have a realworld impact on our capacity to understand whats going on in other places of the world. That is our adversaries responded to those tweets in ways that were helpful to us. To understand command and control issues. Whos listening to what messages, how those messages are resonating around the world. My son knows my views on social media. It is not an unambiguous good. And maybe thats enough. [laughter] how about just reacting about the specific i dont have much to add. The president in my experience when we talked with the president about the threat from radical islamic terrorism understands that it is incredibly important that we address the maligned behavior in a way that reflects opportunities to make americans safer. And of story. End of story. Let me comment on the tweeting thing. Obviously this will be different than mikes view. As a former chief of staff i cannot imagine what its like to survey president who tweets in the morning. The whole purpose of the white house is to develop some discipline in terms of messaging, in terms of policy, in terms of everybody being on the same page when you get up and Everybody Knows what the president is going to be doing. What the message of the day is going to be and everybody is coordinated. When you wake up in the morning if your chief of staff and youve suddenly got a bunch of tweets out there. That are raising all kinds of hell in different areas. Its very upsetting to the operation. You got to then figure out how do i deal with that stuff . And it diverts you. Look i know the president looks to tweet. If i had my way i would take that tweeter and throw it out the window. [laughter] if he ought to tweak if he is going to tweet, he has to have some policy progress. What are the policies you want to advance and then let him tweak the hell out of it. But at least there is a policy process involved. You arent doing this by the seat of your pants. Even on this video. If there is just a check system. Where he says i want to tweak this muslim video out. What do you think . What do you think, john kelly . What do you think, mike pompeo. At least if you had some kind check on the process we would be a hell of a lot better off. I expressed the concern of how do you develop discipline, chain of command, a rational policy process in the white house when you got somebody who loves to tweet, gets up at 5 00 in the morning and says whatever the hell he wants to say . It just raises a little bit of concern about stability. Is correct. We do have a different view. He is correct. We do have a different view. [laughter] we have probably spent too long on this already. Sorry, i opened the door. You did. One last thought. I think secretary mattis said it correctly that the world is more dangerous today. Where have more flashpoints we have more flashpoints. Those all existed before january 20 of this year. So message discipline. Us to those areas. I will leave it with that. [applause] what i mean by saying that is we should not over attributes the place we find ourselves in the world today to things that may or may not have as much impact as folks like to suggest some times. I think a lot of republican president s i know exercised a lot of message discipline. And it wasnt so bad. This wasnt meant in a partisan way at all. Where we find ourselves today is trajectory of postworld war ii conflict or post9 11 conflict. These were republicans and democrats president s alike. I understand what you are saying. It needs to be tied to a strategy. You cant just roll a grenade in the room and have things blow up and not have a strategy for how you deal with it. [laughter] moving on. [laughter] let me get to a process question about something both of you have dealt with. The Osama Bin Laden raid under the Obama Administration led to was called at the time a treasure trove of documents. The last day of the Obama Administration january 19, the dnis released a statement saying it had released all relevant documents captured during the bin laden raid and the total was 571. Pompeo, last month you released an additional 470,000 documents recovered in that raid and and his 255 handwritten journal 255 page handwritten journal of jihad describing how he was much more engaged in the satellite terrorist groups. My question to you first is why do you think the statement was made that that was it . 571 documents . I cant i wouldnt care to speculate to be honest with you. I will leave it to the Previous Administration to explain the decision they made. Why did you put them out . I put them out there because i am doing my darndest to be as transparent wherever we have an opportunity to do so in a way that doesnt present risk for american lives or improves the chances for america to be secure. We felt like there might be some learning that could take place if they were released. And the risk to american National Security interests was very low. So we did what Good Government people do and we released these documents to the public to evaluate and inform their own judgment. Have you discovered things . We had done our work. I cant say much about what we found but you can read the public press and see what others have found. Secretary panetta, president obama repeatedly said that al qaeda was on the run. John brennan said in april that al qaeda would see its demise before 2020. Today we have a rejuvenated al qaeda. Its affiliates control more territory even though isis has taken a hit. Al qaeda is still strong. Do you think the Obama Administration, president obama underestimated al qaeda jihadists more broadly because of ideological thinking at the time . Will look. Terrorism is a challenge to deal with because it metastasizes. We are dealing with an enemy that is able to be resilient, to make adjustments, to go from al qaeda to alnusra to isis and other forms. Boko haram, alshabab. There are a lot of elements. But you have to target the ones that you can go after and do an effective job in doing that. And we did. The time i was there as director and as secretary, we went after the leadership of al qaeda, particularly in pakistan and we decapitated their leadership particularly with the bin laden raid and i think we did a good job and we interrupted a lot of their planning for attacks as a result. But the reality is al qaeda been developed in yemen. Isis developed, etc. And you have to continue the effort in these other areas. You got to be able to target the different forms of terrorism that are developing. I think the Obama Administration in the last few years begin to recognize that they couldnt just ignore what was happening and so counterterrorism capabilities began to be established not only in yemen but in north africa and other places to try to make sure to try to take on what happened here. The reality is that if you dont stick to it, if you suddenly declare victory which i think nobody should do when it comes to terrorism that you commit yourself to going after each of these elements as different as they are. Thats the only way ultimately were going to be able to win at terrorism. Its going to take a long time. This is not going to happen overnight. There have been mistakes made. We have learned a lot from those mistakes. I think the administration frankly on dealing with isis has really done a great job at going after isis and the caliphate treated i think the real question is going to be can we go after boko from, can we go after alshabab, can we go after other elements of al qaeda and continue to do an effective job. Its going to be a challenge and its going to require resources and i think the biggest concern thats been registered here at this forum is going to be the issue of whether or not we have sufficient resources to provide the counterterrorism capabilities that we are going to need in order to defeat terrorism. Two weeks ago company or times lead terrorism reporter suggested that the Obama Administration downplayed intelligence of the threat from al qaeda. Do you think shes right . That certainly wasnt true when i was there. What happened after i left, who knows. When i was there and we presented evidence about the threat from al qaeda and the ability to go after those targets the president supported that effort and supported our operation. Secretary panetta mentioned africa. We are obviously doing things on the intelligence side. Can you talk about the threat in africa broadly and what you are seeing from different groups . There is a history of terrorism there. It would have been under secretary panettas time as well. We cant say enough good things about the work is later shifted to decapitated al qaeda leadership. It was remarkable. Many of those officers still work for me today and america is benefiting from their good work in africa is the same way. It is a constant challenge. It is changing because as the caliphate has been largely defeated there is great risk that isis and others will use platforms in niger and somalia and libya to continue to foment terrorism that puts america at risk. We are interested in terror all places. We are most interested in terror which presents an external threat from those places coming to the homeland and africa is no different in the sense that it presents that risk today. And isis makes version 3. 0 or 4. 0, africa is certainly one of the places that we figure we will find them. Get your questions ready, a few more minutes. Secretary panetta, i have heard you talk about the threat from cyber and whats in evolving in the world. Talk to American People about what we are seeing. I think we tend to underestimate the threat from cyber. And i dont know whether its because we are wrapped up in our cell phones were wrapped up in our computers. I dont really think that somehow it can be used as a weapon. But it can be used as a weapon and very effectively. We have seen whats happened with cyber on interrupting services. We have seen what cyber can do in stealing intellectual property. We have seen what cyber can do in hacking and stealing personal information. The reality is cyber can be used to destroy. Iran developed something called the chamoun virus which they deployed against aramco oil and saudi arabia. 30,000 computers were shut down. Destroyed. You take the same kind of virus and apply it on our computers that run our electric grid system or Financial System or our Government Systems or our chemical systems or our Water Systems or our transportation systems. You can paralyze this country. You dont have to send a b2 bomber. You dont have to send an f16. You dont have to send boots on the ground. You can sit at the computer someplace and the ploy of virus. Thats the kind of threat we are living under. And its extremely important that we wake up to that threat, develop the defenses that are necessary to confront that in frankly develop the offense of system as well in order to make sure that we go after an enemy that is trying to target us on the cyber capability. Can you quantify the cyber threat numbers . No. I dont know how to quantify. I can say that it is becoming more rampant because it is becoming increasingly cheap. The cost to conduct those kinds of attacks has been greatly reduced. I think secretary panetta described it pretty well. I always think about actors. Theres one thing to talk about the tool. Another thing that has increasingly present a threat that wasnt as rampant as when leon was the director is we now are not only facing the cyber threat from nationstates but from nonnationstates as well. The cyber keep the of isis, of al qaeda. Groups like wikileaks and others present real threats to america and the Intelligence Community has traditionally focused on state actors. Our capacity to infiltrate others intelligence agencies and take down there networks was often based on a nationstate model that no longer applies in the world. Individuals, small groups can do lots of damage using this tool in a way that only nationstates could do damage 15 or 25 years ago. Cyber, north korea, radical islamic cleric them. Thats my day. Thats tuesday. [laughter] other three, do you rank them . I dont care to rank them. Three number one. At the end of the day i always had a good scotch. [laughter] on the cyber threat and obviously there has been a lot of focus on that and reaction to the election, is the u. S. Doing enough to counter russian meddling and disinformation in europe around the world . Is the u. S. Doing enough . The enough question is always no. Theres a great deal more that we can do. I talked to my european counterparts. Every week, it is russia. Theyre worried about information warfare, active measures. There are worried about physical interference as well. We have made a lot of progress assisting them and protecting elections that have taken place. Even in my 10 months we have done some really good work alongside them so we not only have russian information but lots of others. It is not just russia. Secretary panetta . Listen, we are in the area of hybrid war. And the ability to use cyber as part and parcel of your effort to destabilize other countries. Is becoming not only more effective, its becoming the kind of tool of preference now because its a way to do it that doesnt necessarily cost lives but can be very disrupting. And so it is incredibly important having been attacked the way we were that we develop defenses to make sure that it doesnt happen again and that we work with other countries to develop defenses in their country because the russians are going to do this. Make no mistake about it. Theyre going to continue to do it in catalonia and elsewhere. Wherever there is elections they will try to influence elections by virtue of being able to use cyber and so we are going to have to join with our allies to really develop effective ways of making sure that doesnt happen. Before i get to these questions i want to get both of you to weigh in on the cia and working with the men and women there. Maybe something that we dont know about data interaction and characterize it. Cia. Gov is where you go to apply. We are always looking for talented young men and women who want to come be part of the finest Espionage Service the world has ever known. I say that half jokingly. We are looking for the next set of people who want to devote their lives to National Security in a clandestine space. We will give you opportunity to excel. The men and women who work there are patriots. They come to work every day. Political noise is something they put off to the side so they can deliver the truth to u. S. Policymakers each and every day. I couldnt concur more. The American People have to understand that these are really professionals that work at the cia. They are not democrats, theyre not republicans. They are good americans that have a job to do and they do it. It was for me one of the more satisfying experiences and government to be able to work at the cia because they know what their job is about and they do it. And the president of the United States is the one that says what you do and what you dont do. Once he says you do it, you do it. And you can do it with the cia. Its a selfcontained operation. I call it the murray and core of the intelligence force. I think of it as the army. [laughter] fair enough. That too. You can put that to music and make it an ad. A couple of questions from folks writing and. Are we going to supply the syrian kurds with arms and assistance or not . If we continue to throw our allies under the bus when we are done with them how are we going to continue offering successfully in the middle east . Im going to leave that. Im not going to talk about that. Ok. Well, for one. I want to say i concur. Throwing allies under the bus is bad form. I concur. We should always support our allies. We should always count on them to support us as well. That wasnt the predicate of the question but i will take that. Absolutely. No bus throwing. Should the cia take action against hostile nations as a means to avoid war . We should use all elements of the United States power to do everything we can to achieve american object to and we should always do it in a way that diminishes any risk to americans whether they are americans in homeland or brave men and women who are part of the United States military. The cia certainly part of that. Our primary function is to do that by collecting foreign intelligence so they can make informed decisions to achieve that and when the president asks us to we conduct actions around the world in furtherance of the same set of policies. Secretary panetta. Their primary mission is to protect this country and protect the American People. Thats what its about. If you get intelligence that somebody is threatening this country and youve got confirmed intelligence that thats going to happen you dont just sit back and wait for it to happen. You have an obligation to try to take steps to make sure that it doesnt happen. So i think in order to protect this country you got to not only have a good defense that you better but you better damn well have a good offense. Does the Intelligence Community have a good Interrogation Program . Can you describe it . [laughter] the cia performs its function. I missed a chance when you asked me about the cia and our officers. I have seen the movies. You all have seen the movies. They are fantastic movies. Most of them are fiction. We operate under the rule of law. Everything we do. I run a pretty goodsized law firm. Too many lawyers. We operate under the rule of law. That is central. It is absolutely our duty to comply with the rules that have been laid down by congress and guidance that has been provided by the president of the United States. Im going to try and answer the question. We ask lots of people lots of things. Thats the trade craft that we teach our officers when they come on duty. The question implies something far more sinister and that i can unequivocally say is not true. There is nothing sinister. We are complying with the rule of law and doing our best to do so each and every day. [applause] ok. As former representatives and or executive cabinet members, do the president s past comments on the credibility of the Intelligence Community encourage our adversaries . Secretary panetta. Me . [laughter] i wasnt addressed but i figured it was your turn. I think its very important that the president of the United States is supportive of the Intelligence Services. Intelligence services are critical to providing intelligence, information that a president needs. And thats what they do. They are dedicated to doing that. And its important for the president of the United States to be supportive of that effort. I think the president started off on the wrong foot criticizing our intelligence agencies. And i think that sent the wrong signal not only to our intelligence agencies but to our allies. But i think hes come back and i think mike deserves a lot of credit for the fact that i think the president now clearly does respect the work that our Intelligence Services does. And i hope you will continue to be supportive. I will add this. I am an engineer by training. I am a facts and data guy. I have read the stories. Facts and data. We get every opportunity. Whenever we call the opportunity, he takes the intelligence and asks good questions. We have asked him repeatedly for increased authority to go out and perform our function in ways that are more robust. Taking more risk. In each and every case the president has provided that. We have asked for increased resources. A little bit of money. The little bit of other resources. Every time, the president says, you bet. I am in full support of you. The president s relationship with not only the fed but other elements of the Intelligence Community as evidenced by the fact is unequivocally supported. About anynot comment data set but i will say that one of the things i saw as a member of congress and one of the things i have put in a enormous part of my attention to his counterintelligence. I never miss an opportunity when i am with my officers, to tell them the last thing we can tolerate is to have a secret that we stole restolen. Unacceptable. It is our duty to protect them. It is our duty to go after those who stole them. It is to prosecute them within the bounds of the law in every way. I have given only two sets of formal remarks. One was about this issue, our duty to protect our information, to protect our officers and their families and National Security. I sometimes hear comments from , he ought to be a bit less confident about that. Were going to figure out how we can protect this information. We go it to the American People and our offices are dedicated to that. To be clear, wikileaks is a National Security threat . Yes. We need go no further than the release of documents by manning to see the risk that a presented to the United States of america. Intoke, im sure cannot go details. But let me tell you how damaging it is when you get somebody that reveals secret that indicate the kind of methods that are used in order to get information. They are basically telling the enemy how you get information and you are exposing our spies, our assets, our methods. The result is that you have to start from scratch pick you have to rebuild it. Sometimes it is not that easy. The people that reveal these secret, believe me, are not heroes. They are traitors. [applause] amen. To more and will wrap up. Ron, today, supporting al qaeda . Would you assess that it has increased or decreased . He was what i can say. I can say that it is a complex relationship between al qaeda and tehran. One ought not think about a ron is being a unitary actor. There are multiple Power Centers inside of a rock. There is a honey and his team and the supreme leader. One has to think about the complexity of who might be working more closely than not. You refer to documents that we released. They showed this compass relationship. They showed very clear support. Rom iran for al qaeda there is no reason to think that, when opportunity strikes, that, if they have a chance to inflict harm on the great state of the United States of america, the ron and alt qaeda will work against us jointly. Of a working with korea . Come with mike i am with mike. Looking with a lot of questions so im going to give you the final chance to wrap things up in this great defense form at the Reagan Library and final thought as you get ready to go to your day job. And that tuesday said it tough. Secretary panetta was one of the first phone calls i made here you have been so generous with your time. I have called him the pdb to ask him how to think about things and how to solve problems. Nearly all of the former directors have been incredibly generous. It did not matter if they worked for a democrat president or republican president. Their mission is one that leon and i and the team that i serve hold in our hearts and will forever. It has been an incredible honor to get to be a part of that and work alongside colleagues who are aimed at delivering for the president to keep america safe. Thank you for inviting me to the conference. It is pretty cool. I grew up not far from your and im glad to be back. Is going to be a requirement have theians always same name. Tolet me express my thanks the Reagan Library and all of those associated with this defense form. Forum. Thatve to understand responsibility that all of us have, not just the president or mike, but the responsibility that all of us have is to protect our country. And to protect the security of this country. It is not easy. Frankly, isipes, that we are dealing with a dysfunctional washington and certainly a Dysfunctional Congress in terms of their ability to Work Together. And be able to get done. That does not make it easier. In many ways, frankly, it impacts on our National Security. The and democrats are not working together to deal what major albums faces country. It impacts on our security. This is a moment in time where this kind of defense form has to convey has to convey a message that we have a responsibility to Work Together to make sure we protect this great country of ours. We have a great defense force. We have great intelligence capability. But it is not worth adm unless the American People are working together to support what they do. So, thank you for your service and thank all of you for attending. Let me end where i began, with the fact that secretary panetta is the last person to go from cia director to secretary. Hank you very much i really appreciate it. Thank you all. I appreciate it. [applause] cspan student cam video documentary competition is underway and the students are busy at work and sharing their experience with us through twitter. It is not too late to enter. Our deadline is january 18, 2018. Were asking students to choose up provision of the u. S. Constitution and create a video of the string why it is important to you. Our competition is open to all middle school and High School Students grades six through 12. 100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded. 5,000 willize of go to the student or team with the best country. For more information go to our website. Studentcam. Org washington journal is live with your phone calls next. A numberthey consider of bills. Including one concerning the recruitment and retention of u. S. Secret service agents. Coming up in an hour, the Supreme Court case on gay marriage with Elizabeth Wydra of th