Was battling american troops in afghanistan and weve been examining this egregious attack on americans and the Trump Administrations failure to handle it appropriately. Itsimportant for the public to know this. Ive been involved in four hearings this week alone we dealt with this issue. That doesnt include the actions of other committees working on their own so i want to underscore to people listening that they should know that wein congress have taken oversight of this matter very seriously. Party politics and everything inside the one thing if we do nothing else one of the most basic and fundamental duties is to do everything in our power tokeep americans safe. We all went to the Service Members whose lives were lost in afghanistan. We owing to their families. We to every member of our military, to every american serving abroad puts their life on the line every day in service to our country. On tuesday the subcommittee heard from former us officials and experts on the kremlins network for malign actors that systems of corruption that press the russian people and to sustain his criminal actions and hybrid warfare submitted testimony, you know maybe even more dangers than the threats we faceduring the cold war. Its regrettable that secretary pompeo could not participate yesterday in our full committee hearing, this was part of a failure to recognize the importance of the united and unambiguous us response to the escalating threats that we face from the kremlin. The members of our committee have questions about what happened and with servicemembers at hand it would have been helpful to hear from the secretary himself as we reckon with the gravity of this issue. To his credit, secretary of defense as per appeared before the House Armed Service committee and in response to my questioning he acknowledged that he had seen reports of payments in response to attacks on our troops. Today we are honored to be joined by secretary leon panetta, a dedicated Public Service servant, and whose perspective and range of experience on these issues is frankly unparalleled. He himself served in the house of representatives and a civilian with the Important Role thelegislative branch plays in shaping our National Security trajectory. Secretary panetta served in multiple executive functions under two president ial administrations including as secretary of defense, director of the cia and white house chief of staff. We are fortunate to have you joining us today because as we try to understand what transpired in the kremlins bounty fee and how much of the Trump Administration knew about it or not, your experience is uniquely instructive. Youre someone whos been responsible for american troops abroad from managing a primary element of our intelligence apparatus to ensuring the president has access to the intelligence and resources he needs to carry out the duties of that office. Furthermore secretary panetta has shaped us policy towards russia throughout the course of his career. Beyond a specific instance of kremlin aggression against americans abroad the resounding take away from this week and all the hearings so far is we have no russia policy. In its place we have a misguided, illdefined impulsive and frankly dangerous series of actions prioritizing the kremlin over the dedicated efforts of our Intelligence Community , diplomats and korea civil servants. It sacrifices our military and the american National Security interests should always remain parallel. There has been no shortage of Information Available to the President Trump about russias malign activities and yet its been one gift to putin after another whether its pulling out his support of inf in the open skies treaty and withdrawing our forces from syria without notice to our allies with troops on the ground. Helsinki, his intent to reduce a quarter of our troops in germany, inviting russia back to a reconstituted g8, pulling funds from the European Deterrence Initiative which was meant to deter russian aggression, casting blame towards ukraine on our Intelligence Community approved russia was responsible for the attack on our 2016 election. Weve been hearing all week of the response to the actions taken by the United States in concert with our allies. Its a message i hear loud and clear from President Trump is you can do what you want because we wont hold you accountable. Its unacceptable. How long do we have to wait until this policy of russia is prioritized all else in keeping americans safe . Thats why these hearings are so important. And why we are so pleased to have you joining us today secretary panetta. Were looking to hear forward to hearing about where we must go as a country and our policy and posture towards russia in its successes and failures and were running out of time to get this right and highyield Ranking Member for his opening statement. Thank you chairman keating for calling this hearing thank you esther secretary for joining us today. Since the 2008 invasion of georgia, russia has shown not only a willingness and eagerness to develop, test and deployan advanced set of tools to undermine democracy and western institutions. While russian and soviet predecessors viewed Foreign Forces to carry out proxy war against the west, to report that Russian Military intelligence referred to as the tru about the program for american soldiers in afghanistan shows andembolden Vladimir Putin , we must remember this is the same unit as possible for interfering in our elections using chemical weapons against russian defectors under nato protection and invading the ukraine, and an aspirational nation and an eu priority partner. More recently weve seen the russian mercenaries supporting genocide in senior syria, selling conflict in libya and propping up the maduro regime. The fact that is trying to harass the United States in afghanistan did not come as a big surprise. The question remains what does the game from the Spelling Program and why does he feel emboldened area . I believe putin wants the United States to fail in afghanistan does like his make it go. Also my colleagues will try to paint this administration as weak on russia i dont believe that is what is driving the agenda read lenin once said you probe with and bind much youproceed, if you find steel you withdraw. Over the past decade putin has found much when probing the United States as congress we must come together and be the seal that forces to think again read the first step is recognizing the nature of warfare has changed. Following the fall of the iron curtain and in the west believe we would usher in an area era of perpetual peace. Countries around the us gave up on cold war policies that made western institutions the standardbearer in a postsoviet world. However russians adapt and learn from their mistakes and reinvigorated their tactics to the 21st century. Theyve been operating within a grace period of neither war nor peace and we must now changehow we respond to these clear provocations. Contrary to popular belief this administration has pushed back against putin. Take 2018 when mercenary forces loyal to a sod track us troops in syria, hundreds of russians were neutralized and when the wagner group did not promoteus forces ever again. Not every propagation can be met with kinetic action. On the contrary our greatest weapon is the alliance of likeminded nations that have defended freedom since 1949 and its in our best interest to work with our allies like we did through the cold war to develop and implementa strategy to counter putins malign activity. Much like putin did over the last decade we need to dust off the playbook to confront the russian threat. The good news is despite putins foreign operations he has not edited domestically. Waving president ial term limits, 60 percent the president shouldnt be as old as does and 84 percent trust plan for their country. If this does not demonstrate that putins strategy failed i dont know what does. I want to thank secretary panetta and with that i will yield back to you mister chair. Thank you representative. I now introduce our witness and again, thank you for being here again today. Secretary leon panetta is chair of the institute for Public Policy and his distinguished career in Public Service includes serving as the 23rd United States secretary of defense , director of the Central Intelligence agency , white house chief of staff to bill clinton , director of office and the management of the budget as a member and most importantly as a member of us house of representatives in california. I will now recognize the witness for five minutes and without objection be prepared witness statement will be made part of the record. We now recognize the opening statement. I dont know if you are muted or not. Can you hear . You are on. Thank you. Mister chairman, thank you. I would like to submit my testimony for the record and if i couldtry to summarize it for your benefit. Mister chairman, mister Ranking Member, distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to be able to testify about the significant threat that all of you recognize from russia and the threat that russia poses to our troops and our democracy in our nation. Ive had the honor to serve in the house for 16 years from 1977 through 1993. It was the height of the cold war. Between the United States and soviet union. Through the end of the vietnam era, the reagan buildup and the fall of the berlin wall and i have to tell you during that time, Congress Played an enormously Important Role in conducting oversight whether it was a Republican Administration or Democratic Administration to ensure that our National Security interests were protected there in the cold war. I want to commend all of you, chairman and all of your members for your continuing critical oversight to make sure that we protect our country. Let me begin by making clear that there is little question that we are in a new chapter of the cold war with russia. But this new chapter with Vladimir Putins Russian Federation is in some ways more dangerous than what we faced with the old soviet union. The soviet union, we were in a rough parity with our nuclear capabilities. A new our strength, we know their strength and in some ways that gave us leverage to be able to deal with them from a position of strength. The deal with Vladimir Putin, you have to deal with him from a position of strength. If he senses weakness, on the part of the United States, then make no mistake, he will take it vantage of it. Because he knows he doesnt have to pay a price. And thus weve seen him take advantage of it through his aggression in crimea, and the ukraine, in syria and the us election process, in libya and afghanistanand other places. The point is very clear and i think its clear to all of you. If we fail to draw a line on putin, if we dont make clear where those lines are, and make clear that he will not be allowed to cross those lines , then he will continue to be encouraged, to be aggressive. Principal point is this. In this new cold war chapter, whats required is a resolute , clear i, strong, unambiguous leadership from the president and the rest of our government. That is informed by our diplomatic military and intelligence professionals and guided by the need to protect our National Security interests. Has got to be the message that putin hears. Some of you may remember president bush once said he look into putins eyes and saw somebody that he thought he would be ableto deal with. My friend and former colleague bob gates said that he too look into putins eyes. And saw kgb, kgb, kgb. Putin believes that the glory of the former soviet state must be restored. He believes all of the iron curtain brought with it and your area of weakness from russia. And hes determined to return russia to the status of a global superpower. And the key to that strategy is to undermine the United States. And to weaken our country and we can our Foreign Policy. What putin has his own problems. Russian population is aging. Its drinking. The economy of russia is struggling. Theres a mix of an overburdened socialist state with a very core of oligarchs who have literally stolen billions of dollars from the russian people. I have serious social and economicissues. No democracy would tolerate the kind of mismanagement and corruption that weve seen their area thats why putin is done away with any semblance of democracy. He was real constitutional referendums as we know recently allows him to be a virtual dictator. Through 2036. Russias strategy to restoring superpower status is on the following elements. First, we clearly want to undermine nato and its emissions. Nato has been a barrier to the ability of russia to expand back to the soviet state. Secondly they want to undermine us militarypresence in europe. And that presence, our forces in europe have been a check on russian ambitions. Thirdly, he wants to reinsert the russian regime back into the g7 to be able to regain the status that they lost whenthey were kicked out because of their invasion of the crimea. Fourthly, they believe that interfering in the United States and other western elections has its own chaos and discord. And theyre seeking an election result in all areas that are favorable to russia. And lastly, they have developed and in some ways perfected hybrid warfare. Russia cannot match the us in a force on force conflict but they have developed asymmetric power, hybrid power. They use a mix of civilian military capabilities to undertake deniable legal covert operations. Theyve engaged obviously and election interference,the recruitment of spies and agents , theft of technology. Theyve taken prisoners. All to gain geostrategic leverage while triggering conventional, without triggeringconventional conflict with the west. What we saw with the latest intelligence of the possibility that russians were using bounties in many ways comes right out of putins playbook. I have not read the intelligence assessment, but i think we all need to take these reports veryseriously. Because as i said, it fits putins playbook. A playbook that hes used as a result of his concern msn and other areas. He still resents what the United States did in Charlie Wilsons war when we kicked the soviet union out of afghanistan in the 80s. He believes we have used the afghan war as a pretext to position us military and intelligence assets on the doorstep of russia and he resents the fact that the afghan war has been a nato mission. His goal is to fracture nato and their sense is the best way to fracture nato is to bring them down in afghanistan which is the graveyard ofempires. He pays mercenary forces to come after us and thats very consistent with putins methods. To develop the wagner group to attack our forces in syria, take over Oil Facilities in libya , they conducted assassination attempts in the uk. Against former spies. And obviously they conducted our own democracy in the 2016 election. The assessment is very clear. Theres no question here that russian president Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in the 2016 election aimed at trying to influence what happened in the us president ial election and a further assess and this is something weve just got to continue to remind ourselves that putin is going to apply the same lesson in the current election in this country as well as an elections that are taking place with our us allies read its not a hoax, its a real threat. It works and you can look at theconsequences. Its strained relations between the United States and nato allies. There even the possibility of at one point that we might pull out of nato and very frankly the entire military structure refused to contain russia could fall apart. If we get. They paid no price for annexing crimea and obviously they believe that the president has in many ways given russia and putin a pass on crimea and the ukraine. They have seen a United States that is slow to enforce sanctions. Sanctions passed by the congress, by you. And although the president invited russia back into the g7 , the reality is that that in indication contains no concession on the part of the russians. The us, also was set to redeploy 9500 us forces in germany. Forces that are critical to signaling the us resolve with our allies. What are the steps required to counter this russian threat. Let me end by summarizing them. One, i do believe we have to make clear. Where the linesare that cannot be crossed. Made very clear that he will not get away with attacks on our forces and that we will respond to diplomatic isolation and sanctions and throughmilitary force if necessary. We have to recommit to the Nato Alliance. But russia and china are primary adversaries at this point in time and what is the one thing that they cannot do west and mark they cannot form alliances. They fear alliance. And so our ability to develop and maintain alliances, one of our best weapons against those adversaries. Third, we have to make sure that we do protect free and Fair Elections in this country. Free from russianinterference. And fourthly, we do have to read and listen to intelligence assessments about russia. This is information that gathered at great risk. Our intelligence professionals and youve heard from many of them have spent their careers analyzing the Russian Federation and putin. They understand what putin is up to. They can be very helpful in providing a heads up to the president and to this country about what putin is trying to do. But, no leader, no leader can act responsibly for this country without good intelligence. Thats the bottom line. Specifically i think its important to suspend the actions to redeploy forces from europe. This is the wrong time to be moving forces out of europe and again, it sends ibelieve a message of weakness to russia. We have to finally rededicate ourselves to the values that make america strong and free. At the end of the day what putin fears the most very frankly is our values area they threaten the power hes trying to consolidate, freedom of the press, freedom of speech. Equality of all citizens, all of that other minds the strength that he is trying to assert in russia. The greatest threat to putin is the values that are our greatest strength in this country. Let me conclude by saying the United States has to be clear with putin. It cannot afford to send mixed messages to an adversary wants to make clear , we must make clear that there are lines that we will not allow russia tocross. One of those lines has to be that we will not tolerate any involvement by russia in killing us men and women who are putting their lives on the line for this country. As secretary of defense and cia director , i was involved in deploying our young men and women into harms way. I had to go to dover to receive our Fallen Heroes. And give condolences to their families on behalf of a grateful nation. This is about life and death. Life and death. Mister chairman and membersof the subcommittee , i think all of us over to our troops and to their families to answer a very simple question. What did our government do to protect our troops and if russia did put a price on the heads of our men and women in combat , what price will russia pay for doing this . Americans are entitled to know that we did everything necessary to protect our troops, our National Security and our democracy. Thank you. Thank you mister secretary for your testimony and comprehensive talk that you gave to that and i will now recognize members for five minutes each. Fulltime yield is for the purpose of questioning our witness. Because of the virtual format of the hearing i would recognize members by Committee Using seniority, alternatingbetween democrats and republicans. If any of you mister turn, please let your staff know and we will circle back to you. As you seek recognition you must unmute your microphone. And address the chair verbally. I will start by recognizing myself for five minutes. Mister secretary, id like to start where you ended your opening remarks. In my life, my younger years , most Sensitive Conversations i had with were my grandmother were when they were talking about the circumstances around which my uncle was killed in action. Its left an indelible imprint in my mind. And my values. But i agree with you, this is about being responsible and respecting our servicemen and women and families who lost loved ones. So i just want to underscore yourpoint , honoring our Fallen Heroes and their loved ones would mean taking action. Taking action. Creating consequences. Children and the kremlin accountable. Also i want to start with your background in terms of your intelligence background. Id like to turn next to the intelligence aspect of this and would it have been possible in the administration that you served in for this type of intelligence not to have been briefed to the president. Not just the initial brief but briefings before there were six calls, six personal calls from march thereafter between thepresident and putin. For slashing funds to the european Intelligence Commission which was there to curb russian aggression before inviting russia and putin to the newly constructed g8 after they were thrown out of the ukraine, thrown out for their actions resulting in 13,000 ukrainian depths and before pulling our troops out of germany. Is it plausible that there would not be a briefing in the administration you served with any of those instances . The role of commanderinchief is to be able to support and defend our men and women in uniform who do put their lives on the line in order to protect our country. And if we received intelligence, frankly as youve heard, intelligence that is presented as part of the ped varies in terms of its credibility. It can be low credibility, it can be moderate, it can be high credibility but if there is intelligence that indicates that this theres a possibility that the russians were putting a bounty or putting a price on the heads of men and womenin uniform , that intelligence would be brought to the attention of the president immediately. Because that doesnt involve lives of our men and women in uniform. That doesnt involve the responsibility that the president and our military leaders have to be able to protect those that are out there in combat. So i find it very surprising. That that kind of information was not brought directly to the president of the United States. I think i, i think the National Security advisor, i think those who provide the Intelligence Briefings to the president have an obligation, an obligation to bring that kind of sensitive intelligence to the attention of the president of the United States. Mister secretary if i could. With both the levels of certainty and given your background , would it be something, maybe you can give us, shed some light on these things. It wouldnt be a random and noncorroborated at all. In your experience if something was brought to the president ial Daily Briefing. If there was information that was shared very high intelligence information shared with an ally like the uk and thats been reported in this instance or maybe you could tell us about the cia wire intelligence review and these are significant benchmarks of intelligence. Im almost out of time if you can shed some light is this aims to be the discussion of the week. Again, theres no question that when i was director of the cia. If we had information that that was taking place and involved our nato allies, that we would immediately share that with our allies. So that they would be aware of it as well read it because it involves their lives. And so first of all, it would be shared with our allies. But most importantly it is the kind of intelligence that i think is the duty of those in the white house and in the Intelligence Community to bring that information to the president. Even though they may think it isnt fully cooperated. Even though they may think it isnt fully backed up. That doesnt make any difference. That is very sensitive intelligence information. At the president of the United States should know and should act on. Thats right on point thank you for answering so directly and ill call on representative kinsinger can have the additional time. I so desired go over the five minutes. Representative kinsinger. You mister chairman and thank you for being here. I think the question of what the president briefed, i believe he wasnt, i believe that. We can debate and i think its probably a good debate within the administration of whether he should have been because as the secretary mentioned its a pretty serious accusation read im not sure if intel was to the point of actionable so i think the decision was made there. One of my concern about this is russia and quite honestly Foreign Policy should be a bipartisan issue. And i think and its nobody on this committee and i mean that but some people quickly jump to accusations of the president loves russia and this kind of stuff and i think what that does is it makes it more likely this becomes partisan and both sides get defensive. But that said i think we need to get to the bottom of it and i think its a very serious, serious accusation that we should find out if its true. Mister secretary, do the russians want to accelerate the us withdrawal in afghanistan western mark they want to bother us down for the next decade or the outcome not matter for them . I think the answer is yes. All of the above because i think their interest is to try to undermine the position of the United States. And theyre going to take advantage of every opportunity and if they think , and i think this is probably the more likely scenario, if they think that the president is going to be trying to remove our forces from afghanistan, theyre going to try to do Everything Possible to try to encourage that result. And try to, and i think part of what was involved in this possible intelligence was that they were trying to obviously get americans killed. Have those bodies returned to dover and have those families physically saying that enough is enough and urge the president to bring those troops home. I think that was part of the game here. But in my experience, the russians were involved in a number of ways with the thailand and with our enemies either providing support and providing weapons to try to assist those that were going after american men and women. Let me ask you 2 questions and i think this is another point you make is extremely important. Two specific questions, if this intel is proven correct and we did whatever high confidence, if the senate is correct what should we do in response and if you could piggyback onthat , what should we do in response to the quote unquote the steel . I disagree with a lot of what the administration is doing on afghanistan. I think its a relatively minor investment for what the alternative would be if we left but if you can answer those that would be great. I think its very important that if this information is further corroborated and if the president of the United States estimate very clear and the president has to do this, the president has to make very clear to russia and to putin that we will not tolerate thiskind of behavior. And that we are going to take all necessary actions to protect and defend our forces. He needs to get that message. We dont have to go into particulars but i think that larger message needs to be said that this is not to be tolerated. You know, with regards to the situation in afghanistan, i think weve got to be very careful not to make the same mistake we made in iraq and i was concerned about that because i thought if we withdrew all of our forces there and it didnt continue to have a presence in iraqi and trying to work with their security forces, with their Intelligence Forces and be able to deal with all of al qaeda and trying to make sure that they did not exert any kind of power in iraq that what would happen is exactly what did happen which is the creation of isis and the invasion and the necessity for the United States to go back in and try to defend it. If we just suddenly pull out all of our forces out of afghanistan , and do not have some kind of rational basis on which to maintain a presence, to make sure that the taliban does not take control of that country and that al qaeda and isis dont take control of that country, and i think were making a big mistake. So it isnt so much whether or not we want to look at the possibility of withdrawing some of our forces there. The bigger question for me is are you taking steps to make sure that you are not handing afghanistan back to those who attacked us on 911. I have a great deal of respect and thank you for being here and the last thing ill say is in afghanistan the difference between the russians and us is the Afghan People want us there, its 80 or 90 percent agreement so thank you for that and mister secretary i yield back. Your muted. This is mister meeks of new york. Thank you. Let me thank you for your testimony, thank you for being here and thank youfor being the great patriot that you are. Youve talked and listening to your testimony today you observed that the administration has been slow to enforce the sanctions against russia. So now in light of the credible observations that the russian government bounties on our Us Armed Services in afghanistan, my question is can we talk to the effectiveness of the United States prints sanctions regime. And all the sanctions that we have in place now and are they an effective instrument to counter what i call putinism, president putins brand of authoritarianism and autocracy. How would you counter those who say as some say putins Approval Ratings may be in decline but to deter russian aggression worldwide . What would you say about that and what we need to doand what kind of sanctions . Thank you for that question area i would urge the administration to look at their approach to sanctions against iran. And apply those same sanctions, same processes that theyve applied their and they have applied very strong sanctions against iran in every area. Weve gone after their ability to sell oil. Weve gone after the very heart of their economic ability to stayalive. Weve done that. And the argument by the administration is that continuing to press on those sanctions is in their minds what will bring iran ultimately to the table to negotiate. Im not sure thats going to be an alternate approach near but what im saying to the administration i think what should be said to the administration is take the same approach that youre using against one adversary, iran and apply exactly the same kind of pressures with regards to russia. Because if we did, mark my words it would send a clear signal to putin that we are serious about making sure that they stop the aggression that theyve been involved in area. Greg, i think you aremuted again. Thank you for that, theres more work we can do in congress as far as passing those similar type of sanctions that you just indicated that we have on iran on russia and see what the president does with that because it is as i said his silence. That is to say hes going to go after and check out everything that if theres anything thats possible to be found, you going to go after them and wehavent heard that. We havent heard anything from this demonstration and silence in my viewpoint is complicity of a large degree. And when it comes to our men and women who put their lives on the line, weve got to stand up for them in that regard. He also testified in the last few minutes about the strong support and the for us to make sure that nato in our economic relations subcommittee of which i am the cochair of for the nato pa. We had this conversation going back andforth. And i make the case that a strong nato is beneficial to the United States unilateral relations. So can you explain to a large degree why the us support for the euro Atlantic Security like nato serve as the bulkhead against russian and russian and we dont need to withdraw from germany so can you let us say now how we can send that message to the American People so that they know that we need to make this a stronger case about how important nato is to us in our National Security. I am a strong believer in the importance of our nato relationship as both director of the cia and also as secretary of defense, i cant tell you important it was to be able to work with our allies not only insuring intelligence but in doing Security Work together. And in taking steps to be able to protect the security of europe and of the United States. We could not have done that without nato. This goes back to what harry truman did for gods sake in establishing not only nato but the Marshall Plan and the other steps that weve taken in order to contain russia. Theyve been successful. I think in some measure are responsible for bringing down the berlin wall. So im a big believer that we need to maintain our Nato Alliance and to our maintain our presence there. I think the president ought to read two things. Number one, make clear to russia that we will not tolerate the russians doing anything to target our men and women in uniform. 2, that we are going to maintain our force strength in germany and elsewhere. As part of our nato commitment to ensure that russia will not take any steps of aggression against other former soviet states. And thirdly, i think diplomatically, strengthening those sanctions you talk about should be part of the package. So that putin get a clear message that we are not going to tolerate his behavior. That message of strength will take us along the way towards making clear that putin is going to pay a price. For behaving the way he does. And right now, that message isnt there. I yield back. Thank you, chair recognizes representative Brian Fitzpatrick and from pennsylvania area. Thank you mister chairman and thank you for following up on an amazing retrospective, always say that the apple doesnt fall far from the tree of your son , the proudest man i know you thank you for being you, thank you for putting the country ahead of your party. Because of that you have more respect than you realize across the political spectrum including from every republican that ive known and i wish wecould call them up here for you sir so i wanted to say that at the outset. Two things and i had to jump off so i dont know if this question was asked before. Number one with regard to in your role as director ofthe cia , if you just help me and the panel and my colleagues understand how the president briefly works as far as inclusion, exclusion, what gets briefed versus what doesnt. And so to what extent different people should be held responsible regarding the omissions. And my question is with respect toVladimir Putin , you probably understand better than any of us, what do you believe his ultimate goals are . What do you believe his greatest fear is because its always helpful to know what these people fear. What do you think he fears . Thank you for that question. You had some testimony with respect but basically what we do with the president ial daily brief is to summarize all of the intelligence has come in during that evening. That involves threats to the United States and it can contain other information but is largely with breast that are out there. And there is a lot of work done to scrub the information that comes in. Theres a great deal of information that comes in from all of our sources around the world. So theres a process of trying to scrub down what is the key intelligence that we are receiving and that the president to be informed of. That is contained in the dvd and for those of you that have not seen a tv, it can be a number of pages. Depending on the intelligence at its come across rid but i understand the president s reluctance to look at some of that stuff. I have to tell you if not a very comforting read when you look at the pdd because youre reading about all the threats that are possible against the United States and it can start your day off on the wrong foot by virtue of that but nevertheless, its Important Information that the president needs to have and those other policymakers need to have. So when its presented to the president and briefings, dont forget thispdd is circulated not just to the president. Its circulated to other individuals in the administration. The National Security advisor, to the chief ofstaff. To the cabinet and key cabinet member, secretary of defense and secretary of state told that all of them are briefed. Normally the briefer is assigned to all those key people. And the briefer will go through the pdd. The first responsibility is to read the pdd and it is as i said a lengthy read so its important to have a board briefer. The briefer will go through the key elements of the briefing and highlight Key Information responded to your questions read that usually whats done and im sure its done withthe president and with these other individuals. So in some ways even though thebriefer may not have touched on everything , it is the responsibility of the person who gets the pdd to read the thing. And as i said, i know its tough. I know it can be timeconsuming but theres a lot of Important Information in it. So im a little concerned that other people who if this was in fact contained in the pdd, while others didnt raise this as well. As a result of it. Its not just up to the briefer, its also up to the individual who have to read the pdd. With regards to putin, i dont think theres any question as i mentioned and i think bob gates got it right. This guy is a kgbofficer. He thinks like a kgb officer. Hes immersed in all of the tactics and the methods of spies. Thats what he cares about. Ill tell you one incident, when we were dealing with 10 russian agents who had been planted in the unitedstates , and we were able to discover that they were there, we arrested them and we tried to work out and we did work out a trade with russia. At the time i talked to my russian counterpart with the intelligence there and i said would you agree to this trade and he said at that time and putin wasnt even president. He said we have to talk to putin about whether or not we can make this trade so putin had his hands on all of that intelligence and trade that goes on. His goals are to really restore the former soviet union. He thinks that that was a great tragedy that they were weekend and i think his goal is to gradually do what he did in crimea with regards to other countries that were former members of the soviet state. His greatest fear. His greatest fear is that if the United States remains strong and remains true to our values that ultimately if we can work with our allies that we can weaken russia and bring them down the same way that the former soviet union did. Thats what he fears. Thats why his primary goal is to undermine our strength and undermine our values. Very heartfelt from the perspective. I feel back. Chair recognizes mister david cellini from rhode island. Thank you mister chairman and thank you for convening this hearing. Mister panetta, you now have the admiration is strong and bipartisan so we all feel a tremendous anxiety to serve. Thank you for service to our country and as you said we have no greater responsibility than to honor the lives lost in defense of our country and sharing appreciation is not sufficient. We must act completely without obligation and our most basic response has been to condemn this action punishment and deterrent from ever happening again and of course the president , has to understand that his responsibility as commanderinchief to support our men and women in uniform goes beyond trying to plan a military parade and fundamentally his most important responsibility. And when the briefing was provided to the senior members of our caucus, at the white house, this came out at the briefing and said nothing in this briefing that we had just received led me to believe its a hoax just what the president claimed and mister admin says the American People deserve to know why the president didnt condemn Vladimir Putin for killing our soldiers and if were not going to protect and what are we going to do so my question as National Security advisor as we begin to prepare options for the president to consider in response to this intelligence and so my first question is is it the normal case that there has to be some level of intelligence in the difficult process of developing options to respond occurs and secondly, included in the president s Daily Briefing there has to be some intelligence to support it whether its moderate, i or low confidence but the president ial mandate does include rumors, innuendo or unsupported allegations. Is that what theyre saying . Absolutely. The intelligence that is there ranges across a vast spectrum of credibility. But let me just give you an example. If there were intelligence there , that a new Nuclear Weapon had been planted some place inwashington dc. Lets assume that a lot of credibility assigned to it. But there may be a Nuclear Weapon in washington, is significant enough that youd better damn well alert the president of theUnited States. And i think theres a challenge and the question that i had mister secretary is sort of the elephant in the room which is that is you spoke a lot about strong combinations, about working more closely with our allies but this is, youre suggesting in the context of a president who has expressed admiration for Vladimir Putin, as described russian strength in our president ial campaign as a hoax. Sided with Vladimir Putin against the us Intelligence Community and so my question is twopart, is what can we do in the context where the president of the United States refuses to do all the things youve described, can congress substitute in a meaningful way and thesecond point, what damage doesnt do. Obviously you complain very Important Role in terms of oversight, you can play an Important Role of legislation, that will send a message, you complete an Important Role in terms of what you do to educate your constituencies about these issues, but in the end, it is the president of the United States who is commanderinchief to be able to speak on behalf of of the United States. I find it really difficult, as a former chief of staff, having worked with the National Security advisor that they would not when this issue came up, they made it very clear that the president needs to speak to this issue and to the country about this and they couldnt make references to the questions that they have about the credibility of the intelligence. But the fact is, that intelligence is so critical because it done involve the lives of the men women in uniform. Secretary of defense, and im sure many of you abroad and youre looking through the eyes of the men and women in these are brave young people who are willing to fight and die for this country, talk about getting a confidence, look into the eyes of her men and women in uniform. And what theyre willing to do. And if you do that, then you show them every step necessary to help protect their lives and when you get this kind of information, i think National Security advisor, i think the chief of staff, think the secretary of defense in the secretary of state shouldve gone to the president of the United States and said you need to issue a statement that makes clear to russia that this should not happen, rather than having the president say i never saw it were nobody ever told me in having National Security advisor say it just wasnt the right kind of intelligence to present to the president. Push all of that aside. The fundamental issue is, are you going to protect our voices and are you going to protect her men and women in uniform, thats what they should have focused on and that shouldve been a message coming out of the white house. Thank you. Thank you the chair recognizes from tennessee. Can you hear me mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you put me on this important meeting. Secretary, i think the best thing that you ever did was make him a really good friend. Anyway thats what we do here in the south we Say Something nic nice with all due respect. Im putting you on my prayer list we need to pray whatever. Anyway ill keep that aside, ive a question with changing lanes a little bit and documented, for the record i dont like him i think hes a thug. We try to be a diplomat, but tim burgess thinks hes a thug and his loafers and 435th most powerful man in congress. I dont like the guy, i dont care, i know this is documented in the ship carries more troubles that can happen would slow our communication with allies considerably. The russians are known to operate, i was wondering if you can discuss to abc Table Network and what we can do to protect the flow of data. It is a very good point for you to look at because make no mistake about it, russians are engaged in whatever efforts they can engage in in order to try to take our technology or interfere with our communication or obviously interfere with our election process. That is what the russians are all about. And there Intelligence Forces and their spies. But they also use their military for that purpose as well. A lot of what youre asking wonders into classify territory. Im a little hesitant to speak operations. Make no mistake about it the russians to conduct efforts that interfere with the communications that go on between the United States and the rest of the world. They have very sophisticated equipment to be able to accomplish that. That i think should be of concern to all americans. To think they would rather sever those tables or hop into them. I think the more important effort for them is to tap in any get the information. Okay. What was then relying on warfare in the covert operation and to confront are so effective or is it the default that they have . It is something we better get smart about because that could very well be the kind of conflict we are going to have to face in the future. I know we focus on conventional wars and we focus on potential nuclear wars but the russians have developed a hybrid capability that i think is going to become the weapon of the future, a combined cyber with the ability to conduct covert operations with the ability to have the military involved to assist others but its all done on a covert basis. And it works very effectively. They used in ukraine, they used it in syria, they used elsewhe elsewhere, we need to develop the hybrid capability, it is not to say that we dont have the same elements, obviously we have special forces and we have other technology that are able to give us some capability and i think the ability to put together an entire strategy as they have done using hybrid methods of warfare has proven very effective in their ability to produce chaos, undermine stability and create the situation that they can take advantage of. In many ways hybrid warfare for the russians is an arm of their diplomacy so that they can go in and underline the strength of whatever country they are dealing with. That is how they operate. I think you, i am out of time but it was an honor, i wish my folks were alive, they wouldnt agree much but they would doing the result that you get. I wish they were alive to see this. This is really cool. Say hi to jimmy tonight. Thank you very much i will say hi for you. Thank you brother. Thank you and tell my wife in kentucky that she can talk something to me tonight. Already prepared for. People dont speak with an accent there you know that. [laughter] we have some here in massachusetts. People in tennessee and they will probably still throw you in the back of a squad car. Anyway. Keyline pie lets get serious and recognize the officer from california. I think you are muted. Does this work . I want to think the chairman subcommittee for this important hearing and im honored on a bipartisan basis to have secretary testify before us and his knowledge and experience. It is obviously been well stated and documented and its been great to work with you for over 30 years. In all my other colleagues giving the opportunity, there has ways been a partnership with sylvia and its been a service to our nation in Public Policy so we know that is only from you but his mom as well. I want to take off, first of all in your summary you talked about what constituted a plan that we use during the cold war on a bipartisan basis to confront the soviet union in that time regardless of the administration in terms of foundation of that plan was really successful because of high continuity and bipartisan support and from administration to administration as well as Congress Wherever politics in those days when you served tended to stop at the waters edge. Not so much these days unfortunately. I guess my question to you, how would you say we reinstitute our bipartisan time and place, i think you talked about the tenets of that and what it could constitute. And you just noted my last colleague who talked about the hybrid implementation that putin has implemented to undermine the westin are allies in europe and you gotta give them credit, hes taken a limited hand in these plated very well. Im wondering because i agree with the convention of weapons because of a lot of reasons as we go forward are going to have less of an impact as our ability to deal with the hybrid efforts that involve hightech and a lot of other things. I think we got work that we need to do and we are both active towards a dialogue and id like to give a sure sense on how much you think we need to do, people forget for 71 years of nato is the longest time. In europe and over 1000 years. And president truman, not just because we are good people but that was in her own interest and instill in her own interest and its quick that we educate and finally we talk about an overall strategy, i sometimes, this is no reference to community. But i think putin are the russian version of the sopranos. And as timing, we look at the 50 top and how theyve taken so much of russians wealth and how much of that is in unity and other prices and i seen them at the caribbean and many lifestyles that they live. We know where a lot of those Bank Accounts are and im wondering if thats part of a hybrid strategy, grabbing where it hurts. Good question jim, let me try to do my best to try to mention what i think are the important areas that we need to stress, first and foremost obviously we do have to maintain our military power, we are to be the Strongest Military power on the face of the earth, that is critical and it sends a very Important Message that the United States has the ability