Transcripts For CSPAN Expansion Of Islamic State 20140831

On thursday, the Potomac Institute for policy studies brought together the former Defense Department and fbi officials to discuss the terror group isis. They reviewed the groups evolution and spoke about why the International Community did not detect them earlier. This is about an hour and 45 minutes. Thank you very much, mike, for the introduction. I would like to welcome the panelists as well as the audience and those who collaborated with us over the years in the Diplomatic Community in washington and internationally. As mike indicated, we are going to focus with isis and we have a very distinguished panel with rich backgrounds and experience. I will not go into details to introduce them, but first, we have professor ruth wedgwood. Right here to my left, not politically, but at any rate i am, actually. [laughter] she is a professor of International Diplomacy at Johns Hopkins university and the president of the International Law association and she has worked with different administrations over the years. Wayne zaideman, a former legal attache in the middle east. And he dealt with officials both domestically and internationally. We will get the perspective from him. Next is ambassador ed marks, who is next to wayne. He served for many years at the state department and dealt with terrorism issues all over the world. And then we have dan raviv, who is known to many of us for many years from the news. He was in the middle east and europe. I have a copy of his book, which we will show later on. He published a number of books on intelligence. And then, of course, we have our colleague, which mike mentioned he collaborated with for decades. Professor don wallace. Last, but not least, the great american, general al gray. What i would like to do with your permission, i want to remind all of us, including myself, that we should turn off this little gadget. I do not see any music now. And we want to thank cspan for bringing the proceedings and the debate to a wider audience because a Civil Society can and should play a role in the debate. So i have a few minutes for some slides. Sharon . The technical expert, right here. Ok. The Islamic State, the name going back to 1999. We should not be surprised. We simply did not follow through what happened on the ground. Again, we are dealing with one of the most vicious groups in history the in history. They clearly represent a threat globally, and controlling the vast territory that we know. Luckily, they think locally and they aim to not only take over the middle east and establish territory there, but also the balkans, spain, and africa as well. We will come back to it. As mike indicated, al qaeda and now, i think we mark the 13th anniversary of the 9 11 attack last month next month, in the next week or so. And we talk about al qaeda, we have to talk about many of their affiliates. The point i am making is there is no way that you can discuss isis in isolation. Some of the other groups still exist and represent a major threat to many societies. Basically, every country in that particular region has an al qaeda affiliate. For example, going all the way from the atlantic to the red sea, in kenya, for example, somalia, and so on. Mike mentioned the attacks on the anniversary of the embassies. I want to mention the anniversary of the attack in kenya, the takeover of the mole of the mall. It terrorized an entire city and country. We have to be concerned in that region. And there is a New York Times report which is really not up to date at the time, the u. S. Marine base in beirut. At that time, reagan insisted that the United States would play a role. We have to look at what hezbollah might do in the coming weeks and months. For example, some groups from al qaeda to over took over about 200 yards from the israeli border. They might have been the second charge. Tranche. Then, of course, hamas, going all the way back. It is justice that we are seeing now in gaza in terms of killing, executing those that were accused of collaboration. Bodies in the streets of gaza. And then the major threat in africa, but also with aspirations globally. Haram. I think we should also Pay Attention to the intentions of the group and the goal to establish national, regional, and global territories. Secondly, all the way from primitive to smart power. In uganda, the recruitment of foreign fighters, for example. Today, there was a great article in the Washington Post dealing with the socalled american fighters. I do not know if you had a chance to see it, but it was something about americans. It is not known that these are it is not only americans. Every particular country in the west is involved and there is more concerned in europe. The networks controlling these territories, the financial support, the capability to obtain funds, and also the quality of their training, acquiring of weapons, oppressing of women, children, minorities, and so on and finally, we have to pay very close attention to war crimes and crimes against humanity. In other words, domestic law is still relevant to this issue. As well as rule of law and International Law. My professor, many years ago, at columbia university, was trying to advance the concept of international civilization. The clash of civilization. In my view, i think we have to be concerned about the culture of life and the culture of death. And isis and the other terrorist groups, both theological as well as secular, they represent the philosophy of that. Hopefully, we can discuss two issues today. One, the nature and intensity of the threat of isis and some other affiliate groups. Secondly, what can society do about it in order to reduce the risks and bring it under manageable levels . As we understand, i think the president and his National Security team are meeting in order to decide what options are available to the United States and their friends and allies in likeminded nations. To deal with the issue of syria and iran. Iraq. But we have the shortterm concern and i submit that we have to look to the longterm. With this, i would like to invite professor wedgwood to begin the discussion. Would you kindly come up here . Thank you for having me. I guess the shorter people in the room get to speak first. That is the rule of deference is. Deferences. We are physically small, but it is a pleasure to be back here. I am, by training, a lawyer. A federal prosecutor for quite a while. I actually did the remnants of the Weather Underground and now teach at Johns Hopkins. It is a Wonderful School facing a tough economy. I am equally ignorant about the actual ideology of isis. One of the great surprises is how little we know about it. I was warned by a christian armenian friend of mine who was from syria that the balance in syria was so delicate. Assad was one of the few people who could probably keep the country mended together, as much as not like him or his tactics or his vicious ways of killing civilians. When syria fell apart, i had a warning given to me by this christian syrian about how difficult it was to manage the debris left by the agreement and how it did not match the ethnography of tribes or their economic mistakes or any logical or their economic stakes or any ideological affiliations. Once again, like 9 11, we are caught flatfooted. 9 11, we had no idea what was up. In iraq, we did not know who was who. The policy lesson, if you will, is that we are extraordinarily deficient in our mapping of the ideological currents of radical islam. It is something that is hard to remedy given our general views of not recruiting people. A thorough vetting to know family members abroad. A thorough vetting and no family members abroad. I also think, if you want a big take away, it is an obvious point, but it is the most important. This is not the moment to be drawing down American Military capabilities. Aint no one else going to do it but us. The brits are relatively modest in their capabilities. And the french are scared. I think now is the time. If i was president obama, i would announce Funding Proposals for the department of defense. I would not be shutting down systems or drawing down the armed forces at these act moment at this exact moment. I do not think of failure to leave a residual force in iraq has much to do with it the cousin it was going to be a small force at best, but it is a signal. Washing our hands of the region. One of my great worries from the last 30 years is what i call maligned multilateralism. It is not just the good guys who do it or do not do it, it is the bad guys. You can have cooperative relationships with radical groups with conjoined operational objectives. The morphing of names is interesting if you are trying to pinpoint how to get them in the but ultimately, the current of the violence and radicalism that have been sweeping the region will not be unveiled by tab on any particular organization. I had a semifrench mother who raised me on memories of Charles Martel and Eastern European friends who remember the turks at the gate it at the gate. I like the turks will stop the turks. Christian, muslim, jewish europe and the rest of the muslim world is one that has been in contest for a while. It is not, in a sense, a new issue. Clearly, the Law Enforcement is not sufficient. I took a few blows because i do not believe in torture but i do believe that you cannot beat this purely by military means as you have to use actions that do not turn upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt. You will never have that. Capturing people and putting them in trial in the islamic in the Southern District of new york will not be a sufficient way of addressing this. I had a nice dinner conversation with a very eminent former prosecutor in new york city and asked him what he thought about putting 9 11 people on trial. He said, do you know what that would mean . The District Attorneys Office tries 50,000 cases a year with four or five witnesses each. Those four or five people could not get to a court. No hearsay, very restrictive rules on what you can present in court. Quite apart from the possible intimidation of juries. Trying this as a criminal manner is not going to be what turns the day. Obviously, the israelipalestinian Peace Process is a footnote. It is not going to drive the region and its success. Its success is going to be completely frustrated by the events of the region. I was on the harvard campus during the troubles. They said, were you one of the diaper babies . I said no. But it was true that there was a move that was very hard to quell. Even liberals were slightly seduced by the complaints. Here, too, i think it will be a generation before this mood of violence for its own sake, violence as sport, will be quelled down. One would like to have Economic Development in the region to give young men something to do. One would not like to be in bed with repressive military regimes like the egyptians. On the other hand, there are very few levers with which we can work at the present time. I do not have anything happy or useful to say. [laughter] my big take away is do not reduce the American Military capabilities. Do not do this. Because it does not stay home. It flies on airplanes and comes here. If we do not help our friends and allies in the middle east to tamp this down, it will be here. It will be here anyway because of the great problem that many countries face. With relatively free immigration, the shortage of manpower after world war ii for the welcoming of many people from the middle eastern region, and most of them were wonderful people, into european countries. Nonetheless, there are huge populations of young men in england and france and germany and elsewhere who will the same from the old bad student days. Always move left. And with calls to jihad, it will be hard for young people to resist this. I will give you one example from my prosecuting days. The germans were always very diffident about Law Enforcement methods. Wiretaps exist for a good reason. Undercover operations exist for a good reason. In keeping europe lever of all in keeping europe liberal, they would have to consider things like this to get inside these radicalized groups and make sure that they are monitored, if not shut down. I wish we were not having this meeting and we were only worrying about the economy and the global labor chain, but one does not choose ones time or issues. Thank you for having me. [applause] my name is wayne zaideman. I was overseas in the middle east. I was the fbi representative in foreign countries. Lebanon, syria, jordan, the palestinian authority, and israel. Very different times. For about 17 years, i was a special agent in the fbi covering counterterrorism and intelligence in the middle east. I spent time in headquarters as a supervisor, assistant section chief. With that background, i would like to say that i agree with professorwegwood. With professor wedgwood. Law enforcement is not the solution. I found it disturbing when i heard president obama say after the beheading of james foley that he is going to make sure that they identify the perpetrator and bring the perpetrator to justice and locate him and bring him to justice. This is reminiscent of the old days, the pre9 11 days of the fbi, where the slogan was, a crime occurs, a terrorism event, the slogan was, if it loads if it blows up, we show up. A crime occurs, a terrorism event, and then the whole unit, in the case of Osama Bin Laden, analysts, supervisors, managers, all working for years on developing evidence, presenting prosecutive summary reports to the u. S. Attorney, and then, after that, bringing it to court and they may or may not ever find the people. If they do, they bring them to the u. S. District court. Is there adequate evidence and then you have to worry about the fact that, besides that, there is the problem of sources and methods. So lets say the fbi is working with the cia, military intelligence, nsa, other agencies. A lot of the information is provided for intelligence purposes only. They do not want to and up testifying in court. They do not want to destroy sources on the ground. So they do not want to give you evidence. On the flipside, the u. S. Attorneys and the grand jurys want to maintain the secrecy of their evidence. So it provided one of the biggest problems of information sharing. So i am hoping that we do not go back. Because after 9 11, there was a huge culture change within the fbi and intelligence investigations. No longer is the primary desire to identify somebody, find them, and convict them in a court of law. It was strictly to disrupt and to defeat terrorism before it happens, to be proactive, to prevent terrorist actions from occurring in the United States. Some of the examples of it were kenya, tanzania, the east african bombings, the uss cole. These were all treated as criminal investigations. It was a dismal failure. So it should remain a war on terrorism. I say war on terrorism because it is not Law Enforcement. We have to identify our enemies and remember who our friends are. We have to return to the terms terrorism and islamic extremism. For a while after obama came into the office, that was stricken from the vocabulary of the fbi and other u. S. Government agencies. No more terrorism, it is manmade disasters. No more islamic extremism because it is not politically correct. The enemy is not islam. It is not all muslims. That is understood. But the enemy is islamic extremism. And while not all terrorists are muslims, that is certainly the case, in recent years, the have seen that most terrorist instances have been conducted by islamic extremists. So we have to understand that. Guantanamo bay, gitmo, that was something of that, when obama took office, he made a pledge that he would immediately close down gitmo. That policy was doomed to dismal failure because they are not criminals, they are enemy combatants. It would be a grave mistake to bring the detainees to the u. S. And put them on civilian trial. That was seen when they made if you attempt to do it. A few attempts to do it. They are acquitted and they are free. Now have terrorist threats in new york and chicago, los angeles, wherever. One of the reasons for gitmo is that their home countries do not want them back. These were terrorists that started off in the war in afghanistan against the soviets and they went through the bosnianserbian war and all of the various al qaeda manifestations. Their own countries do not want them back. That is the problem that we have with isis and these other groups. They have british passports, u. S. Passports, canadian passports. Do we want them back . If they all came back here after fighting in syria or iraq, lebanon, wherever they are fighting, we have a big problem. Now we have a military with reduced resources. We have got to keep track of lots of people. So it is a big problem. As i mentioned, the other intelligence agencies are reluctant to cooperate if they are not sure the evidence will be used in a way they wanted to be used. It is no less relevant for foreign cooperation. As a legal attache, i met with intelligence agencies, security agencies, Police Agencies from those countries. And, in many cases, they cooperate with us because it is reciprocal. We help them, they help us. In most cases, it is not for Law Enforcement purposes. It is for intelligence purposes only. So they have a right to limit if they are giving us information, they can limit how it is being used. Again, it does not lend itself well to lawenforcement purposes. Rendition, another activity that has been widely condemned by some circles within the administration. Rendition is used to transport captured terrorist subjects from one country to another for detention, arrest, and interrogation. They will be afforded the protection in the country detaining and interrogating them. In other words, they are not subject to u. S. Laws. They are subject to egyptian laws, jordanian laws, etc. So the information that they obtained in those host countries and then provided to u. S. Intelligence or Law Enforcement personnel. Think about it this way. If we insist on not letting those home countries deal with it their way and bring them to the United States, now they are immediately subject to u. S. Law, to means you get miranda warnings, you get an attorney, you ensure that they will keep their mouth shut immediately. You are not going to potentially save lives as a result of getting information that could possibly save american lives and other lives. So basically, we let them do the interviews. We do not do it. We can provide them with questions and things we are looking for. Hopefully they will then provide it to us. It would be a mistake to do away with renditions. The former cia director Michael Hayter Michael Hayden said they have been conducted to get terrorist intelligence on those still at large. We are talking about isis now. We have to understand that islamic extremists are basically of one mind. Whether it is isis, isil, hezbollah, hamas, bo boko haram, al qaeda, whatever you are dealing with, they all view the world as being in the abode of islam. By that, i mean there has to be a continuous jihad interrupted by temporary truces until the world is made up of countries ruled by islamic law where the people inside convert to islam or they are required to submit to islamic law. An example, besides i. S. I. S. , no part of it can be negotiated away by any leader. To do so would be heresy and the leader would be labeled an infidel. Or worse yet, a polytheist or pagan. It is no surprise that they have no desire to negotiate with israel. It also shows how christians and jews, they were traditionally called people with a book. They were allowed certain protections within islam countries. If islamic extremists rename them as pagans, all bets are off and they can be subject to anything they want them to be subject to, including beheading. Also, islamic extremists have no desire to submit casualties. It used to be, leftwing groups, they wanted to play to the media and try to reduce civilian casualties in order to retain sympathy. Islamic extremists, their audience is not the International Community. Their audience is god. And they portend to know what god wants. Therefore, terrorism becomes a sacred act. There was always a reluctance to shut down islamic front groups. They were called islamic charities. Even though the fbi and other groups knew that they were supporting the terrorist groups. It was believed that they would not pass the smell test. In other words, if you see in the New York Times or the Washington Post that we shut down all of the charities and the poor children and women and orphans are not getting their money so no action was taken. Even though the moneys were not used to buy bread and cheese. They were used to build bombs and missiles. The one notable exception with the holy land foundation, there was a prosecution. But there are many other different groups in the United States that you see on the news frequently. Unfortunately, there are a lot of elements of the government that use groups as consultants or partners against terrorism. It is really misguided. It will never succeed. We have to remember who are friends are and who our enemies are. One of the things that the Obama Administration did that puzzled me is that they invited the Muslim Brotherhood into egypt, tunisia. They decided that this was going to be a partner for peace. Somehow, that was going to be successful. Another example is when gaddafi was overthrown. After he had dismantled his nuclear program. Does this make any sense to anybody . After bush went into iraq, gaddafi said, i change my mind. I want to ally with the west. Here are the keys to my nuclear site. I am totally dismantling it. Then we go back and take over the regime and kill him. Now we are talking about iran and saying, dismantle your nuclear weapons. What kind of lesson does that give to iran . They would probably say, you know, up yours. But what i see is, in the confirmation hearings of secretary of defense hagel, he made what the news media said was a slip up. He said the policy is containment and he was handed a note by one of the aides. Then he said it was not containment. They are going to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. Now it becomes obvious that he was telling the truth but he was not supposed to at that time, because that is apparently the policy. Instead of dismantling, you are saying you can contain and give them another six months. The end result is that our friends, like egypt, jordan, israel, tend to become our adversaries. Islamic extremist groups and groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, we embrace they do not believe in contemporary nationstates. They believe boundaries are against the muslim caliphate. Parts of europe must be regained by jihad. They must submit to muslim rule. Here we have the Muslim Brotherhood saying what i. S. I. S. Is saying, or isil. We have to examine our policies and get back on the right footing and understand that, number one, we must continue to treat terrorism as an intelligence investigation. We must identify the enemy and eliminate them as a threat for the u. S. And our allies. We must know our real our life and make good use of them in the coalition. Egypt, jordan, israel, parts of saudi arabia. I say that because they have their factions of supporters and factions who do not support us. Finally, we must follow the money trail and Material Support of terrorism. Thank you. [applause] the chairs are tight here. All right. Good afternoon. As yonah said, i am a standard issue american professional diplomat. Or rather, a retired one. Therefore, i will address this question from my professional perspective, as does everybody else who deals with the subject. Therefore, i will try to look at it from the perspective of international politics, International Historic trends and the role of diplomacy. The last 10 or 12 years, we have ignored these questions at our cost. The president of the International System was begun by the pizza was failure, which the piece of west failure the peace of westphalia. It is usually de riguer for diplomats and writers. The system began in the 17th century and was so its so accepted that it became the basic argument for the 20th century to the disappearing colonial regimes in the middle east. They were quite consciously replaced by nationstates, although of varying colors. Nationalist, leftists, authoritarian, and once in a while, even democratic. The United Nations from the original 50, to the record 190 today. Everybody wants to be a nation. This consensual Economic System does not operate with any cost to perfection. It has been challenged several times in the past. By napoleon in his revolutionary mode and most recently with the soviet union, which attempted to replace the nationstate system with a burgeoning theory of economic class. Today, however, while it is still the universal system in the world, it is being challenged on several fronts. First of all, in some regions, by sheer incompetence and social political pressures. Particularly in the middle east, which is apparently in a state of disintegration. As these conflicts reoccur, eric persian, turkish persian, sunnishia, moderntraditional, democraticauthoritarian, nationaltribal, richpoor. I am struck by the observation that the three most obviously competent nationstates in the region, iran, turkey, and israel, are not arabic. The most dramatic challenge to the westphalian system is the islamic caliphate. The original islamic caliphate preceded it by several centuries. It was fundamentally different because it claimed global universality on the basis of religion. The islamic caliphate denied legitimacy of governments to every other system of governance. Pursuing that vision, the islamic caliphate spread over much of what we now call the middle east and what we now call europe. Finally, by vienna in 1853. By the time the last of the last siege of vienna, the caliphate had lost its purely Islamic Religious character. It had morphed into a more traditional empire, a more political military powerorganized empire. The Ottoman Empire and its caliphate identity died, disappeared in 1922, to be replaced, surprised, by a consciouslynational nationstate. And french and englishcreated protector regimes elsewhere in the nation. As the 20th century moved on, these european colonial protector regimes were replaced by westphalian nationstates. To many in the area, this was an alien framework which, to this day, still competes with religious and tribal identities. At the same time this was happening, the counterrevolution of islamic governance was being reborn. Intrinsic in the teachings of the jihadists was a call for the return of islamic governance and the islamic caliphate. While this claim was recognized by many, this aspect of the challenge ignored the more immediate threat to violence on a local level. Substate violence exercised by various groups, some of them jihadists. Arising from various local backgrounds. Sunni, shia, turkey, syria, iraqi, and so on. But the caliphate is more fundamental fights for local power. I. S. I. S. Is clear about its exclusionary caliphate projects. The ambition has been clear to the governments in the area as well as outliers like the United States. And we are an outlier. Obviously, something is missing or wrong in the political orders in the region. Wrong so that the revolutionaries, the islamic governance model practiced by i. S. I. S. , is somehow able to attract growing numbers. The phrase root causes comes to the tongue easily, but is never less pertinent. National leaders in the area must somehow identify and deal with these root causes as matters of urgent recess the. Urgent necessity. Among them is sunni discontent. In history, the caliphate marked a period of sunni dominance and is being touted as the proper form of government for all real muslims. However, this challenge also has a very immediate tactical aspect. The violence on the streets approaching anarchy and chaos, attracting the four horsemen of the apocalypse. That part of it must be dealt with today, somehow, someway. Defeating i. S. I. S. Requires muslim nations to see i. S. I. S. As the threat it really is to them. This has been a problem up to now as most, including iraq, have been mired in religious divisions of their own nature. Many have had their own relations with extremists of one sort or another. I. S. I. S. Has financing from a number of people, donors in kuwait. Saudi arabia furnishing weapons, not worried about where they are going. Weapons flowing across borders. I recently came across an email which rather sarcastically but accurately describe the situation. The title line was, are you confused by what is going on in the middle east . We support the Iraqi Government in the fight against i. S. I. S. We do not like i. S. I. S. I. S. I. S. Is supported by saudi arabia, who we do like. We do not like assad in syria. We support the fight against him. But i. S. I. S. Is also fighting against him. We do not like iran. But iran supports the fight against i. S. I. S. So some of our friends support our enemies. Some enemies are now our friends. And some of our enemies are now fighting against our other enemies, who we want to lose. But we do not want our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win. If the people are defeated, they could be replaced with people we like even less. It is quite simple, really. You you understand now . All of that has to stop. There are signs that is happening in recent days. The challenge is being recognized around the circuit of chanceries. The media is full of verbal and practical adjustments. The sunnishia, persianarab, and other spats are being reevacuated and alliances are being reconsidered. The saudis have made significant contributions to un antiTerrorism Programs. The turkish policy has been evolving. And there is a lot of highlypublic, public agonizing going on in washington. Anybody notice the Washington Post the last week or so . So the threat must be met at several levels immediately as well as over time. Defeating or substantially frustrating i. S. I. S. Will require a Broad Coalition of nations to address the military threat and political and religious issues. This will require some sort of grand strategy. The first step in creating this strategy is identifying its authors and participants. A coalition of the willing is required. Actually, a coalition of the threatened. But that phrase lacks a certain enthusiasm. It must be based on the muslim countries in the region. Such a grand strategy must be multilateral and as much political as military. In fact, even more so. If every military activity is supposed to be the attention of politics and not for its own sake, this is the situation and this is the time we must not let tactics eclipse strategy. This is the situation. The longterm strategy marshaling allies and addressing the regions political dysfunction is required and the operative word is longterm. The need to organize such grand alliance is a matter of priority all around the world. This task is very difficult and only because it requires a serious reconsideration of many previous and existing policies and practices. Including for the United States. Eventually we must consider questions not only of what, how much, and how soon, but with whom. We can only imagine the amount of scrambling that must be going on in offices. Staffs screaming for information and answers. We may be in a moment of historic shifts in changes in pressures. Meanwhile, as this is going on, the response to the immediate challenge is being determined by the key policy question that lies just below the surface of everything we are talking about and everyone concerned. When does the enemy of my enemy become my ally . And at what cost . Thank you. [applause] thank you. Really brilliant from edward marks. I am dan raviv. I am a journalist and historian who has not been a diplomat or a soldier but has watched all of this unfold. A lot of people wonder if it is just sort of history repeats itself and the same things keep happening and we do not learn lessons. I do not really feel that way. Part of what is fascinating about news and history is that it is new. There is something new. The i. S. I. S. Movement really deserves a major concern. It grew out of things, especially in iraq, that we did not pay enough attention to. That we sort of new or not resolved and that muslims would be angry and they would find alliances. You have a new organization that shows many aspects of being an army. So that is i. S. I. S. What is the biggest concern . The biggest concern, if you are a democratic nation, is protecting your own people. That is how we come back to one of the biggest issues here at the Potomac Institute and that is terrorism and what might happen in our own country, in the United States, and in our ally nations. And there really is a danger. I do not want to repeat the obvious that has been in the news. I. S. I. S. Has western citizens with western passports. They can come back to france, italy, and even the United States and commit terrorism here. It is a real danger. If job number one is to keep citizens safe, this merits major public attention. When it comes to americans who have apparently joined Islamic Radical movements in syria and maybe in iraq after all, to i. S. I. S. , the border does not exist. So far, we have two who have gotten media attention. This week, there was the death of the man improbably named douglas macarthur. Mccain. Macarthur in minneapolis, he apparently became a convert to islam and thought it was cool to hang out with somalis, many of whom had become radicalized. He thought it would make sense to go to syria and join the battle. We have heard about that kind of thing happening. Mccain was confirmed killed in some battle in syria this past weekend. The state department had to answer questions about it. The u. S. Government confirmed and tried to offer Consular Services to the extent possible. We are fascinated by what turned this guy, but he is not unique. There have been others. Another who got publicity a few months ago blew himself up in syria. He was a young man from florida who was born as an american muslim. He was said to be a palestinianamerican. Perhaps you have seen his angry video because, in fact, at least one of the islamic front organizations in syria decided to make a big hero of him. He is a martyr to them, after all. So we have his angry speech, the lashing out. So he is going to attack this country and that country. So we will turn to israel and fight for palestine. We are after you next, israel, and all of that. Grandiose ideas. And then he is assigned to drive a truck and push a button and blow himself up, apparently killing some soldiers. I am not going to belittle or magnify these acts, but i will point out that at least those two examples and to others that u. S. Government sources say they have heard of, one in syria and one in iraq a total of 4 at least, happened over there. Does that mean i can relax . They do not have plans to use foreign passports to reinject themselves into society and blow themselves up in a Shopping Mall . Again, we have discussed that. It does not have to be 9 11. It does not have to be some brilliant, complicated attack. It does not have to be for buses and tube trains in london. It could be something relatively small on the world scale. In the United States especially, that would shake things up incredibly. The main job of a western them a government is to keep its own people safe. Also, for the sake of keeping society safe, so the stock market does not crash 800 points when there is an act of terrorism in the United States. So the economy is important. Lives are important. Stopping bloodshed is important. How do you do that . Just war . Just sending troops to where we have had troops before . Clearly not. You have got to have a mix. If i. S. I. S. Is new, and to me, it is new, ignoring borders and being multinational and having these high ambitions and having westerners as volunteers and i am sure some of them would be willing to kill themselves, they are new. We need a new game and a complex one and one that does not just involve the military. If it involves the military, please not 80,000 troops. Something more clever, special operators, folks whose missions are not acknowledged. To the extent that it involves the military. Of course, it has got to involve our intelligence agencies and of course, dare i say thanks to Edward Snowden . Is it ok to say that . We have learned the capabilities of the electronic intelligence and they are formidable. We can listen and monitor and watch, unless your enemy, of course, is totally refusing to use Electronic Media and not using the internet or mobile phones. Well, that does not seem to be true. At the very least, this growing enemy loves issuing propaganda videos and messages and beheadings. There is something to trace, something for intelligence agencies to work on in order to locate people, to identify people. It is not an impossible task. This is not an episode of homeland on tv. It will not be solved in one hour or even 13 episodes. It requires patient work, but there is a lot to do. A lot to come to grips with an things that we can use. We need to monitor i. S. I. S. It can be challenging. To the extent we can, we need to penetrate isis. Use your own imagination here. If they welcome western volunteers, it is not going to be incredibly impossible to penetrate i. S. I. S. , is it . Use your imagination. People who are good at counterintelligence do. It will require a mammoth amount of patience. If you do have an agent inside because you turned somebody or managed to inject someone in, it does not mean you use them right away. It is a longterm activity. All of this could be going on. How do you make i. S. I. S. Break up for surrender . In that part of the world, you want to humiliate them. You want them to look like losers. You want things to go wrong. You want the local communities, the sunni muslims and various communities to reject them, which would be an important part which would be an important part of the solution if it could happen. The sunni nations reject them. The sunni nations show some backbone. Part of the political solution is a better government in iraq. It is meaningful. Sunni muslims, the minority in iraq, felt left out of things and embittered. They werent either going to join the Islamic State or at least support the Islamic State or look the other way or offer hiding places or money or food or travel routes. It makes a difference when the local population turns against them. Al qaeda in iraq started to dry up and diminished when the sunnis in that part of iraq turned against them. There wasnt anything to be gained. If you can get sunnis to turn against them, it makes a difference. Part of the solution is better government in iraq. How about in syria . Sure, that would be nice. Syria has had a civil war for 3. 5 years. It is like a big black hole. We know that terrorists will fill that kind of vacuum. So there are so many costs to the Syrian Civil War. Not the least of rich not the least of which, almost 200,000 people who have died. Just think about that for a moment. Many of them have died awful deaths that would make unbelievable stories in the world media. If we could get there and we could show them and we could show suffering children and families, etc. Of course, we have done some of that. We have done some of the refugee stories from turkey and jordan and other neighboring countries. It has not changed much. The background has not changed. Who are the rebels in syria . Are there still groups that we could support . Are there moderate rebels . I will share with you some of the knowledge israel has acquired. With my coauthor, we write about israel. A lot of people think israel is good at intel. They must understand isis. They should have known about al qaeda. Israel is a country of 8 million people. Think about where it is. It is surrounded by enemies the pickup information and supply information to western intelligence. Our neighbors have now used the weapons. It became lucky. Obama issued a redline challenge. They brokered a deal in which syria gave up chemical weapons. They can still use chlorine gas and other things not classified officially as weapons. They are terrible and brutal. The Syrian Civil War led to serious not having chemical weapons. Ub. It makes the regime more tolerable from an israeli point of view. As for the alternative, there is a phrase going around they are at the fence. Israel holds most of the golan heights. Rebels have taken an area known by. Someone who might be the Free Syrian Army. The israelis watched this. They are at the fence. The response has been, in secret. Try to make contact with everybody. Try to be as friendly as we can. You heard about the hospital northern israel . Which is a good part of publicity . They are treating wounded people from the Syrian Civil War . Is that an intelligence bonanza opportunity to interview people and send them back in. Treat only your favorite people. Treat some of the people, the family members, may be some of the people from the major organizations. The israelis do not have the answer. They cannot unlock the mystery we have been talking about, how to protect the u. S. Or the eiffel tower. They cannot do that. They are mostly concerned about their own neck of the woods. Look at the mixture. They are monitoring, trying to penetrate. Making friends wherever possible. Playing one side against the other. It is something that they are concerned about, job number one. Protecting people at home. Something the u. S. And its allies have to do. Thank you. [applause] i wonder if you have the same experience. You learn so much. Congressman moran has his job cut out. You should remain confident. Sometimes americans are president obama, we keep our morale high. We have to be intelligent about the threat. In spite of a learned, diverse panel, we dont know much about isis. There are roots. Terrorism is different than having a caliphate. We know very little about the Geographic Scope of isis. We have to learn more about them. How concerned should we be. I wouldnt be complacent. Third, the issue ruth and the others talked about. Im a law professor. Law enforcement in and of itself is not the answer. If you are a public International Lawyer as ruth and i are, there is an issue of where the response fits in. Both in iraq and syria. We have been asking about the government, putting them down. Hopefully that will be better as the weeks go on your ready in syria, much trickier. My enemys enemy might be our friend, but we may not admit assad is our friend. We should have high morale. Confidence in ourselves. We have to beat them. I think we will. I think a program like this gives us a sense of how large and amorphous and complicated this is a so many other things are today. Thank you very much. We have time to open a discussion. State your name. Ask a question. Then we will try to open discussion. Raise your hands. Pat murphy first. I am editing a book on nato. Excuse me. Now i forgot what i was going to say. One of the main things is the president has to have an idea what he wants to accomplish. He needs an ambulance. Call an ambulance. I am ok. Im having an anxiety attack. You are among friends. Sorry about that. One of the points i think should be stressed is the president should at some point tell the American Public what it is he wants to do regarding isis. So he is clear in his own mind what he is trying to accomplish. We should set a goal. After the mission. Not before. 50 years ago, i can number when we were going to stay in vietnam. I thought johnson should tell the American Public what they want to accomplish. So he will know himself. He never did. Im not sure what our real goals were in vietnam to this day. The same applies with regard to isis. Especially when the president raise your hands. Pat murphy first. I am editing a book on nato. Excuse me. Now i forgot what i was going to say. One of the main things is the president has to have an idea what he wants to accomplish. He needs an ambulance. Call an ambulance. I am ok. Im having an anxiety attack. You are among friends. [laughter] sorry about that. One of the points i think should be stressed is the president should at some point tell the American Public what it is he wants to do regarding isis. So he is clear in his own mind what he is trying to accomplish. We should set a goal. After the mission. Not before. 50 years ago, i can number when we were going to stay in vietnam. I thought johnson should tell the American Public what they want to accomplish. So he will know himself. He never did. Im not sure what our real goals were in vietnam to this day. The same applies with regard to isis. Especially when the president has said, this is a longterm project. I pointed out there are two triangles going on in syria. One is between us, assad, and the enemies of assad. If we drop a bomb on a group of people opposed to assad, are we hitting the Free Syrian Army or isis . There are so many complexities. The friend of my friend is becoming my enemy. These are things that should be thought about. Thank you. Ok, in the back. Can you get the mic over there . Thank you. Im charles, an International Advisor for the association of moroccan jews. Thank you for the panel. One thing that was not spoken more strongly, isis actually a member of the community has been demonstrating with isiss flag. It has been going on for a few years and has not been mentioned. We know the europeans, france germany england, is a center of recruitment for isis. What is happening in belgium is under the radar. It has been very big. You want to respond . Can i make a comment . I will tag onto your comment to comment to other issues that were mentioned by the panel earlier. We dont know a lot about isis. Just like we didnt know much about al qaeda before 9 11. If you choose my language, that is crap. We knew a lot about Osama Bin Laden before 9 11. We identified all their leadership, their ideology, and their goals. All you had to do was read what he had been saying and writing. He was going to attack the u. S. The same is true with isis. We know their ideology. Read what they have written. Listen to what they have said. They say the streets of america will run with blood. We know what their ideology is. This is not an unknown threat. This is well understood. I wanted to put the concept out there that we dont know we do know who they are. We know what they stand for. We know the nature of the threat. If you personally do not know, go educate yourself. The threat is well understood. Yes. It is often blamed, they are often blamed for being caught unaware. It is not true. They have been warning the menstruation about isis warning the administration about isis. Ok. My name is greg childers. Thanks to all of you for your comments. I noticed, when i had a note to myself dr. Wedgewood talked about tamping down isis to quote a manageable level. You talked about returning to the war on terror. It is not just a lawenforcement issue. It is also a military issue. I found it fascinating that a diplomat was the first to use the word defeat. Followed by a journalist who said that beat. I will quote that is meaning defeat. The question is, without going into the administration, if you were the president , what would you say im following up on what pat murphy said . What is the mission . Is it to tamp them down . To contain them or defeat them . The mission should not be to tempt down or contained tamp down or contain. We saw what happened with hamas. Israel has attacked them. Six months or two years later, they are doing the same thing again. But think it is wrong for the way the u. S. And the europeans handle this by continuously beating up on israel. Clearly, they going to eliminate them as a threat. Same with isis. If you dont take this seriously and have the cool be elimination, it will come back to bite us. That is my opinion. The objective is to defeat them. Not all of japan or germany. The way we defeated the ussr. A long military, political, and social competition. If you get it right, you win. It doesnt take place like the war against japan or germany. There will not be a signing ceremony on a battleship or formal surrender. In addition, you cant kill all of them. The environment and what they do every day needs to be replaced by something new. It is not really up to the u. S. To replace their livelihoods and give them a new system. We are putting the pressure on baghdad where we can for a better government. Maybe we should for syria as well. I will return the focus. Keeping our people safe is the job. Keep isis at a distance. As soon as it is detected we have to counter that. I dont think the opposition will be too high. Go ahead. One second. Can you get him the mic . Leonard, Consulting International liaison. We have heard a lot about the responsibilities of various facets of the u. S. Government and our policies. There was something that comes to mind that i think may be a minor point, but maybe a significant point. I would like the opinion of some of the people who have spoken today. If it is a major point to them. In isis, one of the letter is is iraq. Iraq has northern iraq, kurdistan. The home of the kurdistan democratic party. The most stable part of iraq for many years. Which has had a good communication and relationship with the u. S. When we moved in, the u. S. Did not it was south korea, the republic of korea, as part of the forces, that kept and helped to keep kurdistan very stable. My point is, why havent we heard about the views of the republic of korea and their experiences in iraq that were so successful following successes they had in vietnam . To stay with iraq . Why havent we heard about them . Is there something you think republic of korea could contribute militarily and diplomatically . And perhaps doesnt have something to do with our diplomatic relations with asia and japan . Japans current diplomatic questions with the republic of korea . That is it. As far as a comment about the republic of south korea, which i have a suspicion will be marginal, all of us have to be looking at the region and look at it to review previous concerns, policies. You talk about the kurdish part of iraq. That raises serious questions for us, the turks, the saudis, the iraqis. Everybody. What is iraq . Do we do with it separately or as part of iraq . What does it mean i dont think the south korean question will be relevant. What is relevant is who is interacting with whom under what conditions and their implications if you want to deal with the kurds as a separate power, which is saying something about iraq. And turkey, which the turks may or may not approve of. I dont have an answer except is about redoing the deck for your next hand of bridge. Professor . One second. Would you please stand up . Thank you. I am a retired professor of engineering and applied science. Im an oddball here. I have background in terrorism and security, being a member of the Israeli Defense for many years. I would like to draw on the example of germany and japan. One of the reasons, i think, that the german defeat and japanese defeat were successful was that not only did we defeat them militarily, we changed the political and cultural situation. The denazification process in germany and the change of constitution and japan played a role. It is easy to kill people but difficult to kill ideology. If you want to act against isis, when we act against isis, because act we must, it is not enough to kill or eliminate. No matter what happens with the negotiation, the members of of the hot hot the fatah charters have changed. Until that has changed, nothing will happen. Until we learn how to change the philosophy in dealing with the militant islam, we can defeat some but we wont defeat them longterm. Thank you. One of the reasons, i think, that the german defeat and japanese defeat were successful was that not only did we defeat them militarily, we changed the political and cultural situation. The denazification process in germany and the change of constitution and japan played a role. It is easy to kill people but difficult to kill ideology. If you want to act against isis, when we act against isis, because act we must, it is not enough to kill or eliminate. No matter what happens with the negotiation, the members of of the hot hot the fatah charters have changed. Until that has changed, nothing will happen. Until we learn how to change the philosophy in dealing with the militant islam, we can defeat some but we wont defeat them longterm. Thank you. I would like to pile on that comment a little bit. The strategy of killing as many bad guys as we can was a clear goal of the Terrorism Program for the past decade and a half. Hold them in a box. We have forgotten the second half. You identified that it is the harder part of the problem. Until we start addressing the hearts and minds, it has been identified as a critical part, until we do that, the supply will grow forever. We are going to have to address the key problem. There is something missing. They need another idea. Something to rally around. I am not saying it has to be what rallies us. If we let the story be the key thing that you need to do in your life is take down western people, we are never going to be safe. I know there are many people that would like to ask questions. We have to be mindful the question in the back . I want to make a comment. Thank you. Can i make a comment . I am fascinated why how the conversation keeps returning to israel. Israel is not a key factor in the growth of isis. Can i Say Something too . It goes back to what our engineering friend said. Several colleagues have said we should not confuse them with islam. We have to know more about islam. I lived in turkey for years. Most of my neighbors were harmless. I agree with mike. We are so ignorant, and we know it. There is nothing wrong with that because we have other things to do in america. I follow tennis and baseball. The interest in israel distorts our perspectives. There is no question about it. We think about israel and its problems. Israel looks at the world and away we should not look at it. It probably distorts the american and western view of islam. If we dont understand that, we are going to have problems for a long time to come. I ready spoke. I made my comment. Was so pithy that you missed it. I agreed with the professor, who had retired recently. You are lucky. The problem is, there is the military side, to degrade it. We also had to get them to change their ideology. The problem is that is a long process. It has been unsuccessful. Fatah never took it out of their charter. Hamas, still in their charter, says anybody who would negotiate or compromise even an inch is subject to the death penalty. We are left with a difficult situation. We have to do our best to counter it. It should be countered on numerous fronts. Anyone else on the panel . One more. Thank you very much. In a press conference, secretary hagel said iss is a threat to the u. S. And then later general Martin Dempsey said they are not plotting attacks on the u. S. Homeland. What is the truth . Is the homeland under attack . You all presented what should be done or should be done. What is your assessment of what the Obama Administration will do . And Going Forward with Congress Demanding votes, what are the challenges the administration will face moving forward with whatever they plan to do . Thank you. In answer to your question, it is hard to say what their policy is and they are going to do. You did have both the secretary of state and secretary of defense on the same page, saying isis is a threat. A serious threat and your nationally and potentially domestically. We have to do something about it. What is the truth . Is the homeland under attack . You all presented what should be done or should be done. What is your assessment of what the Obama Administration will do . And Going Forward with Congress Demanding votes, what are the challenges the administration will face moving forward with whatever they plan to do . Thank you. In answer to your question, it is hard to say what their policy is and they are going to do. You did have both the secretary of state and secretary of defense on the same page, saying isis is a threat. A serious threat and your nationally and potentially domestically. We have to do something about it. There are no borders. It has to be syria, also. Then when obama came back from vacation, they started to walk it back. What does that mean . That obama had a change of heart . Because want to get too involved . Who knows. It is a very discombobulated policy. It goes off in Different Directions and changes from one day to the next. It would be possible for me to predict exactly what is on president obamas mind. They were waiting for the seminar. [laughter] quickly. This western may have been answered in part. I am interested in the effort by some, Prime Minister netanyahu, to conflate, specifically hamas and isis. Other terrorist groups as well. In an effort to say, it is all part of the larger conflict between democracy democratic states in the west and radical extremism, specifically islamic extremism. What do you think of this as a rhetorical strategy . What do you think of the relevance of it . What do you think of the consequences of using this approach . Sounds to me like a rational, sensible position for men yahoo to take in terms of his for Benjamin Netanyahu to take in terms of his interest. I dont think it is necessarily a relevant conversation in terms of the overall problem. He was conflating different things. Oranges and apples to make a fruit salad. Its not just a question of the isis i or the terrorist threat against democratic governments. Unless someone wants to call the gulf states democratic governments. They have a priority, which is to defend their necks. It is not a question of democracy or israel parade israel. It is a change in the geology of a major region of the world. We are going to wrap this thing up. The panel has presented to all of us some good thoughts and thought provoking ideas. Let me say one, any master book on strategy talks not just about the military but the National Elements of power. The economic aspects of matters. The political side of things. It talks about the technology and the cultural aspects. No strategy that our president or any of the leaders of the free world as you know today will be military only and be successful. That is the first point. The second point is, clearly we need a global strategy to think about this challenge. It should encompass all the leaders of the free world. Take into account what the people in europe think. What the people in africa think. With the people in the middle east think. Our friends in asia. All of them have a stake in the idea. Because of the ideology of what is going on. Those of you interested in history can go back to the 12th century, 13th century. It it is all there. There was a radical socalled school of sunni thought. The idea after the mongol invasion. He laid it all out. Everything he said then is applicable, in my humble opinion, today. It was followed by the radical people. In the 18th century. This lasted until the 1920s when they were quote defeated. But you never defeat ideologies because they come back like a bee flew. When you say defeat, you have to think about what you mean by the word defeat. Really, if you read any of the books. John allens book on the terrorists or any of the books on this kind of thing, you can get quickly a good idea of what the people really have in mind and want to do. Whether they will be successful or not depends on the leadership of the free world. I dont think it will be successful. I think they can be contained in defeated and defeated, but be careful what you mean by defeat to read we need to these headaches it is not worth doing what youre trying to do. If you keep doing it, you are going to get eliminated. Is that simple. If you read, for example, mein kampf. Hitler said what he was going to do and we chose to ignore it. They have said what theyre going to do. They are going to take europe, the balkans, africa. Then they are going to turn in 2019 to the u. S. Whether that is true or not, they have said that is what they want to do. That is what the radical people are thinking. It is not a conflict between western civilization, east versus west. It is a deeper conflict. We have to keep that in mind. When you say, what should the president do . He has to take the lead in developing Global Opinion as to what has to happen and to do it quickly. We should support the country of iraq, even though it may be in somewhat of a shambled condition. We created that condition and we had to stick with it. We have to stick with the kurds. We had an operation after the first gulf war where we went in with people and provided the kind of humanitarian assistance and support that you would expect our country and the free world to do. We did that very successfully. The kurds have never forgotten. The kurds are sitting on a ton of very valuable oil. We want to keep that in mind as well. When you think about that, where is the money coming from to support that . The Islamic State . What about that . We did for a while have an effective capability globally to disrupt the finances of some of these ideological terrorist outfits. Are we still doing that to the max . That has to be a global effort. As Everybody Knows better than me, there are different ways to handle money. There are no Banking Systems like wed know in this part of the world. We have to get with it. It is a total, comprehensive issue. Against the threat. Not just military. Within the military side of things, you never want to make more enemies than you already have. Part of this is a careful approach to how you get things done. You want to keep the friend you have. You mentioned to south korea. South korea has always been with us in any kind of conflicts at the end of the korean war. They did noble things in the last confrontation. They are a democracy and are going to be with you. Sore many others if it is explained to them in the right way. You can get a lot done if you dont care who gets the credit and take a teamwork approach. Dig in for the long haul if you want to be successful. There are lots of books on strategy. Learn to deal with uncertainty. Speed, boldness, the like. The Campaign Plan, a longterm Campaign Plan is needed. Economic, societal, as well as military. These are some of the things that have to be done. Does anybody have any questions . [applause] feinstein questioned the president s approach. If i have learned one thing about this president , he is very cautious. Maybe, in this instance, to cautious. I know the military, the state department, others have been putting plans together. Hopefully those plans will coalesce into a strategy. That can encourage that coalition from arab nations, you know, jordan is in jeopardy, lebanon is in jeopardy, the uaa and other countries are in so, there is good reason for people to come together now and begin to approach this as a very real threat that this in fact is. The president back in january