And helmand. As far as advocacy for the corps there. Before they had the advisers to do this. Because we were going liftoff we wanted to make sure they had some kind of advocacy. We built a cell of four or five Coalition Members and some function that we thought they needed to continue to mature in our absence and put them up in kabul in september and they were foc in october before we left. Two interpreters were up there and all these individuals had served as advisers with the corps and the police. The leadership knew them. They knew the interpreters. So they would have a means of communication via cell phone, tactical means that was in proximity of headquarters and they were the advocate. Make sure the process was working. We knew at the tactical level they could fight bp we just need to make sure they could sustain themselves and resource themselves from kabul. So we built the cell and it those where the theater was. Where it went to right now. I think the one and four you see right now with kabul, tact north, south and east will go to kabul and continue to evolve what we have with any Long Term Partnership. Odc model. In my humble opinion i think the relationship with afghanistan is important to the International Community and stability in that region. I think thats what rsm sets the stage for. Its a decade of transformation and partnership that we talked about and the tokyo mutual framework and donor countries that pledged money, i think validate this long term commitment to afghanistan and i think the london Conference Also revalidated recently. So when we lifted off we looked at three areas. Institutional, Operational Capability, security normalization where it was afghan supported and afghan sustainable. When we talk about institutional were talking about the battle school. Their basic war training. Centralized program of instruction. But for standardization decentralized execution. Their training happens right there in helmand. At the same time frame we want ad school that could continue individual progression in collective trapg as well too and before that was coalition led. When we lifted off in june on that perspective they were doing all by themselves. This is an example of the general right there leaning over and working with one of the young soldiers on land navigation. The other aspect of that is a medical capability that they needed and road to a hospital they had here. We wanted to make sure at the same time frame that any infrastructure we built for them was sustainable as well too. Those are the institutional aspects of it. And they needed the airfield because of being abling to reach kabul not just from a sustainment perspective but more importantly repatriation of their dead and to passaic sure soldiers had a way, a means to gelt on leave, to go on leave and come back. That itself was a huge force multiplier. When you think of helmand and the kinetics of that district you ask why sociology continue to come back. Because they had a means to do that. When you talk about Operational Capability integration of air. The coordination between the occ, the c 2 command and control operation and Coordination Centers that they used to monitor the election. Thats the cross pillar coordination. Some checkpoints instead of being specific local Afghan Police station or Afghan National Police Station or ana Afghan National Army Checkpoint some of those need to be conso lie mediated you had joint security checkpoints. With f it was a local issue they could identify those outsiders. If the police couldnt handle it because we didnt build it with the capacities, then the ana were there. We wanted to rationalize some of the checkpoints and give them a maneuver capability. Normalize some kind of deployment cycle where you have a red amber green third training, third on leave, third deployed. We wanted to make sure they kept this District Security and provincial security where they brought in the leadership the elders and looked at issues from both the Governance Development but most importantly security perspective. Thats what we built and as you can see these were the critical capabilities that we talked about. Ill briefly talk about this. This is important. This is really whats lost on everybody is the challenge in order to get everything out in good order. It was a mature theater. When we showed up it was rapidly became a mature theater. And the green here is what we call the green zone. And theres a 12,000foot runway right there. And for those that im sure there was a lot of interest, the attacks when they came through the wire was over in this area between guard post 17. You had the brits the afghans had this portion. Around here. Our intention when we were going to lift off is that, again whatever we left behind because we were going be good stewards with the taxpayers money is number one it was secure. So afghans could secure it. It was sustainable and safe. We didnt want them to go to infrastructure that would fall down and electrocute themselves. We didnt want the taliban to occupy it because, again, the impact on the campaign as well so we wanted to make sure they were secure. We thought that we would build this green zone for two reasons. One, because we thought thats what they could sustain and two we needed that as critical infrastructure. As we were drawing down we needed the life support and the c2 in order to command and control our retrograde and redeployment out there was. At the end of the day we remediated quite a bit of this. They elected to keep the whole perimeter and we reduced as you can see quite a bit of infrastructure to them and transferred a lot. When we look at transferring whether it was Real Property buildings or equipment we looked at three things. Number one if it was a piece of equipment that we needed to reset from a coalition or u. S. Marine corps perspective we paid the known redeploy the gear and get it out of theater. If it was cheaper to destroy it in theater and buy new equipment because it was beyond its service life we did that. But if it was a piece of equipment the afghans needed and they could sustain we gifted it. Those were the business rules so to speak of how we did that. So, i think we were very very pragmatic on how we did it. We were very responsible in transitioning in good order. As you can see over here when you talk about transfer and closure of bases pretty significant endeavor throughout the battle space. I think theres 25 now in all of afghanistan that is still out there that belongs to the coalition and that will transition as well too. Then if you look at how many equivalence to get us of there. Because of the uncertainty of this and whether they could do this we didnt advocate our security to anybody. Up to the last day we had end of operations ceremony on the 26th. We lifted off on the 27th using all tactical means. We moved the last security element out of the green zone from this airfield back to kandahar and thats where we broke down our aircraft and redeployed them from there. This is quite a success story. What we got accustomed for. When we came in 2008 and surveyed it and showed up in 2009 it was to build a compound that was large enough for 25,000 in anticipation of the surge. In reality it became a home for 40,000 between the surge force and the many contractors as well. When we talked about going to expeditionary standards and doing things with marines, it was hard at first but then realize this is our bread and butter. We took a service of 2,500 people and reduced to it 600 people using uniformed services. To reinfor the point about them supporting us we retrograded a lot of our heavy stuff. At the very the end last couple of days we were using Southeast Commercial vehicles nontactical vehicles we would gift them and they are loaning us some of the service we bought from them to raining towers seven tons in order to have mobility up to the very end. Okay. Bottom line. 2014 was a seminal year from a political transition and military transition. There were challenges out there. No doubt about it. But im confident based on firsthand experience of watching them and now sitting back here reading the paper every day, i have a vested interest like many of us that have served in afghanistan but specifically southwest on whats happening. Im very happy that ghani has announced his ministers and starting to seat his government. Im curious to see at the core level and provincial level what will happen as far as the leadership perspective. I saw how they executed firsthand for the elections. I saw how they executed after we lifted off. It was a little bit of a growing pain when we were disconnecting ourselves and they were used to us doing it for them their first reaction was to come and ask us for help. I saw what they did when we didnt give them the help. Ive seen what they did since we left. I know you hear about things in helmand and all over afghanistan even kabul. Still very dangerous out there but i am very i should say cautiously optimistic from a security line of operations. Im convinced the effort we put in from a security line of operations has been very successful. I got contacts to see the professionalization of that force from 2001 to where it is today. The real issue which will carry the day is 0this government does in taking advantage of some of the development projects. When you look at the three lines ever operation traditionally that we focus on i think the Development Pieces probably the area that probably need the most emphasis. And this is just a backdrop really just tribute to everyone that served there from both a civilian and military perspective. You see the t walls that it represent. All the way to rt wall. And then the memorial there for the fallen comrades and the colors of all the nations that participated. I truly believe transition is a sign of progress. And in this case for us it certainly was success at this stage of the came. I ask you to raise your hand. Ill get the mic and state it in the form of a question and give him adequate time to respond. You had one of your breaking things organic hazard act. I was at the confirmation hearing for the general and confirmation hearing for general campbell and one of the issues that came up with is several senators wanted to shut off mi17 support. Why cant you go ahead and buy u. S. Products from boeing and the comment that both generals made was if you shut down the mi17 support, not only the new aircraft youre supposed to be getting but the parts it would be almost catastrophic. Your comments on that . From personal experience there and also understanding the topography out there. Mobility is key for their success. When you look at the aviation enterprise its probably one of the things we neglected. I think in southwest, if i had been there from the very beginning and looking back based on our experiences two areas i would have pushed for was the hospital. Because it gives confidence to their soldiers they will get taken off the battlefield like we do and taken care of. And thats a huge success story. And then i would have done, spent more time on the aviation enter flies. I think what happened is we were so focused and were victims of our own experiences and we went to our comfort zone. First part of the campaign we focused on the army. Like i said earlier key to long term stability in supportive governance is the police, and at some point we made that transition and we realized that. But theres still more maturity that need to happen and its going to evolve. Theres too many different pillars out there where they can consolidate those for efficient isis and unity of command. When you talk about the aviation piece its critical for them. So they have the mobility. Some of the capabilities they bring from a cast perspective because it was certainly the case for us for civilian casualties where you had to have zero civilians, zero Collateral Damage even if you had the authority to support them. It became very challenging and therefore having mi35s or what he has now where its a multiplatform, multimission platform is one of the reasons i think they are having success in these areas we lifted off. I hope we continue from provide them that aviation support. Next question. Some interesting reports, pardon my voice im losing it, from the last couple of days have been confirmed reports about the presence of Islamic State groups in helmand. I want your take on that and how that might affect stability how it might affect the ana and other balance of power in the region and also if youre aware of any kind of isis presence at any point while you were out there. Okay. Ill start off with this. Just like anyone thats been in theater there. You leave afghanistan one day, your information is dated. Okay. Its true. Because thats how rapidly things change over there. So most of my information is just like you. Wordofmouth. And reading the media. Again, as i mentioned earlier the media is not always accurate. During our time there we did not see any signs ever isis recruiting or actually fighting in afghanistan. There were rumors about some of it happening in the east. In the article youre referenced i saw the same one when they said there were black fashion up there and a rift between the taliban and isis and at the same time the mullah who was recruiting was somebody in detention at gitmo. Thats as much as i know. I dont think thats the case that there is isis in afghanistan. But, again i dont know. Its not a very good answer. I wish i could be more defy definitive definitive. But during the time i was there we didnt see any indication other than the taliban. Sir, based on your experiences, do you see any large changes based on Lessons Learned when we realized well be fighting a protracted complex insurgency in the future such as changing the tour length or focusing on different lines of operation such as Development Like you were stating earlier . You know its a dilemma were in and the military is in, because of our capability and capacity. Were normally the first once on the scene and asked to do some things that i would say are not in our lane. I think there was a civilian surge that didnt turn out to be the surge we anticipated and i think as we went into transition, some of those organization from the interagency that i thought would be in the forefront would be there when we left. But because much security concerns, some valid concerns from their organization at the very end, you know, the prt that i had lifted off really, they were sitting with me, not really of much use sitting there. Eventually leaving in the early spring, some leaving before the elections. The rp was reduced to one person and he was ineffective not because of individual but because of his capacity and capability based on that. So, i think when you look at this, again, it gets the whole government, whole International Government and who is responsible for that to make sure that youre committed not just to the naermear term but the long campaign. Thats one i was there in 2001, we went in there and lifted off and did the transition. I saw a perspective from the afghans of a lot of hope and future opportunity. And i think from International Development perspective that one time they talked about 10 billion to 15 billion that they thought they were going to get but think ended up 3 to 4 billion. Which was still a significant amount of money. A lot of that money was siphoned off and didnt go back into afghanistan because you had venture capitalists in afghan expats that came in and made all this money but didnt leave it. And so the people never benefitted. When you talk about just afghanistan itself, you know you look at their they are a donor state right now. But there is potential with Mineral Resources and its been validated. In 2010, from rare earths to lithium to the copper mines. And i think one estimate i read was a trillion dollars potential there. Thats significant. So when you go into these reconstruction projects. I mean the military does one thing. We can do other things we were designed for one thing. You have to have the whole International Government realizing that its important to have a stable, sovereign, united afghanistan for stability in the region. And i think people realize that. That is the mantra the generals talk about and i think most of our civilian leadership throughout the International Community understand that as well too. But it gets backs to ends ways and means. And each countrys own perspective of whetherats Vital National interest to them. It is a challenge. I think rsm is headed down the right path and hopefully the commitments made in chicago and tokyo and revalidated in london t monitor everything thinks about the troops on the grounds that. Seems to be the discussion, the authorities. But what part of rsm is natos commitment. It is natos commitment to a Long Term Partnership where afghanistan and the monetary aspect is very important to the afghans and they realize it. And i think because of that they will work out their differences. It is whether they can work out their differences and actually sew progress and tangible benefits to the locals at the subnational governance level. And that is where i think some of the gap is. Otto. Otto chrysler with. You mentioned earlier on that you thought the taliban was at a point where they are in debate whether they were going to do remain military or whether go political. We have isnt seen in the last fighting season we didnt see much line of them running for office or anything like that. What did you mean by that and did you think there is a possibility of a negotiated end to this thing . I think all counterinsurgency end with that that process. And again this is coming from the media. At one point they are talking about ghani was going to give three positions to the taliban. And make provinceial governors were going to be taliban. I dont think thats true and they came out and said its not true. But i this i there is gong toib a point that is if the Afghan National government and Security Forces can maintain security to the point where if the taliban want to be relevant and be part of the process in will be some accommodations. You know, maybe it is not complete reintegration reconciliation. But again, i think there is probably some fracturing. One of the reasons we didnt see a lot of connections in the te elections is what they were preaching and the locals were executing there was a disconnect to. Me that means maybe some fracturing. And i think as long as the momentum continues and the International Community continues to uphold their portion of the tokyo mutually agreement framework and the afghans continue their portion about transparency in showing progress, i think that will be bad for the insurjssy. Insurgency. A question related to culture and attitude. There is strong tribal tradition for thousands of years. How is your midterm outlook in regard to the relationship of Central Government and provinceal government as compared to the tribal fracture . Would it make sense in the future to work more closely with the tribes . Or will this will the power and also the loyalty of the people go over from the tribe to the province and eventually to the nation . If there is one. I think you know, when you look at afghanistan everything there is defined by tribe, sub tribe, clans, families. So when you talk about tribes and you talk about provincial leadership, those all go into consideration, i believe based on who becomes the provincial government and who becomes the civilian leadership and the ministers. So when you say negotiation with the tribes. I mean easily we could have gone up to northern helman. And the govern governor was doing this on his own. He was having this northern Peace Process and he would go up there. And hes belucc but he had angar and others related. And they were going up there having a monthly dialogue or as often as possible to talk about the the security situation in the north. So that stuff is happening from a governance perspective. That when you talk about and accommodations need to be made to some extent. Because a lot of those elders have a lot of influence in those areas. But i think the Afghan Government has done a very good job, definitely in the military unlike what we did in iraq with the debasification to make sure each ethnic group is represented. I think they are working on the Literacy Program to have a more educated force not just from the military but from children. And at the same time frame in the civilians architecture they are very conscious about the tribal affiliations and where they are connected in both formal and inform means of power come. So i think they have done a good job and that is one of the Biggest Challenges that the National Unity government which is not common nor afghanistan. Theres never been a power cherieing ing sharing in the history of afghanistan. When somebody becomes king the first thing he does is maims or blinds his siblings so nobody can take power in him. So this is specifically a western perspective and its challenging to make sure they have the right people. And there is a lot of criticism. Some of the people they have appointed now are not qualified because they dont have the experience or they have ties to some other power broker. But that is all of afghanistan. So to go directly to the tribes and circumvent the injure ga in the lower and upper house thats there i think would be detrimental. I think there has to be dialogue but to make concessions just for that. Its got to look at whats best for whole nation and from a formal governance piece. General, randle forth with ratheon. You mentioned sustainment a number of times during the course of your remarks. Could you characterize the infrastructure and the afghan capabilities to provide on an ongoing basis and Going Forward the beans blankets, bullets that are going to be necessary to maintain any kind of reasonable op tempo as they go forward more independently . Are the resources there . Is the infrastructure there for them to be able to deliver the resources that are going to be necessary for them to maintain that kind of activity . I think resources are definitely there because we provided the resources. I think the infrastructure in most cases is there. It is the cultural mentality. They are horders just like a lot of developing countries. They are used to not living with anything. So when they have something they tend to horde and not distribute like we would do. I any were going through a generation. And this is where i think when you talk about some of the Senior Leadership of corps commanders and brigade commanders that have been on the pointy end of the spear that realize they need a piece of equipment to keep their humvee going or more ammunition they are not getting it from the Central Government. So the supply distribution chain was built really from a western model. And all of the processes that you had to do to get the requisitions is a lot of bureaucracy. We complain about ourselves we built it a lot in our own image and likeness. And it probably is not completely suitable for the aflgs. And i think its evolving and we realize that. Thats why the functional central functions sfa, Security Force assistant that you saw in that slide is so important. So where you actually get the supplies and you are actually projecting ahead. So it is there instead of when you run out of it. And i think they have that capability and i think its moving that way. So they do have the resources. They have the infrastructure. It is the cultural mind set that we need to change. And i think theres been a lot of emphasis from the coalition especially as we go to this advice and assist mission to make sure they take the resources and get them where they need, instead of horde it. And some is not horded from perspective f holding it. Some is corruption and taking it. And were working through that as well too. Ladies and gentlemen were about five minutes over. I want to thank you all for attending. Cspan, thank you for covering. And most importantly general yoo thank you for your service. Sergeant major, thank you for yours. And thank you for coming here today. A warm round of applause please. [ applause ] just in closing. Thank you on behalf off all the marine, Service Coalition and partners and afghan counterparts for all the support provided. It is tremendous on a daily basis of the let erpsers letters and packages. And just the moral support not just from family bs thank you larger american population. So thank you again. [ applause ] mr. President obama chose joseph clansy as head secret service. Mr. Clansy is a 27 year veteran of the agency and headed the president ial detective division. To serve as the permanent director of the United States secret service. A 27 year veteran of the agency and a former special agent in charge of the president ial protective division has served as the acting director since october 1st of last year. Many of you will recall direct clancy stept into stepped into the role at a rather difficult time for the agency and over the course of the last several months director clancy has demonstrated the kind of leadership that frankly many of us expected him to demonstrate. He is somebody that has based on his long track record a lot of credibility built up inside the agency and used that credibility to put in place reforms that were recommended by this outside panel that the dhs secretary jay johnson had convened. So hes got a lot of important work still ahead of him. But were certainly pleased to see that he his leadership thus far has been recognized the with this permanent appointment. Former kansas congressman jim slattery visited iran in december and talks about his experience during an appearance at the Atlantic Council in washington. Interviewed by iran expert barbara slavin. This is an hour. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you so much for coming out to our first public event of the year for the Iran Task Force. Let me thank the Atlantic Councilc r . n and also the plow shares fund for their generous support. Weve been going on about four years and i must say the news keeps getting better, after a period when it didnt. Some positive indications about the nuclear talks. But were here too talk today about the people to people aspects of the u. S. Iran relationship, which are just as important, maybe more important in some ways than the technicalities of how many centrifuges iran is allowed to have. We want to see more interaction between the people of iran and the United States. I should have introduced myself. Im barbara slavin. I coordinate the Iran Task Force here at the council. And im delighted we have a speaker today someone involved with iran for many years but who has just had his first actual visit there. Jim slat i have a former six term u. S. Congressman from if the Second District of kansas. He was a member of the house energy and Commerce Committee which has broad jurisdiction over healthcare energy, telecommunications and environmental issues. Also is served on the house budget committee, House Financial Services committee and House Veterans Affairs committee. Hes currently a partner with the law firm of the reilly rhine llp and advises clients who have matters pending before Congress Federal agencies and regulatory bodies. From our perspective what is most important about congressman slattery is he has been part of something called the abrahamic dialogue which has encouraged interfaith dialogue and reconciliation between the United States and iran. This is a dialogue coordinated by the Peace Research institute of oslo in norway and the Catholic University of america with vatican participation. And jim, as i mentioned, has just come back recently from his very first visit to iran. And im going to ask him to come up and talk a little bit about what that visit was like. And about interfaith dialogue. And the prospects for a better people to people relationship between the u. S. And iran. So congressman. So thank you again for coming. Well its great to be with you barbara. And first let me just say that i have admired you from afar and have enjoyed your writings and the work that you have done with iran your book bitter friend, bosom enemies is one of my favorites. And i appreciate your scholarship on that. Very good. How do you want to begin . Do you want to talk about the interfaith dialogue and how you got involved with that to begin with and then maybe tell us about what it was like to actually be in the heart of the axis of evil. There we go. Well over the last ten years ive had the opportunity to participate in regular dialogues with iranians and we call it the abrahamic dialogue because it was composed of American Christians muslims and jews. And representatives of the abrahamic faiths participated in all of the meetings that we had over this ten year period in iran. I mean, in europe with the iranians. The fascinating part about it was that the participants coming from iran workshop approved by the highest leadership in iran. The Supreme Leader of the president s at the time. And they were a what i called second tier people in iran. Heads of the Business Community members of the modulus personal friends of the Supreme Leader, personal friends of the president s at that time. Now many of the people that we got acquainted with over a ten year period have moved into positions of key responsibilities in this new government. So i feel particularly fortunate that weve had an opportunity to build some friendships with these people. And one of the things that i learned along the way is that the iranians are deeply concerned about respect. Yes. The one thing they yearn for is respect. And think about a texasn and the whole notion of the west respecting them. Very important. The other thing that i learned was that if you want to engage iranians and especially the shia muslims, it is very easy in conversation. You can preface anything you want to talk about with the phrase help me understand what the koran teaches about whatever it is you want to talk about from Nuclear Weapons to sex. And they will be happy to engage and talk about the that. I think it is a way of getting to know people of the religious faith and the people we had to meet were var sincere in their faith. Many only who have were clerics and leaders in the political realm and academic realm, many of them were also part of the deep faith. Can you tell me roughly how many meetings. I know there were groups that came to the u. S. At least once. But these were primarily meetings in europe i would assume. Thats true. Weve probably had 20 meetings at different times. But i will share with you also one evening you will get a kick out of this. I took a group of the ayatollahs to the floor of the house of representatives. When was this. I dont know its probably been seven or eight years ago. More. And ill never forget standing in the well of the house and the iranian friends were just captured by the fact that there is an inscription above the speakers desk in the house that says in god we trust. And then they were also fascinated by the fact that there is a relief of moses looking down on the house of remittive representatives. And i think its very important for us as we engage iran and for that matter as we engage the broader muslim world to be respectful of their religion and to figure out how to communicate more effectively with them about the common things between christianen dom and islam. And that is an important part of this relationship that we tend to blow by. I think because of my involvement over the last ten years in this interfaith dialogue, my name may have come up on the radar screen in iran. And i do know a number of people in the government there now. But i received this invitation to come and speak to this world conference it was called, the world against violence and extremism. And this was in december of last year. And so they told me i was the first either former member of congress or current member of congress that has been invited to iran since 1979 to speak. I dont know whether thats true or not but that is what they told me. Wow. So my topic that was given to e many sort me at the last minute was can religion with a syringe for peace in the middle east . And yes it can be. But it also can be a problem too. And i was particularly pleased that president rohani and Prime Minister and chief of staff all three of them spoke at this conference. And all three of them were very clear, very strong and emphatic in their condemnation on the violent acts of the terrorism on the part of isis and other religious fanatical groups in the middle east that are committed in the name of islam. And i wish the western media would have done a better job covering this conference. Because i thought these statements were clear. They were strong. And they were saying the things that so many of us in the United States would like to hear said by leaders in the islamic world. Let me ask you just on a more personal note what it felt like. I remember very clearly the first time i went to iran in 96, arriving in the middle of the night, very jet lagged. But the First Impressions are always very important. And i remembered being obviously a little nervous. I was going at a journalist after all. And putting down my passport and having this rather gruff looking young man give me a very big smile and being quite taken aback by that just at the passport control. I understand that you also had a fairly positive reception shall i say. It was really interesting. Because my trip really started at the Pakistani Embassy here in washington where the iranian intersection is located. I mean, sort of blew my mind actually. So i go into this meeting. And the three people that interviewed me to get my visa, believe it or not, two of them had degrees from kansas state university. Okay. I used to represent both kansas state and the university of kansas when i was in the congress. They were both in my congressional district. And these guys started talking to me. And one of them remembered me being the congressman from manhattan. Manhattan, kansas. Correct. He was talking to me about the fact he got married in manhattan and his wonderful experience in manhattan, kansas. So fast iffrpd forward to my first tight in teheran. And i sit down to dinner with the assistant. And guess where he went to school. Okay. He went to school at the university of kansas. And he was telling me he remembered me being his congressman while he was in school there. And we had this wonderful conversation about the jay hawks and how they were doing in basketball this season. But talk about a small world. It just sort of blows your mind. Back to your point, i arrived in teheran about 3 00 in the morning. Yeah. And i think every light in teheran was on. I felt like i was flying into the l. A. , you know. Was it a thursday night. It may have been. It may have been a thursday night. But anyway i mean every light that you could imagine was on. And there wasnt a cloud in the sky. So its just this spectacular view as you arrived. We arrived and i should identify dr. Iovani here in the front row. He was short of my sherpa my guide as we landed in teheran. One of the funny things that happened was we got off the plane and went through the passport control area. And they were a little short on vip folks that even because there were a lot of of vips arriving to a attend this conference. So we had to wait little while. And i started chatting with the passport control folks. And they were young men as you might imagine. 3 00 in the morning. We started talking and one of them who spoke pretty good english said, you know, i hope you guys can get this nuclear thing worked out. Because were looking forward to meeting some american women here. So i thought this was, you know once a again a reminder certain things are universal i suppose. Is and i responded by saying to him, you know, you have to keep in mind that we do this there will probably be some handsome american men here in teheran competing with you for the attention of some persian women too. He said i hadnt quite thought about that. Anyway we had a Wonderful Exchange there. And ahmad asked if i wanted to go by Ayatollah Khameneis tomb shrine mozsque on the way to the hotel. What do you at that time of the morning. And it is on the way to the hotel. And long story short i found myself going through the Ayatollah Khamenei memorial shrine mosque burial site. And why not, you know. We walk through and pretty obvious im a westerner. But i found it very interesting. I had no no hostile reactions from anyone. Any expressions were friendly. We went to the tomb of Imam Khamenei and took pictures and took pictures of the facility and quietly walked out and left. No problem at all. So anyway we went to the hotel and then the following morning was the Plenary Session for the conference. But that was sort of my first introduction. Okay. Well i want to open the floor to questions very soon because i know you probably all have a lot of them. But dr. Iovani, i dont know if you would also like to say a few words about how this visit was arranged. I remember many efforts made back when when president hatami was president. There were some members of the Iranian Parliament if i recall correctly in i believe 2000 who came to new york. And they went to the metropolitan museum of art. But i dont remember whether they actually got to come to washington and come to congress. So if you would say a few words. Dr. Ahmed iovani. Thank you for putting this together. Before i answer that one. Jim talk about the importance of the abrahamic dialogue and the people who participated from the iranian side. But he didnt mention the american side. Also from american side i mean there have been many trusted people by the leaders either from congress or senate or from churches or whatever. But the key point from both side are they are or we are bringing people who have trust of both leadership. Iran is integration of religion and politics. And here you have dedicated to leaders to their orewn believes and how they respect their religion. And that was to try to bring Common People and talk about that and start to breaking bread and also start making friendship and connection and trust between us as a human being as a people who love to have relation and to have respect. So out come of that has been one of the trip of jim to iran. That history was not just officially being invite as the congressman or former congressman. He was invited as someone who cares for families a friend of the community. We have been working for years. So that is the problem of even getting visa for him or other issues. So that is how we were able to go to iran. And since we went we received very well, again not as an official guest but as a friend. So concerning to i think those whoever came here, yes it has happened but not just direct think because of this abrahamic phase. But they came for other reasons taking part in world bank or imf meetings or whatever from the parliament. There are other official meetings going on. But those mps, some of them have been part of this abrahamic dialogue. So since they are friend with each other its natural to call each other or have give them a tour. So thats how some members of the Iranian Parliament have been in washington over the years. Yeah of course. Yeah of course. They are coming i think every sings month six months they are coming as a part of the delegation. One of the things on that point is that we dont do what we should be doing to encourage direct dialogue between members of the modulus and members of the United States congress. And one of the sad realities were dealing with right now in these negotiations. Very few members of our administration. Very few members of our government, congress or the executive branch have any personal relationships with iranians. And this is a tragedy. And that is why i, like eisenhower, believe very strongly in people to people diplomas and people getting to know each other and building friendships and relationships. So when times of crisis come you have some friendships and relationships to at least start a confirmation. Are there any plans to try to get this kind of contact between congress and the modulus of iran . As pointed out theres some opposition in both bopd 3w0ddies to the Nuclear Agreement which appears to be in the process. And it would be very valuable with that kind of contact is there happening on that. I would love to see it. And i will do everything i can to encourage it. And i have already done some. And one of the great problems we have to overcome right now is ignorance. Yes. It is amazing when i have conversations with members of the Congress Just how little they know about iran. And by the same token there is great misunderstands in part of the iranians in key position of leadership act thebout the United States. So what we do to break the walls of ignorance and suspicion is enormous value. Did you yes i did. We operate under the chatham rules. I cant attribute specific remarks to individual members. But i can tell you this. I did meet with high ranking members of the modulus and i can tell you they had several very important points to make. Number one is they are all deeply concerned about what effect our Congressional Elections last november will have on president obamas capacity to actually implement any agreement. That was a deep concern to them. And they were very troubled by the prospect of perhaps the iranians putting their best deal on the table, so to speaktt etit rejected by the congress or the United States. This would be a political disaster for them. So they need assurances that if there is a deal that is worked out. They want to be confident it can be approved and implemented by the Obama Administration and wont be scuttled by the congress. The other thing that i took away from the conversations, especially with members of the modulus and keep in mind that the modulus is populated by more conservative government in iran than the government perhaps. But they also made it clear to me that they are determined that iran will preserve its rights under the npt, specifically the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Some would argue there is not such a right in the npt but they think it is. Think certainly person sivaceive they have the right. And im mindful of that dispute. So there is a very intense desire on the part of the members of the modulus especially that iran be able to retain some enrichment capability. I also detected a great flexibility on the part of the iranians with respect to what i call the technical enrichment questions. So the level of enrichment, the quantity of enrichment the number of centrifuges. All of these i believe are negotiable and they are directly tied to the issue of whether and when the u. S. Is prepared to lift sanctions. So the quicker were ready to lift sanctions, the more forthcoming the iranians in all probability will be with respect to the technical Nuclear Issues okay. I think that is a great introduction. So let me open to you and please wait for a microphone and say your name and then ask your question, please. Thank you barbara and congressman. My question has to do with your view of the role of american institution, Civic Institution Educational Institution universities. And generally the American People and their role in leading the charge in establishing these people to people contacts, as opposed to always waiting for either government to be the one that leads the way and opens the path whether you think civic activism in this arena, especially among religious and other Civic Institutions could be the bridgebuilder that is needed right now. Thank you. I support all kinds of bridgebuilding efforts, whether they are academic, religious, faithbased. Anything that we can do to encourage dialogue between the United States and iran i think is beneficial for both sides. And we should not be afraid to learn. And i so i favor that kind of dialogue. And i must tell you that i think both sides are equally guilty of trying to prevent that kind of discussion and that kind of dialogue. And where he have to really think about that and address that. And id like to see the administration be more forth coming and more helpful in terms of expediting those kind of exchanges. And i would like to see the iranian government be more forthcoming in terms of admitting more americans to teheran. And our greatest enemy in this process may very well be ignorance. And this is 2015. We have all this communication capability. We need to get to know each other better. You talked about ignorance. What most surprised you in teheran . What did you least expect . You know, there are a whole bunch of things about iran that you are so fascinating to me. One thing i wish all americans understood is that 60 of the students in the University Universities in iran are female. Rather unique phenomenon in the world of islam. And when i talked to some of my iranian friends, one of the things they share with me sort of off the record is they are troubled by what are they going to do with all of these educated women in the future. Watch out. And so i find that very interesting. The other thing that was amazing to me is that in the streets of teheran teheran, i mean it is like the worst rush hour traffic in washington, seems like all day, you know. And the other thing i observed is that about every third or fourth car is driven by a woman. And so, you know, compared to the situation in saudi arabia i mean it is a whole different world. And then the other thing that i found just walking the streets and let me just share with you that i was in baghdad several years ago to observe as an International Election monitor the elections in the sunni precincts or areas of baghdad. And when i traveled from the green zone and when i woke up on election day, i thought i was in a thunderstorm only to realize after i fully woke up that there were bombs going off all around me. So we went out into the sunni areas to observe the voting places. And, you know, i had to travel with five Armored Vehicles and literally 15 armed dpards eded guards with me. And i wouldnt have lasted five minutes i believe in those neighborhoods but for all of this protection. I walk the streets of teheran and no problem. Went down to the bizarre and people would talk to me and visit with me. And i detected no really anger towards me as an obvious westerner. And i felt completely safe on the streets of teheran. We didnt walk by the American Embassy but we drove by the American Embassy and went to the bazaar. And i felt perfectly safe on the streets of teheran. I couldnt say the same for being in baghdad. So many different situations. Absolutely. Yes, gentlemen up here in the front row. Thank you. You talk your name please. Ivan coron with afp. Can you talk about how your contacts talk about American Partners in the p five plus one. France britain, germany and others. How differently do they see them . And how do they approach each country in the negotiations . Without indicating any disrespect for the other members of the p five plus one i think that iran clearly envisions and thinks of the United States as being the dominant player. And they yearn for an improved relationship with the United States. And let me just elaborate on that. I left all of these conversations in teheran and conversations ive had subsequent with a firm belief that the rahani government really wants to get this right with the United States. I believe they also see this as the threshold decision. And if we can get it right on the nuclear question i think there is an opportunity for us to move quickly on to other more urgent regional issues. And i think the iranians with whom i visited, sort of all of them, were puzzled by the fact that the United States was so reluctant to engage iran in dealing with isis. And they also were very very forthcoming in talking about hezbollah. And they believe that if we can figure out how to address each others concerns about the nuclear question, and do it in a way that is respective of and recognizes the concerns of israel then there is no reason why this conversation cannot be quickly expanded to address the other regional questions, all of them. So imagine a positive relationship with iran and imagine what that might mean for the middle east. And that is what we should be thinking about. Iran is a country of 80 Million People. And 85 literacy rate. Some of the richest Energy Reserves in the world. Arguably the top two or three largest Energy Reserves of both oil and natural gas in the world. And a strategically very significant country in terms of geography and everything. And imagine how the middle east would look so different for all offer allies in the region if we could figure out how to get this right. You have touched on israel and obvious think there are many in israel including Prime Minister netanyahu who have a somewhat different view of this emerging relationship between the u. S. And iran. People when are very concerned that iran will pocket a nuclear deal and then simply use their additional revenues to give more to hezbollah and more to hamas and more to palestinian and Islamic Jihad and actually redouble its efforts to oppose israeli policies. So, you know, how would you answer those critics . Well i can understand, you know, that concern. And, you know, we have to be mindful of the reality that with israel when it comes to this nuclear question and other questions for that matter, there is no margin for error. No margin for error. And as americans i dont think we can get our head around that reality very easily. But having said that i believe very strongly that we have a historic moment right now. And we the clock is ticking on both sides of the table. I believe that the iranians and this government in iron, they want to do a deal with the United States that will result in the lifting over a period of time of the sanctions. I believe that they are prepared to give us virtually unlimited access to their Nuclear Facilities to address our concerns about their compliance with whatever agreement is entered into. And i think that that is the best way for us to a achieve one of our most important objectives and that is to prevent the proliferation of the Nuclear Weapons and specifically prevent iran from obtaining a the Nuclear Weapon that will surely lead to an arms race Nuclear Arms Race in the middle east. Which a disaster for everybody. It is in nobodys interest to do that. Let me just observe that i agree with general dempsey, who has said that the iranians are rational. And i believe that. They are smart sophisticated people and they are good negotiators. But there are a lot of people in the United States that dont think they are rational. There may be people in israel who dont think they are rational. And i reject that. I believe they are rational. In fact they have told me they have told me things like jim, do you think we are crazy . Dont you understand that we know that you could unload onehalf of one of your trident submarines on our country and the rubble would bounce . Do you think we are crazy . Do you think that we dont understand that if we ever militarily struck israeli it would result in almost the immediate annihilation of our country . I mean they share those kind of thoughts with me. Now i just share them with you for whatever they are worth okay. But i dont believe that the iranians are irrational. I believe they will act in their own self interest. I believe they understand that a Nuclear Weapon does not enhance their National Security. That is the bottom line. And, you know, you have got this fattua out there with the Supreme Leader of islam saying its illegal to have a weapons of the mass destruction. And with the iraq war that when the iranians were being gassed they didnt respond. One of the side notes is that dr. Zirahni was responsible and the chairman of the wave conference, the conference that i spoke at. And he was a victim of being gassed in the iraniraq war. And he has shared with me personally that he worries about what effect this is going to have with his children. Is it going to genetically be passed to his children . Hes also shared with me that hes forgiven the United States. He doesnt hold us directly responsible. But he he believes that we were we were acquiescent that we were not helpful in terms of preventing saddam from using the gas that was used against the iranians. So for whatever thats worth. Yeah. Greg in the middle there. Wait for the mic. Thank you for this presentation. I wanted to followup on what you were just talk about the iranian views about Nuclear Weapons. Did you get a sense there was a differentiation. I would just a iodc commander would have a different view than ayatollah and goem. So the man on the street. That is the first part. The second part since there is a religious component in your dialogue how did you explain to the iranians the christian view about the morality of Nuclear Weapons . Let me take this in reverse order. First of all, i believe there are differences of opinion within iran. There are clearly people for example innine ine iran who do not want to see the reproachment against the United States. One is those currently benefitting from the economic sanctions. People are making money on the economic sanctions and life is good for them and they like the status quo. And so they would be opposed. Then you have another group that are the defenders of the revolution i would call them, the people who truly believe in the islamic revolution. And they see reproachment with the United States as a threat to the revolution. And they believe reproachment means Greater Western influence which they perceive it is sinful to everything important about islam. So that crowd is also opposed. So you have those forces working against agreement within iran. And others clearly. The challenge of course is how do we move beyond that . And how do we take advantage of that group, a growing group i would contend, in iran who truly want a better relationship with the United States . And that is where i put the rouhani government and zarif and the team in charge right now. The other quick observation i would make is that all of the people i visited with all indicated to me that they believe the Supreme Leaders is supportive of zarif and these negotiations and albeit a skeptic of where this is going. Because i think the still believe the ultimate objective is the regime change of the United States. And in the back of his mind hes thinking the United States really wants to see this government go away. And they want to see a change in the government a fundamental change in the government. So i think the Supreme Leader has great skepticism about that. But i believe that he is reluctantly agreed to permit zarif to proceed with these negotiations and find out where in the world they lead them. Now what was the other . Other the thing about. Christian. Well you boil it all down and look at abrahamic religions and the bottom line is under all of our faith religions and teaches theologies we all have the right to self defense. And that is maybe the Common Ground in the three abrahamic phase. You mentioned the Supreme Leader. He made some interesting remarks yesterday where he once again expressed support for the negotiations. Very interesting how our language gets mirrored on the other side and vice versa. So, you know, obama says no deal is better than a bad deal. So the ayatollah said no deal is better tlan a bad deal. He also strong implied that the deal now being negotiated is a deal he could accept. There is some disagreement in the Expert Community how to interpret his remarks. But i saw them actually as more forward leaning and a little less hostile towards the United States than they have been. Which suggests he is preparing the ground for acceptsenings of some agreement. I thought it was really interesting he made the point of really talk about the middle ground. The middle ground and both sides have to make concessions. Yeah. And i thought it was really unique his statements yesterday. Again i think further indication that the Supreme Leader is blessing these negotiations and is guardedly optimistic that maybe something can be achieved. And, you know, the other side of this is, you know, what happens if we fail. What happens if we fail . And that is the question i would have for netanyahu. It is one thing to come in and condemn the negotiations and be critical of them. I think it was president truman who once observed that jackass can kick a barn down it. Takes a carpenter to build one. And when you are in these negotiations. Are you calling netanyahu what i think you are . Im not inferring that mr. Prime minister. But my point is that its easy to be critical. It is easy to be critical. It is hard to negotiate these kind of deals. And it is hard to build trust. But the failure to complete an agreement right now and the failure to improve this relationship with iran i think has very dangerous consequences for the United States and for iran. And let me just observe that some people have asked me why in the world are you involved in this, you know . And why do you care . And i must tell you, i dont have a client in any of this. I havent made a time in any of this in ten years, much to the chagrin of my partners. But the reason i care deeply about this is, you know, its all about my kids and grand kids i suppose. As we look out over the next 25 years, what do we see on the horizon. 1. 3 billion chinese that are going to present an Enormous Economic challenge to this country and especially middle class americans. Okay . And then we look at the world of islam. 1. 3 billion muslims in the world. What i know is this. And this is just country boy kansas common sense. We cannot as a country of 300 and some Million People confront the problems that are sure to be on the horizon that are there right now. We cannot confront those economic challenges wile being sucked into a prolonged war in the world of islam. Where does this war in the world of islam end . And for goodness sakes, if we think were a rich enough country to engage in more and more wars in the world of islam while taking on the economic challenges of asia whether its china or india, i mean we are fools. There is a thousand ways you can say it. But well wake up in 20 or 30 years and look like britain 1937 46. And that is why it is so important for us to prevent more wars in the world of islam. And i believe one of the most important things we can do is engage the world of islam. And, you know, one of the things i shared this is sort of getting for aget ing far afield here barbara. But one of the things i have thought about and have shared. Is that when we approach the world of islam think about this. Muslims, faithful muslims are the directly taught to follow the share the teaches of all of the prophets. Including jesus. In the world of christendom, arent we supposed to be following jesus as well . Whether we see him as savior or prophet, if were supposed to be following the teaches of jesus isnt there a space here for conversation . And why cant we have that conversation . And i believe that if we would engage the world of islam, where they are and religion is a big part of their life. Just as it is in kansas by the way. Okay . I think that there could be a very interesting conversation. That takes me back to the point that someone raised here about the need for more dialogue between the faith communities here and there and academic communities. And i think that opportunity exists. And it should be pursued. Before we continue i just want to recognize also former congressman jim moody whos brilliant idea it was to invite congressman slattery to come and talk to us about his trip to teheran. And im sorry you werent here in the earlier part of the conversation. But he has been as good as predicted. Thank you very much. And ive been talkings to iranian imgrants to the u. S. Who have relatives and they still go back to iran to visit. And i talked to a lady and i said what are the average people in iran want . And she said they want to be able to travel to disney world. [ laughter ] and it just blew me away. Because in the 80s i went to lenin grad during the cold war and they wanted lipstick from lor lore lore loreal and koz mow magazines. Who is speaking out for the moderates. They did a poll back in i think 1999 asking what percentage wanted a normal diplomatic relationship with the United States . And it was about 70 at the time. The government was so upset that it put the pollster in prison. The pollster by the way was a former hostage holder named abbas abdi who radically changes his views from the time. So what you had the the people tot passport control and so on is certainly more common than the death to america that we usually hear about, yeah. Let me strike a balance here. And that is that, you know, rouhani and the team around him i believe are people who are deeply committed to improving this relationship with the United States. And i believe that if they fail, we are likely to see the return of a much more hard line government in ala all minute ahmadinejad or worse. I dont want to leave the impression there arent forces in iran who are opposed to a rapprochement with the United States, who do not want to give up any of their Nuclear Enrichment capability and who if left to their own devices would probably develop a Nuclear Weapon. Thats probably the reality in iran. The challenge for us diplomatically is to empower those in iran who see that that is a foolish course for iran and the wiser course is to engage with the United States and to find some solutions to this nuclear question and then move on quickly to address those regional issues where we have a common interest isis. Dealing with the problems of hezbollah. And in my conversations with iranians over a tenyear period many of them will tell me that, you know, when it comes to the palestinian israeli issue, theyre no more palestinian than the palestinians as theyve told me. You know, in other words whatever the palestinians will accept, they will accept. And i think that if we got this deal on the nuclear question then it would reduce hopefully the anxiety and the fear, legitimate fear, that many in israel have about the prospect of a nuclear iran. And that would, i think, make it easier for us to have conversations about the south of lebanon and hamas. And we should not be afraid to have those discussions and those conversations. But i think the first point is to get this nuclear deal done in a way that is the best way available, best reasonable way available, to prevent iran from obtaining a Nuclear Weapon. For skeptics, let me just observe that if we enter into an agreement with iran, and by the way, everybody pretty much agrees that they have complied with the agreement that was entered into in november of 2013 and they have eliminated uranium that was enriched to the 20 level. They have basically frozen their program. So any suggestion that these negotiations have somehow been to the u. S. And the wests disadvantage i think is just dead wrong. The program has basically been froze anyone place. And we have to acknowledge that. Now, if we can continue that, you know, indefinitely even, that is progress. And that is moving us toward a situation where iran does not have a Nuclear Weapon. I would just further observe that since sanctions went into place, when sanctions went into place, we pat ourselves on the back and we think these things are working well. I look at the bottom line. Whats the bottom line . Sanctions went into place there were about 200 centrifuges spinning in iran. By their own admission today there are 20,000 centrifuges online in iran. Now, did sanctions work . You tell me. The lady back there. Thank you. Leann dra bernstein, Sputnik International news. Id just like to get your feedback on how you view whats happening in the congress right now, with the threat of sanctions, in the event its pretty fluid i think, with senator menendez changing his position a little bit. Just how you view that situation in congress with the threat of new sanctions possibly derailing the nuclear negotiations, and also if you could comment, is it normal for the president to be negotiating what is effectively an arms control deal without bringing it to the congress to be ratified . You ask some question, question important questions. Number one i encouraged my friends in the congress to avoid supporting additional sanctions at this time. I think its counterproductive. I dont think it will accomplish anything. I think it risks blowing up the negotiations. And i think what the congress, if i assume the best of the congress is that they are very troubled by the fact that these negotiations are extending sort of indefinitely. And yet i remind some of my friends in the congress, its a little bit like budget negotiations in the congress you know . You know, everybody holds out to the last minute to get the best deal they possibly can. Thats sort of part of the art of negotiating. And so so you know. I think we have to be patient. But i do believe, as i said earlier, the clock is ticking on both sides of the table. I mean president obamas time in office is very limited. And then you have the situation in iran where the iranian government the rouhani government, has to have some success here and has to be able to demonstrate to their constituents within iran that an improved relationship with the United States and the west will yield benefits to iran. And if theyre not able to show that, then their popularity and their politics in iran collapses as well. So, you know i kept hearing when i was in iran that we have a window of opportunity the window isnt going to stay open indefinitely. So the clock is ticking on both sides. And i think that it is time for us, and hopefully by the end of march we can have the framework at least of an agreement although the Supreme Leader said he didnt want a twophase agreement. That was one thing he said that did stick out yesterday. Well, the devil will always be in the details on Something Like this. And the bottom line is we have to have as precise an agreement as we possibly can have and as much detail as possible. There may be some fine things, details that have to be negotiated beyond beyond the end of march. But by the end of march i think its urgent for both sides to have at least the framework agreed upon. Now, let me just be careful not to get in too much trouble when i say this. But, you know, the iranians are they ask me and i heard this several different places, can the United States really do a deal that is opposed by the government in israel . And they were constantly asking me about the influence that apec has with the United States congress. And how do you deal with that . And, you know, so those questions are on the minds of iranians. And they are very sophisticated wellinformed observers of the american political process. Now, as americans, we have to make darn sure that we do not miss a historic opportunity to improve significantly this relationship with iran because of our own domestic politics. That would be a tragedy. Now, the last point in your question was the whole issue of arms control why is this not being treated as a treaty . Let me just tell you that as a former member of congress, i believe the president and the administration would be well advised to engage daily almost in communication with key members of the United States senate and to bring the senators into this process as much as possible. And i think there are some senators on both sides of the political aisle that understand the urgency, the historic moment that were in and i believe that with the president and secretary kerry and others being personally involved on a regular basis, that we should be able to build bipartisan support for some kind of a reasonable agreement. We should not prejudge this. And this is the thing that is very troubling to me when i read mr. Netanyahus statements from yesterday. Theres this sort of prejudging of the deal. I mean, there isnt a deal yet. And yet hes saying that i will do everything i can to prevent this deal from being approved. I mean, really . Lets wait until we see the deal, and then we can talk about what the options are. And thats the thing that i think we should keep in front of us. What are the options . You may not like this deal you may think this deal has some risk involved. And it will have some risk involved. But if you dont do the deal, depending on what the deal is then what are the risks . Where wheres the least risk you might say. Congress has to ratify it. Pardon me . Plus congress has to ratify it. Ideally you would like to see the congress be in a position where you could have a good bipartisan, thoughtful debate as we did with salt 1, as we did with the Nuclear Test Ban treaty, as we did with other arms control agreements. That would be the best for both countries. But by the same token, if were going to get into a situation, and god forbid, where our domestic politics overwhelms the facts of the case, and were into playing 2016 politics with this issue, that would be a horrible tragedy for our country and the world and for iran and all parties involved. You know, ideally i would like to see the congress involved. As a practical political matter, you know, that may not be possible for domestic political reasons. If that is the case thats a sad commentary on the u. S. Also this is a multilateral agreement so its not just between the United States and iran. Good point. Question over here. Thanks for coming. Angela canter berry, counsel for the world. I want to ask you the effect you think the invitation to netanyahu to address the congress is having and if you were in congress today, would you attend . What do you advise members to do. This predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well bottom linethis predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom line this predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom linethis predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom linethis predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom linea this predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom lineb this predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom lineou this predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom linet this predicament . Youre really going to get me in trouble, arent you . Well, bottom line this predicament . Youre real, this is about domestic politics. His or ours . Both. I would tell you that Netanyahu Netanyahus appearance before the house of representatives and congress, joint session, is a mistake. I say this is a supporter and friend of israel. I do not want to see the u. S. israel relationship be politicized in what Bebe Netanyahu is doing is politicizing this critically important relationship at a historic moment. And im afraid that its not going to be beneficial for israel and its not going to be beneficial for the United States. And it was a bad choice a bad decision, in my judgment. But as somebody who thirsts for information, i may very well attend the speech. But i may not, too. I may read about it, you know. If i had to decide today i would not attend the speech. Because i believe that his coming here at this time is showing disrespect to the office of the president. And i think about president truman. How would president truman react to this . Slide Something Like this . I was thinking, i was out at the Truman Library last friday. I went out there and asked the archivist there to pull out all the documents they had, you know that communication between mow intra beak and truman and hairman and i had a wonderful time out there reading ought those documents. The last time Something Like this happened his torecally may very well have been when the Republican Congress invited macarthur to speak before a joint session of the congress after he had been fired by the commander in chief for insubordination. You think about that. As we look back on that historic moment. President truman was acting courageously, doing the right thing, supported by general marshall. In the partisanship of the moment overwhelmed the day. And here, you know, we had a we had a great speech, but it was the wrong time for the great speech and the wrong place for the great speech. Good point. We have time for one mow question. In the back all the way. And very quick. Thank you very much. Im ali, a former member of parliament in iran, a sixth parliament reformist. Im glad you had the chance to visit iran. Have you had a chance to talk to parliament to invite some current members of congress in the United States to visit iran . Its a very good chance fit happens. Its not for me tone vite them to iran. But i would i would lov love to see members of congress visit with members of the mod lists. I would like to see iranian officials come to washington and speak here. Let me throw out a crazy idea. If were going to have Bebe Netanyahu come and speak to a joint session of congress, perhaps members of congress would like to have minister zarif or former minister zarif testify before the congress and have an opportunity to ask him questions. You know . Why not . I think minister zarif has enough problems with his own congress. Somebody from iran might be invited to come and testify before the congress. The Foreign Relations committee. And answer questions and talk about this stuff. Why are we afraid of information . Why are we agreed tofraid to talk to people and learn from them . That sort of puzzles me. We at the than till council are not afraid of information so were really pleased that you had time to come today. Its wonderful to visit with you all. Thank you all for coming. Excellent conversation. This week on cspan in primetime, three nights of tech featuring the executives and innovators driving todays most successful internet companies. He leases a taxi for 40,000 a year it should be a bentley or something. Instead its just a taxi. And for that, for that privilege of leasing that car for 40 grand a year he gets to be i think move evered. Hear from insiders at facebook, paypal and more, all part of a special presentation while congress is in recess. Israel, probably the Top Hightech Company in the world country in the world with digital first, for gdp growth, job creation, inclusion of minorities, Health Care Education to every location, movement of the cities south. By the way, cisco the partner all the way through it. Three nights of tech tonight at 7 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Representative paul ryan says americas being left behind other nations like china and brazil because of trade deals. He talked about the issue at the Washington International trade association. Representative ryan also touched on the upcoming trade deal with the European Union known as the transatlantic trade and Investment Partnership ttip, calling for the eu to remove all tariffs on u. S. Goods. This is about a half hour. Because were short on time im not going to dispense with a lengthy introduction and just say were so privileged to have chairman ryan. We have a great trade agenda i think were looking forward to this year. Chairman ryan, chairman of the house ways and Means Committee which is where all trade matters originate and pass through, is going to be one of the principal architects for that. Wouth further ado, chairman ryan. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks a lot, steve, i appreciate it. As mentioned theyre going to be calling votes fairly soon. So well get on with it. Steve and i have known each other for many years. And i want to thank you for that very quick introduction. You know the last time where i come from, the last time we had this many people talking about trade policy was when brett favre went to the new york jets. You know, its nice to have a lot of protrade people in one room. Let me just say it this way. Trade is absolutely vital because our jobs absolutely depend upon it. 20 years ago, trade supported one out of every ten jobs. Today, trade supports one out of every five jobs. This is our future. And theres no turning back. Because we cannot create more jobs if we dont get more customers. And 96 of the worlds population, 96 of the worlds consumers, they dont live in this country, they live in other countries. So the way i see it, were going global for the same reason the pioneers went west. Because thats where the opportunity is. We should welcome this change. Because more trade, it means higher pay. Jobs that rely on trade pay on average 18 more than others. Take an example. Say youre a blue collar guy or gal working for a computer manufacturer. If that company also exports, you will make another 11,000 more a year. The one reason is, in the big leagues, Companies Just have to be at the top of their game. They have to invest in their workers. They have to give you better equipment or better training, and as a result theyve got to give you better pay. Otherwise theyre going to strike out. Competitions the thing. It is that very pressure, that little extra nudge, that pushes companies to do more and to pay more. And we are heading into this future with our eyes wide open. As we should be. Just as we compete for other peoples business they compete for ours. And just as new jobs will arise other jobs will change. There is no doubt about it. Global competition is tough. Its real tough. Its persistent. And ultimately its a good thing. It means when families shop for groceries or go to buy a car they have more choices. And things to lower duties on our imports the average American Family of four saves 10,000 a year. The thing about trade is it can feel like a competition where theres always a winner and theres always a loser. But really it is more like a collaboration. Because both sides succeed. Otherwise they wouldnt do it. More trade means more people from every country buying selling, investing creating all working together to build a better world. So trade is good for america. And people have legitimate gripes with the Global Economy. But lets make sure that we have grabbed the right culprit on this one. The problem isnt whether other countries play by the rules, its when they break the rules. Or, rather its when they rig the rules in their favor. And i would argue that the best solution to that is more trade agreements. Now what a trade agreement does is it levels the playing field. Our economy is already one of the most open in the world. So trade agreements make other countries take down barriers to our exports. Tariffs, quotas, red tape. When what a grade agreement basically says is youve got what i want, and ive got what you want. So lets work something out. Lets set up rules so its easier to trade that way we will both be better off. And the numbers, well the numbers totally bear this out. Take three of our most recent trade agreements. Where do our exports stand now . Vegetables to korea up 60 . Iron and steel to colombia up 100 . Household appliances to panama up 200 . In fact if you add up all the countries that we do not have trade agreements with, our manufacturers run a huge trade deficit with them. But if you add up all the countries that we do have trade agreements with, we run a surplus. So the numbers confirm what we already know. The american worker, they can compete with anybody if given a fair chance. And only a trade agreement can give you that fair chance. Say someone steals your software. If youre a Big Corporation youve got money, youve got lawyers, you can get to the bottom of it you can do something about it. If youre a small or mediumsized business and 98 of our exporters are small and mediumsized businesses you cant afford to fight that. Youre out of luck unless theres a trade agreement. Unless theres an enforceable trade agreement. Then you can work with federal agencies to take up your case with that country. Ive advocated with the ustr on behalf of businesses in my own district on issues like this. They can bring the full weight of the u. S. Government to bear on your behalf. So when theres no agreement its the law of the jungle. And when there is agreement, its the rule of law. In other words, trade agreements set the rules for the Global Economy. Heres the issue. Right now, other countries are rewriting those rules without us. Just consider this. In the first ten years of this century, the countries of east asia negotiated 48 trade agreements. The United States negotiated just two in that region. It should be no surprise, then that our share of what east asia imported fell by 42 . Every one of our Top Competitors did better. Every single one. You cant put points on the board if youre not on the field. Our rivals . Our rivals are playing for keeps. The chinese are pursuing a lot of agreements. Theyre talking to anyone who will listen to them. From south korea to asia to norway. Its not Free Enterprise that theyre pushing. Instead its what they call state capitalism which we all know is chinese for crony capitalism. Sure, well take down some barriers but were still going to force companies to store their data in china. Were still going to hand out sweetheart deals to our government firms. Were still going to demand people fork over their intellectual property. If you dont like it, too bad. That is the system where some other country writes the rules for the Global Economy. The chinese are walking tall. Now other countries are following their lead. Brazil argentina, indonesia, just to name a few. We cannot just ignore the Foreign Policy implications that are involved in this. When we complete a trade agreement, we strengthen our ties with other countries. Our economy is stronger. Our National Security is stronger. Its a lot areas to live in a neighborhood thats friendly, thats prosperous and free. Now, were also negotiating a deal with europe. Our biggest beef with them is they impose food and Safety Standards based on selfinterest instead of science or sound policy. The way they write the regulations, its really pretty opaque. Theyre a little prickly about their labelling or to be precise their geographic indications. So since wisconsin brat isnt from germany, they want us to label this a bratwurstlike sausage. Its like saying the Green Bay Packers engage in a soccerlike activity. Its a little humorous, its kind of ridiculous. But in recent talks, canada agreed to accept some of these labeling standards for things like feta and upon teenfontina. If we do nothing red tape and barriers to our exports will only multiply. Nobody negotiates with an empty seat. Weve got to be in this game. If we dont write the rules of Global Economy somebody else will. Somebody who may not have our best interests at heart. And if we dont like the way the Global Economy works, guess what . Then we have to get out there and change it. Because its not just the goods and services that we care about. Its people too. Nothing has done more to lift people out of poverty around the spire world than the Free Enterprise system. Nothing has given people a better chance to reach their full potential. But this is an idea that needs defending. Because not every country shares our way of life, or even understands it for that matter. You know a few years back, a foreign politician was talking to an american journalist. And the first question he asked was, here in the United States, you dont have this phenomenon of passing money under the table. The journalist explained that in our country the way to get ahead isnt to grease the palms or to cut the corners but to make an honest living. Competition is the only real cure for corruption, he said. So what we are offering the world is not just an economic vision, were offering a moral vision too. And its our job to make this vision a reality. Luckily, weve got an opportunity to do just that. Right now were negotiating several big trade agreements. These are great opportunities. First theres the Transpacific Partnership with our friends in asia. Then theres the transatlantic trade and Investment Partnership with our friends in europe. Finally theres the trade and Services Agreement and the environmental goods agreement with countries all around the world. These agreements could bring huge benefits to our country. Tpp and ttip could give us access to over 1 billion customers in twothirds of global gdp. Think about that. All negotiations are ongoing. And i dont want to presume the outcome now. But all agreements must win congress support. So i want to explain a little bit what we are looking for in congress. If i had to sum up my approach it would be basically this. Aim high, go for the gold, take down as many barriers as possible. In fact, i would actually rather have fewer countries signed on if it meant we took down more barriers. So say for tpp. Japan and canada they have to lower their agricultural tariffs. You know in some cases japans tariffs reach as high as 700 . And canada they have big restrictions on dairy, poultry, and egg products. Theyve got to go. And if any of the 12 countries currently in these talks think that our standards are too high, well, i would complete the agreement without them and then invite them to join later when they can. For ttip, the European Union must eliminate all tariffs. Every one of them. Just as they promised they would do at the outset. And they must go further. They must justify these unjustifiable regulations. They need to reform these. Labels are labels. Theyre meant tone form. Theyre not meant to frighten. And regulations are meant to keep people safe not to keep politicians in office. So the way i see it this is a great opportunity for our friends in europe to set up a system thats transparent, thats coherent, thats firstrate. Everybody benefits. And any agreement must include strong protections for crossborder data flows, investment, Financial Services intellectual property rights. Now, for tssa we need to think big. We need to go beyond just signing up countries for an ancient 20yearold deal, the general agreement on trade and services, which was signed in the days of bicycle messengers. We can do better for ttsa. We need to push countries to do more and only countries with a good record of fulfilling trade agreements, fulfilling trade commitments, they should join. Weve got to keep trucking at the wto. First wave got to implement the trade facilitation agreement. This agreement alone could add 1 trillion to the Global Economy. Next we got the environmental goods agreements. This is a great opportunity to tear down barriers to our environmental goods. That could add another 1 trillion. Weve got to expand the Information Technology agreement. Because we can keep our crucial edge in this sector if we can do that. Weve got to look for all opportunities to take down barriers of all members of the wto, especially the major emerging economies. And weve got to keep using the dispute settlement process to enforce our rights. Otherwise whats the point of having a trade agreement . Before we can conclude any of these deals, theres one thing that we have to do. Weve got to pass trade promotion authority. Heres the issue. When the United States sits down at the negotiating table, every country at that table has to be able to trust us. They have to know that the deal that the administration wants is also the deal that congress wants. Because if our trading partners dont trust the administration if they think it will make commitments that congress will simply undo later on, they wont make concessions. Why run the risk for no reason . On the other hand, once our trading partners know that we are trust worthy, once they can see that we are negotiating in good fade, theyll be more willing to make concessions. Thats why we have to pass tpa before negotiations are complete. To get the best deal possible we have to be in the best position possible. We cant negotiate with ourselves. We have to maintain a united front. Now im not saying to enhance our leverage we have to enhance the administrations power. Actually, its far from it. What i am saying what is tpa does is it enhances congress power. Tpa empowers congress. Heres how. Nothing stops the administration from negotiating a deal without our input. They can go out and do this right now. So if we waited till after negotiations to get involved and simply reacted to whatever they put in front of us we might just kill the deal. That means we have to get involved before the deal is done, not after its finished. We have to be proactive, not reactive. Thats what tpa does. We call this process trade promotion authority. I think of it more as a contract. We say to the administration, if you want this top up over down vote, you have to meet three requirements. Number one, youve got to follow our guidelines. Heres what we want to see in the trade agreement. Number two youve got to talk with us, you have to consult with us. Number three you have to remember Congress Gets the final say. We simply cant get the best deals without tpa. And thats why weve got to pass it as soon as we can. And thats why the president also has to show leadership on this issue. Completing these trait deals is my number one priority. In the meantime, there are a few other things that are on our to do list. This is going to be a very busy year for trade. First, we authorize gsp. Many Small Businesses need this program to stay competitive. Second, pass a seamless and timely renewal of the african growth and opportunity act as soon as possible. This program has helped reformers promote Good Government in africa. Its helped Free Enterprise come to these countries. Its created opportunity for the continent. Its basically said to our reformers in africa Free Enterprise is the way to go. Third. Find a way forward for the miscellaneous tariff bill. This has been vexing for some time. Its been slipping through us. Weve got to get this done. Weve got to get a commonsense solution to this. The basic thing is the bill would eliminate duties on hundreds of products that we dont even make in this country and that our manufacturers need to make their products. Were needlessly raising prices for consumers in america and we have to finish this. Finally weve got to pass the customs trade fa sill tact and enforcement act. Congressman kevin brady hes done solid work on this bill. It would streamline our customs procedures and enforce our trade laws. Congressman charles bustani, hes come up with a very creative way to fight trade remedy evasion. This is all important legislation. Weve got to get it done. This is a long wish list but it is our plan to execute on all of these fronts this the year. But lets not lose sight of the bigger picture. Of what were doing and why were doing it. Because its not just our economy thats on the line here. Its americas credibility. Theres no question its taken a beating over the last few years. We have left the world wondering, does the United States have the staying power . Will it stick it out . Finishing these trade deals would emphatically answer with a yes. Yes, you can count on the United States. Yes, we will be there. We wont abandon the field. We will stick up for Free Enterprise and for free people. The worldty looks to our example. And on the Big Questions of the day, they still look for our answer. And when it comes to this question, the future of the Global Economy we will have to pronounce our answer clearly and without hesitation. Only in a Free Enterprise system is it true that the condition of your birth does not determine the outcome of your life. That idea the idea we call the american idea, that, that without question is our most valuable export. Thank you very much for doubling me today, i appreciate it. Indulging me today, i appreciate it. Do i have time for questions or do i have to go . There are votes . Sorry. I was going to stay and do questions for a while, but unfortunately, thats the way it works in the house. They have votes. Ive got about five votes that just started already, is that right . I apologize but thank you very much for indulging me i really appreciate your time. Thanks. President barack obama today chose Joseph Clancy to become the next secret service director. Mr. Clancy is the former secret Service Special agent hired temporarily in the wake of security breaches. And independent panels concluded that the job should go to an outsider. Mr. Clancy is a 27year veteran of the agency is and headed the president ial protective division. Heres what white house spokesman josh earnest had to say about the appointment today. Today the president has selected mr. Joseph clancy to serve as the permanent director of the United States secret service. Director clan yescylancy, former special agent in charge of the president ial protective division, has served as the acting director since october 1st of last year. Many of you will recall that director clancy stepped into that role at the special request of the president at a rather difficult time for the agency. And over the course of the last several months director clancy has demonstrated the kind of leadership that frankly many of us expected and to demonstrate. He is somebody that has, based on his long track record with the agency, a lot of credibility build built up inside the agency and he used that credibility to put in place reforms that were recommended by this outside panel that the dhs secretary jay johnson had convened. So hes got a lot of important work still ahead of him. But were certainly pleased to see that he his leadership thus far has been recognized with this permanent appointment. This week while congress is in recess, book tv and American History tv are in primetime. On wednesday at 8 00 eastern its World Affairs talking about chinas secret plan to replace america as a super power. The egyptian revolution and the emergeing crisis on europe. Politics and the white house from our afterwards programs with david axelrod, mike huckabee, and april ryan. Biographies of robert e. Lee and joseph stalin. A look at pakistan through the eyes of a woman raised in karachi. On American History tv on wednesday the 100th anniversary of the release of the film the birth of a nation with an interview of author dick lehr, the showing of the entire 1915 film followed by a reair of our callin program. And thursday historians debate the social changes of the 1970s at the 2015 American Historical Association meeting in new york city. And friday japaneseamerican internment during world war ii. Book tv and American History tv this week in primetime. The Washington Institute for near east policy held a discussion recently on the fight against isis and the role of iran and syrias bashar al assad. Regional experts and a former army colonel who served in iraq took part in this hour and a half discussion. Good afternoon. Good afternoon and welcome to the Washington Institute. My name is david shanker, director of the program on arab politics here. Its nice to see such a large crowd. Were here today for a policy forum, the fight against isil, shiite militias and the coalition effort, to talk about the release talk about the release of two new fascinating institute studies. If anyone had any doubts the video released earlier this week of the burning alife of the jordanian captured pilot confirms the moral depravity of isil. But six months into the air Coalition Campaign against isil, which commenced with the beheading of american journalist james foley, results have been mixed at best. Isil out of cobaunny in syria. However, overall today the group controls more territory in syria and iraq than it did six months ago when the war started. Air power alone is going to be insufficient to degrade and ultimately defeat isil. To roll back isil the organization is going to have to be countered on the ground. And were witnessing right now the initial stages of this new phase in the campaign. In syria, the Administration Strategy of training up the moderate vetted Syrian Opposition remains a distant if realistic option. Meanwhile, though, in syria, iran and the assad regime are deploying a series of shiite militias to combat isil. Across border in iraq, baghdad in cooperation with washington is working to reconstitute and field an integrated internal Security Force. To discuss these differing approaches to isil today we have a great Panel Featuring michael knights, philip smith, and p. J. Dermer. Michael knights is a lafer fellow at the Washington Institute and the author of the justreleased study the long haul rebooting u. S. Skoort cooperation in iraq. Philip smythe is a researcher at the university of maryland and author of the blog which focuses on shiite islamist militarism in the reg jor. The shiite jihad in syria and its regional effects. Commenting on the presentations were really lucky to have p. J. Dermer, retired army colonel who served multiple tours in the region, including two in iraq. And served as senior military