TODAY'S EVENT IS PART OF THE FORD SCHOOL'S TOWSLEY POLICYMAKER PROGRAM. IT DEVELOPED INTO THOUSAND ONE, THE TOWSLEY PROGRAM HAS ALLOWED US TO BRINGS PROFESSIONALS TO JOIN A PROGRAM FOR SEMESTER AND SOMETIMES LONGER. WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE TOWSLEY FOUNDATION WITH US THIS EVENING. I AM HERE TO RECOGNIZE AND ON BEHALF OF THE FORD SCHOOL OFFER OF MY THINGS TO GLENN WHITE AND DALE DUNBAR FOR THE INCREDIBLE SUPPORT OF THE FORD SCHOOL. [APPLAUSE] >> OUR TOWSLEY POLICYMAKER RESIDENTS TEACH AND WORK WITH THE FACULTY AND BECOME A PART OF THE LIFE OF THE SCHOOL BRINGING REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE IN ALL OF ITS COMPLEXITIES AND POTENTIAL RIGHT HERE TO THE FORD SCHOOL AND THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. THE TOWSLEY GIFT HAS HAD A VERY POSITIVE AND POWERFUL IMPACT ON OUR SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS, AND WE ARE DEEPLY GRATEFUL. THIS SEMESTER, THEY ARE GLAD TO HAVE JAVED ALI AS A 2018 TOWSLEY POLICYMAKER AND RESIDENT. HE IS CURRENTLY TEACHING A FORD SCHOOL GRADUATE LEVEL COURSE OF DECISION-MAKING. JAVED HAS OVER 20 YEARS OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE IN WASHINGTON D.C. AND HE MOST RECENTLY SERVED ON ASSIGNMENT FROM THE FBI A SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR COUNTERTERRORISM AT THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL. HE BEGAN HIS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAREER IN TO THOUSAND TO IT IS WORKED AT THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND THE FBI. AND IN ADDITION TO HIS ROLE AT THE NSC, HE WAS ALSO ON ASSIGNMENT AT THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COUNCIL AND TERRORISM CENTER. HE HAS A BA IN POLITICAL SCIENCE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, AND DA, AND AN MA IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS FROM AMERICAN UNIVERSITY. JAVED IS GOING TO INTRODUCE HER DISTINGUISHED PANELIST MORE FULLY IN A MOMENT SO FOR NOW, PLEASE SIMPLY JOIN ME IN OFFERING A VERY WARM WELCOME TO OUR GUESTS. WE HAVE PETER BERGEN, A JOURNALIST FOR FELLOWS OF THE NEW AMERICA. BARBARA McQUADE, MY COLLEAGUE AND PROFESSOR FROM MICHIGAN LAW, AND THE FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. AND CHRIS COSTA, A 30 YEAR VETERAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND NOW THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE SPY MUSEUM IN WASHINGTON, D.C.. LET ME JUST PAUSE THERE AND ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN WELCOMING THEM. [APPLAUSE] >> LET ME JUST SAY A BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS, WE WILL FOLLOW OUR USUAL FORD SCHOOL RULES. IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR JAVED OR ONE OF THE PANELISTS, PLEASE RIGHTED AND WE WILL COLLECT CARS AROUND 4:30. OUR PROFESSOR JOEY RHODY, I AM LOOKING AND SEEING YOU, AND THREE OF JAVED STUDENTS WILL SORT THROUGH AND READ THE QUESTION. MICHAEL BECKMAN, AND ELLIOTT VAN WHITE. IF YOU ARE WATCHING ONLINE, PLEASE SEND YOUR QUESTION VIA TWITTER USING #POLICYTALKS. WITH THAT, JAVED, I WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO YOU. >> THANK YOU, DEAN BARR. FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU, DEAN BARR, FOR GIVING ME A CHANCE TO BE HERE. IT IS A LOOK TO WIND OF THIS CLASS IT HAS BEEN A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE AND HONOR FOR ME TO BE HERE CERTAINLY IS A MICHIGAN GRAD MANY YEARS AGO. AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO WAS TURNED OUT TODAY TO WATCH IN PERSON, A GREAT AUDIENCE TO HEAR THE REMARKABLE INSIGHTS THAT YOU WILL GET FROM THIS VERY DISTINGUISHED PANEL, AND HOPEFULLY FOR THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING ONLINE ARE FOLLOWING ONLINE AS WELL, AND IT IS A NEAT CAPABILITY THAT DID NOT EXIST WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL 30 YEARS AGO. BUT AS DEAN BARR MENTIONED, UNDER THE TOWSLEY PROGRAM, I TRIED TO GET ALL OF THE OBJECTIVES THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF MY PRESENCE HERE OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS AND CERTAINLY TO THIS MONTH, CERTAINLY LEADING A NEW CLASS THAT WILL GO WELL. THE STUDENTS CAN GIVE YOU FEEDBACK ON INTERACTING WITH A BROADER RANGE OF STUDENTS ACROSS THE CAMPUS. I TRY TO DO THAT AS WELL AND A PULL TOGETHER A UNIQUE PANEL DISCUSSION, AND I THINK THAT WE WILL DELIVER THAT TODAY. NOW DEAN BARR, WHEN YOU HAD ASKED ME TO START TO THINK ABOUT AN EVENT UNDER THE TOWSLEY PROGRAM, WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN TRUE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL PRACTICE, AND CHRIS COSTA GNOSIS, I LOOKED AT MULTIPLE OPTIONS, LOOKED AT THE PROS AND CONS OF EACH OPTION AND ULTIMATELY CAME UP WITH MY OWN RECOMMENDATION AND DID NOT HAVE TO CONSULT WITH ANYBODY ELSE. BUT WHEN I SORTED THROUGH THE COMPLEXITY, I DECIDED TO BUILD THE PANEL AROUND SOMETHING THAT MEANS ÃSOMETHING VERY PROFOUND TO ME, COUNTERTERRORISM. THIS IS THE ISSUE WHERE I WORK THE ENTIRETY OF MY CAREER IN GOVERNMENT AND SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE 9/11 IN WASHINGTON SO HOPEFULLY THIS IS THE PERSPECTIVE THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT OVER THE NEXT HOUR, HOUR AND-A-HALF YEAR. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THIS ISSUE ALIGNS WITH SOME OF THE TOPICS WE HAVE EXPLORED IN THE CLASS ON NATIONAL SECURITY DECISION-MAKING, SO THIS IS A TWO FOR ONE. NOW, WHAT I ALSO WANTED TO DO WAS TO LOOK INTO THE FUTURE. SO THE WE LITERALLY JUST PASSING 17TH ANNIVERSARY OF REMEMBER THAT DAY, AND I CERTAINLY DO FOR MY TIME IN WASHINGTON, THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS NOT GOING AWAY ANYTIME SOON IN THE UNITED STATES. TWO YEARS FROM NOW WE WILL BE IN 2020 AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORLD WILL LOOK LIKE THEM. SO THIS IS WHAT I WANTED TO PANEL DISCUSSION TO FOCUS ON, THE FORWARD-LOOKING APPROACH OF WHAT THE WORLD OF TERRORISM AND COUNTERTERRORISM WILL LOOK LIKE IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND WE ARE REALLY LUCKY TO HAVE THESE THREE EXPERT VIEWS BRINGING THEIR OWN DISTINGUISHED BACKGROUNDS THROUGH A VARIETY OF DISCIPLINES, AS DEAN BARR DESCRIBED. EACH OF THEM WHO I KNOW, SOME FOR LONGER THAN OTHERS, AND BOWEL HAVE BUILD POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH. SO, LET'S FIRST TURN TO PETER BERGEN. AS WE HEARD FROM DEAN BARR, I WOULD CONSIDER PETER THE WORLD'S LEADING POLICY EXPERT ON COUNTERTERRORISM. YOU HAVE BEEN IN THIS FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS IF NOT MORE. YOU HAVE WRITTEN SEVEN BOOKS Ã AND CORRECT ME IF I GET THIS WRONG. MOST OF THEM ARE AWARD-WINNING. YOU'VE AUTHORED MULTIPLE REPORTS OF MONOGRAPHS, AND WHAT OF YOUR HOMEWORK ACHIEVEMENTS IS YOUR INTERVIEW WITH OSAMA BIN LADEN IN 1998.IF YOU GET THAT RIGHT? >> YES, SIR, 97. >> THERE WE GO. BUT PETER, AGAIN, I THINK IS REALLY THE WORLD'S LIVING VOICE OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT, AND EVEN IN MY DIFFERENT POSITIONS WITH GOVERNMENT. AND CHRIS COSTA CAN ATTEST TO THIS. WE WERE THINKING OF SORTING THROUGH SOME TOUGH COUNTERTERRORISM ISSUES INSIDE THE NSC. THE FIRST PERSON WE SPOKE TO WAS PETER BERGEN SO PETER, THANK YOU FOR SPENDING TIME WITH US. MY CONNECTION WITH YOU GOES BACK ALMOST 20 YEARS BUT NOW CHRIS I HAVE NOT KNOWN AS LONG. CHRIS HIRED ME AS A DEPUTY AT THE NSC. WE HAD NEVER MET EACH OTHER WHICH IS UNUSUAL. USUALLY IN WASHINGTON THE SENIOR POSITIONS, THE PERSONAL CONNECTIONS TO DO WORK OUT THAT WAY BUT I NEVER MET CHRIS. I'M STILL NOT SURE WHY HE PICKED ME AS A DEPUTY. [LAUGHTER] >> BUT AS YOU CAN TELL, YOU WANT UP TO ME ON THE MICHIGAN TIE EVEN THOUGH YOU DID NOT GO TO SCHOOL HERE BUT THERE IS GOLD OF MY TIE, JUST FOR THE RECORD. BUT CHRIS AND I HIT IT OFF FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WE SPENT TOGETHER WAS ALMOST LIKE A 20 YEAR SORT OF BOND, BECAUSE WE REALLY WENT THROUGH SORT OF THE CRUCIBLE, FROM THE TIME THAT WE BOTH SPENT IN THE NSC FROM EARLY 2017 TO EARLY 2018. SO CHRIS CANNOT SAY ENOUGH ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PICKING ME AS YOUR DEPUTY BUT YOUR OWN CAREER, 34 YEARS OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE, 25 YEARS IN THE MILITARY AND RETIRED AS A COLONEL. A LOT OF THAT TIME IN THE MILITARY INTELLIGENCE WORLD, ALSO IN THE SPECIAL OPERATIONS WORLD, THE COMMANDO HALL OF FAME. BUT YOU DID NOT KNOW THIS ABOUT CHRIS. YOU'VE SEEN THE PICTURES AND YOU WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE HIM WHEN HE WAS IN HIS COMMANDO ROLL! AND THEN, ANOTHER NINE YEARS OF SERVICE IN GOVERNMENT TO INCLUDE THE LAST YEAR IS A SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR COUNTERTERRORISM AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. AGAIN, CHRIS, I WAS HONORED TO WORK WITH CHRIS AS HIS DEPUTY. THEN BARBARA WHO I ALSO HAVE NOT KNOWN AS LONG BUT WHEN I WAS AT THE FBI ÃAND I HAVE LEFT THE GOVERNMENT, JUST TO BE CLEAR. WHEN I WAS AT THE FBI, BARBARA'S REPUTATION WAS WELL-VERSED INSIDE THE HALLS OF THE FBI. HER CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, HAS SPENT A LOT OF TIME AS A PROSECUTOR ON THE FRONT LINES ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES TO INCLUDE COUNTERTERRORISM. BUT THEN, THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN IN 2010, YOUR PROMINENCE BECAME EVEN HIGHER. AND I THOUGHT WHAT WAS REALLY UNIQUE ABOUT YOUR ROLE AS A U.S. ATTORNEY EVEN THOUGH YOU WERE, AGAIN, THESE ARE REALLY TOUGH NATIONAL SECURITY CASES TO INCLUDE COUNTERTERRORISM CASES, BUT I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT YOU WERE ONE OF THE FEW U.S. ATTORNEYS GOING BACK ALMOST 1 DECADE TO TRY TO BALANCE THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH ROLE IN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAD A FOOT EQUALLY IN BOTH CAMPS AS THEY WERE SORTING THROUGH THE TOUGH ISSUES AFTER TO THOUSAND ONE, SO THANK YOU, BARBARA, AS WELL, FOR BEING HERE WITH US. SO THAT IS SORT OF AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PANEL. LET ME JUST FRAME THE CONVERSATION WE WILL HAVE TODAY AND THE FORMAT. SO WE HAVE AN HOUR AND 20 MINUTES OR AN HOUR AND 10 MINUTES AND WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS SMARTLY. I HAVE FOUR QUESTIONS, THE PANELISTS KNOW WHAT THIS IS. UNLIKE SOME OF MY IMMEDIATE APPEARANCES IN TELEVISION AS PETER AND BARBARA CAN ATTEST TO. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS CYCLED THROUGH THE PANEL WITH THE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE THEM GET YOU ALL INVOLVED IN THE AUDIENCE, EITHER HERE IN THE ROOM OR THOSE WATCHING REMOTELY OR ONLINE. WE HAVE STUDENTS FROM THE CLASS WILL HELP TO FACILITATE THAT ASPECT. BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE. IF WE DON'T THEN I WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TWO QUESTIONS AND WE WILL SWING BACK TO THE AUDIENCE QUESTIONS AT THE END BUT WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL GET A CHANCE TO INTERACT WITH THE PANELISTS. SO THAT IS ENOUGH TALKING FOR ME, SORT OF A FRAME UP FOR WHAT WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO ACCOMPLISH, SO LET'S JUST DIVE INTO THE QUESTIONS. WE WILL START WITH PETER AND THEN REVERSE HER FOR THE SECOND ONE. SO I MENTIONED BRIEFLY THAT WE WANT THIS PANEL TO ADD LEAST START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT LOOKING TO THE FUTURE AND WHAT THE POTENTIAL TERROR THREAT WILL LOOK LIKE IN 2020. SO THAT IS SORT OF A JUMPING OFF POINT, PETER. SO JUST LOOKED AT THE TERRORISM PHENOMENON FROM 30 YEARS, LOOKING AT 2020, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE BIGGEST TERRORIST THREATS WILL BE FOR THE UNITED STATES IN THAT TWO YEAR TIMEFRAME, AND WHY DO YOU BELIEVE SO? >> WELL THANK YOU, JAVED, FOR THE INVITATION AND TO THE FORD SCHOOL. YOGI BERRA SAID IT IS HARD TO MAKE PREDICTIONS, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE FUTURE. SO I WOULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION THAT ISIS WAS NOT A PROBLEM. ISIS WAS A SYMPTOM OF THE PROBLEMS THAT DOES NOT AFFECT THE UNITED STATES BUT AFFECTS THE MIDDLE EAST AND EUROPE. A BIG PROBLEM IS A REGIONAL CIVIL WAR BETWEEN THE SUNNI AND THE GULF STATES. NOW, THE COLLAPSE OF OUR GOVERNORS FROM LIBYA TO YEMEN ARE A SECOND ISSUE. THE COLLAPSE OF OUR ECONOMIES, AT 30 PERCENT IN THE REGION RIGHT NOW. THE POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHIC EXPLOSION, THE SECOND MOST OTHER THAN THE THE SUB-SAHARAN AFRICAN, NORTH AFRICA, POLICE, THE FASTEST GROWING POPULATION IN THE WORLD. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE POOREST PEOPLE BECOME TERRORIST BUT I WANT TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT PEOPLE LOOKING FOR JOBS, ISIS AND THE TALIBAN, THESE GROUPS HAVE ÃTHEY PROVIDE JOBS FOR THAN AS A RESULT OF THE FIRST FOUR PROBLEMS, ALTERED BY CLIMATE CHANGES THAT ARE MADE NORTH AFRICA AND THE SUB-SAHARAN A VERY DIFFICULT PLACE TO LIVE. SO WE HAVE THIS NEXT PROBLEM WHICH IS AN UNPRECEDENTED WAVE OF IMMIGRATION INTO YOUR. I GREW UP IN ENGLAND. EUROPEANS DON'T HAVE THE IDEOLOGICAL APPARATUS TO ACCEPT LARGE-SCALE IMMIGRATION.THERE ARE OF COURSE EXCEPTIONS. THE MAYOR OF LONDON IS A MUSLIM IN THE HOMELAND SECRETARY IS A MUSLIM BUT THE FACT IS IF YOU ARE A MUSLIM LIVING IN EUROPE, IT IS NOT AN ACCOMMODATING PLACE. AND THEN, YOU HAVE THE RIGHTS OF THE ULTRANATIONALIST PARTIES, EVEN THE PRO-FASCIST PARTIES WHICH WERE ONCE VERY MARGINAL, AND THEN, ALL OF THESE TRENDS ARE AMPLIFIED BY SOCIAL MEDIA. SO, ISIS WAS A SORT OF MIDDLE EASTERN PHENOMENON WITH A MIDDLE EASTERN DIMENSION BUT THE UNITED STATES WAS NOT REALLY EFFECTIVE BY IT. WE ARE PROTECTED BY IDEOLOGY, THE AMERICAN DREAM WHICH IS WORKED VERY WELL FOR EVERY IMMIGRATION THE LAST GENERATION OF IMMIGRANTS. YOU CAN DRIVE ÃCANNOT DRIVE FROM DETROIT TO | >>> NOW, IT MIGHT NOT BE AS EFFECTIVE AS BARBARA, CHRIS, THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE NOT FLOURISHED IN THIS COUNTRY AND WE HAVE TAKEN THE FIGHT TO THEM.BUT, WITH THAT SAID, FIVE YEARS AGO AFTER THE DEATH OF BIN LADEN IN THE ARAB SPRING, I WOULD'VE HAD A RATHER OPTIMISTIC ANSWER BUT TODAY I DON'T BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE ARE UNDERLYING ISSUES THAT CONTINUE TO EXIST. >> OKAY, THANK YOU, PETER. CHRIS? >> SO FIRST OF ALL IT IS A PRIVILEGE TO BE HERE TONIGHT SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND ESPECIALLY TO PARTICIPATE IN A PANEL WITH JAVED AND PETER AND BARBARA. SO I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT FIRST, THEN I WILL DIG INTO THE QUESTIONS. CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? NO? OKAY. WELL, NORTH AND SOUTH BEREZO ON DAY ONE, JUST TO SET THE CONTEXT, WE HAD THREE ISSUES THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH IN THE COUNTERTERRORISM SPHERE. FIRST OF ALL, WE HAD A DECISION TO MAKE ON AN INTELLIGENCE RAID THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE FIRST WEEK OF THE ADMINISTRATION. THE RATE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY DIRECTED AGAINST AL QAEDA AND THE PENINSULA. I SUBSEQUENTLY DISCOVERED THAT IT WAS AN OPERATOR THAT I KNEW, BUT THAT IS THE PRICE OF DECISION-MAKING, NATIONAL DECISION-MAKING. WE PUT PRESSURE ON AL QAEDA IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA. THE SECOND ISSUE THAT WE HAD TO WORK WAS A CONSTANT UNDERLYING THREAT DIRECTED AT COMMERCIAL AVIATION THAT WAS PERSISTENT AND SEVERE, AND WE WERE VERY MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. THERE WAS A STAY IN CONTINUITY BETWEEN BOTH ADMINISTRATIONS THAT YOU SHOULD BE REASSURED ABOUT. AS WE WENT FROM ONE ADMINISTRATION TO THE NEXT, GETTING TO THE PROBLEM. THE THIRD ISSUE WAS, WE HAD TO ACCELERATE OUR ISIS CAMPAIGN. THOSE WERE THREE ISSUES IN THE FIRST WEEK THAT WE WOULD TACKLE ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. SO I WANT TO PROVIDE THE CONTEXT. NOW, TO ANSWER, THE BIGGEST THREATS ÃI WANT TO REINFORCE THAT REMNANTS OF ISIS IN THE NEXT 25 YEARS OR SOMETHING LIKE ISIS IS GOING TO PERSIST. THE ENEMY HAS GONE UNDERGROUND. ISIS HAS GONE UNDERGROUND CERTAINLY, BUT SOME OF THE WONDERING GROUPS WILL BE BETTER TRAINED AND MORE LETHAL AND STILL INSISTENT ON CAUSING HAVOC IN THE WEST AND SOME WILL GET AWAY FROM SYRIA AND IRAQ, SO I AM WORRIED ABOUT A REBRANDED ISIS HERE IDEOLOGICALLY SOMEBODY ELSE, WHETHER THAT IS A BIGGER AL QAEDA, THAT IS AN OPEN QUESTION BUT WE WILL HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ISIS. SECONDLY, I AM WORRIED ABOUT AL QAEDA. THEY LAY THEIR HEAD LOW AND LET ISIS STICK IT UP AND TAKE THE SHOTS, BUT AL QAEDA HAS NOT GONE AWAY. THEY HAVE BEEN QUIETLY REBUILDING AND USE DOCTOR BRUCE HOFFMAN'S WORDS, THEY HAVE BEEN QUIETLY REBRANDED THEMSELVES. THIRD, THE OTHER CONCERN, BASED ON 2020 WITH THE QUESTION THAT WE RECEIVED, I AM WORRIED ABOUT HEZBOLLAH. THEY HAVE A CLANDESTINE INFRASTRUCTURE. THEY HAVE NOT GOT AWAY. AND THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A GRAY ZONE CONFLICT THAT IS PLAYING OUT IN SYRIA TO THIS DAY. SO I AM VERY MUCH WORRIED ABOUT HEZBOLLAH. AND I SHOULD ARGUE THAT SOME WOULD SAY THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS CURRENTLY RESUSCITATED THE HEZBOLLAH PROBLEM, SO THAT WE COULD JUSTIFY A MORE AGGRESSIVE IRANIAN PROBLEM. FROM A PURELY CT LINENS, I AM STILL WORRIED ABOUT HEZBOLLAH. THEY HAVE A VERY, VERY CAPABLE AND LETHAL CAPABILITY. THE SECOND PART THAT I WILL WRAP UP VERY QUICKLY, I JUST WANT TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A SCENE SETTER, THAT IN THE POST BIN LADEN WORLD, THERE WAS A GREATER OPTIMISM, RIGHT? BIN LADEN WAS KILLED. THERE WAS A CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM THAT BEGAN TO BREAK OUT. BUT THEN AGAIN, A LOT OF OTHER THINGS HAPPENED, BUT AN APOCALYPTIC GROUP CAME ALONG WHICH WAS ISIS, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THE CHAOS. AND WITH THAT SAID, I THINK THAT I WILL CLOSE MY INITIAL COMMENTS WITH THE FIRST ANSWER BY SAYING RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE PLAYING OUT IN SYRIA AND IRAQ AS A METAPHOR FOR WHAT WE WILL BE DEALING WITH IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, WHICH IS THIS GRAY ZONE CONFLICT PLAYING OUT. WHEN YOU CONSIDER SYRIA, WHAT IS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW? WHAT YOU HAVE IS HEZBOLLAH OPERATING IN THAT SPACE. PROXIES. YOU HAVE A GENOCIDAL REGIME OF SYRIA WITH RUSSIANS IN THE PLAYGROUND, ACTING AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THE CHAOS ON THE GROUND IN SYRIA. YOU HAVE ISIS REMNANTS STILL OPERATING IN U.S. PROXY FORCES, AND U.S. FORCES STILL GOING AFTER THE LAST VESTIGES OF ISIS, AND A NATO ALLEY OF THE TURKS PLAYING IN THE SAME SPACE SO I THINK THAT THAT IS VERY MUCH A METAPHOR FOR WHAT WE WILL BE DEALING WITH IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. >> Barbara McQuade: WILL THANK YOU VERY MUCH PRODUCE THE MICROPHONE GOOD? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR INVITING ME, JAVED AND MICHAEL. WE ARE SO GLAD TO BE HERE AT THE FORD SCHOOL, OUR NEIGHBOR FROM ACROSS THE PARKING LOT PART OF ONLY THOUGHT OF YOU AS A GOOD TARGET FOR THE WATER BALLOON FIGHT IN THE PAST BUT IT IS GREAT TO BE HERE. [LAUGHTER] >> OUT ANSWER THE QUESTION, I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH WHAT CHRIS AND PETER HAVE TO SAY AND I'LL ADD A FEW MORE THOUGHTS OF WHAT I THINK IS A PROSECUTOR, LESS OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE BUT MORE OF THE PROSECUTION TEAM, WITH MY PRIOR JOB. NOW IT DOES APPEAR TO ME THAT THE THREAT IS THAT WE MIGHT SEE IN THE FUTURE MIGHT ALSO COME FROM HOMEGROWN VIOLENT EXTREMISM. AS WELL AS NATION STATES. RUSSIA AND KOREA, KORAN, AND CHINA IN PARTICULAR. BUT DURING THE TIME THAT I WORKED ON THESE THREATS IN THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE STARTING INTO THOUSAND TO AND UNTIL LAST YEAR, WE REALLY SAW THE THREAD EVOLVE VERY QUICKLY. FIRST, OF COURSE AFTER 9/11, IT WAS ALL ABOUT AL QAEDA. SHORTLY THEREAFTER IT BECAME AL QAEDA IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA, AND THEN IT DID EVOLVE TO ISIS, AND EVEN THAT WE HAVE SEEN HAS EVOLVED SINCE THAT TIME. SO I DO SEE ÃEVEN THE ISIS THREAT HAS EVOLVED FROM TRAVEL TO SYRIA AND SIGN UP TO BE A FIGHTER FOR ISIS. OR DON'T COME TO US, STAY WHERE YOU ARE AND FIGHT WHERE YOU ARE. THEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE DRIVING A CAR INTO A CROWD, COMMITTING TERRORIST ACTS WHERE YOU LIVE. SO THE THREAT IS SO CONSTANTLY EVOLVING, I THINK AS PETER MENTIONED, I SEE CLIMATE CHANGE WHICH IS DRIVING CARE ACTIVITY. MIGRATION OF REFUGEES, PEOPLE WITH NO PLACE TO LIVE, I THINK THAT THAT IS GOING TO SPARK THE MILITANT GROUPS, FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIVES, FIGHTING FOR THEIR LAND. SO I THINK THAT THOSE CAN SPARK THE THREAD AS WELL. THEN JUST TO TALK ABOUT THE TWO THREATS OF HOMEGROWN VIOLENCE AND EXTREMISM, THREATS FROM NATIONSTATES, WITH REGARD HOMEGROWN VIOLENCE AND EXTREMISM, THIS IS SO OVERSTATED AND UNDER LOOKED. SINCE 9/11, 71 PERCENT OF TERROR ATTACKS IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE BEEN PERPETRATED BY HOMEGROWN VIOLENT EXTREMISTS, RIGHT WING GROUPS. WE FOCUS ON THE BIG AND DRAMATIC ATTACKS LIKE 9/11, BUT WE TEND NOT TO PAY AS MUCH ATTENTION TO THE OTHER GROUPS BY HOMEGROWN VIOLENT EXTREMIST WHICH I THINK IT'S A MISTAKE. IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE COUNTERTERRORISM OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THE WE AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STARTED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE THREAD AND RESUSCITATED A GROUP CALLED THE DOMESTIC TERRORISM EXECUTIVE COUNCIL. I WAS A COCHAIR OF THE GROUP, AND THE GROUP HAD LAST MET ON SEPTEMBER 10 TO THOUSAND ONE. HIS WORK HAS BEEN GREATLY OVERSHADOWED BY THIS VERY HORRIBLE AND SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT EVENT OF 9/11, BUT BECAUSE SO MUCH EMPHASIS WAS PLACED ON INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM, I THINK THAT THERE IS LESS ATTENTION THAN APPROPRIATE, PAINTED THE DOMESTIC TERRORISM. SO IT IS STILL ALIVE AND WELL AND MY COCHAIR WITH THE U.S. ATTORNEY FROM THE DISTRICT OF UTAH IS STILL THE ATTORNEY IN THIS ADMINISTRATION AND I KNOW THAT HE IS CARING ON THAT IMPORTANT WORK SO I AM GLAD TO SEE HE HAS HIS EYE ON THE BALL. SOMETIMES I WORRY ABOUT THE RHETORIC THAT FOCUSES ON THE INTERNATIONAL THREAT THAT UNDERSTATES WHAT THIS THREAD IS OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM, BUT I MEAN IT IS JUST AS SIGNIFICANT. WHEN SOMEBODY DIES, NOBODY CARES IF IT WAS MOTIVATED BY INTERNATIONAL OR DOMESTIC TERRORISM. THIS IS A THREAT THAT WE NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO. AND THEN, WITH REGARD TO THE FOREIGN THREAT FROM NATIONSTATES, THE CIA HAS RECENTLY SAID THAT THIS WILL BE HIS RENEWED FOCUS, SINCE 9/11, THE TOP PRIORITY HAVE BEEN COUNTERTERRORISM. AND THOUGH IT IS CERTAINLY PART OF WHAT THEY FOCUS ON, THEY HAD MADE A TOP PRIORITY NATIONSTATES FROM HUMAN INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION, AND I THINK THAT THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE WITH WHAT WE HAVE SEEN WITH RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE AND THE ELECTION WHICH IS A CONCLUSION OF THE 17 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WHO HAVE LOOKED AT THAT AND THE FEAR OF THE WAY THAT CYBER TECHNOLOGY CAN BE USED TO ATTACK THE COUNTRY. WE HAVE SEEN ELECTION INTERFERENCE AND IT CAN BE USED FOR ATTACKING OUR ELECTRICAL GRID, AS WE MOVE TOWARDS THE INTERNET, BEING ABLE TO INTERFERE WITH AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES AND HOSPITAL SYSTEMS, PRIVATE RECORDS AND DATA, FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, CREATING CHAOS IN ALL OF THOSE THINGS BUT USING SOCIAL MEDIA AS A WEAPON AGAINST US FOR THE INFORMATION WARS AS A PROPAGANDA TOOL AND AS A WAY TO COLLECT INFORMATION ABOUT AMERICANS WHO SHARE LOTS OF PRIVATE DATA ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS. NO USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO CROWD SOURCE TERRORISM, WE HAVE SEEN ISIS DO THAT BY RADICALIZING PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA LIKE TWITTER AND OTHER PLATFORMS, SO I AM SORRY TO PRESENT SUCH A DIRE OUTLOOK ON THE FUTURE BUT IT WILL BE SUNNY AND WARM. >> THANK YOU, BARBARA, FOR THE COMMENTS. I JUST READ ABOUT THE THREE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, WE HEARD THAT YES THIS IS NOT A ROSY PICTURE WE ARE STARING AT LOOKING AT THE FUTURE BUT IT IS A REALISTIC ONE. AND AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN STUDYING THE TERRORISM ISSUE FOR A LONG TIME AS WELL, I WAS SAY THAT WE HAD ALL THE ONES THAT I WOULD'VE EXPECTED EVERYONE TO SORT OF COMMENT ON, BUT THAT JUST GOES BACK TO ONE OF MY EARLIER POINTS, THE PHENOMENON OF TERRORISM NO MATTER HOW YOU DESCRIBE IT IS GOING TO MANIFEST ITSELF FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES WHETHER IT IS A THREAT TO THE HOMELAND OR A THREAT TO THE INTEREST OVERSEAS AND IT WILL NOT RECEDE AT ANY TIME IN THE FUTURE. NOW, BARBARA, I WAS STRUCK BY YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE NATION'S STATE AND THREAT, EVEN FROM THE CONTEXT OF TERRORISM, THOUGH I THINK THAT YOU ARE GOING BROADER THAN THAT. BUT FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DO REMEMBER, BEFORE 9/11, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT ÃAND THEY STILL DO, BUT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT USED TO COMPILE A LIST OF THE FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS THAT WE BELIEVED WERE ACTIVELY USING TERRORISM AS A TOOL, AN OFFICIAL STATE POLICY, TO AFFECT HER INTEREST. AND IF YOU HAD WATCHED THE WAY THAT THAT LIST HAS GROWN OVER TIME, CERTAINLY AFTER 9/11, THE LIST IS MUCH SMALLER NOW THAT WAS BEFORE 9/11. BUT WHO IS TO SAY THAT IT COULD NOT COME BACK AROUND IN THE FUTURE? THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK ABOUT. SO THAT IS SORT OF THE NOT TO ROSY PERSPECTIVE OF THE FUTURE BUT WHAT IT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE SO LET ME START WITH BARBARA AND WORK HER WAY BACKWARDS WITH HIS NEXT ROUND OF QUESTIONS. WITHOUT, DOES THE UNITED STATES NEED NEW AUTHORITY, CAPABILITIES, OR RESOURCES TO COMBAT WHAT LOOKS LIKE A VERY BROAD THREAT ON THE TERRORISM LEVEL? >> Barbara McQuade: AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR WHEN I THINK OF THE TOOLS THAT ARE NEEDED, IT IS TWO THINGS. ONE IS INVESTIGATIVE TOOLS TO BE USED AS A PROCESS TO DISRUPT AND PROSECUTE TERRORIST ACTIVITY. DID THE OTHER THING IS SUBSTANTIVE LAWS, CRIMES THAT CAN BE CHARGED AGAINST PEOPLE WHO COMMIT THESE ACTS, AND BOTH PRESENT SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES. ONE, GETTING CONGRESS TO PASS ANYTHING COULD BE A CHALLENGE. ANYTHING WHATSOEVER. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE, IT IS DIFFICULT TO KEEP UP WITH THE EVOLVING THREAT. SO FIRST WITH REGARD TO INVESTIGATIVE TOOLS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, WHAT A PROSECUTOR WANTS MOST TO CERTAINTY AND CLARITY. TELL ME WHAT THE RULES ARE, I WILL FOLLOW THEM.BUT AS TECHNOLOGY IS EVOLVING SO QUICKLY, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE LAW TO KEEP UP WITH TECHNOLOGY.NOW I WILL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF A CASE THAT CAME OUT OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. BUT I WAS THERE WE HAD A CASE CALLED UNITED STATES VERSUS CARPENTER WHICH WAS A CASE INVOLVING AN ARMED ROBBERY CREW THAT WAS OPERATING AROUND DETROIT COULD NOW ONE OF THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE THAT WAS USED IN THAT CASE IN MANY OTHER CASES IS CELL SITE LOCATION DATA. YOU PROBABLY ALL KNOW THAT YOUR CELL PHONE IS A TRACKING DEVICE AND YOU CAN BE IDENTIFIED BY YOUR LOCATION 24/7 BACK FOR YEARS. IF THAT INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED, WE CAN FIND OUT WHERE YOUR PHONE WAS AT ANY TIME OF THE DAY OR NIGHT. NOW IN MR. CARPENTER'S RECORDS, THEY WERE OBTAINED WITH WHAT AT THE TIME WAS BELIEVED TO BE THE PROPER LEGAL PROCESS, A COURT ORDER UNDER WHAT IS CALLED THE STORED COMMUNICATION INFORMATION ACT, AND WITH THE COURT ORDER THAT WE OBTAINED, WE WENT TO THE PHONE COMPANY AND FOUND OUT THAT MR. CARPENTER WAS AT THE SCENE OF THE ROBBERIES AT THE DATE AND TIME THAT THEY OCCURRED. SO IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO CONVICT HIM, THE CASE WENT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT AND IN DECEMBER THEY HELD THAT THIS DATA IS SO INVASIVE THAT WE THINK THAT INSTEAD OF JUSTICE COURT ORDER, YOU SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET THIS HIGHER LEGAL STANDARD OF A SEARCH WARRANT IN ORDER TO GET THAT GOING FORWARD. WILL THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS SUPPRESSED IN A CASE LIKE CARPENTER. SO GOING FORWARD AND JUST FIGURING OUT WHAT THE RULES OF THE ROAD ARE CAN BE SO CHALLENGING THE CONGRESS CANNOT EVEN KEEP UP WITH THE EVOLVING TECHNOLOGY TO GET PROSECUTORS THE TOOLS THAT THEY NEED. SO BEING NIMBLE, THINKING THROUGH HOW THESE ISSUES PARALLEL THE TOOLS WERE OBTAINED IN THE PAST. ANOTHER CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE NOW IS ENCRYPTION ON APPLE TELEVISIONS IN THE SAN BERNARDINO TERRORISM CASE WHERE THERE WAS A SHOOTING, YOU MIGHT KNOW THAT THE FBI WANTED TO RETRIEVE THE CONTENT OF HIS CELL PHONE. HE WORKED FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AND THEY GAVE CONSENT TO USE THE PHONE, BUT IT WAS PASSWORD PROTECTED AND THE FBI CANNOT OPEN IT WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THE PASSWORD WAS. THEN TIM FAILED PASSWORD ATTEMPTS WOULD ERASE THE CONTENT OF THE PHONE WITHOUT KNOWING IF IT HAD BEEN SYNCED TO THE CLOUD OR IF HE HAD COMMUNICATED WITH OTHER ASSOCIATES, THAT WAS ÃTHEY COULD NOT ÃTHEY WANTED TO LOOK AT IT BUT LACKED THE ABILITY TO DO IT. THEY TRY TO GET APPLE TO HELP WHICH RESISTED AND THEY DID NOT HAVE THE TOOLS TO GET INTO THAT CELL PHONE. SO THAT IS A PROCESS PART THAT IS CHALLENGING FOR PROSECUTORS. NOW I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE CLEARER WALLS. WHAT DOES THE LAW REQUIRED TO GET THESE THINGS? AND SUBSTANTIVELY AND ALSO DIFFICULT, WHAT TOOLS ARE AVAILABLE TO PROSECUTE THESE HOMEGROWN EXTREMIST GROUPS WHEN IT COMES TO INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM, THERE'S A LOT OF THE STATUTES ON THE BOOKS WHICH IS WHY LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES OFTEN QUICKLY SAY THIS IS A TERRORISM INVESTIGATION AND WE CAN INVESTIGATE FOR MATERIAL SUPPORT TO A FORD TERRORIST ORGANIZATION OR TERRORISM TRANSCENDING NATIONAL BOUNDARIES. THE SAME TOOLS ARE NOT AVAILABLE WHEN IT COMES TO DOMESTIC TERRORIST GROUPS BECAUSE THAT IS A HARDER NUT TO CRACK. WE KNOW FROM FBI ABUSES IN THE GO AND TELL PRO, OPERATION CHAOS, THAT SOMETIMES THE FBI INFILTRATED ORGANIZATIONS FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES SO AS A RESULT THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT RELUCTANCE TO ALLOW LAW ENFORCEMENT OF SOME OF THE SAME KIND OF TOOLS FOR DOMESTIC GROUPS AS INTERNATIONAL GROUPS, BUT THAT LEAVES US WITHOUT THE LAWS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO CHARGE AGAINST DOMESTIC GROUPS. SO THERE DOES REMAIN THE QUESTION OF HOW DO YOU EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTE THESE GROUPS WITHOUT VIOLATING THEIR CIVIL LIBERTIES? AND THAT REMAINS A CHALLENGE. >> THANK YOU, CHRIS? >> SO, AUTHORITIES, CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES. THE SIMPLE ANSWER AND A WORD IS NO. FROM MY STANDPOINT. NOW, I WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT THE COUNTERTERRORISM ENTERPRISE HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE. PRE-9/11 THROUGH 9/11, POST INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF LEARNING. RICHARD CLARK SET UP THE ENTERPRISE PRE-9/11. NOW, WE HAD A HORRIFIC ATTACK AGAINST OUR NATION. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF LEARNING SINCE THE HORRIFIC ATTACK HIM THERE HAS BEEN NO ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE RIGHT UP FRONT THAT I WANT TO REINFORCE IS THE IDEA OF AN OVERCORRECTION. SO, WE IN THE COUNTERTERRORISM DOMAIN, WE ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY TO FOCUS ON NORTH KOREA.WE UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY TO FOCUS ON OTHER STATE THREATS AND CERTAINLY THE RUSSIANS, AND WE DO WORRY ABOUT IRAN, THE STATE THREAT AND SPONSOR TERRORISM. WITH THAT SAID, WHAT I WOULD UNDERSCORE IS WE HAVE AN EXCELLENT COUNTERTERRORISM ENTERPRISE THAT HAS BEEN REFINED OVER YEARS, AND SOME HAVE CALLED A TRAP. WE KEEP SAYING THAT WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER 9/11 IF YOU TAKE AWAY THE RESOURCES. BUT I JUST SAY THAT WE CAN WE APPORTION THE RESOURCES, BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND DOING SO VERY CAREFULLY AS I AM VERY, VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE HAVE AN ENTERPRISE THAT IS VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON KEEPING THE NATION SAFE DAY IN AND DAY OUT. THE REAL LIFE 24 PLAYS OUT EVERY DAY. THE ENTERPRISE I AM TALKING ABOUT IS THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT PLUGS IN VERY SURGICALLY AND FOCUSES ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND THE CONVENING AUTHORITY WAS THE OFFICE THAT JAVED AND I WORKED IN AT THE NSC. WE BROUGHT THE AGENCY TOGETHER, NOT JUST TO HEAR THE INTELLIGENCE BUT TO FOCUS ON MITIGATION MEASURES. OKAY, YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE A THREAT STREAM DIRECTED AT COMMERCIAL AVIATION, WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT IT? WE HAD THE BULLY PULPIT OF THE WHITE HOUSE TO ENSURE WE WERE APPLYING THE RIGHT RESOURCES SO I AM VERY PLEASED WITH THE ENTERPRISE BUT ALSO WANT TO STATE ÃNOW THIS IS A FRANK ADMISSION, WE DID NOT DO ENOUGH LAST YEAR ON COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM OR WHATEVER THE TERM IS TODAY, WE DID NOT FOCUS ON THAT ENOUGH. I TRIED. AND I THINK THAT OUR NEW COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY, I HOPE AM HOPING, WILL FOCUS ON THAT BUT THAT WAS NOT THE PRIORITY LAST YEAR. CONTEXTUALLY, UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS WHAT I DELIBERATELY TOLD YOU THE THREEFOLD FOCUS ON DAY ONE. NOW THIS REALLY WAS A LARGE PART ON ISIS, SO I DO THINK THAT AS THINGS EVEN NOW, WE WILL BE ABLE TO FOCUS GOING FORWARD ON THE HPE THREAT. THE FBI AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY DOES SOME EXCELLENT WORK. AND WE DON'T HAVE THE DS FOR PROBLEMS THAT OUR EUROPEAN FRIENDS AND ALLIES HAVE. WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SOCIAL STRUCTURE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. WITH THAT SAID, I DO WORRY ABOUT HPE'S, AND I DO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT BARBARA SAID AND WILL TELL YOU THAT I JUST SPOKE TO ÃI HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO A BROADCAST WITH BRIAN PENAS, AMERICA'S VERY FIRST 9/11. HE HAS BEEN A COOPERATOR WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SINCE HE WAS RELEASED FROM PRISON. GETTING PEOPLE LIKE BRIAN TO TELL THEIR STORY IN A POSITIVE WAY, TO SHARE THEIR OBSERVATIONS AND TO KIND OF BOUNCE BACK FROM A COLOSSAL MISTAKE, THAT IS WHAT THE JUDGE HAS ALLOWED HIM TO DO. I WANT MORE BRIANS TO TELL THEIR STORY TO DETER PEOPLE FROM GOING DOWN THE PATH. AND OF COURSE, THE MAJOR ATTACK THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR WAS HVE ON HALLOWEEN LAST YEAR. NO SLEEP THAT NIGHT WHILE WE WORKED THROUGH THAT TO MAKE SURE THERE WEREN'T ANY FOREIGN TIES, BUT HOW DO WE PREVENT THAT? WE HAVE TO PREVENTED BY A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP CONTINUING TO GIVE RESOURCES THAT THE FBI VIEWS, THE DOJ NEEDS, AND HOMELAND SECURITY. I HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT OUR NEED TO FOCUS SOME OF THE RESOURCES ON THE GRAY ZONE. SO I WON'T THAT BUT I REALLY THINK THAT THE ENTERPRISE IS IN A GOOD PLACE. I JUST WORRY ABOUT AN OVERCORRECTION, THE FURTHER AND FURTHER WE GET AWAY FROM 9/11, THERE WILL BE A TENDENCY ÃTHE GOVERNMENT DOES THIS. WE HAVE A HISTORY OF DO THIS, TO REAPPORTIONED RESOURCES TO DECLARE SOME KIND OF VICTORY PRECIPITOUSLY AND TAKE YOUR EYE OFF OF A MOVEMENT THAT HAS NOT GONE AWAY. IT IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS A CONCERN, THAT IS THE IDEOLOGICAL PIECE OF THIS FIGHT. CHRIS GREAT, CHRIS, THANK YOU. >> WELL, WHY HAVE FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS NOT SUCCESSFULLY ATTACKED THE U.S. SINCE 9/11? THREE BIG REASONS ARE OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE CAPABILITIES, THREE, PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE. ON 9/11, WE WERE AN OPEN DOOR WITH 18 PEOPLE ON THE NO-FLY LIST, AND ONE OF THEM WAS THE OPERATIONAL COMMANDER OF 9/11. BUT NOW, 81,000 PEOPLE ARE ON THE NO-FLY LIST WITH ONE AND HALF BILLION PEOPLE ON THE TITLE LIST WHICH MEANS THAT YOU GET ON AN AMERICAN BOUND FLIGHT OR CARRIER. FOR 9/11 WE DID NOT HAVE THE NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM SET UP WITH DHS OR TSA. WE HAD ABOUT 30 JOINT TERRORISM TASK FORCES BUT NOW THERE'S MORE THAN 100. THE INTELLIGENCE BUDGET TEST TRIPLED WHICH IS OUR DEFENSIVE CAPABILITIES. FOR OUR OFFENSE OF CAPABILITIES, THE DRONE PROGRAM PUT A HUGE CRIMP ON AL QAEDA CENTRAL. THE BEST WITNESS HAS BEEN BIN LADEN HIMSELF WAS SAID THAT HIS ENTIRE ORGANIZATION WAS BEING OBLITERATED. NOW YOU HAVE THE CASE IT WAS AN UNDERWEAR BOMBER. WHEN A GUY HAS SMOKE POURING OUT OF HIS CROTCH ON A TRANSATLANTIC FLIGHT APPROACHING DETROIT IT WAS THE PASSENGERS AND CREW THE BASICALLY DISABLED HIM. SO THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS NO, WE DON'T NEED MORE AUTHORITIES. NOW I HEAR BARBARA ON THE BACK DOOR, BUT LIKE HIS DILEMMA FOR AMERICANS, THE BACK DOOR WOULD GIVE PEOPLE ACCESS TO A POTENTIAL CRIMINAL, BUT THE MOST SUCCESSFUL ENTERPRISE IN THE UNITED STATES IS SILICON VALLEY. WE WOULD BE UNDERCUTTING THIS AMAZING BUSINESS BY SAYING YES, THERE IS A WAY INTO EVERY PRODUCT CALLED A BACKDOOR. IF THERE IS A MY INCOME IS NOT JUST THE GOVERNMENT. SO THERE'S NO SIMPLE ANSWER TO THAT. AND ON THE SECOND POINT, WHICH I JUST WANT TO ÃI TOTALLY AGREE WITH BARBARA ON THIS DOMESTIC TERRORISM QUESTION. BUT THIS IS THE DILEMMA, NOT EVEN THE DILEMMA. WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT AND IT IS NOT A CRIME TO BE A MEMBER OF A NEO-NAZI GROUP IN THIS COUNTRY. IT IS A CRIME TO CONDUCT A VIOLENT ACT ON THEIR BEHALF, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS A CRIME TO BE A MEMBER OF ISIS IN THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE YOU ARE A PART OF AN INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM ORGANIZATION. YOU CAN NEVER CRIMINALIZE NAZI GROUPS WHICH HAVE A PERFECT RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT ACTUALLY BREAKING THE LAW. SO THIS IS WHAT MAKES IT SUCH A DIFFICULT | >> PEOPLE OFTEN SAY WHEN THERE IS A DOMESTIC TERRORISM ATTACK, WHY IS IT NOT TREATED AS TERRORISM. WHILE THE ANSWER IS FOR A PROSECUTOR LIKE BARBARA, IT'S VERY EASY TO JUST GET THEM ON MURDER, AND IF YOU INTRODUCE TERRORISM INTO THE EQUATION, IT RAISES A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER ISSUES MOST OF WHICH ARE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES, WHICH YOU WOULD NOT GO DOWN, I THINK IT'S A GREAT ROUND OF QUESTIONS THAT I DID NOT HEAR A CONSENSUS WHICH IS INTERESTING, BUT YOU HEARD TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT VIEWS, SOME OVERLAPPING IN RESPECTS BUT OTHERS, THE LINES WERE CLEARLY DRAWN BUT THANK YOU TO THE PANELISTS FOR THEIR THOUGHTS. SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH TWO QUESTIONS. I'M LOOKING AT RYAN, ELLIOTT AND MICHAEL. IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE AUDIENCE QUESTIONS, SEVERAL PEERS RATHER THAN RECYCLE THROUGH THE NEXT ROUND OF MY OWN QUESTIONS THAT EVERYONE HAS SEEN, LET'S GET TO THE AUDIENCE QUESTIONS AND I WILL LEAVE IT TO YOU THREE TO LEAD US THROUGH THE. >> YES, THANK YOU, ABSOLUTELY. MY NAME IS ELLIOT BYRD. IN MY FIRST YEAR STUDENT HERE AT THE FORD SCHOOL AND THIS IS YOUR FIRST QUESTION. HOW CAN WE AVOID AND/OR REMEDY ANTI-WESTERN SENTIMENT OFTEN PERPETUATED BY CONTINUES THAT MY PRESENCE IN THE REGION TO PREVENT THE REGROUPING OF PROMINENT EXTREMIST GROUPS IN THE NATION? AND IF YOU NEED ME TO REPEAT THAT, JUST LET ME KNOW. >> LET ME SAY, THE UNITED STATES, I'M A CATHOLIC SO I CAN SAY THIS. THERE ARE SINS OF OMISSION AND SINS OF COMMISSION. SO I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT HIS SYRIA POLICY HELPED CONTRIBUTE TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY PRETTY OBVIOUSLY DID NOT CREATE THE SITUATION INDEED AND NOT AMELIORATED. AND THE ORIGINAL SIN GOES BACK TO THE WALLS. AS IF YOU OVERTHROW SOMEBODY, ANARCHY IS WORSE IN DICTATORSHIP THAN OBAMA DID THE SAME THING IN LIBYA JUST EIGHT YEARS LATER, AND THAT IS ONE OF HIS WORST MISTAKES. I THINK THE QUESTION ABOUT ANTI-WESTERN SENTIMENT ÃWE ARE THE WORLD'S SUPERPOWER, YOU KNOW? BUT IT IS VERY HARD TO KNOW WHAT THE SECOND DAY AFTER LOOKS LIKE OR THE THIRD DAY. BUT IF YOU DON'T PLAN FOR IT IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE WORSE THAN IF YOU DO PLAN FOR IT. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A SIMPLE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. OBVIOUSLY, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE. BUT THAT IS IT. I THINK THE PRESIDENT TRUMP MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE IN AFGHANISTAN, BY THE WAY, AFTER A LOT OF DELIBERATION. THE FIRST TIME HE IS PUBLICLY SAID LOOK, I'VE CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT. THE ONLY THING WORSE THAN BEING IN AFGHANISTAN IS LEAVING IT. WE HAVE RUN THIS BEFORE IN IRAQ IN TO THOUSAND 11. NO, THERE'S NO SIMPLE ANSWER BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE WE PAY THE PRESIDENT AND THE PEOPLE ON THE NSC TO TRY TO FIGURE THESE THINGS OUT AND THERE WILL BE NO GOOD ANSWER. THAT IS THE NATURE PRESIDENTIAL DECISION-MAKING, I THINK. >> I WOULD JUST ADD THAT NO ADMINISTRATION HAS FIGURED OUT HOW TO GET AT THE GRIEVANCE PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. WE ARE JUST NOT FIGURED THAT OUT. I REMEMBER PETER LOOKING AT A DRAFT OF RCT STRATEGY, AND HE IDENTIFIED THAT AS A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN. IT WAS A CONCERN THAT I SHARED WITH HIM. BUT WE HAVE TO RELY ALSO WITH OUR BROADER POLICIES TO HELP AMELIORATE SOME OF THE ANXIETY IN THE MIDDLE EAST, FOR EXAMPLE. I DO THINK THAT IN SOME WAYS WE ARE DOING THAT. REMEMBER THAT THERE IS A PUBLIC AND A PRIVATE VIEW OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE MIDDLE EAST IN PARTICULAR WHICH MEANS THAT PUBLICLY THEY MIGHT HAVE TO SAY, WE DON'T LIKE AMERICA BUT PRIVATELY THEY SAY, WE NEED YOUR HELP. AND THE BEST WORK THAT WE ARE DOING IS SMALL FOOTPRINTS, NOT TO VIOLATE THE SENSIBILITIES OF NATIONS, NOT HAVE A LARGE MILITARY PRESENCE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ANY INTEREST IN ALL IN A LARGE SCALE PRESENCE. SO SMALL GROUPS OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS WORKING WITH FOREIGN PARTNERS, I THINK THAT THAT IS THE RIGHT BLENDING. BUT WE DO NEED THE OVERARCHING POLICY WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT OUT OF MY PAY GRADE.I HAD A COUNTERTERRORISM FOCUS I HAVE TO ENSURE THAT MY REGIONAL COUNTERPARTS ARE KIND OF BUILDING THIS SUPERSTRUCTURE. THEN WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO CT APPROPRIATELY, COUNTERTERRORISM, USING OUR EXQUISITE CAPABILITIES BUT THIS IS A TOUGH PROBLEM AND I WISH I HAD THE ANSWER. >> I GUESS THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD THIS TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN CONTROL THE PERCEPTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO SOME HELP, ONE OF THE PROPAGANDA TOOLS THAT GETS USED FOR ALL OF THESE TERROR GROUPS IS THAT THE UNITED STATES IS AN OCCUPYING FORCE AND AN OPPRESSOR. SO DOES NOT HELP THAT WE HAVE A PRISON IN GUANTCNAMO FOR EXAMPLE. THAT IS USED AS PROPAGANDA AGAINST US AND IT DOES NOT HELP WHEN THERE ARE IMAGES OF THINGS ROLLING THROUGH THE MIDDLE EAST. SO THOSE KIND OF THINGS MAY BE TOO SOME EXTENT ARE INEVITABLE, BUT I DO THINK THAT ALL OF THOSE THINGS FEED THE NARRATIVE. THE OTHER THING THAT FEEDS THE NARRATIVE IS WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND OTHERS CONTRIBUTE TO THE FALSE NARRATIVE THAT AMERICA IS AT WAR WITH ISLAM AND, YOU KNOW, MUSLIMS ARE THE PROBLEMS AND AN IMMIGRATION BAN, ALL OF THOSE THINGS. I THINK THAT THAT COULD BE USED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES IN THE LONG RUN. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. MICHAEL?>> I AM MICHAEL BACHMAN, A FIRST-YEAR CANDIDATE FOR THE MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY AND MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE THE COUNTERTERRORISM IMPLICATIONS OF THE U.S. MILITARY LEAVES AFGHANISTAN. >> DID YOU LIKE WHAT HAPPENED IN IRAQ IN 2014? SO, I WOULD JUST ADD NOT A WHOLE LOT MORE BEYOND THAT, BUT I WILL SAY THAT THE KEYWORDS TO FOCUS ON OUR COUNTERTERRORISM PLATFORM WAS GETS INTO THE CYCLE OF I CAN BE ACCUSED READILY OF BEING CAUGHT IN A COUNTERTERRORISM TRAP. IF WE PULL OUT WITHOUT A PLATFORM TO PROSECUTE COUNTERTERRORISM, I CAN SAY I TOLD YOU SO IF THERE IS ANOTHER THAT.BUT FRANKLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE LINES OF COMMUNICATION, WHICH REALLY MEANS, THE TYRANNY OF DISTANCE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT PRESSURE ON OUR ADVERSARIES WHILE THEY ARE CONDUCTING PLANNING WHICH IS ANOTHER TRAP, RIGHT? YOU CAN IDENTIFY POCKETS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD THAT COULD BE USED AS A SANCTUARY FOR TERRORISTS TO CONDUCT PLANNING SO WE DO HAVE TO PRIORITIZE. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE A BURGEONING, DEVELOPING ISIS FOOTPRINT THAT WAS NOT THERE A FEW YEARS AGO IN AFGHANISTAN AND YOU HAVE STILL, REMNANTS OF AL QAEDA STRADDLING THE BORDER, ABLE TO OPERATE. THOUGH WE HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB AS PETER SAID, PUTTING PRESSURE ON AL QAEDA, THE CORE OF AL QAEDA. BUT THE OVERARCHING ARGUMENT IS, WE NEED A PLATFORM TO CONDUCT COUNTERTERRORISM. I WAS NOT FOCUSED ON THE COUNTER TALIBAN FIGHT. THAT IS AN INSURGENCY AND A VIBRANT INSURGENCY, AND I DO HOPE THAT EVENTUALLY WE CAN END THE INSURGENCY AND THERE COULD BE SOME KIND OF A RECONCILIATION, AND I HOPE THAT THE INSURGENCY DIES IN TIME. THERE IS GOOD HISTORY TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVENTUALLY, INSURGENCIES DIE OUT BASED ON AN EXHAUSTION OF THE POPULATION, BUT AFGHANS ARE A HEARTY PEOPLE. SO I CAN'T BE TOO OPTIMISTIC. WITH THAT SAID, I AM ADAMANT THOUGH THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO AFTER THESE CORE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE AL QAEDA AND ISIS WHEN THEY ARE IN A POSITION TO CONTINUE THEIR PLANNING AGENCY WESTERN TARGETS, AND THAT IS THE OVERARCHING REASON THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE U.S. FOOTPRINTS IN SUPPORT OF THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT. PLUS, THEY HAVE ASKED US TO STAY. >> NOW, I WILL CHEAT A LITTLE BIT. THOUGH I AM THE MODERATOR AND I AM SUPPOSED TO BE NEUTRAL BUT ON THAT QUESTION AS WELL, WITH MY OWN CAREER AS AN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL SUPPORTING A LOT OF POLICY DECISIONS ON THE ISSUE, I WAS ALWAYS VERY COMFORTABLE GIVING POLICYMAKERS SORT OF AN INTELLIGENCE PERSPECTIVE AND LEAVING IT UP TO SOMEBODY ELSE TO MAKE THE ULTIMATE DECISION BUT THAT TOOK ON A WHOLE NEW CONTEXT WHEN I MYSELF, CHRIS AND I, WERE AT THE NSC ON THE FRONT LINE WHERE THE ROLES ARE REVERSED. MY COLLEAGUES FROM THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY WERE GIVING US FORMS AND CHOICES OR OPTIONS, BUT WE HAD TO MAKE OUR DECISIONS. AS CHRIS AND PETER SAID, THERE ARE RISKS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ISSUE. IF YOU SAY THERE ARE RISKS. BUT IF YOU LEAVE, HISTORY HAS SHOWN FROM POST-9/11, THE RISK OF WHEN THE UNITED STATES LEAVES THE CONFLICT ZONE, THE RISKS THAT CAN HAPPEN. SO THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO SAY. NOW, RYAN, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, RYAN, A FIRST-YEAR CANDIDATE AS WELL. NOW A QUESTION THAT KINDA FALLS OFF OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, CAPABILITIES TO TARGET THE CAPABILITIES, GIVEN HOW THE WAR HAS EXPANDED, HAS THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE MILITARY FORCE WAS GRANTED INTO THOUSAND ONE NEED TO BE UPDATED 17 YEARS LATER TO KIND OF ACCOUNT FOR NEW REALITIES ON THE GROUND? >> I HAD A FEELING THAT SOMEBODY WOULD ASK ME THAT QUESTION SO LAST NIGHT I THOUGHT THROUGH THAT BECAUSE TO BE CANDID, LAST YEAR, NOT THAT I WAS TACTICAL AT ALL. WE HAD A WORK AT A STRATEGIC LEVEL BUT THAT WAS A DECISION THAT LEGISLATORS HAD A SWORD OUT. NOW THIS IS A QUESTION OF LEGISLATIVE VERSUS EXECUTIVE POWERS, RIGHT?WITH THAT SAID, AS I SAID EARLIER, I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE RIGHT RESOURCES AND AUTHORITIES TO PROSECUTE THE COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY AGAINST OUR ADVERSARIES, REALLY, THEY COME FROM THE SAME ROOTS OF THE MOVEMENT THAT ATTACKED US ON 9/11. SO I AM VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT AND I WILL LET THOSE DEBATES PLAY OUT AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT IN A DEMOCRACY FOR US TO HAVE THOSE DEBATES. BUT OTHERS WILL HAVE THAT DEBATE. IT IS HEALTHY THOUGH TO ASK THE QUESTIONS, BUT AS I SAID AND MAKE CLEAR, I WAS VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE AUTHORITIES THAT WE HAD, AND I WOULD RESTATE THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH THE MOVEMENT AND THE ROOTS OF THAT MOVEMENT GO BACK TO OUR ADVERSARIES THAT ATTACKED US ON 9/11. >> Woman: I WILL ADD TO THIS. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT THE AUFM. THIS WAS THE AUTHORIZATION TO USE MILITARY FORCE. IT WAS LIKE ALL FORCES NECESSARY AGAINST THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACKS OF >> THAT IS RIGHT. >> SO LEGALLY, WHAT IS THAT MEAN? WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THAT? IT CERTAINLY DOES MEAN THAT CORE AL QAEDA, THE 19 HIJACKERS, THOUGH STARTED BUT THE OTHERS WERE AFFILIATED WITH THEM THAT PLANNED THE ATTACK AND SUPPORTED THEM, BUT HOW BROADLY CAN YOU INTERPRET WHAT WAS MEANT BY THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACKS OF 9/11? IT HAS BEEN USED FOR ISIS FOR EXAMPLE, AN ORGANIZATION THAT DID NOT EXIST ON 9/11. SO IS THAT A REASONABLE LEGAL ARGUMENT IS THAT IT CAN BE USED AGAINST ISIS? SOME ARE IN FAVOR OF IT THAT THAT IS THE SUCCESSOR ORGANIZATION SO THOSE ARE PEOPLE, BUT IF YOU TAKE A VERY NARROW LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE THERE WAS A NO, ISIS DID NOT EXIST. SO THE QUESTION IS A GOOD ONE WHICH IS, SHOULD THE LANGUAGE BE AMENDED, MODIFIED OR EXPANDED IN SOME WAY TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT THREAD AS IT EXISTED TODAY TO REFLECT THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE.>> YES, THE LIKELIHOOD OF IT BEING REVISED IS CLOSE TO ZERO BECAUSE CONGRESS ÃEVERYBODY REMEMBERS HILLARY CLINTON'S VOTE AND WHAT THAT DID FOR HER, SO NO ONE WAS TO VOTE ON ANYTHING THAT IS CONTROVERSIAL. JEFF FLAKE AND TIM KAINE HAVE ISSUES, BUT IS NEVER GONNA MAKE IT TO THE FLOOR LET ALONE PASS. SO UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE WHERE WE ARE BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF ÃCONGRESS IS AN ADVOCATE OF ALL POWERS THAT IS ALLOWED TO HAVE A ROLE IN IT. AND OF COURSE, WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THE DECISION, WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE WAR AND THE LENGTH OF THE WAR AND HOW MUCH WILL WE HEAR? SO THIS IS NOT TO BE AS.>> AND I WILL CHIME IN AS A MODERATOR. THE ONE TIME I USED MY LAW SCHOOL BACK INTO MY GOVERNMENT CAREER ÃIT WAS NOT A SUCCESS BEFORE THAT IS WHEN I GOT TO THE NSC AND WHEN CHRIS AND I WERE HAVING TO WRAP OUR HEADS AROUND THESE TOUGH LEGAL ISSUES, THAT IS WHERE THE LAW SCHOOL ÃTHE VAGUE MEMORIES OF LAW SCHOOL, THAT IS WHEN THAT WAS IMPORTANT FOR WHICH YOU REFERENCED, SO FROM A LITERAL READING OF THE AUFM, COULD WE USE AMF TO STICK TO THE STRAIGHT CON STRAINS? SO THAT WAS A ONE TIME WERE MY LEGAL BACKGROUND ACTUALLY KEEP HIM FROM A COUNTERTERRORISM PERSPECTIVE. SO I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS AS WELL, MICHAEL? >> WHAT ARE THE FUTURE THREATS TO OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES FROM COUNTERTERRORISM POLICIES AND OPERATIONS IN THE FUTURE? >> YEAH, I GUESS THAT I CAN TAKE THAT ONE. I THINK THE BIG ONE IS HER PRIVACY RIGHTS UNDER ALL OF THE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS WE HAVE TODAY. YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO INTERCEPT THREATS COMING INTO THE UNITED STATES. WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS ABOUT THAT. AND ONE OF THE OPEN QUESTIONS IS THE EXTENT OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER TO INTERCEPT THOSE KINDS OF COMMUNICATIONS, BECAUSE OF THE ABUSES OF WATERGATE AND MARTIN LUTHER KING, WAR PROTESTERS AND OTHERS, IN THE CALLED THE FOREIGN SURVEILLANCE ACT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A COMPROMISE BETWEEN ALLOWING THE EXECUTIVE TO HAVE UNFETTERED POWER TO CONDUCT SURVEILLANCE IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY VERSUS THE VERY CAREFUL OVERSIGHT THAT IS GIVEN IN CRIMINAL CASES WITH COURTS. SO THE COMPROMISE WAS CREATED FOR A SECRET COURT, THE FOREIGN SURVEILLANCE COURT, WITHIN OVERSIGHT, AND A NONPUBLIC WAY THAT THEY CAN KEEP INTELLIGENCE CONTROVERSIAL. BUT THERE IS SOME OVERSIGHT. WE DO KNOW THAT OVER THE YEARS, THE PRESIDENT HAS SOMETIMES GO AROUND THE STATUTE, WITH A PRONE CARE PROGRAM THAT WAS REVEALED BY THE "NEW YORK TIMES" INTO THOUSAND FIVE. WE KNOW THAT JIM COMEY REFUSED TO SIGN OFF ON THE PROGRAM BECAUSE HE BELIEVED IT TO BE ILLEGAL BUT SCHOLARS WILL SAY THAT IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT IT IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS PERMITTED TO DO SO THE IT IS LIKELY THAT THERE ARE PROGRAMS GOING ON THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. THE SNOWDEN CLIQUES FOR EXAMPLE SHARED WITH US THAT THERE WERE PROGRAMS GOING ON WE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT LIKE THE COLLECTION OF EVERY PHONE CALL THAT EXISTS IN AMERICA EVERY DAY BY ALL USERS, JUST IN CASE THAT MIGHT NEED TO BE CLEARED. SO WHAT OTHER PROGRAMS ARE GOING ON OUT THERE? YOU KNOW, GENEALOGY WEBSITES, IS THE DATA BEING COLLECTED FOR OTHER PURPOSES? YOUR CELL SITE LOCATION DATA? WHAT INFORMATION IS BEING COLLECTED TO BE USED? AND THOUGH IT DOES SEEM INNOCUOUS ENOUGH ÃPEOPLE THAT DON'T DO ANYTHING WRONG SO DON'T CARE IF THE GOVERNMENT HAS MY INFORMATION. WE KNOW THAT IN NAZI GERMANY, CENSUS DATA IDENTIFYING PEOPLE IS JEWISH WAS USED TO RHONDA POSEN INTO CONCENTRATION CAMPS SPIRITS WE MIGHT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT NOW BUT WE DON'T KNOW FOR WHAT NEFARIOUS PURPOSE ALL OF THE DATA MIGHT BE USED IN THE FUTURE SO I THINK THAT SURVEILLANCE COLLECTION IS IMPORTANT BUT SHOULD CONCERN US FROM A CIVIL LIBERTIES PERSPECTIVE. >> AND I WOULD ADD TO WHAT BARBARA SAID. SO GETTING EVERY CELL PHONE CALL IN THE UNITED STATES AND STORING IT, SECTION TO 05, THESE REVELATIONS HAVE COME OUT AND IT TURNED OUT THAT ACTUALLY, GIANT FISHING EXPEDITIONS PRODUCED VERY LITTLE. THERE WAS JUST ONE CASE AS FAR AS I COULD TELL THAT WAS VERY CLEARLY BASED ON THIS EVIDENCE OF SOMEBODY SENDING MONEY TO A PEER GROUP FROM SAN DIEGO. THE THING THAT FINDS TERRORIST'S TRADITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNIQUES, INFORMANTS AND SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORTS, FAMILY, AND/OR COMMUNITY MEMBER, TIPS. OLD-FASHIONED POLICE WORK. SO THESE VERY SOPHISTICATED KIND OF APPROACHES, A, THEY ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT TURNS OUT AND BY THE WAY IT WAS OBAMA WHO CONTINUED THIS PROGRAM, RIGHT? SO IT WAS BOTH BUSH AND OBAMA, BUT ALSO, THEY DON'T REALLY ANSWER THE MAIL IN TERMS OF ACTUALLY FINDING TERRORIST, THESE KIND OF UNIVERSAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS THAT ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. >> SO, I JUST ÃWE DID COVER THIS A LITTLE BIT AND ACTUALLY, BARBARA DID A GREAT JOB OF TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT WING IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND I THINK THAT PETER DID AS WELL. SO AGAIN, THE CONCERN IS THE ABUSE. DO WE GO TOO FAR? I WAS IN THE SEAT WITH THE GENRE DURING CHARLOTTESVILLE SO I'M NOT A LAWYER BUT I FOUND MYSELF THAT WE CAN PLAN THE PART OF A LAWYER AS WE WALK THROUGH WHILE WE DON'T HAVE TERRORISM LEGISLATION NECESSARILY, AND I KNOW THAT I AM NOT SAYING THAT EXACTLY RIGHT FOR DOMESTICALLY. THERE IS A NUANCE THERE. BUT WE DO NOT USE INTELLIGENCE TOOLS ARE REFERRED TO EARLIER IN A BIG WAY, INTRUSIVELY. WE DO NOT APPLY THAT DOMESTICALLY TO FOLKS IN THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT. SO DO WORRY ABOUT THAT, HAVING GROWN UP FIRST AS A COUNTERTERRORISM AGENT KNOWING THAT THE ARMY HAD ABUSES, WE HAD A PROBE WITH THE FBI AND THE ARMY THAT WENT BEYOND THE PALE, MANY YEARS AGO. NOW WE DID LIVE THROUGH THAT AND WE WERE SCHOOLED IN UNDERSTANDING THE LEFT AND RIGHT LIMITS OF OUR LAWS. SO I DO WORRY ABOUT THAT. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT EVEN AT THE INTERNATIONAL SPY MUSEUM, WE DO EXPLORE THAT AND IT IS FASCINATING, THE PALMER RAIDS AGAINST ANARCHISTS IN THE SO I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE REMINDED OF OUR HISTORY, AND I LIKE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T NEED TO GO FURTHER INTO THE DOMESTIC FRONT. NOW, THE HV EASE THAT ARE FOCUSED ON OVERSEAS AND HAVING COMMUNICATIONS WITH FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE OR TERROR ORGANIZATIONS OR INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SUPPORTING THEM, THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. >> AND I THINK THAT WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AS WELL, RIGHT? >> OH, FOLLOWING ON THE CT LIKE POLICY THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS IMPLEMENTED ABROAD TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT OF TERRORISM, THIS IS ADDRESSED TO THE PANEL. ARE YOU CONCERNED WITH THE OVER EMPLOYMENT AND RELIANCE ON SPECIAL FORCES TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF TERRORISM, AND IS THAT SHORT-TERM USE OF SPECIAL FORCES AND DECISIVE ACTION TARGETING MISSIONS, DOES THAT CREATE A GREATER RISK IN THE LONG TERM? >> SO, I HAVE ARGUED ELSEWHERE AND AGAIN I DO SAY THIS VERY CAREFULLY AND WITH SOME THOUGHT. I DO WORRY ABOUT ÃI CANNOT SPEAK FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY DO WORRY ABOUT THE BURNING OUT OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF DEPLOYMENTS, THE FOOTPRINT, WHERE THEY ARE IN THE GLOBE, THINGS LIKE NIGER HAPPENING WHERE WE LOSE SPECIAL OPERATORS AND SUPPORT TO SPECIAL OPERATORS. WE LOSE AMERICAN SERVICE MEMBERS. I TOLD YOU ABOUT THE FIRST WEEK WHERE WE LOST A NAVY SEAL AS A RESULT OF THE RAID AGAINST AL QAEDA IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA. WITH THAT SAID, I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CT PRESSURE REQUIRES, SMALL FOOTPRINTS OF SPECIAL OPERATORS, A HIGH PRICE TO PAY, BUT IT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO CONTINUE THE PRESSURE AND WORK WITH FOREIGN PARTNERS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH PARTNERS AND PROVIDING THE INTELLIGENCE THAT THEY NEED. IN OTHER WORDS, INTELLIGENCE SHARING HAS TO HAPPEN ROBUSTLY AND WE HAVE TO HAVE DISCRETE RELATIONSHIPS WITH NONSTATE ACTORS IS WELL-MEANING SOME TRIBES IN PLACES WHICH COMES WITH A PRICE AS WELL. OUTSIDE OF THE STATE TO STATE ENGAGEMENTS, IN SOME WAYS, WE DO GO BACKWARDS WHEN WE WORK WITH NONSTATE ACTORS AS PARTNERS, BUT I THINK THAT THE THREAT NECESSITATES THAT AND IT HAS TO BE DONE THOUGHTFULLY AND IT HAS TO BE DONE SURGICALLY, AND SPECIAL OPERATIONS IN OUR INTELLIGENCE SERVICES ARE POSTURED TO DO THAT, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO BALANCE THAT OUT WITH THE STATE THREATS LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT. >> I MEAN, CHRIS, I BELIEVE THAT HE SAID THAT PERFECTLY. >> AND I SHOULD JUST ADD THAT I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPECIAL OPERATIONS SO I THINK THAT THE TRACK RECORD SPEAKS VOLUMES THAT ISIS HAS BEEN ALMOST EFFECTIVELY DISMANTLED THROUGH SPECIAL OPERATIONS, DRONE STRIKES, AND OTHER MILITARY LEVELS. BUT ANOTHER PART OF THE EQUATION IS WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS. YOU CAN CONTINUE TO BEAT THEM BACK BUT IT IS THE PREVENTION, THE CHANGING OF MINDS, WHAT THAT WILL STOP THE NEXT THREAT. WE DO HAVE INCREDIBLE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO US. IN THE SAME WITH THE TERROR ORGANIZATIONS ARE CROWDSOURCING, WE COULD USE THAT AS WELL. WE OFTEN ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT TO BE THIS VOICE AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS PROBABLY A WRONG MODEL. I DON'T THINK THE GOVERNMENT HAS A CREDIBILITY TO BE THAT VOICE. IT LOOKS LIKE PROPAGANDA BUT FINDING WAYS TO EMPOWER REFUGEES TO TELL THE REAL STORY OF WHAT LOOKS LIKE, PEOPLE WHO ARE ISIS DEFECTORS TO TELL THE REAL STORY OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, THAT COULD BE A POWERFUL COUNTER NARRATIVE, SO FINDING WAYS TO GET PLATFORMS TO THOSE WHO TELL A DIFFERENT STORY COULD BE EFFECTIVE. >> NO ELLIOT, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL. >> WHAT ROLES SHOULD ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PLAY IN COUNTERTERRORISM, IF ANY? >> IF WE DID NOT HAVE A FIRST FOR THIRD AMENDMENT WE CAN STOP EVERY TERROR ATTACK IN THE COUNTRY BECAUSE ÃI AM NOT A TECH GUY BUT WE ARE AT THE POINT WHERE WE COULD MAKE SOME PRETTY GOOD ASSUMPTIONS. LOOK, SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES DO THIS ALL THE TIME. THEY KNOW YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION, IF YOU'RE MARRIED OR WHERE YOU LIVE OR THE HOBBIES THEY HAVE AND THEY CAN PUT TOGETHER A BIG PICTURE VIEW WHICH IS WHY THERE ARE MICRO-TARGETING OF ADS. SO SIMILARLY, JUST REVERSING THE PICTURE IF SOMEBODY IS EXHIBITING CERTAIN BEHAVIORS ONLINE AND BY THE WAY, EVERYBODY IS GETTING RADICALIZED ONLINE. FOR INSTANCE. THERE IS NO IN PERSON MEETINGS OR RADICAL MOSQUE. IT WAS ALL ONLINE. BUT IF THERE'S NO FIRST OR THIRD AMENDMENT YOU COULD VERY EASILY DETECT PEOPLE USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WHO COULD BE THREATENING. IT IS A MINORITY REPORT THAT HAS COME TO LIFE. LOOK AT WHAT THE CHINESE ARE DOING GOOD YOU CAN CREATE THE PERFECT TOTALITARIAN STATE NOW WITH FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY AND AI. AND LUCKILY, WE ARE NOT GONNA DO THAT. >> AND I WOULD JUST ADD THAT LAST YEAR, SOMEBODY ASKED ME RECENTLY ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND I'M TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND THAT NOW, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT AS I REFLECTED ON THAT, THERE WAS NOT ONE TIME IN A YEAR AT THE WHITE HOUSE WITH ALL OF THE INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS THAT JAVED AND I RECEIVED INCESSANTLY, NO ONE BRIEFED ME ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. I DID KNOW THAT IT WAS OUT THERE BUT THAT WAS NOT WHAT WE WERE FOCUSED ON DAY-TO-DAY. HOWEVER, NOW THAT I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO BREATHE A LITTLE BIT AND GET SLEEP AND REFLECT ON WHAT WE DID NOT DO LAST YEAR ALONG WITH CV, WE DID NOT GIVEN A FOCUS TO HOW OUR ADVERSARIES WILL USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. SO I DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER. BUT I WILL TELL YOU, THEY ARE USING DRONES IN THE BATTLE SPACE, ISIS IS. THEY ARE VERY SAVVY LOOKING FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO UNDERSTAND TECHNOLOGY, SO THEY CAN REVERSE THE TECHNOLOGY TO USE IT FOR ALLIANT PURPOSES.SO WE DO HAVE TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BECAUSE OUR ADVERSARIES ARE LEARNING. BUT AGAIN, A FRANK ADMISSION LAST YEAR, WE DID NOT FOCUS A LOT ON THAT. BUT IN FACILITATING A DISCUSSION ON AI IN OCTOBER SO I WILL GET A LOT MORE ON THAT. [LAUGHTER] >> ANYTIME YOU RELY ON MORE TECHNOLOGY IT IS WONDERFUL AND MAKES OUR LIVES EASIER, BUT JUST IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE HAVE ALL PROBABLY ENCOUNTERED PROBLEMS WITH YOU KNOW, CREDIT CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPROMISED, IN THE SAME WAY, ANYTIME WE RELY ON TECHNOLOGY THERE IS A RISK FOR AN ADVERSARY TO USE IT AGAINST US. THERE IS THIS BIG DISRUPTION OF DATA BY OVERLOADING THE CIRCUITS THAT HAPPENED A YEAR OR A YEAR AND-A-HALF AGO. YOU KNOW, AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES. IF WE RELY ON AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES, A FOREIGN ADVERSARIES USED THAT AGAINST US. IT IS LIKE ÃWHAT WAS IT? DO THOUSAND ONE, A SPACE ODYSSEY WHEN THEY TAKE OVER. WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE BUILT THESE SYSTEMS THAT WE ARE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHAT CAN HAPPEN IF AN ADVERSARY CAN CONTROL THIS? IS THERE A WAY TO SHUT IT DOWN WITH A BACKUP PLAN IN PLACE WE ARE NOT SO RELIANT ON THE SYSTEMS THAT WE ARE COMPLETELY DISABLED WHEN THEY GO DOWN. >> YOU KNOW, I WILL WEIGH IN QUICKLY WITH MY OWN KIND OF OBSERVATION NOT NECESSARILY ON THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POINT BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS AN ANALYST BEFORE HE GOT TO THE WHITE HOUSE, WHAT I THOUGHT MAYBE ISIS RIGHT SO DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE AND PROBABLY THE MOST PERNICIOUS THING THAT WE HAVE SEEN AFTER 9/11 WAS THE FACT THAT ISIS, THERE IS SOME ASPECT THAT ISIS MANAGED TO CRACK THIS TECHNOLOGY PHENOMENON IN A WAY THAT WE IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT ARE CLEARLY FALLING BEHIND AS CHRIS HAS DESCRIBED. WITH ISIS, SOME OF THE INITIAL SUCCESSES WERE USED, ALL OF THESE ADVANCES WERE HAPPENING IN THE EARLY TO THOUSAND TENS ON ENCRYPTION AND INSTANT MESSAGING AND MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS. WE, OURSELVES AND THE GOVERNMENT, WERE NOT DOING AS GOOD OF A JOB AS ISIS WAS AS A GROUP IN TERMS OF ORGANIZING THEMSELVES AND COMMUNICATING AS AN ENTERPRISE AND ACTUALLY INSPIRING PEOPLE TO CONDUCT ATTACKS OR ORGANIZING ATTACKS. ISIS WAS ANIMUS FOR A WHILE AND THAT, AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS PROBABLY IN ASPECT OF THAT. >> WHAT ROLE SHOULD THEY PLAY IN COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMIST EFFORTS? >> THE ACTS THAT ÃA VERY FEW PEOPLE ARE ENGAGED IN THESE ACTS. SO WITH ANY KIND OF HUMANITARIAN DEVELOPMENT, YES, IT IS GREAT. I'M ALWAYS VERY SKEPTICAL, THE SON OF A BILLIONAIRE. THERE'S AN ASSERTION FROM AN UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS EGYPTIAN FAMILY SO THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT WHERE WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT TERROR GROUPS MADE UP OF VOLUNTEERS AND INSURGENTS WERE ON A PAYROLL. SO IF YOU WORK FOR ISIS YOU'RE GETTING SO IF YOU WORK FOR ISIS YOU'RE GETTING PAID $100 A MONTH. THE TALIBAN, $150 A MONTH. SO IN AN INTELLIGENT SITUATION THIS COULD BE USEFUL IF YOU COULD CREATE OTHER LIVELIHOODS. FORCE THAT IS NOT ALWAYS EASY IN OTHER COUNTRIES BUT IN THE TERRORISM ISSUE, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL BECAUSE TERRORISTS ARE VOLUNTEERS WERE WILLING TO DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE. YOU CANNOT PAY PEOPLE SEE HOW TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN, THIS CAN BE USEFUL FOR INSURGENCIES THAT OFTEN PRACTICE TERRORISM, BUT TERRORISM ÃKIND OF A CLASSIC PEER GROUP LIKE AL QAEDA, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE IN EFFECT, HE CAME OUT OF SAUDI ARABIA WHICH IS NOT A POOR COUNTRY WHERE MANY OF THESE IDEAS WERE INCUBATED. >> AND I THINK THAT PETER COVERED THAT VERY WELL. >> OKAY. I THINK THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 15 MINUTES LEFT OR LESS THAN THAT BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE, SO LET'S JUST KEEP GOING WITH THAT RUN. >> FOR THE ISSUE OF THE ONGOING INSURGENCY AND TERROR THREAT IN AFGHANISTAN, CAN WE SOLVE THE ISSUES WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE SAFE HAVEN IN PAKISTAN AND WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT THAT? >> THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. [LAUGHTER] >> YOU WANT TO EXPOUND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT PETER? [LAUGHTER] >> WELL, COUNTRIES HAVE INTEREST AND ÃWE HAVE AN ALLIANCE OF SOME SORT WITH PAKISTAN BUT THEY ARE NOT Ã WE'RE NOT FRIENDS BECAUSE WE LIKE THEM OR THEY LIKE US. THEIR INTERESTS ARE VERY STABLE. THERE'S A WONDERFUL SCENE WHERE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT CARROTS AND STICKS AND THEY SAID WHAT IF THEY'RE NOT QUITE CURIOUS? NOW THE POINT IS, WE HAVE TRIED CARROTS WITH THE PAKISTANIS AND STICKS. THIS IS 17 YEARS ON AN AVERAGE HEATEDLY RELEASE THIS. THIS COUNTRY AFGHANISTAN WILL BE ATTACHED TO THEM FOREVER SO THEIR INTERESTS ARE MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE A NON- ENEMY LINED COUNTRY ON THE BORDER BECAUSE THEY ARE THREATENED ON THEIR OTHER BORDER, AND THE ARE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THERE IS NOT AN INDIAN ALIGNED GOVERNMENT IN KABUL WHICH MEANS THAT THERE ARE GROUPS IN THE TALIBAN THAT THEY WILL DO FOREVER. PRESIDENT TRUMP CORRECTLY SAID WE WILL GET TOUGH ON PAKISTANIS. WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET TOUGH ON THEM. AS LONG AS WE HAVE TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN, WE NEED THEM. LOOK AT THE GEOGRAPHY. YOU HAVE IRAN AND THE RUSSIAN PRO-RUSSIAN STATES. THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET SUPPLIES OUR TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN IS ON GROUND THROUGH PAKISTAN OR THROUGH AIR AND THEY HAVE NOT THREATENED THAT PERSON WE ARE IN THIS FORM OF INSTABILITY WHERE THEY WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE INSURGENT GROUPS TO SOME DEGREE AND WE WILL BE ANNOYED BY IT BUT WERE NOT GOING TO TRY TO MAKE THEM A STATE SPONSOR OF TERRORISM OR SANCTION THE INDIVIDUALS OF THE PAKISTANI STATE BECAUSE WE DO NEED THEM SO THAT IS A VERY UNCOMFORTABLE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NO GOOD ANSWER HERE OR MAGIC BULLET. BUT ALSO FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT CHRIS OUTLINED EARLIER WE WILL BE IN AFGHANISTAN FOR QUITE SOME PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ÃBY THE WAY, CAN YOU IMAGINE ANY PRESIDENT IN OUT OF AFGHANISTAN WHEN HILLARY CLINTON OR DONALD TRUMP, A TERROR ATTACK WAS SOMEHOW, YOU KNOW, EMANATE FROM THE AREA SEVERAL YEARS LATER, IT WOULD BE THE BENGHAZI EPISODE TO THE POWER OF ÃSO NO. WE WILL NOT LEAVE FOR GOOD REASONS BECAUSE OUR NATIONAL SECURITY IS THERE BUT WE ALSO CANNOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THE PAKISTANI KIND OF FUTURE. >> JUST A NUANCED POINT, IT IS NOT JUST AN AFGHANISTAN STRATEGY BUT IT IS DISTINCTIVELY A SOUTH ASIAN STRATEGY TO GET AT THE PROBLEM OF MORE PRESSURE ON PAKISTAN, WITH ALL OF THE THINGS THAT PETER SAID ARE EXACTLY RIGHT. WE HAVE PLAYED THIS BEFORE WITH THE PAKISTANIS. THE JURY IS OUT BUT THIS IS A SOUTH ASIAN STRATEGY THAT IS BROADER THAN JUST AFGHANISTAN. WE HAVE TO EMBRACE INDIAN ISSUES AS WELL IS PAKISTANI ISSUES. THE PAKISTANIS DO NOT LIKE THAT. SO WE WILL SEE. THE JURY IS OUT. I'VE HEARD ALL OF THE SAME ARGUMENTS, AND I HAVE LISTENED TO SOME OF THE ENGAGEMENTS, WITH PAKISTANIS. I WAS PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT. WE TOLD THEM THE SAME THING THAT I HEARD A GENERAL TILL THE PAKISTANIS INTO THOUSAND FIVE, EVEN AT THE ISI HEADQUARTERS, I HAD MY FOOT SLAMMED THE DOOR AT THE ISI HEADQUARTERS WHEN THE GENERAL SAID CHRIS, STAY REALLY CLOSE TO ME BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO THE MEETING NO MATTER WHAT. I HAD TO STAY REALLY CLOSE BUT THEY STILL SLAMMED THE DOOR IN MY FOOT BUT I MANAGED TO GET IN. THEY GLARED AT ME THROUGHOUT THE MEETING BUT I TOOK NOTES AND SMIRKED WHICH IS NOT MY NORMAL STYLE BUT MY FOOT WAS HURTING. THE POINT IS, I LISTENED TO THE MESSAGING, THE SAME THAT I HEARD LAST YEAR SO IT IS A CYCLE. >> YES. >> NOW, ON WE HAVE MORE AUDIENCE QUESTIONS? >> AND I THINK THAT THIS WILL BE THE LAST QUESTION. TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD THE UNITED STATES PRIORITIZE COUNTERTERRORISM OVER OTHER THREATS LIKE EMPOWER CHINA AND A REAL EMERGING CHINA? >> THAT IS A QUESTION AND I'M GLAD THAT SOMEONE THOUGHT OF THIS. >> I THINK THAT CHRIS HAS STRONG VIEWS ON THIS. >> Chris Costa: I DO. SO I HAVE ACTUALLY PREPARED SOME REMARKS AND I WILL JUST READ A COUPLE OF REMARKS THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT. THIS IS MY CENTRAL THESIS AND I HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO GET SOME SLEEP AND REFLECT ON THIS VERY THOUGHTFUL QUESTION AND COMMENTARY FROM THE PANEL AND AM BETTER FOR HAVING HEARD IT. I WILL TELL YOU THAT I WORRY ABOUT HASTE TO PIVOT FROM TERRORISM TO OTHER SECURITY CHALLENGES AND I WORRY ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE STAND TO LOSE ON SETBACKS OF THE COUNTERTERRORISM FRONT. WE CAN DO MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONE TIME. NOW PEOPLE HAVE ARGUED THAT WE HAVE DISPROPORTIONATELY FOCUS ON COUNTERTERRORISM BUT I WILL TELL YOU IN MY TIME, IN JAVED'S TIME IN THE WHITE HOUSE, WE DID NOT DISPROPORTIONATELY FOCUS ON COUNTERTERRORISM. I HAD TO FIGHT TO ENSURE THAT OUR EQUITIES ÃI HAD TO ARGUE OUR ISSUES IN AFGHANISTAN. OF COURSE HE ARGUES BROKE OUT IN THE DEBATE LEADING UP TO THE FINAL DECISION FOR THE SOUTH ASIAN STRATEGY, BUT I DO WORRY THAT THE PENDULUM WILL SWING GET THE OTHER END OF THE SPECTRUM AND WE WILL FORGET WHAT HAPPENED ON 9/11. I DO WORRY ABOUT THAT. I AM NOT ALARMIST. I JUST BELIEVE THAT THAT IS A PRAGMATIC VIEW OF THE WORLD SO I THINK THE STEADY PRESSURE, IS IF I DID IT ARREST? IS IT SHOULD WE READ PORTIONS OF RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON CT? YES, I THINK THAT WE CAN DO THAT APPROPRIATELY AND THAT THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY CAN FIGURE IT OUT. I THINK A SOUND, OVERARCHING COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY ÃDO NOT DECREMENT THE RESOURCES. DO NOT DETRACT FROM THE GAINS THAT WE HAVE HAD. SO I DO FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT THAT. I WANTED TO TEST THAT OUT ON THIS AUDIENCE AND MAY BE WE CAN TALK WHEN WE BREAK AT THE ÃAT THE SOCIAL, I THINK, THAT SOME OF US ARE GOING TO. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Barbara McQuade: I AM IN NO POSITION TO DISAGREE WITH THIS. CERTAINLY, COUNTERTERRORISM REMAINS A TOP PRIORITY. WE WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME BUT IF YOU HAVE EVER MANAGED RESOURCES, YOU KNOW THE CHAPTER PRIORITIZE ONE THING OVER THE OTHER. NOW I WAS STRUCK WHEN GINA SAID THAT THEY WOULD MAKE THAT A PRIORITY. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT THREAT FROM NATIONSTATES, ELECTION INTERFERENCE, AND ALSO A REALLY SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE FROM OUR FOREIGN ADVERSARIES. A HUGE PROBLEM WITH ÃI CONTINUED IN DETROIT, STEALING TRADE SECRETS FROM THE AUTO INDUSTRY, OFTEN THROUGH CYBER MEANS. SOMETIMES IT IS JUST FROM PAIN ENOUGH TO AN EMPLOYEE TO LEAVE AND COLLECT DATA ON A THUMB DRIVE OR AN EXTERNAL HARD DRIVE AND TAKE IT TO A COMPANY, A START UP IN CHINA. BUT THE ABILITY TO SNEAK IN AND OUT THROUGH THE DOOR BUT THROUGH YOUR COMPUTER TO STEAL TRADE SECRETS, I THINK THAT THAT COULD HARM THE GREATEST ADVANTAGE THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS WHICH IS OUR INDUSTRY AND ECONOMY. AND WE DO KNOW THAT THERE WAS A BIG INDICTMENT AGAINST CHINESE NATIONALS, CHINESE INTELLIGENCE, STEALING FROM THE STEEL INDUSTRY IN PITTSBURGH. NOW A LOT OF THOSE WERE NOT CHARGED BECAUSE YOU CANNOT EXTRADITE PEOPLE FROM THE COUNTRIES WHERE THE THREATS ARE COMING FROM SO RATHER THAN CHARGE THEM AND GO PUBLIC IS USUALLY THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO WASH TO TRY TO GAIN VALUABLE INTELLIGENCE FROM THAT KIND OF ATTACK. BUT IN THAT INSTANCE IT WAS DECIDED WHAT IS CALLED NAME AND SHAME. TO SAY WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE UP TO AND WOULD COST YOU TO LET THE WORLD KNOW ABOUT THAT BUT IT IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT THREAT THAT IS GOING ON AND THREATENS ONE OF THE GREAT ADVANTAGES THAT THE U.S. HAS OVERCOME OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD. SO THOUGH COUNTERTERRORISM IS AN IMPORTANT PRIORITY, I DO NOT WANT THAT TO DIMINISH THE PRIORITY OF THE THREAT POSED BY NATIONSTATES. >> ALL RIGHT. >> NOW, IT WON'T SURPRISE US IN THIS DISCUSSION THAT IS ALL TRUE, IT WILL PROBABLY BE IRRELEVANT FOR THE NEXT THING HAPPENS WHICH WILL BE KIND OF A SWINE FLU VIRUS THAT KILLS 2 MILLION AMERICANS OR SOMETHING UNPREDICTABLE, A BIO ATTACK. AND WE WILL LOOK BASICALLY ÃIS ALWAYS A PROBLEM WHERE YOU'RE FIGHTING THE LAST WALL BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THAT YOU KNOW. BUT I DO THINK THAT IT IS FAIRLY OBVIOUS THAT IT WILL SURPRISE US. THEY SURPRISE US ON PEARL HARBOR AND 9/11. OF COURSE THERE WERE INDICATIONS BUT WE DO TEND TO BE SURPRISED. UNFORTUNATELY, SOMETHING ELSE WILL HAPPEN. HISTORY HAS NOT STOPPED.>> ALL RIGHT. I AM MINDFUL OF THE TIME. WE ARE THREE MINUTES AHEAD OF SCHEDULE, BUT AS CHRIS KNOWS HIS PEOPLE WHO USED TO RUN MEETINGS IS SAVING A LITTLE BIT OF TIME IS GOOD FOR EVERYBODY. WE HAD A GOOD COMPETITION OF WHO COULD IN THE MEETING THE EARLY SO I THINK THAT ONE IN THAT REGARD, EVEN AT THE NSC. BUT THANK YOU FIRST OF ALL TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. FIRST, THANK YOU TO YOU ALL WHO DECIDED TO TAKE TIME OUT OF YOUR BUSY SCHEDULES AND AFTERNOONS. THANK YOU FOR THAT INTO THE PANEL AS WELL, COMING IN FROM WASHINGTON. THANK YOU FOR BARBARA FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR SCHEDULE. >> ALWAYS. >> THANK YOU FOR SHARING TIME WITH US. THANK YOU TO THE STUDENTS FROM THE CLASS, RYAN AND MICHAEL, ELLIOTT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HELPING TO FACILITATE THE QUESTIONS AND A SPECIAL THANKS TO LAURA LEE. I KNOW THAT I SAW LAURA HERE SOMEWHERE BEFORE. LAURA, I HAVE PROBABLY BUGGED THE MOST OF MY TIME COMING TO THE FORD SCHOOL ASKING HER LITERALLY MILLIONS OF QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW DO I PUT AN EVENT LIKE THIS TOGETHER? WHAT ARE THE DOS AND DON'TS? SO THANK YOU. AND LAST, THANK YOU TO AARON FLOREZ. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE THERE IN THE BACK. YOU REALLY WHERE THE PERSON WHO DID ALL THE HARD WORK YOU PUT THIS TOGETHER SO A SPECIAL THANK YOU FOR THAT. A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR EVERYONE! [APPLAUSE] DEAN BARR, THANK YOU. LET ME SAY THANK YOU AGAIN TO JAVED FOR PUTTING TOGETHER A WONDERFUL GROUP OF PANELISTS. EVERYBODY, PLEASE JOIN US OUTSIDE FOR A RECEPTION. THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.