defense secretary leon panetta. live coverage here on c-span2. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> select committee will come to order. we will play a video. >> the largest temptation of an vaping country in europe since world war ii. >> hamas launches surprise attacks within israel borders overnight. >> $100 $100 million a year . >> xi jinping's says that one will be reunified with china during his new year's address. >> so 2024 must mark an inflection point. >> we stand at this crossroads. >> whether it's a sea of troubles, we will do everything we can. >> a growing number of world conflicts. to shape a new world order. ..

>> led by the united states and its allies, china is by far the most serious challenge to u.s. national security with a power to reshape the international order to beijing's liking. >> the people's republic of china and russia have the means to threaten our interests and way of life. >> we're the last real super power and now china is a near peer-to-peer adversary to us now and of course, their goal is to build up the empire. they're putting up outposts buying up land in the country and ccp coming up and opening shop on main street. >> being replaced with imperialization. new ones are taking shape and

battle lines. >> russia is gathering forces in an attempt to break ukrainian defenses and russia is receiving from iran. ukrainian officials say moscow has used drones to hit targets and then there's china, the records show that chinese state-owned companies provided russian-owned defense firms with equipment, jamming technology, and jet parts. >> and iran has turned sights toward china. >> china is the only trading partner and heavily sanctioned oil exports made by an agreement in 2021, according to the new york times, calls for joint training and joint weapons development and intelligence sharing. >> actively deepened cooperation with new member iran. >> iran across, and connects

and the alliance with iran called the axis of resistance. >> chinese firearms, relics that made their way into hamas. >> the foundation of the world order is being shaken to their core. >> to guarantee our freedom, we must be prepared to serve. >> and every work to meet the authentic problems of our time, we will generate a vision and an energy which would demonstrate a new to the world, superior vitality and the strength of the free society. >> well, thank you, first a point of order, we have a hard stop at 11:00, so i'm going to be ruthless in enforcing time limits, beginning with my own. i had a fancy prepared speech, but would like to tell a story secretary panetta has heard before. when i was with his son and

listening to his wisdom, i piped up, mr. secretary, what's the best job you had in washington d.c.? in response that would simultaneously inspire and depress me, he said the best job i ever had was being a member of congress. he was a man who had every great job in washington d.c. and he said best job was member of congress because, and i quote him, there was a feeling you could get stuff done. and i'd like to think that at a time when congress is struggling to get much done, this committee has been an oasis of bipartisanship and at least an attempt to reinvigorate that feeling and spirit that secretary panetta was talking about. we have two incredible public servants with us today, secretary pompeo as well, to provide their perspective how we restore deterrents and meet the moment. and we are in a decisive moment for u.s. national security for global security more broadly. famous churchill called the period of german re-armament and alliance building the gathering storm.

today the storm gathers once more and as we watch china undertake the largest peace time military buildup since world war ii and in moscow and pyongyang, and problems do not age well. we ignore them at our peril. appeasement or overreliance on polite diplomacy will not save us. we must have our military strength, support our allies and deter in authoritarian alliance and only strength will withstand the storm. i recognize for the opening statement. >> thank you for coming the distinguished secretaries who are with us today. until the last few years, a lot of americans thought that freedom and democracy were finally spreading around the world. after the cold war democracy spread from eastern europe to east asian it sub saharan

africa. in the 1990's some pundits theorized in an addition to the spread of democracy, growing economic ties between countries would also make war less likely. in fact, there was even a theory that it would be impossible for two countries at that both had mcdonald's to go to war with each other. this was called, and i'm not kidding, this is called, quote, the golden arch he is theory of conflict prevention and it was-- (inaudible) to plow shares, tanks are traded in for, yes, happy meals. i like this theory a lot. one reason is that mcdonald's is based in my home state of illinois and the other reason is that mcdonald's was my first real job in life flipping burgers, so i have a

sentimental attachment to this theory, but there's only one thing wrong with this theory, that is that it's falls and doesn't work. while the chinese communist party invited mcdonald's into china the ccp did not trade in tanks for happy meals. instead in 1989 they sent those tanks into tiananmen square a few blocks from what would be the largest mcdonald's in the world. vladimir putin didn't trade in his tanks either and sent them into ukraine two years ago, when mcdonald's stopped operating in russia in protest, putin forced the sale of mcdonald's property and renamed their brand. you can't go to mcdonald's in moscow anymore, but you can go to this place. it's russian for tasty and that's it. economic ties with the ccp and russia did not lead them to become democracies or to become more peaceful. in fact, the opposite happened.

after coming to power, xi jinping issued document number nine to stamp out false ideological trends like democracy, universal values, media independence, and civil society. the ccp now jails, disappears and murders journalists and dissidents and is carrying out an ongoing genocide, a genocide against the uyghur people in the province. beyond bits border, the south china sea and militarizing taiwan. and no limits partnership with vladimir putin and stands by the putin regime during its brutal invasion in ukraine. last october, president biden sent congress a request for additional funding to support ukraine and others defending freedom and democracy against those who wish to tear down those ideals. in november, every single

democrat on this committee signed a letter to congressional leadership urging this body to take action to pass that supplemental funding request. it's now january. the time to pass president biden's supplemental funding request is now. it's now. the spread of freedom and democracy around the world has been one of recent history's most extraordinary developments. the power of these ideals has been proven by how fiercely those who enjoy them will fight to protect them. rather than turning their swords into plow shares as they've integrated with the world economy, the ccp and putin's russia have bought more swords. consequently, we must acquire more shields, and we must help our friends shield their democracies from attack as well. our mutual security depends on it. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you, ranking member. i note for the record that your chart and prop game gets better

every time we do a hearing. very impressive. again, we're privileged have two former secretaries. secretary pompeo was secretary of state and 4th district in kansas from 2011-2017. secretary pompeo was director of the cia as well as secretary of defense under president barack obama, and chief of staff for former president bill clinton and best job, apparently, as a member of congress from california from 1977 to 1993. we thank both of you for making time out of our busy schedules to be here. if you could please stand and raise your right hand, i will now swear you in. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief so help you god? let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative, you may be seated. thank you, secretary pompeo, you're recognized for your

opening remarks. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you ranking member, it's great to be here. i started my career canon 107 so feels like home very much. it's a real privilege to be in front of this particular committee. you all are doing important, remarkable, bipartisan work and i want to personally on behalf of the pompeo family thank you, each of you, for doing that. it matters to my family, it matters to each american and bless you for that. and you all have in front of you, much as my time in congress, important decisions, we have wars in the europe, the middle east, and risk at home, and the topic we're here to talk about today, challenges in the pacific and asia, i know you'll endeavor to get these decisions right. you know, to start i always get to the facts. i'm going to try to do this in just three minutes. we have a he got deterrents

loss of europe, deterrents lost in the middle east. we're in the cusp of losing that deterrent model in asia as well, and one could argue those have already been lost. chairman kim who i spent way so much time with, chairman kim has now talked about the absence of any desire for peaceful reunification with the republic of korea. that's a change that is important within guyana two weeks ago, they are frightened by maduro and his efforts to retake, his words, much as xi jinping talks about reunifying, retake what is theirs. this is a challenge that's linked. not just about one of these theaters, one of these zones, one of these regions, but these are all deeply linked whether america will have the resolve, capacity to deter and maintain the order that we have benefitted, that americans have benefitted from since the post cold war order was established.

we know that this conflict largely begins with economics. chinese communist party has been at war with the united states economy for at least 20 years. one could argue 40. it might well have made sense for the esteemed dr. kissinger to go and travel and open up relationships with the chinese communist party back in 1972. it might have made sense in 1982. it made no sense by 2002, 2012 and certainly today makes no sense. it's dangerous for the united states to allow the chinese communist party to engaged in way that for our republic. i'll be asked about that. we think not only about taiwan, not only the south pacific and the los angeles chains, but los angeles, denver, washington d.c., chicago and my home state

of kansas. the chinese party is working diligently inside the gates to undermine what we stand for. when he talks about american decline. he's not doing so passively. he's working to achieve that very american decline here at home. the last thought, secretary panetta, it's great to be with you here today and i think it's important for america to see that this challenge is not remotely about politics, it's not remotely partisan, it's so much more fundamental than that. i have been critical of many of president biden's foreign policy actions, but i must say the work that they continue to do to confront the work of china i have approved and appreciated. i always knew we could do more, they could do more as well and i'm counting on this committee to help us to get to that place when we put sanctions in place we can't immediately turn around and create loopholes. when we put in place economic orders that suggest how america

ought to proceed, we cannot let our adversaries, whether they be from russia, escape those sanctions regimes and we have to make sure that our friends comply with them as well. this will require termerity from each of us. the chinese communist party is not to about to give in because of some great speech that someone gives, some set of wonderful remarks or meetings held in san francisco or beijing or washington d.c. they are determined, they will push back against our actions and we need to make sure that we hold the chinese communist party at risk in the same way that they seek to put america at risk each day. if we get that piece right, the tactics, the operational pieces we'll get those. a strong united states military, capable diplomatic corps and robust outcomes will give awes chance that 250 years from now, the 76th or 79th secretary of state can sit here

with his democrat counterpart from previous administration and still have the opportunity to defend what we hold most sacred. thank you for giving me the opportunity to be with you today. i look for your questions. >> thank you, mr. pompeo. mr. panetta we look forward to your comments. >> thanks for inviting me to testify on the increasing threat posed by the people's republic of china and its ongoing efforts to undermine the united states and allied interests around the world. and thank you for having me join with my good friend mike pompeo, who we worked together when he was in my job as director of the cia and continued to be in touch during

the time he was secretary of state. mike and i are good friends and i'm glad that we are here to be able to present our views. i also want to thank this committee, the fact that you are a bipartisan committee working on this issue is incredibly important to our foreign policy and i want to commend you for the work that you've done and particularly the report you issued on economic competition. look, we live in a dangerous world in which tyrants and autocrats and terrorists are challenging and attacking democracies. and so they're threatening our values. they're threatening our interests and our national security. when putin brutally invaded ukraine, it was for no other reason, but that he did not believe the people of ukraine had the right to decide how to govern themselves. i believe ukraine is fighting not just to protect their

democracy, but to protect the concept of democracy in the 21st century. when hamas attacked and brutalrily killed innocent men, women and children in israel, they, like al-qaeda on 9/11, made clear that they had no regard for the dignity of life and hamas' leadership does need to be destroyed just as we targeted and destroyed al-qaeda leadership. we are facing an aligning group of dictators and autocrats from around the world united in their determination to undermine our democracy. china is exploiting these conflicts to advance its own narrative of western decline. xi explicitly said the east is rising and the west is declining and that china will replace the united states as a world power. i've met with xi multiple times

during the time i was in office, here and in beijing. he's smart. he can be very diplomatic, he's committed to an aggressive china, but it is important that we never underestimate xi jinping because he will use every opportunity to undermine the stability of the united states and the west. he will steal our intellectual property, conduct economic espionage, have extensive intelligence. i believe they've planted malware within our own computer networks, he'll use artificial intelligence for disinformation campaign. he'll militarize and continue to militarize the south china sea. he will modernize the people's liberation army. they have the largest navy. they're producing large numbers of manned and unmanned aircraft, icbm's. they're expanding their nuclear

arsenal, they have 500 warheads and they hope to double that by the end of the decade. as a result, they are not simply developing what could be called the general purpose military. they're developing a military that can employ the threat and the use of force. xi jinping recently said the reunification of the motherland is a historical necessity and so there's no question they threaten taiwan. the president was correct to say that we will defend taiwan militarily if it comes to that. i have always believed strongly that when the u.s. gives its word it must stand by its word. that's the essence of deterrents. the bottom line is we are facing an increasingly aligned group of autocrats around the world and the fact is that they're now having dual use technologies spread with

russia, iran, china and north korea. while this alignment of autocrats is troubling, the good news is that it does not even come close to approaching the strength and depth and breadth of the united states global network of allies and partners. look, some have suggested that our relationship with china is improving and there's no question, we've had increased military and economic dialog, but make no mistake, the only way to try to avoid war with china, the only way to deal with china is from strength, from strength. both china and russia became more aggressive when they sensed weakness on the part of the u.s. and for that reason we must take strong action to arm and train taiwan to defend itself. to strengthen our force posture, to invest in the next

generation of military technology, to bolster our alliances and to maintain strong export controls on critical technologies. and, i must say, we must demonstrate that our democracy is strong and that we can govern. for that reason, it is incredibly important that this congress pass the supplemental request and provide necessary military aid to ukraine, israel, and taiwan. to fail would send a terrible message of weakness. to adversaries and allies alike, make it clear those who believe that the united states can back away from our commitment in ukraine, you cannot be weak on ukraine and be tough on china. in conclusion, let me just say, i tell the students at the panetta institute that in our

democracy we govern either by leadership or by crisis. if we fail to provide leadership, then we will govern by crisis. and the price of that is the loss of the trust of the american people in our democracy. this committee provides hope that we can govern and work together in a real sense. our democracy and our national security depend on each of you for your leadership necessary to govern and protect our country. thank you. >> thank you, mr. secretary. we've released three major policy reports that were the culmination of a year's worth of work and membership hearings and input and we're now trying to turn those into legislative reality, but i think perhaps the most important function of the committee is to try to explain to our colleagues and the american people, why, why any of this matters and for those who are in the d.c. beltway and think tanks, it may seem obvious why the defense of

taiwan or the genocide matters, but i'm not sure it's as obvious to americans who are just trying to live their lives. for example, i had 600 people come to a town hall in my district to talk about the lake sturgeon being listed as endangered species, a huge issue for northeast wisconsin. i'm not sure i could get 20 people to come to a discussion about china. i'd like both of you the opportunity to answer the everyday american who you've represented in your past job, why does this matter? why should they care about the threat posed by the ccp. i'll start with you, secretary pompeo. >> chairman gallagher, it doesn't matter you might not think it might not be of as much interest to your constituents. i don't think they're two separate things, this is domestic policy, this is foreign policy. they are so deeply interconnected. what happens in kyiv doesn't stay there. what happens in gaza doesn't stay there. these threats are real. you can see it on our southern

border as well. right there are bad actors trying to infiltrate our nation across that border as well. and for the folks back in kansas, so many american jobs depend on the fact that we will confront the chinese communist party's efforts to destroy our manufacturing base and intellectual property there are jut comes for ordinary families prepared on a united states that is prepared to defend its own economy, create the rule of law, trade lanes open, all of these things that somehow seem distant. they're right on top of us. last piece, talked about china inside the gates. you know what? we closed in the trump administration the chinese consulate in houston, texas. we didn't close it because we disliked them, we closed it because they were conducting what i believe is one of the largest espionage operations ever against the american people from that very facility there in our universities today, operating to steal our

finest high end research. these things matter to american economic growth for years in front of us. if we get it wrong then our children and grandchildren will live in an america that looks fundamentally different. we can't permit that to happen. it's not something about 6,000 miles away. it's about something just down the street from you, your family and your neighbors. thank you, sir. >> secretary panetta, why does it matter in monterey? >> it matters because it really is about the fundamental security of our country. and i think one of the things that marks the american people is not just their common sense and their spirit and their resilience, but it's also their willingness to secure not just

their family, but their country. as secretary of defense i had the opportunity to look into the eyes of our men and women in uniform sat going both to iraq and afghanistan. and what i saw was a willingness on the part of these young men and women to put their lives on the line in order to fight and die for this country. to fight and die for this country. and so there are men and women from across this country who have assumed the responsibility of providing security and putting their lives on the line in order to defend this country. so it is incredibly important to what i call the american

dream. i'm the son of italian immigrants. i used to ask my parents why did you come to this country? they came in the early 30's they came from a poor area in italy and never forgot my father's response. he said, your mother and i believe we could give our children a better life in this country. i think that's the american dream. giving our children a better life. and that's what this is all about. if we don't provide security for this country, if we don't deal with the threats that we're facing abroad, then we are not providing security. we are not providing the american dream for our children. >> thank you, sir. i yield my one second, ranking member is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. secretary panetta, you el quently stated your strong support for the white house's

supplemental request for ukraine assistance. secretary pompeo, you're an eloquent and strong supporter for aid to ukraine and in your op-ed part of the reason, putin winning in ukraine would em bolden the ccp and make a war over taiwan more likely, isn't that right? >> yes, that's correct. and secretary panetta spoke to that as well. >> let's just be very clear. if we do not further fund ukraine now, war is more likely over taiwan, which none of us, none of us want war over taiwan or with china and that's certainly what the american people do not want. let me turn to my next topic, this is a picture of the cia memorial wall honoring those who died in the line of duty. last year the ccp's secret police launched a recruitment campaign. they posted this picture with

an article about the first cia officer killed in the line of duty whom the ccp claims they killed in tibet in 1950. now, here is the rub. if you look at this article, the headline reads, quote, the first black star the cia hung on the stone wall is related to china exclamation point. now, secretary panetta, i find this very disturbing. nobody should glorify the killing of an american, do you agree? >> absolutely. >> and xi, chairman xi came to san francisco recently and told us he wants to quote, make friends with us. secretary panetta, this might be obvious, friends don't glorify or laud the killing of other's people. >> absolutely. >> i think this is another example of the need to always judge the ccp by their actions not necessarily just their words. let me turn to this other very

interesting picture and secretary panetta, you might recognize this. [laughter] >> secretary panetta, this is you in the prc in 2012 and it looks like you're receiving a very memorable gift from china's then minister of defense. do you remember this. >> i remember very well. >> is this hung in your dining room, by the way? >> i don't know if i've ever brought that photograph with me. now, interestingly, not only is that plate very memorable, but this gentleman here, general was the last defense minister in china to not be prosecuted for corruption. the next three individuals to hold this position as minister of defense were all prosecuted for corruption and/or purged and many others in the people's liberation army have also been purged. secretary panetta, there have

been numerous reports of xi jinping purging some leaders not because of corruption, but because they disagree with xi's leadership. so here is my question, can you rule out that xi jinping is purging people from the pla because they disagree with his leadership? >> you know, that defense minister that i met with, i actually -- we established a pretty good relationship in our ability to talk to one another and as a matter of fact, we began to do military exercises together and continued to have a dialog. and i was hopeful at that time that we could continue that relationship. unfortunately, that hasn't been the case and you've just indicated the amount of corruption and those that are being dismissed because xi doesn't particularly like the

way they conduct business. with that does is, is undermines stability in china. and it undermines stability in the military. the fact that we broke down our communication with china here is of concern because we need to be able to stay in touch with china when we have differences of one kind or another. i think the answer to your question is that xi, by virtue of the way he's dealing with his military leadership, i think is undermining their ability to respond effectively to what they need to do. >> let me turn to my last topic. this is a picture of joshua wong, secretary pompeo, joshua wong is a prisoner because he led pro democracy protests in hong kong. he came to the consulate in hong kong and requested refuge in 2020 when you were secretary. were you personally in favor of him receiving refuge?

>> look, i don't want to talk about the discussions we had inside. i think the united states can always do more, whether as for him, nathan law, jimmy who has been prosecuted, the united states can do more and better to protect these people in their capacity to just do the base things that every human being to speak their mind peacefully. >> i call upon the ccp to relaesch joshua wong and wish we had provided him refuge at the time. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you, recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank both secretary panetta and pompeo for your service to our country. we appreciate it. secretary pompeo in your written testimony today you talk about a couple of different things that deal with the difficulties that the chinese economy's having right now. demographically they're struggling. you talk about their stock market is a disaster, stealing money off shore accounts, and, but it says make no mistake a

weakened china is an ever growing danger to the united states and the world. so are you saying there, or just elaborate a little on this, the weaker their economy is, the more volatile their government could be and the more danger they are to the rest of the world? >> that's good to see you again. >> great to see you, too, sir. >> it's not a direct line, that's not a one for one as they weaken they present more risk. i think they present more risk, the decision making apparatus and secretary panetta spoke to this, as there's more turmoil, as their economy struggles more and see the democratic writing on the wall, the decision making inside the chinese leadership becomes more fractured and as xi jinping sees the end of his time in leadership approaching as each day goes on, more likely to achieve the end-game that he's

described. he's unambiguous about it, that he's determined to do it, and as the challenges present themselves there's always a risk that xi jinping has seen the clock has run and if america is not prepared to deter him, more likely to take action that is adverse to u.s. economic and u.s. military interests in the region. >> thank you, secretary panetta, you talked a while ago about dealing from strength. i'm assuming that also means economic strength because as indicated here, you know, even if they're weakened, they're still dangerous and in some of the testimony we've had before, from some of our witnesses, who have been refugees from china, they talk about the fact that they spent about 300 billion a year to surveil, detain and building detention camps on their own people and in doing that, they have a tremendous fear of their own people, the government does of their own people. if you stress them, if you stress their economy, there's some difficulties and we

ourselves to be able to offset have to have a strong economy. do you agree with that, would you like to speak, elaborate on that a little bit more? >> look, i think there's-- the whole thrust of our efforts with china is deterrents. and that deterrence has to be both military and economic. and i think the reality is that right now because china has a very unpredictable economy, you just read today where their real estate industry is being challenged, they're being-- they're in trouble because of loans that were issued and the real estate area is a huge investment area for china. so they're going to suffer

another hit because of that. and add to that the other unpredictability of the chinese economy right now and low growth that's taking place, i think what that -- what that's doing in some ways is, it's drawing xi's attention to what he was primarily concerned about, which was developing china as an economic power for the future. so in some ways, their problems represent good news for the united states. >> thank you. secretary pompeo, there were decoupling ourselves from china and all the trade we've had has always been discussed on this committee. should we do it at all? should we do some, should we do none? how do we approach that. i think we've had discussions and i've been in the committee along with mr. barr and i chair the subcommittee on national

security and national finance and so, the trade and international financing, these things all fits together here so decoupling, only about half a minute left here. key coupling ourselves from china, what is your opinion on there, do it halfway, what would you suggest? >> difficult to do in 15 seconds let me give it a run. >> we should never think for a moment we're going to get the decision on this. it could be the chinese party doing it as well decoupling. >> and xi jinping on what terms. makes sure high end dual materials, we should focus intensely in the reterm and shut not part of it down, but all of it down. as for the, you know, the beach balls and blankets and the likes and more complicated problem sets and it's a continuum, but the effort today has to be protect the crown jewels of the american economy

and make sure that we have the resources that we need to continue to deliver american manufacturing across the world. >> thank you, i'll yield back. >> thank you. >> good morning. secretary panetta, in 2022, after vladimir putin and russia invaded ukraine, the united states, president biden and our n.a.t.o. allies helped rally freedom loving people across the globe to support ukraine. what do you surmise xi jinping and the prc took from that? what lesson did they take from the swiftness of that coalition? >> as i mentioned in my testimony, i really do think that russia and china grew more aggressive because they sensed a weakness on the part of the united states. that the united states was withdrawing from leadership in the world, was withdrawing from our alliances and wasn't drawing the line on aggression

and i'm thankful that president biden and our n.a.t.o. allies drew a line on putin. i don't think putin expected that, really frankly. so it was really important for the united states and our allies to be able to say, if you cross that line, we will take steps to go after russia, we'll undermine your economy, we'll provide military aid, and we will strengthen n.a.t.o. that was a clear message and most importantly, the message was if the ukrainians, because they're brave fighters, stopped the russian invasion. that got the attention of xi jinping and the fact that that invasion was stopped, the fact that the united states and our allies came together to help ukraine has been a major signal, i think, to xi to think twice about taiwan. >> around that time, putin and

xi said that there are no limits to this deepening relationship. they wanted to convey that publicly to send that message to the rest of the world and i think that that's correct, that the swiftness of the coalition, the robustness of it sent a message to china and xi. but now, it seems like they're waiting for the americans the next election this year, that they're kind of hedging that there's going to be a change in policy and they see that the congress has not been able to pass a supplemental to bolster the ukrainian people. what signal, what is xi jinping and the prc taking from the fact that the congress has not united in continuing to repel this foreign aggression from putin? >> look, i believe that it's mike mullen that said

dysfunction in washington is a threat to our national security because our ability to govern, our ability to work together, our ability to deal with the problems in this country, that's what democracy is all about. that's the strength of democracy, is the ability of republicans and democrats to sit down and to get things done. to provide the supplemental requests, to deal with defense issues, to deal with foreign policy issues, and when for whatever reason that breaks down and it doesn't work, what it does is, it sends a signal to the world that the united states is not strong in our democracy and that because of the dysfunction that we see in washington, it is undermining our credibility in the world. so i can't tell you how important it is for the united states, for republicans and democrats, to work together as this committee is, to basically send a signal that we are

unified when it comes to defending our interests. >> and for xi jinping in particular, what is he -- what do you surmise that he, they're considering right now as the u.s. does not follow through with the help to democracies and the ukrainian people in particular? >> xi is very aware of what's happening with regards to our country, just as putin is. and when they see dysfunction, when they see that we can't get our act together, to be able to do what's right, then they sense that that's weakness and it gives them the incentive to think that given the opportunity, they can take advantage of that. so, what we're doing -- if wii failing to pass the supplemental as i said, we're playing xi jinping's game. and we're playing putin's game, which is that our strength is

being undermined, not from abroad, but from within. >> i'll yield back. >> thank you, mr. barr. >> thank you, mr. chairman and to both secretary panetta and secretary pompeo, thank you for your extraordinary public service. it's good to see both of you again. secretary pompeo, i enjoyed visiting with you in monterey with your son jimmy and playing a little golf. thank you for tolerating my bad golf with ted, and good to see you again. secretary pompeo, thank you for-- as secretary of state elevating the issue of the threat from china and establishing the deterrents that we need to continue to be vigilant about. i want to ask you about the recent apex summit and your impressions of that following that biden-xi summit. the biden administration removed the chinese ministry of public security institute of forensic science from the commercial entity list in exchange for greater

cooperation on stopping the flow of fentanyl precursors are that being produced in the prc. last year i questioned assistant secretary of state to delay sanctions and export controls. secretary pompeo, what kind of message does it send to our adversaries if the state department intervenes to prevent the listing of prc entities who should be sanctioned or subject to export controls? >> congressman barr, i think it's an enormous policy mistake, not only send the wrong message, but the chance for xi jinping removing precursors to our country is zero. as a result of that action, he has been determined and continue to poison our children here at home and i don't think any action taken by the united states department of state to sort of relieve them of any penalties, restrictions, prohibitions is likely to change his direction on that. >> and just for context, this

ministry that was removed from the commerce entity list, this is an instrumentality of the ccp that has engaged in horrendous genetic testing of uighurs and human rights violations. secretary panetta, you noted in your testimony that our adversaries routinely weaponize economic tools of market access and trade dependencies, such as fossil fuels from russia and critical minerals from china. last week, it was announced na in an effort to combat climate change, the biden administration would be halting lng exports. this administration, however, has extended eight times a treasury general license allowing for transactions involving russian energy exports, including oil, to be exempt from u.s. sanctions. do either of these actions, the action to block lng exports to our allies in eastern europe or the action to provide a general

license to our sanctioned regime against putin, to either of those actions help us cut off funds from moscow? >> i don't know whether -- and i hope they haven't, the administration has made a final decision with regards to lng, i know the president has postponed that issue and is looking at some of the issues related to regulations, but i think it is very important to be able to provide that kind of fuel to our allies for goodness sakes. because they've joined with the united states, they have lost the ability to have to rely on russian energy. that's a good thing.

and we ought to be providing the support necessary in order to give them the ability to be independent of that source of energy. so i hope that the administration moves forward with the lng and allows that fuel-- >> thank you. >> from the united states to be able to go to our allies. >> i agree with that. i think that exporting producing energy is a geopolitical tool and a grave mistake to not recognize that. but in addition, i want to talk a little about, as a member of the financial services committee with oversight over treasury, that the treasury department's inexplicable decision to provide a license to russian banks to allow them to process energy transactions, ap i've spoken with secretary yellen about this. i've spoken to wally, these are great public servants who are trying to do right with this oil price cap regime, but the

problem is, the oil price cap is not working. it's russian crude is trading above the cap and it's not enforceable. to me, what would make more sense is to sanction dirty polluting russian energy and produce more american energy to help our allies. can either of you speak to that? >> i think you've made a very good point and that's what we should be doing. >> well, i thank the gentlemen for their testimony and their service and once again, secretary pompeo, new, especially-- or secretary panetta, thank you especially for your incredible work with the intelligence community in lead up to the abadabad, and thank you. >> at some point somebody will play you in a movie, secretary pompeo, i fear that's true. recognized for five minutes. thank you, mr. chair. thank you to the two of you for

coming on out and talking to us here. secretary panetta, i'd like to start with you. i've been listening to your responses to some of these questions. you've had great points and i'd like to flesh out and talk about some more you talked about deterrents and critical nature of components there in terms of our economic strength and also in response to one of my colleagues talked about the importance of sending a signal to the world that we're strong and that credibility that's there, and so i want to try to merge these together because you know, when i had the conversation once with a leader from the indo-pacific region, they're talking about, look, the american military strength is here, they're asking-- you know, the united states is asking us to join that component. we're talking about economic strength and yes, that's part of it, but what they pointed out is one thing, the number one question that they talk about amongst themselves, about what to do with the united states and china, and that

other countries are talking about, is the singular question, is america a reliable partner and they said it to me in a way, we know the answer to that right now. all the challenges we see, domestic turmoil and things like that. i guess i wanted to ask you, when you talk about deterrents with military and economic strength as these two pillars, would you be amenable adding political strength, too, of showing that if you have the strong military, the strong economy, without that component of having a government that can make decisions decisively, quickly, that it weakens the components of the other elements of deterrents. is that something that makes sense to you? >> oh, it makes a great deal of sense. look, what represents the power of the united states, obviously our military capabilities, our

diplomatic capability, our economic strength. those are the strengths of the united states. but most important, is the word of the united states and whether we stand by our word. whether we are credible, and so, when it appears that we are-- that we are weak in the sense of delivering what we promised we would do, it hurts our credibility. i mean, i've been abroad, just like you have. and i've talked to foreign leaders. and the question that they inevitably ask is, what's happening in the united states? can we trust the president? can we trust the congress, can we trust an ally? those are the questions i get and i'm sure others have gotten the same question. >> thank you. >> and the important thing is

that we have to show that what we say we will do, we do and if we back away from that, it sends the wrong message to the world. >> thank you, secretary. secretary pompeo, i'd love to kind of bring you into this, you know, the challenges that you see before us, the fact that the two of you served here in congress and you're seeing what we're up to, the challenges we're facing this constant threat of a government shutdown that we keep struggling with, the issues with the supplemental. i guess i wanted to ask your thought of what secretary panetta just stayed said. to fix our own system and show that the bipartisanship here is something that can extend to 435 in the who us and 100 in the senate. i'd be interested in your thoughts. >> yes, i lived the dream as well and pass add handful of continuing resolutions on my watch, too, much to the department of defense's consternation, we couldn't redirect our resources.

the same was true during my time in the executive branch. i watched congress unable to actually move resources to the current day challenges as time moves on, one needs to be able to do that. continuing resolutions do that and i was an advocate for working through that. and there are serious matters and judgments and opinions, i don't mind the to and fro, the angst that people somehow describe. i'm unbothered by a rambunctious american democracy. in the end. and i heard secretary panetta talked about xi jinping and vladimir putin invasion of ukraine, we should not pat ourselves on the back of america. one free bite at the apple killing tens of thousands of

ukrainians is not something we should pat ourselves on the back. we should remember we did not conduct american foreign policy with the excellency to actually convince putin not to invade ukraine. we need to win these things. it's insufficient to catch incoming missiles, you have to hold your adversary at risk. when we think about the ccp this is my simple theory to what congressman barr said my effort at secretary of state to remind the world if we don't hold the ccp at risk, just play defense, economically, diplomatically, we allow a spy balloon over our country for five days and then holding a press conference, the brilliance to shut it down over south carolina, that xi jinping gets he's on offense and we're on defense and that's not a good place for the united states to be. >> mr. newhouse. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

mr. secretaries, welcome this morning, an honor to have you both here and mr. panetta, just so you know, your son an honorably carrying on the tradition of public service. [laughter] >> i guess the journey. >> and i appreciate that, we take a family affair. >> so, peace through strength, that's something that we've lived with and have tried to exercise for several -- many decades and i think, i agree with both of your comments in that regard. you know, we as a committee went through a table top exercise as some people call it, a war game to see what scenarios and outcomes would look like in the event of china moving on taiwan. i heard someone say that it was a prevent war games because at the conclusion of that, no outcome was anything that anybody would like to see on

either side. the costs would be very high. one of the goals, i think, of many people is to have president xi wake up every morning and think, today is not the day, that there are so many deterrents staring him in the face that he would come to that conclusion. and i think i've heard from secretary gates, robert gates that no one in the chinese military has experience on any kind of major war. no general has any war experience and so there's a lot of reasons why maybe an invasion would not be their first course of action which leads me to maybe a more probable course of action. i just returned from the-- from japan recently and the number of incursions in taiwanese and japanese air space by aircraft from china is in the hundreds every year. the naval ships that, the presence of the chinese navy on

the eastern coast of taiwan is constant. so, if invasion, all-out invasion cost is too high and too difficult, what's to-- what can we do as a country to prevent or stop or deter china from taking an easier route, perhaps, of a blockade and simply just strangling taiwan from outside any travel or anything coming into the country? >> there is no question that the most important thing we can do with regards to taiwan is to strengthen their deterrents and to not only provide the arms, but provide the training necessary for them to be able to defend themselves and to show that the united states will maintain a presence in

that area with our navy and with our other capabilities. it's important to make clear to china that they aren't going to have a free ride if they decide to make trouble for taiwan. but it is very important that if we say we will defend them militarily that we defend them militarily and that means providing whatever support they need if they are, in fact, a victim of aggression by china. ...

i country upon taiwan is a country upon which the entire world is dependent daily for deliveries across the world come pick it's difficult very quickly. he gets it difficult for the big names, the japanese, the philippines, but still gives it more quickly than for us in the united states. so we should not, i guess my urging is not to think about the blockade as as a more peacefa more genteel solution to xi

jinping's desire to bring taiwan under his political control but inactive or very much in the same way then an invasion would be. >> thank you, mr. chair, and thank you to both of our witnesses. it's quite significant to have both of you here testifying before our committee, and we thank you for your time. mr. pompeo, in your testimony you talk about the economic war and the war within an and maybe sometimes pretending we are not in. do you see economics is the primary motivation for the ccp to align itself with american adversaries, and in many respects taught us on the global stage? or are there other motivation? >> thank you for the question at thank sadiq khan words. you got 100% of the former italian american director cia's

here today. >> and i at joint the italian caucus. >> thank you for that. we appreciate it. no, i think the primary motivation is ideological. it is xi jinping is driven by a marxist leninist ideology, a. >> understand of china as the middle kingdom of the central act on the world stage and he feels there is, that their history has been wronged by the western order. economics is a tool by which he seeks to achieve a global hegemony that he so seeks i think the motivation is much deeper and much darker than just ranking member krishnamoorthi how to make a few more minute before his people. this not an effort to improve life for the chinese people. this is an effort for aggregation of power for the chinese communist party. >> as we look towards maintaining

when i was in asia i would remind them, you think bangladesh would be first, you're running the country. sovereign nations acting in the own interest and then second the trade as a deep interest in protecting basic freedoms and

property rights and contractual capacity to deliver against increasing efforts to undermine market-based economies. this is one of the central theories of xi jinping is show up in africa with some stole intellectual property from the united states that you built with cheap labor inside of china and then dump it on the world than ever to aggregate political power. we have a model that is deeply different from that. we should not have gone down that right but we have to make sure in an increasing number of nations benefit from the central ideas of basic property rights,, contact, capacity to engage in relationships in a way to protect human dignity as a. >> in the use of american innovation as a place of strength not to be exploited for those who do not necessarily share our goals for free and open capital markets success. there's a lot to be set around

this idea of how we maintain the post-world war ii order and redefine it for the time period we're in today. looking not only back to a great history that defined so much economic success for individuals, but also for the world. we needed to thank for strategic about how we're working with our allies, particularly on supply chains and access to minerals. mr. mr. panetta, with a slight remaining time, would love to get any thoughts you have with iran and what the ccp's motivations are taken as we're facing another pressure with the moxley being under attack with a friend israel as well as some of the impeding terrorists demands that are coming down. >> i think, i think you get it and you understand where we really have to go in order to

develop the strength of the united states and our allies in economic competition with china. china engages with belt and road initiatives. they engage in spreading a lot of money around. they engage in building ports and doing all kinds of things that portend to help countries. but let me tell you, it doesn't work because countries feel like they are not the ones that are really benefiting for this. and that's why the united states needs to continue to show how we should promote economic justice. >> thank you. >> i was a little farther down the line. thank you, mr. chairman. i have several articles elected in it. first i would like to enter this information, then they can read the names.

>> without objection. >> so what, afghanistan, ukraine, iran, the biden administration's categorically failed to come they failed to deter war the very first nation of diplomacy, from the disastrous withdrawal of afghanistan to lack of guidance in ukraine and delayed support for israel. and now delayed responses on this drone attack on american servicemen. it's all failure of deterrence. how much easier it is to fail when u.s. president turns over $6 billion to iran. the iranian government is constantly worried, they pose a danger to allies in the region. they are a known funder of terrorism at the pose a direct threat to national security.

we can't economically support them. let me say, mr. secretaries, i've never said that, mr. secretaries, never before have we had more auguste paris experts on international policy before us. so thank you very much for being here. secretary panetta, i wanted to thank you for all your comments about the willingness of our young men and women to defend america and the free world. one of my son served under you in the middle east and its office in determination that you described, and i will add my, anybody tell you how well he's behaving. he's been outstanding. nobody has ever come he's never had a day with people said something nice to him. secretary pompeo, thank you very much for being here today and for your continued public service on foreign affairs and diplomatic policy, even in the

face of irenic death threats and bounties on your life. with all separate attacks are seeing across the world, can sort it look like a growing number are acting independently but i think we know that's not the case. there's this sort of global alliance against democracy and the rules-based order of nations. and our nato allies actually have risen to the stack and declared their concerns in these of the theater such as the indo-pacific. i wonder if you clarify for us this threat to the free world for our folks back home, because it doesn't always, they don't always think about that on a larger sense. >> it is the case as you described. these are all linked. these are not independent strategies. they may be an independent theater separately but make the mistake about it, the our reigning drones going to russia to kill ukrainian kids.

there's russian energy flowing to china. there's chinese semiconductor song to the russian defense industry. iranian oil into both russia and china. these actors are working to undermine the things about her most to us here at home. it's hard sometimes when a represented south central kansas it's hard to pressure when you going about your life and you found it hard appreciate there's evil in the world that is a staggering competition to our way of life as a fund. always in america we find the best in people. we are always but having spent time as an of secretary panetta with some of the most evil human being set of ever walk the face of the earth during our lifetimes, these folks want that thinks rose. it would undermine that very idea of prepared home and we have a responsibility to get it right economically comfortable medical to make sure we have strong military to defend those. >> i opposite i agree with you greatly. i appreciate both of each element lending your life of service and knowledge and insights to this committee.

this committee has been behaving very quite bipartisan fashion. they would all agree that this republican filibuster it's our job to rally our friends around this and our colleagues to support these things. they do so much for coming here and in showing of our determination to appreciate that. with that, trejo yelled back. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, history is an opportunity to either didn't of authoritarian not just a problem also the threats we face at home. in your testimony, mr. pompeo, cite the lack of decency and respect for by the institution of culture as a troubling sign for our nation's future. a nation and society intent on despising the destroying itself will not prevail. it's a a worthy message undert by the record of its messenger. the messenger cited the insurrection that occurred on

january 6 as an example of quote a peaceful transition of power. january 6, 2021 when xi jinping's best day in office. when the united states degrades its own democracy on the world stage for people all over to it as it undermines our ability to lead and the power of our example. what kind of example are we setting when former administrations take the side of dictators? what can of example are resetting your former boss, the likely presidential dominate of your party is promising to be a dictator? mr. pompeo, , you write regimesn moscow tehran pyongyang all owe their continued existence of chinese communist party. uams that prior to the invasion of screen picky descriptiveness quote very capable end quote and said you quote the enormous respect for him. also missing from your marks these regimes have an ally in donald trump. just this month donald trump praised kim jong-un's at about the natural for them to misquote a tough, smart guy. while in office he considered meeting with moderna and

second-guess his own administrations recognition of venezuelan legitimate president. you reject its own intelligence agents including the cia which with the dreck of at the time on the world stage during his shameful helsinki summit and denied the evidence that moscow interfered in our elections. on one thing that we do agree. our democracy is stronger when we invest in celebrate our free society. we have the tools to compete autocracy at home and abroad but it's not just as you say a strong military and a strong economy. it's also a strong democracy here secretary panetta as you make this your remarks quote the greatest threat to national security is a refill to govern our democracy i agree with you. mr. pompeo, this cannot happen if we defy reality and rewrite history for political expedience. so now behalf of your call for respect for vital institutions will you a test now under oath that joe biden was duly elected and a free and fair election? >> so much for bipartisanship on this committee.

well done, sir. you have destroyed -- >> will you attest under oath that joe biden was duly elected and free and fair election? out of respect for the vital institutions of our democracy, as you write. >> yes, sir, i spent my entire life my time is of a lieutenant and captain of the united states army as a member of commerce. will you -- joe biden what a free and fair election -- [talking over each other] >> of course president biden is a duly-elected president of the ten but if you'll allow me to respond for a moment, if you permit that the with the most decent and bipartisan institution respecting if you would do that. >> free and fair election? me i just respond to the tirade that you engaged in? >> answer yes or no question. [talking over each other] >> you would call witnesses that permit them to respond to it when you make assertions that a fundamentally unfound and indecent. >> would the witness unwilling to respond to the question we're going to assert that his answer was in no mr. panetta, if republican were to win november, would you recognize that individuals duly-elected president of the united states?

>> of course is right and to, pompeo. i yield back. >> i wish secretary clinton would be so clear about her election as well. >> we have 100 come with a man and ten seconds that it will give you secretary pompeo to answer the question. >> just this. we did have a peaceful transition of power from the top administration to the biden administration or i was present for that. i saw my state department work diligently to deliver the information the secretary glickman desperately needed to get started on the right foot and i been proud to work alongside speedy mr. chairman, reclaiming speedy the gentleman has yielded to me. i've given that time to secretary pompeo. spondylitis see a show of hands who think people here january speeded what are you doing? >> the last thought, by the way i was happy that the state department executed that tradition with such excellence. second thought is of this. look, we will have partisan

disagreements on many things. i think it is a factual matter you recounted a number foreign policy -- is a factual matter of the world was in less conflict three years ago that it is today. secretary blinken just yesterday said that not since 1973 has the middle east been so dangerous. i agree with him on that. it was safer three years ago because we had established a deterrence model that was successful in preventing invasion of europe, the debacle in afghanistan, the good work that we did, you will recall the top of menstruation was a first administration to provide defensive weapon system to ukraine. these were things that kept the american people safe. wasn't partisan, it wasn't political. it was good policy. >> mr. johnson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretaries, thank you very much for being articulate and logical voices about the power of deterrence, about the

importance of american leadership and about the very real risk posed by this authoritarian alignment between china, russia, north korea, iran and others. we have talked a lot about that authoritarian alignment of external actors. i'm curious to what extent doese that of i'm next in the within our own borders? to what extent as a chinese communist party identified and avesta importers that seek to undermine our country from within? mr. pompeo, or rather secretary pompeo, you can start. >> go ahead, mr. panetta. >> that, that was one of the great concerns we saw when i was director of the cia. it was obvious that china had an extensive intelligence network at play.

and that through their technology they were deliberately planning methods of gathering intelligence, whether it was how way, while weight are other sales at the using that for intelligence. they are very aggressive within the united states now on this information. we know that putin waged a disinformation campaign as well. china is doing exactly the same thing come using artificial intelligence very effectively to spread disinformation and misinformation in this country. so that i think remains a significant concern that at a time when, you know, they talk about dialogue, a time when the

talk but improving relations we cannot underestimate their efforts to basically undermine our democracy. >> two quick thoughts but i agree that we should never forget information space in social media and other chinese communist party has communist directed it is on everyone of her children's cell phones passing information that is deeply filtered, designed for our young people here to undermine the idea and understanding of america and our foundational ideas. we had to take serious action there. second thought. it seemed like like a longo but don't forget this is this is a very xi jinping that unleashed a virus upon the world that killed millions of people including over one mean people in the united states. beckett seldom reference. hard to imagine the staggering impact that covid out on the world and get know what has helped xi jinping accountable, not from the leaked leakb which happen but for the fact that once he was where that had a leak from the slab of a relatively, village of the contagious virus, he . to force

it upon world. he made the decision by the data and information to offer the researchers and to put thousands people under . and transit them across what with the death and destruction and economic harm the followed from that. this is a very same xi jinping that is working here in the united states against us. >> it's pretty well in a record of this committee that the algorithms of tiktok in america are designed to deliver trash to american youth. the algorithms in china deliver a more virtuous content. because of that end of the reasons i've intended to describe tiktok is nothing by the ccp malware because of hyperbolic or is an accurate? >> no, it is accurate. >> and has to be fixed at a stop i would only add not just tiktok, deeper, broader, it's more pervasive in the way secretary panetta described it and so this effort of information were for something, it's hard for democracy to defend because we have a

wide-open societies and i i get that unhappy about that, but we have to do it and we have the tools to do it as well. >> secretary panetta. >> by the way, i think, i think it also raises the importance of our ability to have good intelligence on china. we need good intelligence on our adversaries. we get intelligence even on our allies. but intelligence is critical to our ability to make the right decisions. and they had to chile, china is a very tough target, and is not easy to be able to penetrate and get the kind of intelligence that we absolutely need it we are going to deal with china. >> thank you gently. i felt much of america still sleepwalking through the very real threat that every single day china, russia and others have thousands of people and millions of dollars of work and undermining our country and waste you describe. thank you for calling attention to that threat. with that i yield.

>> mr. brown. >> ten what and thank you, secretary pompeo and secretary panetta for doing us today. it is clear he was global leadership is critical at a time when our competitors like the chinese communist party our manufacturing strategic alliances to challenge us. however, there must be other ways to avoid a competition which the ccp increasingly supports oppressive states like russia, north korea and iran. forcing us to respond. and as we know conflict on the international stage cannot impact seen at the local level including eye prices at the gas pumps in grocery stores and longer shipping times for u.s. consumers to get the goods they need. this is a cycle of ever greater conflict between which we must break if we are to work together in the global community to solve our biggest challenges like climate change, migration and nuclear proliferation. the secretary panetta come since we cannot draw any of these

hostile nations into our orbit, what can we do to break the cycle and disrupt the formation of ccp led strategic alliances before they seemed? >> -- seemed. >> i think, i think we have to stand back and look at that dangerous world that's out there, and look at all the flashpoints that are part of that world and the threats coming from china, from russia, from north korea, from iran, from terrorists. it is a troublesome world here and they often think, how does the united states confront that many challenges? the only way we can confront those challenges is through building alliances. it's the only way we're going to be able to deal with it. it has to be not only the united states but it has to be our allies. and by the way, the one thing about these autocrats is they are not very good in alliances. they're not very good at building their own alliances.

that's our advantage. so we need to strengthen nato. we need to strengthen our relationship with both israel and modern arabs nations in middle east. we need to strengthen our relationship in the pacific between japan, south korea, australia, india, the quad. we need to build those relationships. we need to do it in latin and central america and we need to do it in africa. that i think is going to be the most fundamental task is how we effectively build those alliances so that we can confront these adversaries with our allies. >> and while we aim for fore productive global committee will must continue to operate in the reality of these times. i am clear right on the need for the used remain a steady solid and sound defense of the rules-based international order. when democracies anywhere are threatened whether japan, south korea or taiwan, it is our moral

duty to step up and lend a helping hand. president biden has led the world in support for democracies under threat like ukraine an issue that congress needs to do more to provide the resources the president requested it is national security emergency supplemental. without these essential resources our allies would be left in the corporate secretary panetta what would you set of the most critical pieces of president president biden's national security supplemental request, particularly with regards to taiwan? >> look, i think that supplemental is very, is a very important request that will benefit our foreign policy in the world. our ability to provide military aid to ukraine. we have delayed this for too long, and ukraine has suffered as a result of that. and the last damn thing we want

is to get put in an advantage in ukraine. so that is extremely important. aid to israel, we know how important that is in order to give them the capability they need in order to defend themselves. and taiwan obviously another democracy that is under threat. so every, every one of those pieces that are critical to the supplemental, i think the president has also made the request, but very frankly i think the bipartisan support in the congress is there to pass that package. we just need to get there. and i understand that we need a deal and understand we need to protect our borders as well. all of that is critical though to being able to show the world that the united states stands by onward. >> thank you. with that i yield back.

>> thank you. 11 a.m. 11 a.m. is a hard. the math would probably work out every stage of the we will power through and get as many done up to 11. ms. henson. >> thank you, mr. chair. good morning gentlemen. thank you both for being here and for your service to our country for sharing your insights so our committee can do this very important work. it's obviously hugely challenging hearing about the links of the prc will go to to continue under my house. as. they are a fight against us. for the agenda which is to spread the authoritarian regime, not just through china and suppressed the chinese people but continue to do this for arod the world. so obviously very concerning while they can keep it about their surveillance state globally, , think about spreadig that influence through the debt trap diplomas as urgent both reference, the belt and road initiative and initiatives to try to use undermined and overpower these partnerships and relationships really as a know are really nothing more than an

attempt to spread the authoritarian regime around the world and undermined us in that process. i want to focus on the relationship. obviously they have opened up bricks to opec countries principally talk of energy and the vulnerabilities that exist there, with iran, saudi arabia. how concerning is it that block were really control the lion share of oil production worker what you think that means for the united states and what our next steps need to be? directed to either the. >> thank you for the question, congresswoman. the united states is the swing producer energy in the world if we permit it to be so. secretary panetta said it's an enormous mistake to even pause the production of elegy, that will cause downstream to capital markets will stop and run lng production and who have a gap. the united states to remain cut if we continue to produce, we

will be the producer of choice and will be the swing producer on price. sec, were also enormous consumer of energy as well. so those countries that think they can homework the exclusion of u.s. companies or misuse and does a consumers and we consumers i think they're making a mistake because it also try prices from the demand and as well. so they're going to do with her going to do. the last thing i'll say about that is remember, those alliances form more story with our allies don't have confidence that the united states stands with them. when you tell the leader of the kingdom of saudi arabia that he is a pariah, he is more likely to choose to align himself with our adversaries than is with the united states. those are fundamental errors in understanding how these nations operate and we should never take for granted what secretary panetta said can which is we have the capacity to build alliances that deliver good things for the american people and if we get that right, america will be in a much better

stronger position. >> do you have anything to add, secretary panetta? >> no, i, i agree with what mike said. it is, you know, we have in dealing with this challenge from autocracy in the world, we have several areas that represent the strength of the united states. our military power, our diplomatic power, our economic power, and our energy power. all are critical to our ability to be able to deal with these challenges that were facing the world. so on energy it just seems to me extremely important that the alliances we built in order to make sure that we're developing and independent source of energy, and that we working

towards the ability to undermine russia's ability and iran's ability to control that area. imagine if we could get our act together on energy, how effective that would be in undermining those countries. >> we say and i were all-of-the-above energy strategy and all. where trying to do all of it of everything. i think when you look at their strategy for bricks and you combine that with your and road obviously kind of, you look at that debt trap deposit with the been able to do in south america. you talked about the instability there potentially the war close to home, mr. secretary as well as what we seem with canopies unfulfilled loans and investments and china's ability to call and that capital. what do you think the united states role is to be encountering that i just met with dj norquist this when chocolate of the world bank and our financial situation and china is trying to grow, so

they're trying to pull these levers and lower their operating. what you think our next step needs to be? >> i don't have much time but let me just say one thing when you mentioned the world bank under role in these things. we should never mistake our desire for the global system to work for reliance on these international organizations. my experience as secretary of state at the u.n. was a wreck, the world bank was largely chinese influenced. these institutions, visa store, the world health organization and the type of covid, i could go on and on and on. we sometimes in america think international therefore existing structures and frameworks. we should revisit each of those that they cannot function in a way that delivers for america we should evaluate america's continued participation in each of those institutions. >> thank you so much, thank you ranking member. thank you both. good to see it again. given prc's economic interests in global motivations, what should we be doing in terms of watching china kind of expansion

of the footprint and africa? >> look, having visited africa and seeing it up close, there's no question in my mind that wherever you go china is present. they are investing in africa. they are -- they're built and wrote initiatives being implemented in africa. they are developing ports, developing infrastructure the end result of it, make no mistake about it, everything there providing is not to tot help those countries develop independence and develop their own economic strength. it's to basically undermine it. and do it in order for china to benefit from that.

if there are minerals there they're going to take advantage of those minerals. if there are other assets there, they're going to take advantage of those assets. they are in it for their own gain, that's why think the united states and our allies have to put a much more critical role to show african countries that we are there to help their people, to help us. >> i would add, it's good to see you, congressman. i would only add that in the sense i think time is on our side a bit. my observation and that of my team when i was secretary of state was that many of these countries are beginning to see the folly of having taken so much resource and money from the chinese, and his party. it the moment but there now come to appreciate what secretary panetta said, the finale lost political power, political capacity and that is constrained them and that hurts them in terms of continuing to be able to represent and get good outcomes. we had to be more active or i could get state department to do

better so the west could compete in those places. i think omit a little bit of progress, a lot of work to do but i think as time marches on if we continue our efforts in what secretary panetta described, that ultimately the norms that we have come to believe in in the west will be ones that africa will largely adopt as well. i hope i'm right about that. i think that i am. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank both of you for your tremendous service to our country, your commitment and dedication to what you have done to help make us a better country and a safer country. i think it sends a strong message in a bipartisan way the both of you here today and the message you're sending, so grateful for that. i wanted to come this can is focused on member different things over the last year. one is exposing the mind activities of the ccp. they've done a good job hunting. the second thing is figurehead we went the to strategic con against china. in my view when he got on

economic front is key to the future of how we do that. going back over 20 years ago when we allowed china into the world trade organization, a seems to be a pivotal moment in this country. the argument at the time, none of us i think when congress event but the argument was bring china into the world trade organization. they're going to modernize, liberalize their economy will become like us, they would be part of a world global order. clearly, that didn't work out the way that many of us thought it would. they play by different set of rules, different set of standards. they are deceitful in many ways, steal intellectual property. and so here we are today having to deal with that. what else have the reality that we have the two largest economic powers in the world. i think about my own district probably similar to yours, secretary pompeo, corn and soybeans. 40% goes to china for you. my farmers need to rely on the market to do it. take your fortune 200 companies that are heavily invested in china. they are in bed in many ways

with the ccp in terms of their business there. i have the largest concentration of caterpillar workers anywhere in the world. cat has 20 on manufacturing plants in china, four r&d facilities and you can get any company and look at that. so when we think about how to win the strategic competition against china, it's tough because our people in this country willing to take the economic hit that may be required to many of us here in congress want to go to a cold war mentality with china an economic front. we heard causally from the brt, business roundtable, chamber of commerce companies that are in china saying well, they become sought to hold ofcom pump the brakes to be careful about what you're doing. i'm curious as to think about how we went the strategic competition economically, your advice on that. >> arkady to thoughts. first, well, not all those businesses for the activities there as you start medicare we

encourage them to go. this was a factor model you described from the world trade organization. so they will become more like us. it just epically fail. it may have been raised at the time. what's that mean for kansas farmers and for manufactures across america? two things. one, don't count on the fact that will be used with decision that driessen out of the country. we can see this already today executives being detained, products not being permitted to move. the chinese, his party will have a say in the level of disconnection between our two economies and i think xi jinping is intent upon making his country more self-reliant. so i would urge those leaders of this business to rethink the alternative markets and how you do you risk your balance sheet from a presence in china today in doing so immediately. the second piece is and this is the policy role. when you get clear about those things that are legal and illegal. it is difficult for business leaders will be tell them you ought not do that but it is lawful for a promise you the chinese commerce party is telling them what is illegal

inside of the country and it is becoming more difficult and harder for them to operate in both of those environments. you policymakers have the responsibility that if you really want this disconnection come if you really want certain elements of supply chain but if you want this done to many to put a legal regime the place and a promise you the american economy will prosper. we will prevail. the chinese communist party is far more dependent on america than we are on thin and we ought to use that to our advantage. >> thank you. secretary panetta. >> look, i agree with what micah said. the argument important areas here. one is the competition in the economy, and is nobody better at competition than the united states. our farmers, our manufactures, our businessmen, i mean, we know how to get it done, innovation, creativity. that goes to the strength of our economy. so i think it is very important

for the united states to be able to unleash that kind of creativity and capability, and too often we try to restrict it because of various rules, et cetera. we ought to be enhancing the freedom of our economy in order to allow people to compete and to develop the kind of products that sell in the world. secondly, dealing with china, look, i'm a believer in free trade but i'm also a believer in fair trade. and the problem with china is, we engage in trade but they don't believe in fair trade in the way they operate. and have to do is we have got to be able to put -- and you did with your recommendations on the economy. i think they are great recommendations. you have 152 recommendations that are right on point and one of those is making sure that we take the wto and make certain

that the wto is strong enough to be able to say to china and it engages in unfair trade that that's what you're doing and you are going to be penalized for. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. ms. mr. trott. >> secretary panetta you and i should believe in american leadership. we share a belief that america for all of its perfection so on balance for good and were an america place an indispensable role as leader of the free world and as the enforcement of the rules-based international order. that the alternative of world shapes and hotels are an the ccp is too terrifying to imagine. but that basically in the necessity of america's global leadership which is the risk of the china committee has been eroding that only abroad but here at home. when we are witnessing the rise of isolationism of both the left and the right. and so america is a democracy, constrained as it should be by

the consent of the governed, is american global leadership lyrically sustainable in the long run if american sentiment here at home takes a decidedly isolationist turn as it did in aftermath of world war i? >> look, we made that mistake before. before world war ii this country decided that some of it could be isolationist and not have to get involved in dealing with the challenges of the threats abroad. we learned, we learned our lesson, , i hope we learned our lesson, which is that you can't put your head in the sand. in a global world it's even more so. the united states has to be out there, has to be dealing with our allies, has to be developing relationships with those that agree with the goals that we seek. we have to be engaged with the

world we cannot just simply pull back and pretend that somehow we can escape our responsibilities in the world and just somehow focused on issues here in the united states. yes, we have to be concerned about the united states. yes, we have to be concerned about our economy will buto be concerned about our role in the world. the united states has to be a world leader count. if there's any lesson was learned from world war ii, is that the united states is a a world leader. let me tell you something. if the united states is not a world leader, nobody else will play that role. >> in your testimony, secretary panetta you said america needs to send a message that stands by our allies. congress its office said nothing but mixed messages even though the overwhelming bipartisan, bicameral support for israel and taiwan, there's been an indefinite delay in delivering aid to both countries.

congress fails to accurately when democrats and republicans disagree, we fail to act even when we agree. and if there are stand-alone bills on official at taiwan with no poison pills, both bills were passed overwhelmingly in both chambers of congress. answer given the risk that negotiations around ukraine and immigration could languish indefinitely, he believed in my be necessary at some point to decouple israel and taiwan for large negotiation or to pass immunity stand-alone bill? >> well look, as as a member, former member of congress, i said in my over 50 years of public life i've seen washington at its best advice in washington at its worse. the good news is i have seen washington work. the reason i said i had the best job in the world as a as af cards is because republicans and democrats when i was here worked

together. we worked together and we got things done. we had good relationships. and when it issue like a to a foreign country came around, we worked together. look, i understand that politics is involved. i understand that there is the give-and-take i mean that's what democracy is all about. and i understand that dynamic. but in the end it isn't about scoring political points. it's about governing. you guys are not elected to come back here and pound her shoe on the table. you are invited to come back here and govern. that's what people elect you for. and for that reason, ultimately, you know, people who of goodwill need to sit down, develop whatever deal they can develop, and get it passed. and if they can't get a deal, then there is no question that

this got to move ukraine aid, visual aid, and take taiwan aid on its own. i guess i've ten seconds left. do you feel china is emboldened by donald trump's america first isolationism or deterred by it? >> look, i -- i -- >> was that for me? >> we're trying to hit the deadline. >> secretary pompeo on the show the has ever experienced for the record -- secretary cardona show the world has ever experienced an american foreign policy whiplash from peace through strength to swagger of the trump pompeo approach to the weakness and appeasement that we see coming from the current administration. why did putin wait for you and president trump to leave office before he invaded ukraine? >> it's good to see you again. look, i try to take a back bench approach to the sink often get asked with these things happen if you are with the iowa and xi does.

i cannot articulate that they did not. i can only articulate that putin decided that it was not a wise time to invade ukraine while we were there and then shortly thereafter began to continue his effort to take more of ukraine. he took the fifth a ukraine under president obama, 0% during our time as and when added again. again. in the end putin didn't change. putin has been the same guy since he was young kgb officer. his desire for greater russia is deep and abetted in his dna. the only thing that stops these bad actors for moment free around the world is an america prepared to respond in a way that puts more cost on them than the benefits of action. >> so fast forward last weekend, three of our american heroes were killed by a drone operated by the houthis. what would've been this with appropriate reaction to hold those accountable for killing our american heroes? >> it's hard to know exactly, exactly the response that

operational level that would have taken. deterrence is always temporary. it's one of the things i reminded edwin and administration. when you have deterrence for a moment you can squander it so quickly and, frankly, that's what has happened. we lost that moment. by the way we had risk, too. the u.s. embassy in baghdad but no secretary of state. we armed the dancing to the teeth to protect our young men and women who with their military and diplomatic women that were in that facility. and then when we beginning to have deterrence, took a strike on general soleimani that did that for a time. i think the covid administration would've recognized long ago this would've been before october 7 that you can't negotiate with the ayatollah. you can't release sanctions allow them to go there for exchange to over $60 billion. that money will be used for terror and this is now the risk that we have an escalation that

sticky price as result of united states and allies and partners having lost that deterrent capability, and well. >> secretary pompeo you notably warned our nation's governors about not getting too entwined and tangled with the chinese communist party, as many of them did. as washington becomes more aware of the china threat, the ccp is targeted many of our states governors picked this point the "washington post" published a story about the ccp's united front efforts ramping up their engagement with our nation's mayors, including a of carmel indiana in my state, the former mayor come just left office. went on lavish trips to china and engage at a high level with chinese officials in their country. why should our nation's mayors straight away from these types of entanglements with sister cities projects and of the ccp united front efforts?

>> in some ways its pellets will talk about in africa. the chinese comes for you will always show up at peoples doors with things feel good. the remarks i made to the national guard association, i'd run through the state department roadblock to make those remarks. it just was, it was hard-core, even state department to see the threat not just at the federal level but this was twisters but governors and an elderly people at times, his party showing up at school board meetings, showing of a city council middies and county commission meetings all across america. your state in wisconsin they made it hard play for your state legislative body. they are determined to propagate their efforts. they want to make friends so that come so when they're confronted they can turn to defense and say we are not such a bad guys after all. the chinese communist party is truly evil. they will work at every level of government. it will work against her by the sect is still show up at pta meetings if that's what it takes. this is an effort at every level for the chinese communist party

to any capacity to influence spitted sister cities program is the dangers. >> when the chinese, his party shows up after school and offers a slick free swing sets that because they care about the health of their children. maybe the simplest way to articulate sister cities programs at the confucius institutes, on all all of te united front efforts inside of her country. they may show up and give you some temporary lift but in the end it is about them, not about us. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you, secretary panetta and secretary pompeo to your service to our country. as you know we hollowed out a lot of our manufacturing in this country and a lot of went to china. china has a massive trade deficit. we select a a massive trade deficit with china, and china has trade surplus with japan, south korea, india engage in unfair economic competition. would you think it is reasonable for the united states to explicitly have a goal to try to

reduce the trade deficit with china by 10% every year as a metric of the we could rebalance the relationship? >> i -- i think it is very important for the united states to be able to develop industry, manufacturing, develop those products that are important particularly to our national security. and you're right, we have hollowed out that capability over the last few years. we need to be able to make clear that we are going to develop the kind of security that we need. and yeah, i think limits make sense as part of that package of the developing our own capabilities and manufacturing and industry. >> secretary pompeo? >> yeah, i would add, larger

right that i would add only this. should begin to focus on things that really matter as opposed to trade more generally. i'm happy to think our way through that but the initial problem is of the dual use technologies, and i come all the places for the next generation of american manufacturing will actually evolve from, i ran a machine shop in wichita, kansas, probably still secretary of state with that and his background even for the next 250 years. in the end we ran missions but innuendos technology and innovation at the deluxe property against which were building those manufactured goods which are most important to the workforce in my capacity to grow my business. i think that's true today. went to make sure we protect those things that we can get that right. that's a policy matter can pretty straightforward and i watched as you try to tackle that. i hope you all can make even more progress there. >> one of the things i'm working on a by person basis is to sw we can have steel and clean still in particular return to

the united states. hollowed out in johnstone pennsylvania, downriver michigan. one of the originators of the chips and science act. i give him credit, even as we work with todd john and chairman gallagher was an earlier part of the endless frontiers. we did that for chips. can we do that first deal which is to say the next generation of steel, which is going to direct reduction and back in toledo or hydrogen comply can we do something like that and have the government partner with the cleveland on an issue like that come like we did for chips? what from the largest export of stew, now nine out of the 15 biggest steel companies are in china. one, would you support a chips like approach to new modern steel plants in the united states? and, second, if you could just add count the lucky to the rest

of the time, i don't understand how we even think of line steel by u.s. steel. i mean japan would never let us by one of their steel plants. why is this even a question? >> i guess i will income stove with this equipment in the first one. i actually encourage foreign direct investment of the trinity i think is equally important. it has created thousands and thousands just a hometown wichita can't conform come to say japanese, european companies want to, invest in america great jobs come south koreans now investing in those amounts of money in taxes to build semiconductor. think we should be in normalcy supportive of foreign direct investment when want to come on american terms and these are friends and allies. second, i did support the chips and science act it goes with a touch of reluctance in my heart that it was what our teams by the way secretary raimondo has been fantastic on this, i credit the biden administration come this is a set of technology that mattered and went none of it here at home. i think that's the quintessential model for when

someone needs to use american taxpayer dollars as a form of industrial drafting when you be very careful about how and when we do that, and i prefer competition house up the bott when the competition is unfair and capital markets will not support an important technology for soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, and if the queen do that. it's a the case if steel were so i was supportive. i wonder if those and social metals don't end up come if you put a tariff on them for a tax and if it end up costing the american industry more than it gains them. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. we have four minutes. >> congresswoman. we can do it. >> thank you. i will be very quick. appreciate your service. there is a chinese company building an electric vehicle battery plant in my district as part of the project they plan to

bring 20-50 chinese nationals to michigan. what do you feel are the odds of those nationals maintain a spin is for the ccp while they are in the united states? i know you both been involved in looking at these kinds of things. after pompeo, you were issuing workpieces the chinese nationals as part of the state department. wondered if you would both comment? >> look, i don't think there's any question that the quantitative fans of that situation at a think we have to be very vigilant about what the hell is going on. that's just the way they operate. they will establish a manufacturing unit. it will establish whatever they can and then they will use that for the own intelligence purposes. they will use that for the own economic purposes. they would use it to be able to gain the kind of advantages that

they want that are counter wrinkly to the interest of the united states. i think it is very important in those situations to make sure that we are, that the united states and that our intelligence capabilities are being used to ensure that we know what they are doing and could hurt the united states. >> i think worse than the fact to engage in espionage, i think that's just top of the list they will use this in ways that will leverage chinese advantage comp. these plans are deeply dangerous to our national security, and ought not be built. >> thank you. then one last question. one of the concerns you talked about the belt and road initiatives, china spreading money around. one of the concerns i've had in some of our light in the inflation reduction act we provide green energy tax credits.

his company would actually likely be applying for green energy tax credit so we could actually be supplying american taxpayer dollars to fund this project. you have any thoughts on that? >> yes, i'm against it. trying to be quick. >> thank you. >> by the waist up just that. you cite a good example, a marquee except one has been very public. there are dozens of these taking place and we, i promise you the chinese communist party is not subsidizing american companies that are acting in america's interest in sight of china that benefit the united states of america. >> thank you. secretary panetta? >> i, look, i think, i think we have to obviously be innovative in the way we use economic assistance but we also have to be careful in the way we do it, and i think if we're going to provide funds we better make damn sure they are not being used for purposes that

undermined our national security. >> thank you both friend much. i yield back. .. do you think today xi jinping the ccp are more likely or less likely to take decisive action to unify taiwan? briefly, please to make i mentioned in my testimony i visited with xi jinping a number of times allows both director as well as secretary of defense and at the time i remember one conversation where he was being critical over rebalancing forcing the pacific as we are

power, we have every right to oppose what you can do with us deal with north korea and the problems is greater will a free approach to our navy something about if we could work together develop piece of xi jinping i saw we could talk about the reason this happened. there's no question in my mind xi jinping has been cornered both in the way he dealt with covid as well as dealing with this economy. this one fundamental purpose, it's on china and this problem

is that china is eroding from under him and i think makes them more dangerous, not less. >> i concur, feeling with a different xi jinping overtime, he created more power and it's more likely you will continue not both secretaries came and pompeo, you came from my district, thank you for coming out today. i wish i had more time. don't have time but i want to say thank you. >> we appreciate that. thank you to both witnesses and

what was almost a perfect hearing but we are still doing pretty well and for the record only today and for that, we are adjourned. [silence] [inaudible conversations]