the next legislative day. mr. reid: i now ask unanimous consent that the president of the senate be authorized to appoint a committee as part of the senate to joint the like committee on the part of house of representatives to escort president obama to the house chamber from the joint session at 7:00 p.m. on thursday, september 8. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i have already asked part of this closing script consent. i would further state that following any leader remarks the senate be in a period of morning business for an hours with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the time be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. the republicans control the first half, the majority control the second half. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: after we finish morning business, we'll resume consideration of h.r. 1249. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: so we have reached an agreement to complete action on the bill as i outlined earlier mr. president. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask

that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate will stand adjourned >> in a few moments, a hearing on the challenges facing the homeland security depart --

department.

>> a new report by the government accountability office says the homeland security department has completed about half the recommendations made by federal auditors since the department was organized in 2003. but significant security gaps remain. officials from the tal and ths before the homeland security committee chaired by joe lieberman of connecticut. this is a little more than an hour and a half. >> good morning. the hearing will come to order. thanks to our witnesses for being here. in four days we will commemorate the 10th anniversary of the attacks of 9/11 and mourned anew for the nearly 3000 lives that were lost that day at the world trade center pentagon and on flight 93 which as we all know of course crashed into a field in shanksville, pennsylvania. but we have already quite

appropriately and i'm sure continue to sit over 11 a look back on that timbre 11th to both understand what the clarity of hindsight what that meant in american history and to evaluate what our government particularly and our people, have done since that time. there is no question that i think although we know it then we can look back and say now that we understand on that day we were drawn into a war which is increasingly global. this is a word that is being thought by violent islamist extremists, against most of the rest of the world including most of the muslim world. and that day that brutal attack, in my own opinion, in the clarity of hindsight began

outpour. although in fact osama bin laden declared war in 1998 but statements they have made them they've been attacking us for a period of time before that including the world trade center. but it really began that day and in the days and months following 9/11 01 we in government set out with energy and determination to determine the systems that failed us. the more we knew about how september 11th happened, particularly informed by the work of the 9/11 commission headed by tom kean and lee hamilton we've learned a lot more. i came to conclusion and one will never be able to know with certainty that 9/11 was probably preventable. as i looked back and think of all we've done to respond to our failures i'm not i think if another group of terrorists

attempted similar attack on the united states today we would prevent it. and that of course gives me great comfort in a sense of great gratitude for all that has been done by so many people in our government, state and local governments to work together and make sure we're better security at home than we were on 9/11 01. we put into place, measures that reorganize and reform government to prevent another terrorist attack on the u.s. i know there is some in this 10th anniversary look back that say we overreacted to 9/11 that it was an effect not just a sensitive overreaction, but an expensive overreaction. well, i don't agree. the most extraordinary bottom-line realities today is that as we look over the 10 years, as we all know thank god

and thanks to everybody that has worked so hard there has not been another mass casualty terrorist attack on the united states by violent islamist since 9/11. i don't think anybody would have predicted that on 9-12-01. we can say that today not because our enemies start trying. they tried over and over and over again, but fortunately our defenses come intelligence all the things we've done and it's made us more secure and frankly a couple times just remind us that we continue the work we do that we are just plain lucky us in the two glaring cases of the detroit armor on christmas day on the airplane in the times square bomber both of his weapons, explosives just didn't go off. if they had, i think we'd be looking back with a different

sense of this 10 years. but overall no question in my mind, we have been spared another catastrophic terrorist attack like the one on 9/11 not just as a matter of luck or coincidence, but because of a lot of things a lot of people did. i'm very proud of the role members on this committee, across party lines playback time and continue to play in the organizations are supporting. the first of course is the cabinet level which we created to lead our efforts to prevent terrorist attacks within the united state. and i believe dhs has significantly contributed to our increase national safety. i am grateful with the reports gao has issued today. to our committee as we move toward 9/11 a love and essentially agrees with that in

a positive report on of the department of homeland security. it points to some work yet to be done and i think we would all agree with.com including people at the department. but the fact is 10 years ago no single agency in a single official redesignated to leave the federal government's efforts to prevent terrorism, or for that matter to adequately resource to respond to natural disasters, not just terrorist disasters. today there is clarity about who is in charge and that is the secretary of the department of homeland security and whose absurd that secretary should be coordinating to prepare respond to and recover from disasters. that has made a tremendous difference. i'm going to put the rest of my statement in the record because i want to hear the witnesses.

i simply want to thank deputy secretary lute from dhs who is with us today and gene dodaro, direct or of the u.s. and dhs is going to evaluation of these 10 years and comptroller general is on behalf of gao. and i repeat, i am heartened at the root port that gao is to show you today concludes that overall the department of homeland security has implemented most of its key missions and achieve most of its important goals, creating a foundation that will allow the department to continue to move aggressively toward its full potential. so we appreciate it very much and look forward to the testimony of eyewitnesses. thank you. senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

first, let me thank you for holding today's hearing to review the first eight years of the department of homeland. he whose vital mission is to protect our nation and our people. after the attacks of september 11 2001, president roche established the white house office of homeland security and soon concluded that the nation needed a more unified homeland security structure. we envisioned a department that would secure our borders improve the security of transportation and critical infrastructures mal homeland security sources and work with law enforcement to deter detect prepare for and respond to terrorist plots.

the law establishing the department of homeland security was in that date in november of 2002. 22 entities and approximately 180,000 employees were merged into dhs yet not only was the near department's mission a challenge, but so was simply unifying it e-mail system. over the past eight years, the gao has repeatedly played the department on its high risk left. the gao has issued approximately 1500 recommendations and dhs has adopted only about half of them although others are in progress. this july, dhs issued a self-administered report card

noting considerable progress in achieving the goals set out nearly a decade ago to strengthen our security. when it comes to our homeland security however we are only as strong as our weakest link. this week, as the chairman has indicated, we will commemorate the worst attack ever on the united states. in doing so, we must ask ourselves some fundamental questions. are we safer or we just safer from attack takes terrorist a birdie try at? i think the answer is yes to both questions. we are far safer than we were on september 10 2001. the terrorists continue to probe our vulnerability is an attempt to exploit gaps in our security.

we also face increasing threats from homegrown terrorists already within our borders. today, the gao conclude that more than eight years after its creation and 10 years after september 11th dhs has indeed made significant strides and protect you and our nation, but has yet to reach its full potential. the examples are many. tsa has strengthened their line passenger prescreening. the outcome a young man recently was able to apply cross country without a valid government i.d. with an expired boarding pass that was not even issued in its name. at the other extreme they troubled many americans to see tsa screeners putting the very young and the very elderly through intrusive and in many

cases unnecessary pat downs. although dhs has bolstered security of u.s. borders and identification documents, to iraqi refugees associated with al qaeda were recently amassed at in kentucky. how a known bomb maker, whose fingerprints we have had on file for some time was able to enter our country on humanitarian grounds remains an unanswered and extremely troubling question. are there other iraqi nationals granted asylum who are involved in attacking our troops? the fact is we don't know. we still await clear answers from the administration, which must do more to ensure that all relevant databases are used so that we do not like terrorists

and criminals into our country, much less grand than asylum. i am agreed that the seaports or savor. both priorities of mine and of this committee. the gao indicates that dhs should make it purveying and how it shares and manages cyberthreats information. this is the key goal of comprehensive cybersecurity legislation that chairman lieberman, senator carper and i have co-authored. the department has also had its fair share and then some of management problems. failure is an expensive have cost taxpayers billions of dollars in delayed much-needed technology. now, merging 22 agencies and

nearly 180,000 employees is always going to be a challenge. if dhs is to become a truly unified department its employees and headquarters should not remain spread over 70 building and 40 sites. the lack of a consolidated headquarters and have this communication coordination and cooperation among dhs components and i know the administration is working hard to consolidate to have orders. i also believe that their efficiencies that can be gained by consolidating offices at the regional level a recommendation made by former homelands security secretary tom ridge. we should take a look at consolidating field office locations to reduce costs and improve for nations.

as this committee will soon consider a reauthorization of the department, it is important to discuss inside and outside dhs have been have not. they must even answer the fundamental question of whether or not we are safer because of the creation of dhs. as has been noted offhand comment that terrorists only have to get it right once. dhs and its partners have to be right every single time where we will suffer the devastating consequences of a terrorist attack. we are much safer than we were 10 years ago but we must be tenacious in anticipating the changing tactics that terrorists as the successful decade-long

search for osama bin laden proved, and america's resolve is a powerful weapon against those who would seek to destroy our way of life. mr. chairman, i appreciate the opportunity to review gao's report but the comptroller general today and look forward to hearing from deputy secretary lute on how dhs can better fulfill its mission. thank you. >> thanks very much for that statement, senator collins. secretary lute, welcome back. so, how long have you been at the department now? >> over two and half years. >> two and half years you have been on this theme in the previous years you were an informed observer. >> yes comments. thank you, chairman lieberman and ranking member comments come distinguished members of the committee for this opportunity

to appear before you today to discuss the department's progress and keeping our nation safe in the range of threats that we face. mr. chairman, you have my full statement was to be entered into the record. >> without objection. >> first mr. chairman, i would like to strike a note to remember such allies as if those who are lost on 9/11 in 2001. i was in new york city that day. i will never forget it. none of us will ever forget where we were how we felt and how it came together as a nation determined in our resolve to never let that happen again. determined in a conviction, and the poor belief that this country can protect itself. and nowhere has that commitment and stronger than in this committee, mr. chairman what do you and other members of the committee and your steadfast support for the efforts that we have been undertaken in homeland security.

i'd like to thank many partners in the effort to ensure the safety, security and resilience of our nation. dhs is a central master, but we will and strong partnerships throughout all levels of government, law enforcement private industry and the public. we view homeland security as a whole community enterprise and we are fortunate to have strong partners to help us meet our mission. as i mentioned congress is an essential partner, particularly this committee is played an extraordinary role in creating and equipping dhs and the other institutions that the authorities and resources necessary to carry out programs to secure our country. you've carried for the bipartisan spirit that marked the days after 9/11 and have always hold us accountable to maintain it. and achieve our missions. in the spirit of accountability, we also thankful for the hard work of our partners in the gao. and they say that sincerely. along with dhs office of

inspector general gao has outed and reported on the work of the department and the work has helped inform us as we mature and grow as an organization. as we approach this important anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we are thankful to you mr. chairman, for commitment of the american people. countless americans have stepped up whether in military in afghanistan iraq or the posts overseas under federal agencies, including department of homeland security and other states, cities tribal communities and elsewhere as first responders law enforcement officials reservists and engage citizens. i take great pride is in on my service in the united states army for the first half of my adult life but i'm equally proud of my service as a member of the department of homeland security. great progress has been made of the department and around the country since the department was created in 2003. today we are more capable nation and a stronger nation. we can detect threat sooner with

better information and make adjustments were quickly based on real-time intelligence. today we know more about those who seek to enter our country level of risk they might pose and what they do to prevent potential threats from leading our shores. borders are stronger, and he has personnel technology and infrastructure is always stronger partnerships, states cities, border communities and our international partners around the world especially in canada and mexico. our immigration law you need every reform are being forced putting common sense priorities to identifying them as criminals and those were a threat to the american people. at the same time come with strength and processes and for providing legal immigration benefits and services, will ensure security of our system. we have also created for mark for ensuring cybersystems that works in critical infrastructure that none previously visited.

we enhanced our ability to protect federal government networks to reporting and countermeasures. we've engaged favor users at all levels, public and private inner share protection and broadened our partnership to protect her infrastructure and establish a new regulatory framework to protect high-risk chemical facilities. we've built more readily to confront disasters and emergencies in their states cities and communities. we've helped responders become more? better trained and more unified under a new national response framework and command system as you've noted. with improved emergency communications and provide a capacity building grants to support our nation's first responders. the response and ongoing recovery efforts of hurricane irene is the most recent estimate for the robust capabilities that you helped us build. we'll continue to to integrate the department of homeland security advancing work for the

majors to go to refashion enterprise and engage a full set of partners in the protection of our nation. finally, the department is committed to civil rights values of liberty, fairness, equality under the law are embodied in the departments programs and activities. while we then make you much progress mr. chairman, we must continue to improve as a threat against continues to evolve, so do we appear to be as an important opportunity to talk about our progress which gao notes in its report and also to address in areas where there is more work to be done. i look forward to discussing this with you today so we may build upon the foundation of security in place to address their future challenges and with this committee's partnership in support, continue to protect our nation citizens, freedom and our way of life. thank you very much. >> thank you, secretary lute. l. go to comptroller general of the u.s. and a note for the

record that mr. dodaro is accompanied by cathleen berrick, who is the director of homeland security and justice issues that gao. please proceed. >> good morning mr. chairman senator collins, senator akaka i am pleased to discuss gao's report on the various homeland security issues and progress and remaining issues and challenges and the 9/11 event. our report reflects a summary of the work that we've done over the last decade and also reflects the constructive approach we have tried to take in making recommendations to offer improvements and suggestions to the department. we are pleased at the department's response, although senator collins mentioned, needs to be implemented, but generally i think we've had a good dialogue and has enhanced their operations. on the bottom line of our report, as everyone has noted in opening comments is a lot of

progress has been made since 9/11 it's clearly been done and treated. but there is work remaining to address gaps and weaknesses that will enable dhs to reach its full potential appeared on the progress side of the ledger, we have a secure flight in place not a check against terrorist watch lists of incoming passengers. we've got work forces screening, across the country. we have a biometric entry system now in place to be able to check those people entering our borders over time. we have also established, put more resources of deputy secretary lute mentioned at the ports and along the borders giving resources equipment and infrastructure in place over time. there is also the border visa

security program that's been put in place. a dhs work along with the state department and screening visa applications overseas and we also have put in an electronic authorization program for those entering under the visa waiver program is now in place. there is also banned a range of plan and assessments that have done a maritime security surface transportation rail, mass transit, that has been playing an important foundation for assessments of risk. also pleased that the sabre security has increased emphasis in the program and is the deputy secretary pointed out, issued a national response framework and associated documents with that to address emergency preparedness. on the work remaining side there's a number of significant issues. a day to highlight a few this

morning. one is there needs to be continuous improvement in the processes and technologies used as screenings at airports including coming up with a plan to ensure that the equipment screening checked baggage meets the current requirements for detect dean explosive devices. secondly while we haven't a very exact adventure system we still don't have an accent system in place. i know this is very difficult task, but the over space issue estimates of between four and 5 million people have been made in that area. of course as we know five of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 had overstayed issues. this is something that is a big challenge, but it's to be addressed going forward. we also think the visa security program can be expanded so that dhs is working with state department on all critical

high-risk areas whether they are deployed abroad in countries where working remotely here in the united states. ..

the whole question of management is not too fascinating really as it is to discuss individual programs, successes, failures. but just enter contacts, what you try to do what the department of homeland security was to take a lot as agencies or departments of our federal government attached on homeland security and disaster response and bring them together with the aim of making a whole greater than the sum of the parts, to make sure the doubts were all connected. but i think i was a worthy goal and we've achieved on that. in doing that we have created a very large department. over 200,000 employees agencies

and federal employees at 200,000 therefore created a very large management challenge. the comptroller general mentions two things particularly that his contract and new technology. but to the extent that you can let me ask you both to comment on the overall management, which is to say what kind of progress have we made in the eight years that the department's history to really lend these 22 agencies together, not that they were ever all intended to become homogenized, but they are intended to work together maybe the current one said the unit ths is to make sure everyone component agencies is speaking the same language in their own

dire lack, not speaking ethnically, but in terms of agency. so jeanne let me ask you to begin. how do you evaluate that part of the management record ths? >> i think clearly, the intent of having a lot of synergies, having this collection of departments in place has been evolving and taking place. we pointed out in the past couple for example there were difficulties in court nation among many agencies particularly in the law enforcement areas and they had to manage problems when they were merged into dhs. so that was one of the reasons we put them on the high-risk list when they were formed. there has been progress in this area and a framework for the progress has been in a lot of cases the plans rainouts in

clearly defining roles and responsibilities. .. response i will ask if she has anything else she will add. >> thanks mr. chairman for that. i would say the first thing mr. chairman, that we have been able to reflect is the common

narrative that exists across the 22 agencies and over the life of the department. everyone has heard of homeland security but people were not sure sure what it means in part inspired by the work of this committee to finance the effort to build a safe secure, resulting in a way where the americans can thrive. what does it take to do that? we prevent terrorism and secure the borders and enforce immigration laws we ensure cybersecurity and build a national resilience. everyone in homeland security can find themselves in these missions and in this purpose is so in the first instance meriting of the story that was originally intended these years ago when the department was first conceived informed and having all of the agency is really the work that they have been doing and they continue to do in the context of those missions and not that overarching vision. what we've had to do over the course of time again building on the work of those who've gone before us is to continue to operate.

homeland security is overwhelmingly in operating agency every single day, sort of the build the plane while flying at metaphor is here and then in fact gao points that out in its report it's a huge challenge and so the question for us as a department is how do we add value of this overarching structure in the day-to-day management of those operations and we've done everything as mentioned from improved planning across and improving our information gathering and sharing across the enterprise equipping the entire enterprise with the information that it needs, working on that front, the developing the ability to do risk assessment that address threats vulnerabilities of consequences to mobilize the department across agencies when operations require it as we often do in disaster response and to work increasingly on those crosscutting areas whether it is aviation planning for acquisition whether it is common vetting establishing a single

point in the resource to use for the entire department across the needs we have and other areas like this. acquisition of perfidy and strengthening which the committee knows well that we've undertaken under the under secretary of management petraeus in the three key areas this committee has a right to expect the department to come form can we run ourselves and account for the resources that have been entrusted to us in each of these areas as the gao report makes clear in the department has made progress. 64. t want to add anything? >> thank you mr. chairman. i would say in the area of management the most progress has absolutely been the establishment of plans for example if you look at acquisition management the dhs has a pretty rigorous policy in place that governs oversight of the acquisition programs. very similar in the information technology area and in fact dhs has efforts underway to improve

that. i think the areas where the need to focus there's three primary areas one is making sure that they have the resources in place to implement those plans. if you look across a range of the plans in the management areas they fight available resources as a number one country to implementing them. the of oversight mechanisms in place to make sure that they are executing the plans as design and. we've identified in a number of the areas and i will dig acquisition management as an example. dhs and a number of times routinely has not followed that guidance. they haven't had the executive level of oversight of a major acquisition programs, haven't developed the cost estimates in accordance with their own guidance so they need to have the oversight mechanisms and then finally, i would say that it's demonstrating progress and delivering the mission capabilities that they can sustain over time and this is

what we are getting at the major acquisition programs being able to show they can feel the programs that need the cost schedule performance expectations and have an infrastructure to continue to be able to do that. >> thanks and i will make two comments briefly in response. the first is on the resources i think that's a very important point, and for the management. particularly we are in the middle of it right now as we go through the process of trying to get back to some kind of fiscal balance in the federal government and we are squeezing and squeezing. it is a real temptation to take money out of the management accounts like it apart one of dhs because the management accounts have advocates for them. hopefully we are. in other words, the programs all have constituencies, the programs of a department. the management really doesn't in that sense, and the danger is

you will but the management and the end result will be the programs won't be run very well, so i think that is up to us but that's something we've got to do. second, senator collins and i had this conversation some months into the obama administration we were all serving together that there was a kind of market test that the coherence of the department of homeland security because at the beginning of the new of administration which was the first new administration since the department had been created that would have been in the moment constituent agencies within the department to try to break out legislatively or with of the new administration. there was a little bit of a flurry, not widespread and very short-lived about one fema

coming out of the department. so that said, both the first to secretaries and now secretary napolitano and itself has created a coherence to the department in a fairly short time at least for the extent that nobody tried to get out and you've got some agencies and i don't mean just because they couldn't stand being in the department. i mean a lot of them have big constituencies of their own and a certain amount of political muscle around here but neither through the administration or to congress to try to break away and i think that says that for them the department is working as an entity may be helping them do their job better and one thing that happened after 9/11 is the kind of turf projection that went on before is impossible to defend after a

disaster and attack like 9/11 and there's an attitude now that yeah we'd better work together because that prevents -- god forbid something happens we don't want the press or the congress to come out at us and say you were just being parochial and not sharing information and not cooperating with another agency the federal government and that's why this attack occurred so long story to say that we haven't reached the ultimate destination here as the gao reminds us we've come a long way in the right direction. senator collins. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. dordaro, the ghs has studied extensively report after report, recommendation after recommendation so i want to ask the fundamental question, a question that we are going to be

asked as we seek to reauthorize the department this year and that is has it worked, has it made us safer as a nation, was it a good idea to bring all 22 agencies together in terms of improving our security. what is the giglio's assessment in answer to that very fundamental question? >> we are very prepared as a nation to address these issues and to the extent we are better prepared we are safer in that regard, although we need to be vigilant, we need to be alert, we need to evolve to changes. i think in terms of bringing the 22 agencies together there are a lot of different organizational models that could have been used. that is one that was chosen. our focus is making sure the model worked as effectively and as efficiently as possible i

think there were synergies to be gained and there are beginning to be developed as they overtime and so the benefits of putting them, those agencies together are becoming clear and with regard to the progress i would say that the department in our view and this is reflecting on the report in the missionary is they've made considerable progress. the management areas that underpin some of the developments really need additional work to be implemented properly to help the missions whether it is developing and acquiring new technology or looking at the cost effectiveness issues and measures over time so i think i've addressed all parts of your questions those are very good questions but that's our response. >> thank you. secretary, i want to turn to the management challenge that both

of the comptroller general particularly in the area of procurement. i mentioned in my opening statement that there have been a string of procurement failures that spans both the administration's and causes the taxpayers literally billions of dollars and equally troubling its delayed the deployment of much-needed technology and equipment. here's just a partial list. the tsa determined that the explosive trade detectors machines that we've fought for a while the airport could not work in a real world environment and not at the airport. there was the portal with which done dndo move to deploy before

the protesting and evaluation had been completed. there had been two major consolidated financial data system failures. the $2 million was spent before it was canceled. the transformation and systems consolidation project was abandoned this year in may after multiple protests and gao ruling against the dhs a lot of money spent and this one in particular is very frustrating to me because senator mccaskill and i repeatedly wrote to secretary napolitano and we've received written personal assurances that the task initiative was critical and on track and we were assured of the soundness of the programs like cycle cost estimates and

yet in the sdi net program canceled by the administration after the program failures even the coast guard, one of my favorite agencies and one that is very well run had extraordinary problems for a while with the deep water program because of a field lead system integrator relationship with the government and in july of this year the dhs ig issued the report that found that the department had not leveraged its collective buying power across the department and that is what is paying literally billions more than needed. that is not the record in the area of procurement. so my question to you is what is the department doing to better

define the requirements of the front which is one of the major problems to ensure real world testing and evaluation and to ensure we don't have a string of failures continuing to the future. >> i testified before this committee before on certain acquisitions this has been an area where we have been working diligently to improve their record in the practice. we have cancelled them on performing programs that's true. and we have had other challenges in the procurement process but we have addressed them by looking comprehensively at the acquisition process and tailoring a program and planning within the process that meets the needs of the department which largely although not exclusively reside in the acquisition of services and

important technologies to fasuba to the reparations of the border and at airports and across the homeland security enterprise. we have worked in three key areas in the area of procurement first on the requirements. let me give an excellent aviation requirements. i now share a committee composed of the members across the department principally with cbp and the coast guard to look at the aviation assets and the aviation fleet leading to the biggest of which that of a joint requirement board so that we can sensibly prioritize what we need in terms of air fleet and seek the air solutions that are not only the most economical but the most effective operation of the first and foremost and we've improved the process of the cost estimates that's often bedeviled procurements at every stage not only the acquisition of items in particular but the sustainability cost which are intrinsic understanding the lifecycle of those acquisitions as well and we have taken a number of steps to strengthen

the procurement work force. you are very familiar with these establishing the department white acquisition training program under our head of procurement enhancing our internship program we recently had 60 graduates of that program and we are training more and establishing an acquisition corps for the senior personnel so that the understand their responsibilities in the acquisition process. importantly in this regard and something i also know that you have a great interest in is the intersection of the operators with the procurements. it makes absolutely no sense to go down and pass the tortured path of procurement without having the operators of stability introduce every step of the way do we know what we need, are we considering alternatives for would operation works and then are we testing it in the operational environment? of these are areas we've made strong improvements and will continue to do so. >> is this an area mr. comptroller general, where the department has to show more

progress and control before the gao will remove the department from its list? >> yes. >> thank you. >> senator akaka, good morning. >> thank you very much mr. chairman, for holding this hearing, this important hearing updating the progress in implementing the department of homeland security. this is especially significant as we reflect on the last ten years since the terrible event that led to the department's creation. my subcommittee has held several hearings on efforts to reform and improve management of the dhs which is vital to executing its mission.

the department has made a great deal of progress. but as we have heard from the gao, the important work is not yet finished. again mr. chairman, think you for this hearing and i will have a few questions here. i would like to ask general dodaro, i would like to hear your thoughts on this issue as well. as you know the entire federal government including the dhs has experienced and will continue to face budget reductions this has caused delays in consolidating the dhs headquarters and force the reductions in the management directorate and please discuss the challenges the dhs faces in

effectively executing its mission to protect the nation in this budget environment. >> thank you senator. we are all facing those challenges will. we have articulated so that within the budget guidelines as articulated by the president, the priority for us of course are the five mission areas that we should see as essential to the homeland security, preventing another terrorist attack such as we saw in 9/11 where that is the job one we do it every day. we will continue to prioritize that within our budgetary dhaka lines. securing the borders again, we have achieved a significant progress in securing our border, and we will continue to emphasize that enforcing the immigration law conveying the innovation as well building our cyber capacity is essential,

developing cybersecurity for the nation and building a nation's resilience as well to face of risks and hazards. we will continue to prioritize these. we will also continue to prioritize the integration of the department and the management of the department. there are some on this committee i am proud to say have never suggested that somehow the management is separate and apart from the line of the programmatic functions. we are one department. the entire department is operational and we will continue to prioritize our ability to execute the missions to run our souls and account for the resources that were given. >> general dodaro i would like to hear your view on this as well. this gao report is based on observations over the past several years at dhs, but in the last year, the department's

budgetary outlook has dramatically changed. based on your work are you concerned that budgetary challenges will reverse any of the recent management progress at dhs? >> i think it largely depends on how the dhs can implement its mission in the manner, and i point out several members i think are critical to that. one is in the acquisition area. it's about 40% of the department's budget. and so it's very important that the acquisition be carried out according to their plans as jane outlined it's got a lot of efforts underway to try to improve the acquisition. i think it's very important in the i.t. area for example right now there are 46 projects that roll over $3 billion in need of a significant management attention according to their i.t. - border approach --

dashboard approach and the to insure they are integrated into the plans. more are beginning to do that and more and more, but in order to be cost-effective, you have to use your risk assessment more effectively. third as i pointed out in my opening statement, the performance measures, what's working, what isn't working as critical of you were going to target your resources on the erie as needed in greater improvement or make sure that your financing things for producing the right types of results in those areas. lastly the financial management systems are still in need of reform and if you are going to operate within the cost-effective manner, you need a good economy and good process these. so i think all of those things can help them deal in a more cost-effective manner and they will be critical in this period of budgetary challenges.

>> the dhs is committed to solomon the agricultural mission of cpb with the leadership structure and the authorities that all levels necessary for success. i am concerned, concerned that if we fully accomplish this important goal, our efforts in the safeguard american agriculture will continue to fall short. ..

>> i will, senator. >> thank you very match. ms. lute, lastly the high risk management strategy, which i think is an important step toward t. chester, for high risk list. however, it gao reports this plan has not been fully implemented. my question is, what more needs to be done to implement a high risk strategy and are there any areas preventing implementation? >> thank you senator. we have made getting ourselves out the high-risk list a priority from a management point

of view and am pleased to say we have been working closely with gene dodaro and kathleen. gao has given us a detailed view on what it takes to get off the high-risk os x we have responded with an equally detailed plan for executing those steps and we've been working very closely together. so i think we are on track reprieve issued one report on our progress in june of this year. will issue another in december of this year and we are going to get tenure to march along this track until we succeed. >> thank you are a match. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator akaka. senator pryor. >> thank you very much. i appreciate all of our witnesses being here. let me thank with you secretary lute. according to the gao one reason they have messed opportunities

to optimize across its missions is a lack of reliable performance information or assessment of existing information. that concerns me, so how has dhs tried to address this problem? where you are doing to try to fix it? >> we have made identifying commonsense metrics to progress a priority for us. we have been working as i mentioned, with gao across a range of areas to improve business intelligence processes so we can have a fact-based understanding of how we are executing in the effect their operations are having. this is across the missionary sent across the components within dhs. and so including very pragmatic matcher ask for understanding the effectiveness of our emergency response and feedback, border protection and i.c.e. and

tsa as well. >> also, since you mention different parts of your mission, let me ask about fema. what are you all doing to improve financial management practices at seamount clerk >> so administrator lute that seem that engages on the preparedness side and the response site. and my chair, for example, a departmentwide task force to look at the administration of grants, for example come to streamline processes, include accountability and frankly improved the overall performance of the current program as well. but across the maximum payment of management is the commitment we have in that apartment for

responses, timely, effective accountability for resources given to us. in the context of the liberty of effective operations. >> if mr. dodaro it's gao comfortable with the progress theme that is making on its financial management? >> basically we remain concerned about financial management. we look across the federal government and there are only four agencies rate out that are not able to have a clean opinion on the consolidated financial statements and dhs and dod are two of the largest ones in the list of four. there've been a couple at first or try to an integrated financial management system in. most of the problems are in the coast guard area and property accountability and tsa. so i think the department is trying to get a good plan together in that area. we are going to be evaluating

not to see if they make the necessary improvements. but it is one of the critical areas and reasons for why they are in a high risk list. we will continue to give them advice on how to move forward and fix problems. >> let me ask this since it's a relatively new department. you know seemed to me like i started a few years ago they had a chance of clean slate all the operations with the way it should be done and not inherit a lot of issues and challenges from the other agencies in areas that existed before the tape right under the umbrella. is it because they didn't set it up the right way? tell us that the origin of the problem is. >> well, the origins started -- i'll ask kathy to elaborate issue today, but basically they inherited to 22 departments. a lot of them have their own definitions and requirements and systems and methods. so while it presented an

opportunity to start fresh, it also presented a challenge because you did in harriet a lot of problems and concerns. we have mentioned early on and i report reflects that they made more progress than the missionaries and in the management area. over time we were concerned about management from day one. we put them on higher sedalia started operations in 2003. we always advocated for more management oversight and eventually the management position was created in the position is now filled. and so i think senator there was an opportunity in the early days. there wasn't enough focus on taking advantage of the opportunity, but they inherited a lot of problems and challenges, so they are working their way through those still. >> ms. berrick commented a comment? >> sure coming thank you senator. just by the nature of the these

are systems among the components that aren't integrated together is a challenge in and of itself because the systems can't speak to each other and that apartment above all senior leadership does not access to financial information they otherwise would have with an integrated financial management system. i think it's both inheriting from existing problems and also the fact desire to spare systems that don't work well together. >> are they actively trying to address and fix those problems? >> they're trying to do that to the financial management system. i've had a couple attempts that have not been successful so far but are working towards that is their goal. >> how much money does not cause to try to integrate the financial system? >> over a billion dollars has been devoted to that. >> already? >> yes. >> senator, the only thing i would add is that is one component. we have made steady progress towards the goal of a clean

audit, which is anyone's aspiration. we have gone from over 18 reportable conditions down to six and we are on track to make even further progress this year and like to do so. >> thank you mr. chairman. that's all he has. >> senator carper. >> thanks to our witnesses. i have three questions. the first window with a clean not a to toe with the clean audit and a third toe with a clean audit. so it sounds like we plowed the field pretty well. let me just ask your comptroller general. are you in charge by the progress being reported by deputy secretary lute? >> yes. i think the sickly the department is committed to trying tunic progress in this area. as jane mentioned the material weaknesses are coming down but they still have some challenges.

they've said some aggressive targets for giving an opinion on the consolidated balance sheet for 2011 and to try to get an -- clean opinion by 2014. i think those are aggressive targets and those will be the benchmarks as to whether they are successful or not. but they are focused on it. what they really need to continue to focus on improving their systems underlying systems as well and recover from a couple efforts to have resulted in success. >> if you are successful in that, really one department as an outlier. is that correct? >> one major department is the department of defense. >> to her colleagues, had a chance to meet in the early part of august with secretary panetta, who indicated the idea of waiting until 2017 to reach that goal audit financials and may be hearing from some of the

folks that they were probably going to be able to make that goal. what he said to me in a conversation is at the meet that goal rather than have to slide further on. sometimes it is good to have somebody with his -- was he an omb chief of staff? i mean he's done it all. he brings a real commitment to these issues, which is very much welcome. yesterday mr. dodaro, you may know, some of you folks are here. the issue was on the postal service and how do we hope them help themselves get back on track? i described the situation as dire, but not without hope. one of the questions that is not the subject of this hearing but i want to ask while you are here. there is reason to believe the

postal service has overpaid its obligation in the civil service retirement system to the tune of $75 billion over time and overpaid they are -- the amount that they owe to the federal employee retirement system by maybe $700 million or so. we had yesterday one of the witnesses from seagull segal company on it along with independent audits to determine what is the validity of the overpayment has really been overpayment. i think the postal service alleges that those segal company and hate groups that we think there's an overpayment from at least 50 billion to as much of $75 billion. the administration is not finite yet. we had some discussion. they were here to talk about that and we asked the witness from gao if gao would be willing to take a look at the work that has been done by the two independent auditors to find out whether they are valid. we need that kind of direction.

if you will a good housing stamp of approval from gao would be helpful as we try to know if and not the postal service take out of the hole they are in and return to profitability is. is that something you can help with? could be most grateful. >> definitely, senator. we'll be able to do that. we are the chief actuary if gao that would be a little figure out that status and we will do that. i understand the tasking work and will deliver that. as you know, the postal service is on our high-risk list because of financial condition situations. we be happy to do that. >> thanks very much. i don't know. since my first three questions have been addressed, i'll turn to the fourth and 90 cybersecurity initiatives under collins and i am the chairman have a whole lot of interest and done with the help of our staff have done some good work.

it's hard to get anything passed around here. we have done good work. the administration has done good work on this front. over the last 10 years, secretary lute, as you know we witness an evolving terrorist threat that's required the department and other agencies to constantly be thinking about tomorrow's threat appeared i like to say as a naval flight officer, work at it fighting glassware. were not always good at preparing to fight the next war. in my view, this is very likely -- could very well likely be the next war. on the cybersecurity front. nowhere is this more evident than in the world of cybersecurity on the wordpress can change almost daily almost weekly without a lot of notice. gao has noticed much of the good director or department is undertaking in this area. it's also -- gao has stated that

homeland security needs to better secure internet connections at federal agencies and more thoroughly share cybersecurity information with the private secretary. none of secretary, i understand that department of homeland security has an einstein because federal agencies detect and prevent cyberintrusion. i will ask you if you will discuss the steps that the department of homeland security to integrate public site kind and across the government to much additional authority resources for staffing. you need to be more effective. my colleagues here know i like to quote albert einstein from time to time his onset among other things in adversity lies opportunity and we have plenty of adversity in the world. this hopefully some opportunity as well. maybe einstein can be part of that. would you proceed? >> thanks very much, senator. there certainly opportunity

here. the department, this is an area that i've been spending a lot of my time as we have in the department. we have called it as one of the five essentials of homeland security, which is ensuring cybersecurity. we can all agree the status quo is not acceptable. there are intrusions and threads we have to address. cyberspace is an environment that offers certainly to change that. ours is one that security worry of smart machines and smart users by networks that identify threats, hopefully before they occur, to prevent them and cultivate the community intensity of hygiene is pervasive throughout the united states and indeed throughout the internet because we are so interconnected. einstein specifically is a program we have come as you know designed to prevent intrusions. where 84%. but the federal agency and

offices have a number of things they have to do as well to bring their traffic behind einstein to ensure that they are taking advantage of this technology and we are working with them. in fact i attended a meeting at the president's management council consists of department deputies and operating and spoke to them about what they can do to ensure that their agencies are taking steps necessary to organize their traffic behind the protections. there's other things to do as well. what's on your network's class i was information traveling? today have access? appropriate levels of access and controls? there's a whole. those measures that is perhaps a way to think of it. it is only a part of the puzzle necessary to ensure cybersecurity. for also working closely with the department of defense and with industry and our vision is

to have an environment of distributed security that utilizes all of the assets of his country and protect them ourselves. >> the last part of my question was what additional resources for staffing and you need in the department to be even more effective on this front? >> the president's budget that was submitted reflex specifics in a number of those areas. we can address this in the standalone if you would like caregroup also been working with omb and a legislative proposal sent to the hill regarding ways to strengthen our ability to fulfill our cybersecurity mission. >> all right good. thanks mr. chairman. >> thanks, senator carper. we'll do a second round of up to seven minutes apiece. thanks for hanging in there with us. i wanted to ask you about a particular part of the department that the committee was anxious in the creation of the department to put in and

that is the science and allergy section. you know our hope had been a lot of us on this committee or in the armed services committee, that we can develop an end for homeland security something like darpa and the department of defense. over the time that the department overall it does appear to to meet at the smt acknowledge has been below what our hopes were. my impression is that it's doing better now. and i wonder if either of you would like to comment on that. >> i think i say at the outset assigns a technology is a key part of the department. our ability to innovate to make use of and solutions not just a particular piece of technology is the task we have given to smt. it is very able leadership, who

is integrated into every aspect of our mission performance working directly with components to ensure we have a system approach and making best use of technology within the context of an overall system solution. we also had a very robust cooperation with the other department, notably obviously the department of defense looking to learn from them on such things as tunnel type allergy and smt is critical and important to this remains a priority for us in the leadership of the department for the secretary. >> ms. barrack, have you had any overview of s. nt and what is your sense of it now? >> i would agree with your characterization that they have been making progress in the snt area. i would agree there is a framework in place right now for the office to be successful. they put in additional policies

created units within snt throughout the department that i think will strengthen the foundation of that office enables some successes. two areas i would mention that i think the continued focus. when its resources. for example, looking at the test and evaluation function of snt we found they were low in terms of resources and its inhibited the average they could perform at the components and supporting their testing efforts. i think the second area that could require focus and snt as coordination within the department. we found sometimes snt would pursue a technologies without effectively coordinating with the end-users of those technologies to make sure what they were developing or meeting needs. a quick example is the cars program being designed to shield

nuclear material and cargo and vehicles. dhs decided to stop that program after learning that snt is working on a system that wasn't going to fit within primary inspection lanes. i think that is an example of the internal coordination. >> another is a so-called virtual fence. my impression is there wasn't much interaction with customs and border protection in the development of that. >> we did site that is a concern. cdp's input on operationally howard was working, challenges they were facing wasn't always fully considered and decisions made related to the program. >> okay, that's when we'll want to keep an eye on because it has tremendous potential post to avoid the kinds of problems cited in terms of a new type knowledge he been introduced.

in the second of course is more affirmative, which is to -- as we've seen with darpa to leverage federal money with private innovation and knowledge premiership to create allergies that will more effectively protect our homeland and also hopefully as in darpa's case of remarkable spinoffs into a commercial application that will create economic activity. let me ask you madam secretary, about something a little different, which is the increasing concern and all of us in homeland security have had in recent years about homegrown terrorism comes self radicalized, particularly the own rules so-called. i know that the administration mr. brandon put out a report recently. senator collins and i frankly

were overall disappointed either report. we have our continuing concern about guerrilla dance refusal of the administration to use the term violent islamic extremism as opposed to violent extremism. i what to focus on a different aspect. we also didn't see in the report a clear allocation or designation of authority. in other words who is in charge? a lot of different departments should be involved and interact in affirmatively with the muslim american community to gain their assistance in education and noticing the lone wolf -- potential lone wolf behavior coordinating law enforcement education, et cetera. i'm at the national counterterrorism center interestingly has been doing some of that. i can't say that we had that

kind of function in mind. it does seem to me the white house i suppose is a natural overview, which might suggest that it could oversee the response or prevention of homegrown terrorism. so much in the white house now. i wonder whether this isn't some david dhs should begin to play a more active role in. i want to give you an opportunity as we look back at this decade and four to the next and seeing homegrown terrorism rising as a threat once you think about dhs put the record here but it might do in the years ahead. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we certainly have been playing a very active role in what was announced emphasizes three things. first, we need to understand more about what generates a set and how promulgates within communities. secondly, we need to engage communities are part of bears

that isolate and an engaging understand them. create pathways of dialogue and understanding no breach. third and equally as important, if not more so we strengthen the hand of law enforcement to be able to stop violent extremism in its tracks. this is on bin laden for that may prevent crimes all the time quite effectively and equip them with information and tools they need to address this major crisis well. for the department works closely with the department of justice, fbi and ec white house and other agencies. we need is a smoker. i meet with counterparts on exactly this question about how in each of these areas, in terms of understanding the threat, sharing information and command breaking down beers that isolate committees and strengthening the hand of law enforcement we are doing every day to address this. >> to me those are the right

coast. who would you say is in charge now of the effort on behalf of the government? >> under president's leadership, so much of the work is in homeland security. >> that i understand. but again, there has to be someone in charge to keep driving it. did you say it's in the national security council? >> i was paydays. it is a working system. i meet with my counterparts in the department of justice and fbi and an ctc regularly on the subject. there's enormous work going on in each of those strengths. >> i thank you. senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to emphasize that the chairman has said. strategy produced by the white house does not clearly assign responsibility to an individual who we can hold accountable, his progress we can measure and they still don't hear that from you.

you keep talking about when they're together, all these agencies involved. that is not adequate. we need to have a leader of this effort and i hope you will relay that we are continuing to push on that as well. i want to switch to some other issues in my remaining time. the recent hurricanes and natural disasters in this country have reminded us of the importance of ensuring that people are notified as quickly as possible when a natural disaster is looming. early warning can make a huge difference in saving lives and property and that's why i have been working hard on a bill that would strengthen the nation's public alert and warning system. i would like to ask your

assessment and gao may have something to add on this as well. as far as, where are we in using smart type allergy so we are not just relying on the crawl on a television screen, the emergency alert that comes across, sent many people are not going to have television fund. instead, using phones social networking sites, using it tools more likely to reach more whole. secretary lute first. >> thank you, senator. the public alert system now reaches 70% of the population. we have a number of initiatives in play particularly anger they can progress to senior, rolling out a commercial mobile alert

system in new york and d.c. and having the first-ever national level test of the emergency alert system as well. so we are absolutely committed to making use of modern technology social media to give people accurate and timely information because they know that in a crisis particularly information is a commodity and is essential to having informed individuals incapable communities. >> does gao have anything to add to that? >> we have not looked at this issue, senator collins. it is an important issue i know we are dealing with ourselves and communicating around results. we be happy to take a look at this in the future. >> thank you. secretary lute, want to talk to you about an issue that they did to the homegrown terrorism threat and that is the insider threat, certainly a major assign case was an extent of the

insider threat. in a report was released by gao earlier this year gao took a look at the twix program, transportation worker identification credential used for asset to our seaports and its findings were disturbing in terms from the insider threat. first, gao found that tsa is background checking process is not even designed to detect fraud in other words, gao found it would be easier to it taine a card with fraudulent documents than a drivers license. that is very disturbing. fatcat, gao criticized the process is not providing an

ongoing check. in other words, once the worker receives a twic card he or she has that twic card for an indefinite time even if there is subsequent information or conviction or something that would cause the twic card to be revoked one would hope. what steps has dhs taken to remedy these critical flaws in that twic program? >> senator, we share the concerns i know it is when we have to stay constantly vigilant. this involves not only those of us in the federal government but also in our critical infrastructure, having programs in place in the private sector so we know who is working in these facilities and that they are trustworthy for the responsibilities they have been get in.

twic covers 2 million workers in way of running number of pilots to ensure we can strengthen the system with respect to not only technology, but reliability of the system. in this regard, the ongoing check is something they are looking at departmentwide because as we've learned for example, in the case of abdulmutallab on the 12/25 attend, do we have to have other credential holders. i'd shared interdepartmental examination of a common setting platform to bring together all of firefighting capabilities and deploy event in real time to get full check been also working with agencies to ensure we have requirements fully on hand to prevent fraud and other abuses. the mac that reminds me of the bowling green kentucky case, where two suspects have been

arrested, one of whom's fingerprints allegedly worked in a database that should have been checked before the individual was granted asylum and admitted to this country. the chairman and i have read your letter with a number of detailed questions since the information provided at the hearing, where we explored this issue proved to be an accurate. when do you anticipate the department will complete its review of how in the world this could've happened that an individual whose fingerprints were on ieds used to attack our soldiers in iraq was granted asylum in the lab to be a resident of this country? >> we expect that shortly senator. importantly, we've taken a number of steps to ensure that can't happen again. we've expanded databases,

working closely with dod to take advantage of the databases of individuals they hold. again this is part of our common setting examination to strengthen the system overall. >> finally, i want to ask you about the department's progress in dealing with chemical biological radiological and nuclear threats. this is an issue that we have held several hearings on in the past, they gao has also examined. and by gao found echoed the conclusions of our investigation and that is that there was poor cooperation between dhs and the department of health and human services and instead saying that the cbr and risk in particular is of great concern that the bio watch program under the bio

watch program, a threat might not be identified in total more than a day after its release. what is being done to improve coordination between dhs and hhs in this area? and also edwin gearan to the paid the next generation and more sensitive bio watch system will be diploid? >> thank you, senator. again here we think that we make progress continually with other agencies in this regard and for example, does affect to integrate information for early warning and response on possible attacks and pandemics in the biosphere as well. as you know the work we've done, for example, on the global nuclear detection architecture is generating work on an

implementation plan to further develop our cooperation with other agencies in identifying threats to the homeland and responsibilities for early action to defeat those guys. so when jen three specifically to answer your question, this is a priority for the department, when we make continued progress toward and we believe that will substantially reduce the response time inherent in the detection of a dangerous pathogens and alerting appropriate responses. >> but when? what is the timetable? >> so, i can get back with you senator on the specifics of akamai but this is a program we have in place and a priority for the pertinent. >> is good chairman would indulge me, one final question on the kentucky case which really deserves me. can you ensure today that department has reviewed the bios

of every iraqi national who was admitted under that program to ensure there is popper bedding including matching fingerprints with databases in possession of the department of defense? >> it is my understanding that every person under the program has been vetted. i will confirm that it complies with the question you have asked. >> thank you. mr. chairman. >> i want to ask one more brief question about the saint elizabeth campus project. the last time i looked at the stats, the department and they talked about its management and coordination was spread through 70 buildings and of course that is what motivated the plan to coordinate and collect as many

of those has occurred on the same elizabeth's campus. i know the next building if i'm not mistaken, would be to bring the 10 operations centers of the department together there. so, we're in touch reggie terry times. the president laid in his budget. the senate appropriations homeland security has cut them down to a third were about -- has appropriated the third of what the president asked for and the houses had all the money out for same elizabeth's. how important -- how bad will that be for improved management of the department isu secretary. i don't know whether they've done this or it's even possible, but is it possible to make a judgment ms. berrick of the cost effect of this is not building -- i don't know whether it's possible to evaluate the department being spread out as

to his budget but go ahead secretary. >> as you know it's important there is wisdom in consolidating to reduce transaction time and engagement but also to facilitate coordination, dialogue sharing as well. we remain committed about that view that this is an important step in the development and evolution of the department. >> anything else gene? >> there would be challenges in trying to come up with the exact quantification you are calling for. one of the things they could do is look at the department's business case for the consolidation and offer our thoughts on that. >> i'd welcome that if you could. >> sure. >> thanks to the three of you for being here. overall, obviously we have almost parental or possessive

interest in this department because we are privileged to be there to help in its creation. so we would like to think it is solved. i do think both the record and the independent valuations over the years in the summer you offer here as we approach the commemoration of 9/11 as the department of homeland security has made a difference. again, it is not an accident we haven't had a major attack on us succeed. do we have more work to do? of course we do. i would also say one of the mentioned that a different kind of country after 9/11 would have become much more like a police state. i suppose people feel at different times somebody's civil liberties are compromised. overall, our record is remarkable. i say that also to say that in the country is big open and free as we are and we want to remain as free as we are, will

never achieve 100% security. but where is the better -- a lot more towards that goal that we should always aspire to the goal on 9/11. it is exit the leadership of the department over these two administrations and literally hundreds of thousands of men and women who have worked for the department, working with colleagues and other depart thence, department of defense intelligence, and ctc, et cetera. it's gratitude and confidence that both gao and this committee will continue to push you to get as close to a 100% as it possibly can. >> to it to have anything? that experiments. again, thank you. the hearing is adjourned. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> and a few moments senators discussed u.s. troop withdrawals from iraq.

>> defense secretary, leon panetta reportedly supporting a plan to keep about a dozen troops in iraq passed the withdrawal deadline. today on the senate floor can arizona senator john mccain argued more troops are needed to

maintain a stable and self-governing iraq. the ranking member of the armed services committee, restoring the homeland security senator, joe lieberman and lindsey graham. >> yesterday we learned from media reports that the obamathe atreduceum this ration has made a decision to sharply reduce the number of u.s. forces is proposing for a roughly post-2011 security agreement with iraq to roughly 3000 troops. that media reports has not been taken yet by anyone in the administration. so one has to assume that is the direction, which the administration is headed.no wn as is well known, 3000 troops is dramatically lower than what our military commanders have toraq

repeatedly told us on multthiple trips to iraq that would be support needed to support iraq's stability and secure our mutual interest that our two nations have sacrificed so much to the achieve. our military leaders on thewhich i ground have told us in order to achieve our goal, which is a t stablehat's self-governing iraq, a they partner in fighting terrorism and extremism, we need a pose 2011 is significantly higher continue than 3000 troops. we continue to hear that the iraqis are to blame because they well t haven't asked for a newhe fac ear agreement. with the fact is in early politic al august, iraq's major political blocs begin negotiations with the u.s. on a new security agreement. this week, the suit is funny the president of the regional government and one of the more v

respected men in iraq ended myesence view, one of the finest calledll for iraqi security forces are t o still not prepared to secure protection for iraq. perhaps, significantly thereconstrucon inspector general for iraq reconstruction mr. stewartquote allen just recently reported exinary iraq remains an extraordinarilyk. dangerous place to work. judgment, it is less safe in my judgment mon than 12th months ago. this conclusion is the fact that the june was the deadliest month for years u.s. troops in two years. w either way we continue to hear these quotes from officials t about a request from the iraqis. it's difficult to settle on any one thing.

the taurean newland stated that h the iraqis if they come forward with a request, we would that consider it. that is assuming that it is only an iraq's national interests tove add have additional troopsitio there. lose it's a national security interest not to lose iraq after some the sacrifice of some 4500 brave young americans. c and the consequences -- the consequences of failure arest obvious. andrew has said that opposes the continued presence of u.s. troops most vociferously ve strenuously sometimes they very subversives way, i ran into saweddets solders. wan they want the unitedt states out. security int it is not a matter of iraqi national security interests.

it is a matter of american national security interests. what does 3000 troops do? i don't know what 3000 troops do, but i know they are required to have certain force protection numbers, bewhich would be to significant and then how many troops would be last to carry out the mission of protecting civians the united states civilians personnel contractors and personnel whoum remain there. i guess you can sum this up this decision-making process bass. i quote from a "new york times" in article, a plan to keep small force in iraq past deadline. quote, a senior americanitary military officer -- a senior american military of us are said to planning this point seem to poi be driven more by thent troop missions numbers in the missions they could accomplish, exactly the lik

opposite of how military planners ideally like to quote, i operate. quotes i think we are doing sa this thing backwards theid officer aut wha said. quotes, we should be talkinghen about what mission they want to do and then decide how many t troops we'll need.eed." i can assure my colleagues thatany is the view of the majority of members of the military, many of whom have multiple tours in iraq, that that is their view of this process that we are going point through. i out would point out that my friend, senator graham, senator lieberman who are coming and i occas have been to iraq on many many -- since occasions. since the initial invasion we have had the opportunity to serve watch the brave young americans serve and sacrifice.

we have had the ability to see is the initial military access deteriorated into a situation of in chaos, beginning with the looting and unrest in bag thatns come into the very unfortunate t vision made in the early. after that it hurry and iraq. and we watched. we watched a situation where many of our military leaders but also those who are now in the administration say that if it we employ the surge it would fail. the president of the united states, the vice president of the united the states secretary ofe would state, president's national security adviser all of them said they would be doomed to failure. the fact is the surge succeeded. tha and the fact is that we now have

an iraq that has an opportunity inpend en to be free and independent country, then maybe more importantly, one that would never pose a threat to the united states of america. most importantly a chance for the iraqi people to enjoy the the fruits of the sacrifice thaton thousands and thousands andhe thousands of iraqis have made onir on t their behalf and approximately bra 4800 brave young americans pass.eeting senator from south carolina andry senator from connecticut and i recall meeting with leaders military leaders in 2006 where we wereonnect told that everything was going ic fine. the senator from connecticut and the senator from south carolina w and i recallit a meeting with the who kernel is -- a british colonelhat

we w in bozrah who told us unless we we turn things around that we were2007 whe doomed failure. remember the summer of 2007 when we remotely voices along with that of petr general petraeus general odierno and other great could features and pain the surge and could and must succeed. the never leave it at to whether historians to decide whether our bad venture into iraq was a good one or a bad one, whether the' sacrifice of young american sizend democ was worth it, whether a stable and democratic iraq, which can be the results of our involvement there was the right or wrong thing to do.o it will be should not do and in sacriced deference to those who have served and sacrificed we must not do is make a decision which ined would put all of that sacrifice and all that was gained by it in failu

jeopardy because of our failure t to carry out the fundamental requirement of contributing to iraqi security in this very difficult transition time. start so i would ask my friend from he south carolina to start with perhaps he remembers when we went to bed at. d i believe it was 2007 and went downtown for general petraeus the and vermont and made fun of inack and the media as they came back andiraq. said that things had improved in iraq.n w perhaps a senator from south carolina recalls when we had f that almost triumphant visit inith downtown falluja, a conflict that was one with cost great cost in caroli americanna blood and treasure.nto perhaps the senator from south and carolina recalls going into going downtown bag to and go into a

bakery, and environment not a all o complete security the dramatically improved. although that was purchased.iture of all of that was purchased by the pr expenditure of america's most am precious asset gallant americans bled. and now now replace now he plays our lives at a great risk r and the decisions they sayes with respect company at the samet people who said that the surge couldn't succeed. so i urge the administration and the president to recoup theater decion would appear he is a decision lea and listen to our military em pl leaders once unemployed a sufficient number of troops to wi provide iraqis with as for sunnyside, sufficient -- sai sufficient number of troops

iraq's security forces are still still not not appear to secure protections for to iraq. and i would ask my colleague from south carolina and aren't connecticut are there plans? are there plans for us to large amounts of american civilians expen they are contract or super am check them? probably the most expensive form flawe we could do, rather than american troops. is it not a flood strategy toes not have enough american troops they are to ensure ar the lies of americans who are serving mayor in various capacities or protect t the it. >> i may try to respond to the question. the answer is yes. believee but you don't have to believe me or senator mccain. mcc ira t ambassador jeffreys told us back in june when he was getting frome her and that all civilian movements were accompanied at american forces to some ask and

a mixture of iraqi and american forces. were about to pass the time between the department of defense to the department of formedver state. the civilian military partnership formed over the last decade is working worki very well. the future of iraq is in iraq his hands but they need our help. senator mccain said, were helping ourselves. in ter june 24 2010 come as generalw would odierno, where a reactor in terms of iraq? how would you evaluate our situation? >> this is at a hearing. >> a confirmation for general austin. he said were inside the 10-yardthiserstand line. progr this is footballess a season. and it think most americans understand this great progress. felt goo first intent on the 10 with four going downs and he felt that we could get it in the end zone. in the end zone will require aludee

follow-on presidentpeasants in 2012. most americans want our troops to come home. include me in that group. we are going to go from 50000 to zero at the end of this year something it doesn't happen. i'm confident the iraqis want to have continue presence in a recent of way. in tld a what they need we can provide intelligence gathering? ahe we have the best capability pinning the world. what the enemies? geraniums are trying toocracy. destabilize this young need democracy. basinger jeffries, who is a good man cometh that the reason we need to get iraq right helps our national security interests. shamanic sample were two democracies that were. take there's really not any. so if we could take eight to diorship teeter ship, saddam hussein's advancent dictatorship that is a huge do advancement of our national security interest over time. our ..t only to

sell them planes, f-16's but actually train them how to use those airplanes. they have an infant navy, to patrol their coast to protect them against threats there. so nits our interest only to train and develop the iraqi police and army but make sure our civilians who are going to help build this democracy can travel without fear and without unnecessary casualties because the iranians are going to try to undercut us at every turn and that means targeting american forces left hin. what else do they need? counterterrorism. al qaeda other groups, other radical groups are going to try to come back into iraq and destabilize what we've done. we've seen some signs of that. we've had 60 al qaeda types released from american custody to iraqi custody and som them are back out released from american custody and some back out on theootp streets. be so a counterterrorism footprint would be smart. vice president biden is right about this.and ira

in iraq and afghanistan make sense if you add all thesentelligence missions, intelligence gathering, training, embedding counterterrorism, force ou protection -- you are leaving out the necessity for thedi peacekeeping? a vy g >> yes, that's a very goodly w point, and that is exactly where req i want to take this. ousa nd that requires a footprint of thousands. we don't need 25000 but iare think 10,000 when you add it is becse the bear minimum to do thishe because the commander who is policing the kurdish area of iq, dispute boundary line in the northern route part of iraq they come up with a novel approach and i want to give the miliry administration credit. what they've done is they've taken basically kurdish militia, force integrated them with iraqi national security forces to formet

to know companies that eventually go to observe brigades where they know each other as a teamr and any observer would say that our presence has prevented a shooting conflict innd the past and that is where the president is worried enough and the kurdish area. that said we will need 5,000 troops here for a while to make sure that this new concept thehole develops over time so when you add it the whole package of you the are around 10,000 plus and to the administration not only is in tional bipartisanship desired a national security, i think it's other onhe bac required.lame e we can look back and pat each n other on the black and blame prett each othery but that is not iranians want to do. we are in a pretty decent place to the pointe going that the iranians are going nuts, they are trying to undercut the national development because the biggest nightmare is to have a representative democracy on the that border that will inside their

ir own people belong to ask for more freedom. so please, to the obamaistakes administration, don't make the end same mistakes at the end that the bush administration made at some the beginning. and i can say with credibility that i argue with my ownnd infrastructure that senator eno ug mccain and lieberman and others weep and they're enough to know that it wasn't the key debt interest that the whole security footprint was not sufficient from the model that change iraq wasn't working. pet it was general petraeus's modelident adopted to president bush's credit. that was a hard decision. the war was on a popular, people were frustrated. it seemed as a lost cause and president bush went against what was the political tide at the'm gla moment, and i'm glad he did so i w would ask president obama to consider the long-term national do security interest of the unitedcain states and do what senator mccain suggested not what he

suggested, with the military's adjusted. it's s important to have some support intelligence gathering i would say yes to training the arm army and air force and navy i would say yes.oing to having presence to present data to protect the civilians i would say overwhelmingly yes and doest it make sense to have somein the american military support in the dispute kurdish area disputed areas?y overwhelmingly yes and we will aricans are stand by you and i think most war americans are frustrated andon't w to worried but they don't want tohanging lose. we are close to changing iraq byhange helping the iraqi people. we can'tca change, only they can.americs and we talk about the death oft. fo americans for every american that has tied there's probably been ten on iraqis. it hasn't been easy for people i in iraq. fth. that's why i never lost faith. what kept me going in iraq and kno afghanistan is i've been therepeop in tho enough to know that people with

these countries the one the same thing for their children as mostchildrant for want for there's to be a judgeet in america you get criticized it is a tough job.nistan i have personally met people whoo step up to decided to step up to the plate be it warriors judges, policemen have gotten killed and i they knew what was coming theirour na ti way and it is in our national security interest to help thishat's democracy, and that is what it still is corruption is still abound there are problems in iraq but they are on the right adminision trajectory. so i'm asking the administration t listen to theo commanders. 25000 in my view i'm not a not commander but i could understand und why the president would say that as a bridge too far in line with the generals have recommended. mid it goes from the teens to the mid-20s but somewhere north ofiven m ten, given my understanding of inow iraq i think it will work and i know we are broke. but the one thing i can tell you o we can afford after all thisfter investment is to lose.the pce and

the price and cost of losing inould be iraq now would be devastating for years to come. if we didn't see this through who would help in the future knowing pushback against extremismn youe knowing that america left at that time when you were asking them to stay?fident i am confident the sunni, shia and kurds want us there in reasonable numbers to make sure that they can help to -- of theeed help they need to get this so t right. aarently the decision apparently hasn't been made yet urging the administration to look at theissions, missions, be reasonable understand that you can't gette the military all they want all the time and is the commander in chief decision he is a good man. it is his call but the one the nigh offer and i think the threeffer of us offered in these verya is u nd difficult times when america is under siege here at home is toces be supportive for the idea we can't retreat in america.appened w lookhe what happens when a few and

people from afghanistan in faraway places for less than ay wreed million dollars had been reached on the country and this sunday is the tenth anniversary. i am hopeful that as we get to the tenth anniversary we can look back and say that we haveipartisa defended america in a bipartisan way and it's not just look it ised. the pr for being attacked the president serves a lot of credit for going after bin laden. of he receives a lot of credit for i the troops in afghanistan whenre to people come home from there.i would i would just urge this administration to listen to the military leaders and finish this right. it would be a tragedy upon a the tragedy for us to be inside of the 10-yard line and fumbled at score a time we can score a touchdown on only for our nationalin security but for the fundamental if we g change inet the middle east. if we get it right in iraq the arab spurring is going to get the support that it needs andq, i

deserves. if we fail in iraq it would do just repeating history's mistakes. the bush administration didly change because they did not get close it right early on. we are so close to the end nowlet's be let's be cautious, let's be the side reasonable let's error on the side of making sure we can. sustain what we have all fought for and i will tell you this history will judge everybody will imposing president obama and that would be okay with me if we can take saddam hussein's dictatorship, turn it into ave governm that representative government that u s would be aligned with us and for voice as a moderation for the rest of the 21st century.sena senator lieberman i would like m to get his thoughts.h it's one thing to talk about this in south carolina. very red but even in south carolina, a and they are n very real estate people were havin worried they are not excited about having to stay iraq in

2012 but i think they will listen to reason.st days but during the o darkest days of this effort in iraq senator we mccain said we need more at ay is rea t time when everybody is ready to donuestio come home and i don't questioni mea anybody's patriotism.l, it it was a hard call, it was a wer tough fight, there were no easy answers but i'm glad that we chose to do what we did and i glad president bush adjusted but senator lieberman above all ri quite frankly literally riskede his political career because he felt that what happened in iraq wer battered to the united states to thk and he knew right and i want to of thank him on behalf of all all of in those who served in iraq for d giving them the time and resources to prove we could get a right. so i'd like if you don't mind about h sharing your thoughts with the body about how we could finishonnecticut. iraq.hank m >> mr. president? i. what thank the chair and think my friend from south w

carolina for his generous words. obviously what turned the tide in iraq was a vision commanding to vision by general petraeus and suced about what had to succeed with a new counterterrorism strendous suprt fro and tremendous support from the men and women of the military. that the generation that volunteered th ande stepped up to the call and new rightfully should be calledeatest america's new greatest to generation. the are an inspiration to us and lot of of course we lost a lot of them there and the iraqi military fought hard and has increasingly shown its capability to defend its own nation which is what we had hoped and prayed and fought for, so my friends from arizonaarol and south carolina had the samebegan

reaction i did yesterday and wes w began at the end of the day as origally a we talk to the cooking back to washington what was the fox news e story that the decision had been made in the administration to goion to down to 3000 troops and wected reacted that way because a wasber lower than any number we had fm a ever heard from anybody that we had confidence that about what was necessary to secure all that we have gained and all of the iraqis have gained. the papers today reported as a fact secretary leon panetta says no decision has been made. made. i hope not because in in these matters by understand there's politics in iraq as well as your but what has to be put at the top of the list is what is best

for our national security and of the course for the iraqis and what is best for their national security, and to me if the number is right and it is only going to be 3000 more after the end of this year i don't see howan we can feel confident that we a can protect what we have spent a lot of our american lives, iraqi lives and the national treasuryure and there's securing and i don't n hop see how we can avoid the civil war particularly on the fault lines mentioned between the kurdish areas and the arab area and this is a decision and ultimately for the president come and i want to see is about doing the right thing. a the president obviously to get

position for the withdrawal of troops american troops during the campaign of 2008. i think that there were a lot of supporters who felt and hoped and dreamed that pretty much were heari a are hearing a lot about day onetion. of these days but a lot of the president obama supportersministraon h expected that on day one of hisrom administration he would begin a full withdrawal from iraq. i think that he understood that he had a goal to put the troops outq of iraq but america had an had interest and he and hisct president had to protect that i and not losing in iraq on not letting letting it fall apart and not n ot letting us suffered the loss we to would to our credibility and strength around the world my a lot friends and i travel a lote been i places f together. we have been in place is for away from iraq, asia for uin a

instance when boit was uncertainoing about whether we were going ton stick to it in iraq we heard iraq from our allies iraq is here but we depend on american's strength and credibilityy for our security do and freedom in asia in the be asia-pacific region. if you seem to be weak and flame and with not up to the fight in iraq is going to compromise that tnk for you. the president to his credit -low understood all that and put us on a slow pathto to withdraw but i fault t don't think that anybody would a fault the president if -- and i has think the expectation b has been much that that we have achieved so much leave that we can leave a core grouprain there to continue to trim the the iraqi military so they reach their full potential to be there coterterro to assist them in the characterhat's for that is essentially what isq

going on in iraq now. is the war is basically over the militia remnants of al qaeda are carry in carrying out terrorist attacks explos and those of the explosive literal politically explosive devotee to speci the to of the attacks were of special capacities in the u.s. military to work with the military to prevent and encounter those terrorist par attacks and then the final partion rlly of the mission really has to be to protect the american per personnel there, civilian be. personnel. i don't know the number will be. at one point when we were. >> i ask unanimous consent for an additional seven minutes past 12:30. at one p at one point somebody indicated we were in baghdad that thecan american embassy exerted the largest largest u.s. embassy in then world in terms of personnel and

go as high as 20000. it could be that high. a we need forces there to protect,today t so we oare they're coming to theretary floor to appeal secretary leon panetta, it to the president it really g would be shortsighted. if it is only going to be 3,000e're only 3000 took away theersonn civilian personnel in number in osomewh the embassy are somewhere else it's covert operators if it is only do 3,000 they are not going to thee will to the deutsch the job that needs to be done and not only messa that they are going to send a wea message of weakness, lack of anx result, anxiousness to get out of the iraqi enemies and hours in the region.s. we hav

so i join my colleagues. we've been together on this for a long long time. i don't want us to squander what won we have one and we will i'm afraid if we only leave 3,000 l americanea troops.hink w none marks ackley similar but i think that we learned in lebanon i and againn in somalia the forces t oo but are too small and don't have force sufficient force protection and by not saying they are exact parallels, but certainly it puts in som rubber is there whether they be military or civilian in some kind of danger and as the been m progress that has been made and has been significant progress in r the country that's never really known democracy but we have now turkish a turkish attacks on the pkk in we have c the kurdish area. we have continued attentionut scenarios that the senator from

south carolina referred to at which 1. i believe last year and almost came to exchange of hostility between of -- the >> if i may in the others there's also the increasedluence in iranian influence in basra andhe they're continues to be the export of arms and the ied from iran and iraq. to they have no air force, noace. ability to protect the air space. isn't it true that the counter intelligence is really dependent on our technical assistance an d which means personnel? and so the argument seems to be that if we want this experiment unnecessa to succeed we shouldn't put it in on necessary jeopardy. j >> i would add if a i made thatesn't the 3,000 number doesn't allow to most the missions obvious to mostooked everybody a that's looked at iraq

to be performed a successful manner. if that's the bottom line no one's throwing out three dhaka said before. can you do00 it with ten? that's pushing the envelope, but the kurdish area boundary disputera almost went and this newplan w plan we've come up with to integrate the push marrec, the iraqi security forces was with some americans would payraqi dividends over time.h 5,000 is for the american commanders said he needed torican continue that plan. we have a plan to even wind downn that number it's just going tomber take a while but when it comes to iran, i can tell you right now her a i wouldn't of american mil civilians to be without some i military support given what i know is coming to iraq from menon iran. question >> i mention one fundamental here.t the question is if the united states national securityhis interest to have this 10000sions

plus american troops carrying out the missions we just described or is it not? it is, then it is pure sophistry only to say we would only consider this if they requested it. for if we are waiting for the iraqi side to request it than it meanstates it doesn't matter whether the united states is there or not and whether general odierno and general petraeus and the most milit and respected military and civilians leadership that it is in our national interest. so so the way that this should ha happen is the united states on the iraqi source sitting down coming to together and one is coming to anyment that is agreement making a joint announcement that it is in both countries' national security interest. if it is not we shouldn't send one single american there to theor wou estimate of the senator would yield that is a good point we'ved

been there enough to know we'veoi bee been asked to go by boths administrations the iraqis have problem a political problem that's not lost upon us.undreds most people in most countries don't want hundreds of t thousands of troops foreign troops roaming around the country forever, so the iraqi is have been up front and we want to a continue the partnership but it needs to be at a small level and they are absolutely right.omentre i don't buy one moment that iraq say there'sin a movement in iraq saying we will take 3000 not on one soldier more. here i thinkis what is going on here is there is as senator mccain suggested another to drive day missions and at the end of the day this 3000 doesn't get any of the essential jobs done at least the 3,000 exposed and of nee l leased 1,000 civilians it leads the iraqi military there is no thi upside to this.d wit so i would just end with this

idtified thought let's get the missions identified and resources themnd and an adequate way and i thinkun the country will rally around the president because if i can't man ameri think of too many americans who would want our people to be in harm's way unnecessarily if you leave one you have some one. obligation to the one that if you left one you would be doing that person a disservice.t leave enough so we can get itar right and that number is far beyond 3000 to estimate a lot to say in response to something senator mccain said if we aree not going not going to leave enough to do might a the job we might as well not leave anybody there and of course we don't want that toe, o happen. tha there's a couplet alternatives. one is the 3,000 is not the number and hopefully have morethat clarification on that and it's more than that. trips because of all of our troops in iraq and the leadership never

sa has there been anyone that said to us we needed less than 10,000oo american troops there to do this wt job i want to repeat this is a her kind of sleight of hand here and and that maybe it's 3,000 here and there's going to be a few more t thousand tucked into thecivilian wor civilian work force of the embassy and samore in the special operating covert mistake operators will need to say exactly how many are leaving their.in the a there are confidence to the allies in the region particularly in iraq and underwear enemies particularly in iran senator mccain has cities in the national interestecurit above the such region concerned there about the small number of troops l thatef may be left and there may ira be some iraqis that might be a pushing for a smaller post 2011h force with a more limited set of and

i missions but this may be a bad deal for the iraqi people and the united states. our troops would be reduced to spectators as the various iraqiraqi groups employ violence againster. one another however if we have troops in iraq that do nothing to stop bloodshed there it would be seen as part of washington's mplicity. complicity if we cannot enforce the rules o if the game they pe should not beri an iraq period a lest sthey be portrayed asn of contributing to the destruction of the. country. and the final point here is drpollack dr. polis argues in this pieceues that the united states if this thi s is in response given the benefit of the doubt here for a moment tha to the iraqit political concerns that the u.s. has the leveragethis to avoid this danger is outcome and i quote him directly america

has the goods to borden is and t whether washington will and that is the question and that is south cina whether my colleagues from there is a layer of complete a softer line are asking the bargain with is our iraqi allies that this is with the problem to work with themll for another chapter to secure all that we've been together until now.

ran for president of the united states and lost but he changed political history. she's one of the 14 men featured in the season and a weekly series the contenders. this week live from ashlawn henry clay's kentucky home friday at eight eastern. the u.s. ambassador to libya says the u.s. will not be involved in the nation-building in libya and the u.s. recognizes lydia's transitional national council. he spoke in washington for a little more than a half-hour. >> please join me in welcoming ambassador cretz. [applause] >> it's a pleasure to be here after the last six months which have been living for all of

those involved in this very intensive and finally, we have achieved something i think that very few of us thought would happen so quickly. if this was leading from behind i don't know those of us who are exhausted don't really see it that way. wendy mentioned the meeting in paris. let me go back to talk about the international community's response to the crisis and then move on to several different topics that she mentioned. prior to the meeting in paris last week i think that you are all aware that there were several international meetings starting with summit in london and paris and then heading on to the contact group meetings in doha rome and istanbul and also a nato ministerial in berlin all of which secretary of state clinton participated in and the

commitment of the united states to this effort. i think each of the meetings each of them built on the every end of the time period i think he found, we found that we build an international consensus number one in support of the nado mandate and the number two, in support of trying to aid of a libyan opposition to the extent that we could come in the number three and increasing comfort with the mtc as time went on. i remember from the first day is that this that started within two weeks of the crisis the secretary asked me to go out and find out exactly who were these people come and we have had a sense of who they were. i met some of them when i was ambassador in some of the more ministers from some of them occupied others in the libyan government but we didn't have a sense beyond that of who they were and so i traveled to rome

and cairo to meet them, and i feel that you know when don the international community became more comfortable with them as each meeting solidified a particular consensus leading up to the july 15th meeting in istanbul in which the contact group basically offered recognition to the ntc as well as the united states and called upon the international community to support the ntc with funds and also congealed a around the sense that ghaddafi had to go. up until that time as you know there were several attempts trying to find a political solution in fact the libyans were sending out envoys to everyone and in an attempt, we think to try to play one part of against the other in istanbul the contact group put its foot

down and said they would no longer be a diffusion of on voice and the effort of the international community respect to find a political solution if one could be found would be through the u.n. special representative. so basically that brought us to in effect a stumble was a turning point i think in the international community view and approach to the issue last week in paris was quite extraordinary the atmosphere some people said this was a victory lap i didn't get that sense of all living the people in that room including several prime ministers including the president of france, the prime minister of britain and the prime minister of italy and several other high-level officials importing

bon ki moon and the head secretary-general. they're certainly was a sense that of pride in what the international communities have done over the past several months but it was in that sense a victory lap of such because i think everybody recognized that while the situation had reached a more positive point than it had over the past months that there certainly was a lot more work to do and there's no doubt that in a ghaddafi along with his sons the most dangerous of the lot having them continue to be free anywhere in libya much less outside of libya and pose a danger to the fer efforts but tnt was going to make in establishing a new government and a new way for word for the new plebeian country. so for their part i think the at

the paris meeting some things were common among all the different presentations made. number one there was a further calling on the nations to recognize tnt as a representative of the people and up to date i think we have approximately 65 nations now that have formally recognized the tnc including several african nations that came on board in the last few days. there was certainly a sense of pride talking to the leadership of the international community was certainly amazed at the courage that the libyan people had shown over the past months in taking to the streets and fighting this dictator who suffocated them for the past 42

years. there was a call for everybody in that room to try to do what they could individually and through the u.n. of course to unfreeze the assets which we hope now would be made available to the tnc with some very difficult problems in the next several days weeks and months and a colleague will be able to address the need to address more fully and there was also a call in the presentations directed at the leadership of the tnc that the international community was very proud to have helped them through this effort and now i expected them as well to uphold the commitment that they have made during the past several months from the start basically with respect to observing human rights with respect to treating prisoners of war according to the geneva conventions with respect to unify and libya because part of the problem always was a part of the concern was this was a very been gauzy

central government and that no government could survive as a and to unify the country if it retained that kind of perception so there was also a sense of an appeal to the libyan leadership that they needed to take care of these assets and with to -- on the get them to be carefully the the the international community expected transparency and some kind of accountability so that in fact that money was used for the purpose and would be tangibly seen as time went on. for their part, the two leaders of the tnc gave a very moving thanks to the international community for its support. they were very clear that they intended to fulfill the obligations that the jet made

with respect to human rights treatment of prisoners etc. and that they would do everything they could that they had heard the international community's please on these different issues in terms of unity and all that they understood and that they really didn't need to be told what they needed to do because they've understood those particular problems and they also agree it would be the governing authority that would make sure the way in which they handled these billions of dollars a would be flowing into the country would be handled in a transparent and accountable way up to international standards. i think as we look forward to the next days and weeks in terms of the interest of the united states particularly in the international community at large, i think that there are a few things we want to stress. number one we will continue the nado mission that there was a

clear sense in paris that this is not over and that it continues to face problems on the security front and as i mentioned especially with ghaddafi and his sons still running around the country. so there was certainly still a very strong sense that that would continue and that when the circumstances were right and a decision would be made as to what the future would be if anything in it libya. number two what we would hope to promote over the next days and weeks is to welcome libya back into the community nations to regain its seat at the u.n. number three the we would support to the tnc in the needs to meet the libyan people to keep things as they begin to establish themselves and they're making their way back into tripoli day-by-day.

the minister has been there and we expect that the head will also make their way back and establish themselves in the coming days in tripoli and that the two key things are going to become the number one, establishing security, and also making sure that humanitarian needs of the population withholds writ large are fulfilled because i think that there is an understanding that in order to begin to put the country back together again and i said it's not recreation, called the creation of the new country because what they have inherited i think from ghaddafi is a very difficult and hard point. when you think about the east west problem and the tribal problems, when you think about the minority problems, the north and south, it's really quite a challenge that they face and

like i said in several interviews i think that he was on to take the concept to the unprecedented heights and this is what they face. they've done a deal with these issues as well as to build new institutions as well as to deal with the issues remaining from the regime including how to deal with over hundreds of billions of dollars with the contracts. the have said that they will honor contracts, but certainly there's going to be a lot that needs to be figured out as they go forward on the economic side and also of course and getting their resources back on line. the international community also i think is committed now to the u.n. lead in helping the libyan people. ian martin is on the ground now with the u.n. assessment team. i think that at some point in the next several days he is going to be put back to ferre

u.n. to the secretary in terms of what the scope and the size of that mission should be and i think at the end of the day the final goal is that we are committed to helping pave a path to peaceful inclusive democracy. none of us can predict what that democracy is going to look like. it is probably going to be messy as they try to put this country together again they are going to have to create an ngo society and new institutions. but the commitment seems to be to a democracy of some kind, and i think we have seen from the first days of the tnc assuming authority in places like benenghazi certainly we saw the first few weeks debates taking

place about what the constitution is what democracies should be we saw the tens of newspapers, you know, published, we saw an ngo springing up in the hundreds. so it seems they do have a sense of what democracy is and that the leadership will have to kind of harness that and see what makes sense what will be the new political and economic and social fabric. let me say a few words about planning. i know that there has been a lot of questions, certainly i've received a lot and there has been a lot directed at what kind of planning was done in terms of this crisis and from the start i think we have an advantage in fact in washington because i had my embassy team basically transport back and we were able to work together out of the state department and so we exported that knowledge on the ground that we had and we then

worked with the process here to basically laid out the various scenarios we thought would play out in libya from the worst to the best. and sacked the one that is played out this kind of next to worst and the was obviously would have been a ghaddafi leading or being overthrown in tripoli but ending in a rage of some kind in bringing down we'll resources and then really doing damage to the country's infrastructure which did not happen to read the speed with which the opposition forces went into effect prevented that kind of apocalyptic scenario but we did have an idea of the different issues we would face and that the international community would face, and i think by and large after we had on our planning in the u.s. government we then hooked up

with the iain martin and then finally we went to the planning sell which at that time several weeks ago which is an dhaka and i think that all of us were quite pleasantly surprised that the tnc group had done an amazing amount of planning much along the lines of what we have been doing and so we were able to kind of compare notes on what kind of political issues they would face, what kind of social issues, economic issues messaging, all these different things we had taken into account in the planning phase the yet also done and we were able to fill in the gaps. so i'm not sure that at this point we can definitively say that the planning process that we all engaged in is in fact paying dividends now but i think there are some issues being brought to the floor now which were considered previously in are being played out now.

for a sample, on the proliferation of weapons we all recognize this was an issue that needed to be dealt with and i think they are certainly aware of it and at some point over the next few weeks i think you'll see efforts being made to decommission and get people to turn in their weapons and bring them in which have been independent during the six months bring them under a national security force of some kind or another. the wmd you have seen in the other weapons you have seen a lot of concern i think there was the news of what happened to the sites that were under the suppose it guard of ghaddafi and some of the c. w. sites etc. etc. and we have also in our planning and they're planning as well considered what needed to be done, and right now we have people on the ground and working very closely with the

international community to make sure that those sites are secure. the other question for example that might be proliferated are taking the same attitude so i think that all of the planning that we had done this kind of playing itself out. we also noted that the problem of african migrants in libya could be a problem because we had predicted and i think it didn't take a genius to figure this out that a lot of the wrath of the libyans would be directed against the black africans who were seen as having played a part in terms of mercenaries and after having received fairly credible reports from the international organizations that there has been an ongoing sense of mistreatment of some of the black africans. we are now very intensively engaged in the international

community to make sure that we get some protection and figure out a solution to bring these migrants out of harm's way. we don't think that it is obviously a systematic approach but is being done by the tawdry at a lower level who don't have the sense of what is fair play and how do you not accuse a whole race of atrocities that can be attributed possibly to only a few of them so we are working very carefully with them. i think that in talking with the tnc at least some of their priorities include number one, pursuing ghaddafi. i think this is very important to them obviously to put him on trial there will be a lingering problem i think as though she is free. number two, they are geared towards stabilization and providing security and providing a new regime of the rules law.

they have the possibility of establishing the special courts for those who committed crimes to demilitarizing the militia as i mentioned and to work with some members of the regime of possible if they are proven not to have blood on their hands. i think that they're always looking for a way to compensate those who have the families of marvers who played a role in the revolution and also to come up with a budget process the will prioritize public services public salaries and rebuilding and upgrading infrastructure and housing and utilities so they have a massive challenge ahead of them. the united states certainly along with its allies will do what we can. we are not going to be engaged in the kind of nation building that we were either in iraq or afghanistan.

it's clear that we don't have the resources to do that and this situation doesn't really lend itself to that. by its own statements they've said that they are not looking for a massive handouts or financial infusion from the international community they are looking for training and for help to set up the institutions that they know are necessary in order for them to build their new country. so with that i think that we are -- we have a lot of work ahead of us and we are looking for to going back at some point. this has been a tremendous opportunity for us to watch these people and we will serve as a model for historians for hundreds of years to come to take the courage and actually overthrow this dictator. we now have a very important role to play i think in helping them according to the kind of

need that they will lay out and trying to help build this new society and i think that at the end of the day certainly the international community and we as americans can be proud of the role that we've played and i think that we stand our reputation and libya is very well fall of. i look forward to hopefully helping american companies and get back into libya because i think they have the expertise of the libyans will need, but we will take this. the key to this is that it is going to be led by the libyans and we are not going to dictate the terms of how we should proceed we will be there should they need our help and at the end of today may be five or ten years from now or even sooner we may have a conversation and we may be able to say that there was a democracy in libya and that the united states had a role to play and i think that

having worked last six months with the president and secretary of state can say we took the right path, and i think that dhaka concept of the smart power has been a good one, and we look forward to going back to libya helping them build their nation. thank you very much. [applause] thank you very much for the clear, comprehensive account. ambassador cretz has agreed to take a few questions from the audience and let me remind you this is on the record so please come to the microphone at the center and state your name and affiliation and then after a few questions we will continue with the rest of our panel on the humanitarian situation in libya.

thank you. islamic and with the public international law and policy group and i was wondering if you have any particular concerns regarding how the international backing might affect the legitimacy going forward? >> well i think that by saying the number one this will be a libyan lead process that we recognize we have to be very sensitive about the position of the tnc. it's clear that the no boots on the ground was not only a row is out of a domestic imperative in the united states but that i would be very difficult issue for the tnc. so we have been carefully and i think our allied partners have been as well and so i don't -- we'll understand the sensitivities. they are in a very difficult

position because they have to establish legitimacy and credibility with the whole population parts of which don't know who they are parts of which are very skeptical of them and for us to be seen as a quote on quote western and during a list attempting to reimpose ourselves or intervene would be very dangerous thing for them so i don't think it is planned to be a problem quite honestly. >> thank you. we already have a long lines we are going to cut it off their so if i could just ask you not to join the line after we complete this. >> you have echoed secateurs clinton's statement that they should be able to decide their fate on their own but you're believe that nato will continue its involvement and implies that the rebels would lose. it doesn't letting them fight among themselves come closer to letting them decide than having nato continue its devastation of the country?

>> what i meant by the fact they would continue the mission would continue the mission to protect civilians. >> but it is continuing to bomb? >> i think as has been the case throughout the six months or the five months that nato has been involved in this the have been careful in terms of the targeting and i don't think there have been instances where one could argue that the mission has veered much from number one making sure there was a no-fly zone and number two that its mandate or protecting civilians was honored most of that time or all of that time. >> you mentioned you hope to be going back soon. can you put a point on that because others have begun to set up a diplomatic establishments. do you know if you are going to be giving back or if anybody is going to be setting up the embassy? >> right now we have a small

team on the ground that is assessing the situation. as you know our mission was torched along with the british the french and italians that night that he was killed in a fit of rage by ghaddafi. chris stevens has been in benghazi all this time and we are taking a measured approach to the return and i expect us to be there as the days go on i think he will see an increased american presence assuming that the security situation is stabilized even further and that we can find fists facilities to house people. >> [inaudible] we wouldn't have

achieved getting rid of ghaddafi. my question is to words. libya in 1949 and in 51 the united nations played a great role again a great scholar who every would begin today ignores. it's the second independence of libya. i think the united nations and by unmasking you as the ambassador of the united states that the united states played a single publicly in seeing that the political rebuilding will be there and that it is very much respected because of the 1973 revolutions. my question to you, ambassador i just came back last weekend they were asking me who is bring to pay for the nato expenses?

that has never been clearly explained in the media or other places and i know -- the second one is the rebuilding needs to build the civil society needs to build the media and the educational systems and so on and that is a great role for the united states to play and tell us what kind of plan you have for that. thank you. islamic in terms of the u.n. i'm going to let my colleague address that because he has been hooked up with ian martin for quite awhile but it's clear that since the start of this international community has placed great faith in the u.n. certainly in the secretary general in the representative in jordan and certainly now with ian martin who's on the ground in libya as we speak. the question of paying for the nato expenses this has come up. several congressmen have asked me will to we ask for

reimbursement? this is very complex and has to be dealt with at a later time. but there's a certain recognition of let's let them get established before issues like this and other ones i assure you are aware of will come out in the bilateral relationship. civil society and what role the united states we intend to do that and she will be able to address that is all because that is the real we are going to be the most attractive and that we have the most competitive of vantage with respect to others as well. from the woodrow wilson center former middle east correspondent , i'm curious how you would explain the amazing role in overthrowing ghaddafi. what do you think the motives were for the royal family to become so involved in so many different ways in overthrowing another leader which generally

speaking has not been part of the way that arabs treat each other. >> welcome a look of there is no doubt that the emirate's played an upfront role in this including in the military campaign but don't forget that one of the main reasons that we were able to intervene, and this was because we had arab backing not only from the gcc but from the start, so i think there was a consensus certainly in the arab world that had to exist in order for them to approach us and the nato group to take action. so why can't speak to the motivations i don't think of the amorites. obviously there was -- to have their own interest as well as other interests at stake, but i think those will probably come out as history is written of the

crisis but it's clear they played an important role with our colleagues >> if the infrastructure is the lifeblood of the country, and even before the regime fell there have been projects started to improve the infrastructure in the country. can you elaborate just a bit now as to what we should be expecting for the international airport in tripoli was already contracted out for improvement of expansion and the number of roads and if you have any knowledge about that situation would be very welcome. >> you're absolutely right. libya in the pre-february