assure us . >> congressman, i can only tell you what i'm telling. we are on track to meet october 1st. i can't tell you exactly will happen. that's the determination we are on track to meet it. we test it. >> you're not on track to meet it. that was the question. >> pardon me? >> you're not track on meet it. >> we are on track to meet the october first deadline. >> there will be no further -- again, i'm trying to get to the bottom line. ..

speed thank you area match, madam secretary. >> out zero and assistant secretary of state, andrew shapiro sat down for an interview at the council of foreign relations today in washington. he's a longtime adviser to

hillary clinton. his conversation for the national defense university lasts about an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning everyone and welcome to the account on foreign relations. a reminder, today's meeting is on the record. greetings to everyone there as well. my name is celina realuyo. i'm not national security at the defense university and i will be serving a circus rider. with a great honor honor and privilege of having secretary andrew shapiro with as here today who will be discussing his tenure. i understand you're the longest-serving publicly appointed secretary and if you think about it, you've been with us at a very auspicious time because it is unprecedented

cooperation between the state department and defense department. talking about the defense diplomacy. as he looked back at your four years, what would she think of your two or three top highlights? >> i think you hit it right on the head that one of the most significant accomplishment has been restoring balance between the state department and department of defense. after 9/11 we were out war and a lot of the traditional migrated to the department of defense. when the obama administration came into office, it made it a priority to rebalance their relationship. it mandates that secretary clinton gave me when i took the job as secretary of state for

military affairs. we've made a lot of progress in that respect in that the relationship between state department and defense department has never been better. it is often referred to as the principal link between state department and department of defense. so at its core, the mission is to make sure the relationship goes smoothly as well as ensuring what the defense department is doing is consistent with u.s. foreign policy. and so, we made progress in increasing personnel exchanges and rebalancing the authorities and in a variety of interactions that the relationship is more intimate and closer than ever before. it's not just with the osd, ostrich adtran office of secretary of defense policy. the defense to dodgy security

agency about these agencies take actions, which can have impact on foreign policy and we really rebuilt the capacity of the political military to have the expertise to interact with dod on its own terms. so it is one of the things that has been a real accomplishment. another issue is that the focus on has been a geopolitical changes that have really occurred during the last four years. so that means, for example, tremendous changes in the middle east, the so-called arab spring. that's enormous complicated issues and challenges in libya, egypt, the golf, young men, syria now. dataset implications for security systems policy as well

as the major department of defense interacts as well and it designed to make sure they dod and state are well synced. it is also impacted our analysis and ability to think about israel and the qualitative military edge. under law, the united states has to consider every sale to the region for its potential act and qualitative military edge. in a time of dramatic change in the middle east, it means he tried to refine our analysis and think about how these dramatic changes will impact israel's qualitative military edge. we've develop new structures of communication with the israelis

so we understand how they see the world and they understand how we see the developing issues in the region are able to take that into account when i make these issues. the other geopolitical issue is the rebalance toshio. there is an area where the girl has really played more role on asian issues than any time in its history. when it was created, in a stirring the cold war. i remember talking to predecessors from that era and they spent a lot of time negotiating arms control agreements with the russian or thinking about how nuclear proliferation could impact our policy in europe and elsewhere.

the bureaus focus shifted to the middle east. obviously iraq invading kuwait and made 290 in the bureau with a part of developing the agreements that enabled us to have bases from which to operate from in response to that crisis and obviously in the post-9/11 era, that's been a primary focus. but now we are starting to pay much more of a role in asia. one of the primary areas i travel to is the middle east, but the second mouse is asia. when i took a job, i didn't anticipate that, but it is just the necessity of going to asia, building relationships, interacting with part or as him.

the final point, i will add a fourth is early in my tenure were able to get the treaties passed with united kingdom and australia were beginning to see there is used. the broader export control is just now going to be moving items to the state department control lists to the commerce department control lists and that will happen next week for the first two categories and that's a significant accomplishment. they're going to go to raw 18 categories and scrubbed them so that things maintained by the things we really need to protect and deserve the highest level of protection and those that still need to be controlled, but don't need this high level of protection.

the categories were looking at to move next week our aircraft and engines and we think the thousands from those two categories will be limited and when they are done with this process over the next year, thousands more will those as well and that will have a real impact on our economy at a time when competition is even more fierce and at a time and a manufacturing base could move. >> that's a great way to start for conversation. i think it's quite auspicious that today secretary kerry is actually in seoul. it's one of those things for nobody anticipated the timing and particularly the tensions are rising on the korean peninsula.

you spent a lot of time traveling and the question of your insider's view is how did you actually described our partnerships with south korea, japan and china, particularly as we reach the states, anniversaries of particular interest, which for some reason could be triggers in terms of them trying to show their strength from pyongyang? >> he's in the region. he just had a press conference and it is important to remember we are at a unique time in northeast asia and that the leaders of japan, south korea, north korea and china are all relatively new. this is a timely visit by secretary kerry to establish those relationships, to consult on a tense time in the korean peninsula and make clear our resolve and standing by partners

as well as communicating with the chinese about the best approach vis-à-vis north korea. it is important to recognize we been through these cycles before and we need to continue to show our partners that we will stand by them and continue to make the case that north korea will not benefit from this type of behavior. i went to korea a couple times in this job. once the secretary clinton and secretary gates for a 22 meeting, which is the defense secretary and secretary of state and the defense minister and south korea. it is also during a time of tension on the korean payment. i remember visiting the bmc and

you're stepping back in time and we went to those cabins they have a straddle the dmz in-house. and secretary gates and secretary clinton went into one of those cabinet, a famous picture of the north korean soldier lucky man, appearing and gives you a sense when you go up there that this is a very unique place that is still stuck in the cold war. so we need to continue to demonstrate that we will stand by our partners. the second time i went, i was honored and privileged to serve in the presidential delegation to the celebration of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of soul. i want to secretary sheikh zaki

and akio and the flu when on their budget three more veterans come who participated in the celebration. all of them in their later years in their life and they sat down at every table at every bank way, every dinner. cb sitting with the defense minister of korea and several korean war veterans. many of them had not been back to seoul since the korean war and many of them were taken aback with the notion when they saw housel had changed from what they remembered. when you think about it, this is what they were fighting for. to have things with an opportunity to have freedom and enjoy a project of life.

and so, the history of our involvement in korea is one that often can be forgotten, but we lost a lot on behalf of protect and freedom and south korea and we need to continue to keep our commitment to the south korean government and people and that's the secretary kerry is doing on his trip now is demonstrating our resolve and commitment to south korea and also sending a strong signal we will stand by our partners. >> over the past 12 hours if not 24, we've had to of reports alluding to the north koreans have the capability of perhaps delivering. the question is if they could physically deliver in terms of

reliability in nuclear weapons and missile as was yesterday one of the heads of the leaders in the parliament and south korea talked about maybe it's time for south korea to think about also becoming a nuclear arms owner and that's obviously created an interesting backlog for secretary kerry's meetings and obviously that is also filled rhetoric and you're involved your colleagues in pyongyang would be looking at discussions about going down the road. >> all just make a couple points. first, direct or clapper and i had some comments about the report and that it did not have the intelligence community and i

think i'll let his comments in the comments in the hearing yesterday speak for themselves. it does remind me eight years ago i was senator clinton's senior defense policy on the armed services committee and there's a similar action that had a similar public responds when she asked a question about the ability of the north koreans to put a warhead on a missile. so the more things change, the more they stay the same. this is an issue eight years ago that we were concerned about and one that we are so concerned about in our intelligence community is considering an inking about. in terms of the nuclear issue related to south korea, it would not be something that would directly work on one of my colleagues for non-proliferation

, former principal deputy and so, i think that, you know, i don't think we see that as formal south korean policy and as such, i don't think it's appropriate for me to respond, but i imagine they're following very closely. >> since it covered the pb to asia, wedowee pivot to the middle east and the khadijah. as you know, egypt is the second largest beneficiary in military and economic assistance. under the morrissey government and his interpretation of democratic principles, there's a lot of critiques about whether or not we should think about rebalancing. it's predominantly historically given the government throughout the years. if they should be rebalancing to use your words and more

importantly, the demands they be tied to the respect for human rights and democracy and religious freedom we've been observing and i believe you've also traveled to that part of the world quite a bit. >> i was in a jet at couple years ago, talking about these issues with the egyptian government. i think it is important to recognize we do still have very strong national interest and our relationship with egypt. we have an interest in ensuring the peace accords. we have interest in the free flow of trade through the suez canal. we have interest in working with counterterrorism. we have interest in preventing

weapons. so there's a number of issues, where it's important to work with the egyptian government towards addressing our own and chess. so you know, our security system to dj at is in furtherance of the national security interests. so the analysis we put in his does this continue to serve our national security interests? in our view at this does. and so, we are seeing progress from the egyptians and, for example, addressing border ratios. and so, they've taken steps to prevent the smuggling. we went to work with them to develop the capacity and user

security assistance to further their ability to prevent smuggling. we want to continue with the military in egypt is an important player and we want to continue to have a relationship that enables us to communicate and discuss sensitive issues as they arise. we've been very clear to the egyptians that we expect that they will use our systems properly and we have not seen any indication it is for misuse and we continue to press down, issues related to human rights, freedom for women, press freedom

and where they don't meet internationally recognized standards, we address them. and so, this is something we will continue to look at very closely. but at this particular time, we believe our security system is still furthering our interest and we will proceed going forward with an analysis that says that their security systems serve our interests? and if it does we will continue to have a conversation with an on how to ensure that it serves our mutual security interests. >> i'm a similar vein, there's a lot of scrutiny regarding assistance to pakistan and questions as to how willing and able to partner they are and what countries keep you up at night seems to be one of several

national security thinkers are thinking about. have you actually spent time rethinking the idea conditionality when it comes to the carrots and sticks and military assistance? >> as we know, i relationship with pakistan wickersham challenges the past couple of years. we had the osama bin laden rate, the border incident were pakistani soldiers were killed. and so, we went through a period, a difficult. where there is not a lot of assistance flowing and communication was not great. we are now icing on a track where the communication has started to occur again and we're making progress.

but we have to be realistic in our assumption and expectations. we can ask fact the pakistanis to act when it is in their interest. and now, they have had a number of incidents and attacks by extremists that directly impact their interest and also impact our interests. so it makes sense for us to work with them, where we have these mutual interest to provide them with assistance that will go after the bad guys. and so, we will continue to have these conversations with them about the best way to use the assistance. early on there was a bit of a debate over who should manage security assistance and around government. should it be the department of defense issued directly related

to our efforts in afghanistan, or should it be the state department? ultimately, the state department transition. the pakistan counterinsurgency capability. we demonstrate is one of the state department could manage, not like the foreign military finance and account, which is designed for longer-term capacity building to help pakistan and immediately in their fight against terrorists. what i think we demonstrated is that it's just that. the state department had technical expertise and ability to manage the security systems, which gets back to what we talked about earlier, between the state department and department of defense.

we have seen some promising signs in our dialogue with pack and that we think make it worthwhile to continue our security system. >> censored viewers work hand-in-hand with department of defense everyday were talking about sequestration and the effects on the defense program we have, particularly in the international arena. just want to get your views as to how its effect to things on the ground at curtailing the aspirations you had during your tenure as secretary. >> it hasn't fully kicked in yet, so we are planning for it. obviously it will mean our security assistant accounts will have an across-the-board cut in foreign military financing with some important partners with the

account at a time when we try to build partnerships overseas at a time when we are saying we would like our partners to do so more so we don't have to do so much. it seems they've to across-the-board cut our security assistance. more crack the week, my bureau, for example funds humanitarian de-mining programs around the world. those will be cut. in terms of u.s. industry, we rely on expertise from the depart of defense when we reviewed by his does for export. they reveal licenser tildes technology security concerns. the department of defense is to furlough, that will mean we will not get an answer as quickly when we review a license. so that his life processing

times will increase. again, at a time when we are trying to eat for contracts overseas and to preserve our own industrial base, it seems it is not in our interest for an across-the-board cut to the two furloughs, which will mean it will take longer for licenses to the process. so while there has been a lot of attention focused on the impact of sequestration on the department of defense, it impacts more than the department of defense and will have been my view, an impact on national security and foreign policy than sequestration kicks in foley. >> are just about to finish your tenure as assistant secretary. is there one thing you wish you would've accomplished or impress upon your successor and you've seen this whole josh rogan in

terms of when the successor is named and perhaps confirmed, what do you think he would impart that she'd been working on that she did not have this time to achieve? >> their search things happening at by my successor, by necessity will have to focus on. syria, for example is an issue that will demand a lot of attention, planning in the future, working with dod. conventional weapons, proliferation. that's a serious issue. one of the things i wasn't quite able to get across the finish line, but i hope will happen soon after he departed that we've been reviewing our conventional policy, which we use to determine whether we're going to sell weapons system to

a country. it has not been updated in 17 years, so it was written after the cold war. there's still a lot of his two cold war era terminology and so this time, given all the changes that have occurred, it was time to take a look. so we've been reviewing and we just had the passage of the treaty. we also need to look at it to make sure our policy is consistent with the arms trade treaty, which we think it will be. this will be something that will update a policy that is at the core of our political military policy, which is what type of assistance and are we willing to provide to our partners? and where do we draw the line in

terms of the type of assistance were willing to provide? have you take into account non-proliferation, human rights, developing a part. how do you balance all this? we started that process under my tenure and i'm hoping after he depart a look at more. >> lister in the audience for questions and answers. if you wait for the microphone and speak clearly into the microphone, will state your name and affiliation of an issue question with a question or as opposed to a position. in the front. >> thank you very much, and tour. you need to be congratulated. >> your affiliation? >> global insights. starry. >> there is a great deal of talk

and policies towards breaking state that is more united in terms of approaches. i recall the welcome back and was a major initiative of secretary clinton. i'm sure you're at the center of that with the quadrennial review and so on. in the last two years, let's put it that way, it is come out that dod has been increasingly active in what i call foreign policy areas. in particular, special forces, which if you read the recent testimony, you really see a global approach to special forces. somewhat independent, let's put it that way, a very close state

in the special do. secondly, the cia it turns out i've been very active in pakistan and elsewhere, making decisions with both the military component for sure, but also foreign policy components. so that puts into question the whole emphasis on integration of state, dod or foreign policy defend and raises the question of where is the engine in making the foreign policy decisions now and what is the direction compared to perhaps the direction of the beginning of the administration? >> thank you for that question. i know there's been a lot of interest in the press over what our special operations forces are doing them at the future will be.

one way in which we have responded to the global footprint of special operators that exist for political advisories to special operations commanders. we've moved positions around and there's a demand signal, not just do so, a malicious adenoma cravens, but some of those subordinate commands, from the combatant commands which handles special operations. we are having for the first time to ensure. i give admiral mike raven a lot

of credit for understanding there is this anxiety and one of the first meeting that a joint secretary kerry for us to keep the lines of communication going and has been making sure he touches base with other senior state department officials as well. there is, you know, i need to ensure with the special operators are doing is understood by his admission in the country in which they operate, but there's transparency so we can make sure because these are their procedures and says being developed. the need to work back through. and so, we are working through.

so there may be some bumps upon the road, but there is a commitment by admiral mike raven and his organization and secretary of defense she had to have that relationship. we still don't always agree on the authorities issue and who should be doing what amounts furthers an interagency process that helped figure out who is going to do what would have released to certain types of assistance. for the most part, the administration has reaffirmed it should be the state department, which has the authority over security assisted and we work closely with our partners at the pentagon in a way that fit the gaps that we see. the cia, i will, you know,

hesitate to speak too much about that, but obviously we have counterterrorism office and research office who are closely synced to the intelligence community and i think that given the types of things you're talking about are not often in the public sphere. i'll leave it at that. >> i have questions on two smaller issues. first, the question is, what has been accomplished in your time and what still needs to be done to strength in those prolapse? i asked because i worked in the clinton administration, we found view of the pool adds were integrated with combat commanders or talents that made

good use of. second is the global contingency security, which was an extraordinary action creating the contingency fund, $300 million they didn't have all of the streams most of the foreign aid programs have. what i heard and maybe 10 correct is the administration took a long time to come up with any proposed year was and what they ended up pacing is this is not the way we want a fund to be used. they haven't extended the authority. so how do you explain that reaction to an unusual action by congress? >> thank you for those questions. the program stands for these are foreign policy advisers that we provide to commanders.

in 2007, there is basically the senior combatant command and the joint chiefs army chief of staff, naval chief of operations commemorate, don. to the first one, we have added a foreign policy adviser and we've expanded this program to now almost 100 foreign service officers who are now serving not just the seniormost command, so it's not just ambassador for his final tour, though there have been more mid-level sponsors serving the two is to restart commands in getting that experience serving with the military. withdraw from afghanistan, we're

not going to have as much of an opportunity for foreign service officers to serve side-by-side in the military. so the program will be a key element of preserving the experience of working side-by-side with military commanders. and our goal is to have future political counselors and ambassadors who have had experience working side-by-side with military commanders. so one entity we found when i came in for the job was that it wasn't considered necessarily a role of job. we put a lot of after into making sure those who do good work at promoting. if you get promoted or pin assignment, it becomes more desirable. we had more bids for foreign

policy advisor jobs last year exponentially more than we've ever had before and we see more foreign policy advisers being promoted than ever before. so that i think is a testament to see the fair trade shots that i value and can further their careers. i do think you have it quite right. it is an extraordinary fraud that we hope will be a real model for the future security systems. for example, when adenoma cravens had a dozen or 30 to help korean special operations force coming out in the military. some of the first projects were going to notifying are going to be for treating special operations forces with key partners.

we've also notified certain countries to receive assistance. nigeria, philippines and the vocal from brad. we didn't budget for that. we didn't plan for that. having a contingency fund, which allowed us to help nigeria is what it's for. libya, border security, wasn't budgeted for, but it became an issue, so we were able to designate the way of reprogramming money to help with border security. so it's taken longer. but i get to go faster. our congressional committees had a lot of questions about it with a committees committees we have to brief and that is the part congress requires and takes time because each committee has their own issue they are focused on. that is the part that's taken us longer than we would like is

figuring out how to navigate the a committees and their different requirements. we are now hopeful that future it will go much more quickly and these projects are going to add real value. >> in the back of the room in the very last row. >> thank you for your time. today with north korea come you mentioned about china and everybody says china is a key player, but they really want to talk to the united states. is there any possibility if the united states starts talking with them? if not, why? >> i'm not the administration spokesmen on north korean policy, so i'm hesitant to make news on a very sensitive topic at a sensitive time. i'm going to point you to

secretary kerry's comments, where, you know, he talked about we are going to by south korea and north korea will not benefit from this behavior. we are going to consult with china as well about the need to deliver a strong message that this behavior is not going to achieve the goals and that's going to be the focus. >> allen went, firmly with the state department. you mentioned early in your remarks that the state isn't moving a large number of items in the state department control and the commerce department. of the accord hate how licenses are issued and second night, what mechanisms you have to coordinate with other countries that might ask for the same items to countries of concern? >> excellent questions.

our export control reform effort is designed to have a more unified approach. the ultimate goal is the four singles enforcement mechanism. it would be a critical element of the coordination you're talking about with congress about that right now if they cannot get on and the licenses come in, double make it easier. commerce, we let them know which licensees would like to see in most of them to the state department and the state department bureaus that have equities will look at commerce and opinion. eventually would like to get tracing the lives. so in terms of other countries, these various non-proliferation including the agreement among

countries. my doesn't handle it. it's a non-proliferation were they talk about items that we send delegations to an annual meeting, where they talk about the appropriate level of control for various dual use items that have both a military application in a commercial application. because they banned the military operation, we bought more stingier control can be installed anywhere to anyone. >> thank you. congratulations on your accomplishment. you talk about the review of conventional arms sales and transfer policy. i would like you pleased me an asset today on the review by congress of major arms sales.

back in the 70s, it was deeply involved in the legislation, which got embedded in the law, which requires major arms sales be reported to congress for a period of review. how is that working? does that part of your updating feature perspective they expecting to see finished even after you leave? can you tell us about that? >> thank you for the question. for those of you don't know my first job was working -- [inaudible] and this is an issue near and dear to my heart because it is a major initiative the administration engaged in. this is how do we control congress and my view is when i came in the process was broken,

meaning you go to congress and the recent unmounted talk that the staff could take to the could and arms so. if they didn't say yes, it could be months. this is not just sensitive sales. it could be a sale to the united kingdom for a sale to france or germany that for reasons that could be held up for 60 days, 90 days. so it didn't make sense or offer reliability to industry. there is no forcing function to address those issues. so we come with secretary clinton support, we initiated a new system as well as the export control reform changes.

what we've done is a sad these are sales to our closest allies. first of all, we give you information early in the process, so you see this information even before we come up to formally consult with you, go see the licenses that they've come in and we'll give it to you earlier as well. so you know it's coming. novosti in the classified javits report. we really focused on the sales that would be eligible for the coming year and use that process to try to determine what congress might have concerns. so they could prepare too brief. we said to consider our closest

allies, we'll give you 20 days even before we notified under the law, we give 30 days. 20 days in advance. at the end of the 20 days, if we haven't heard from you, we are going to move it forward. this is again our closest allies. if it is not a nato ally, it will be 30 days. the sensitive sales will take 40 days and then check out and just make sure you're okay. and the result has been, you know, the times have gone down in last year was the first year, you know, we were tentative and starting. at the end of the day, and i want to emphasize this, if a member raises an objection, we'll stop the sale and we will consult and stop the notification. we have committed we will consult with the number before

we moved to sale. so this is not about limiting congress' authority. it's about introducing predictability, reliability and the forcing function to have the conversation take place. at the time i nonmeat that after 40 days on a sensitive sale, we've got nowhere. we need to call the staff director and say where are we? if the member has a problem, it's good to know that so we can in age and bring in a briefing team to address those concerns. so i think some in congress thought we would start notifying sales that were controversial and of the two introductory role revolutions. that's not in our interest to have resolution, so we want to be sure it is going to get

through the. we very much value the process of congress because they have expertise as well that is important for us to hear about their concerns. so we struck the right balance between introducing project ability and reliability in the process, but at the same time, allowing congress to play the significant role below provides an identity opportunity to weigh in. >> second row. >> just met with arlen porter. i join everybody else here who congratulates you on your tenure. everybody i speak to gives you very high marks. i picked to take you back to china in two areas that are in your area of responsibility. one is how you do a arms sales

china given a dynamic region and military to military relations in the u.s. and china. >> well, we saw them to taiwan of course and we've had two significant arms sales packages during my tenure, during the obama administration's first-term. and so, billions of dollars worth of arms sales, which are designed to meet our obligations under the taiwan relations act and are consistent with it. and we managed an obviously the chinese do not particularly like our arms sales to china. but we have been able to manage the relationship with china, while ensuring we have delivered significant capability to taiwan. this administration remains committed to the ninth

desegregation under the taiwan relationship. on the milton motivations, dod, you know, has repeatedly said it would take to further develop our military to military relationship with china. general dempsey is headed to china and i'm sure this will be a topic of discussion. the value of military to military relations is having those channels and relationship can be helpful if a crisis should emerge or if there is a sensitive issue that emerges. that makes miscalculation less likely if you've had those types of communications and conversations. so what if something dod will continue to pursue an odyssey from the state department

perspective we agree with that. >> hi, i'm only today with rollcall. and the president's fy 14 request, and that been zeroed out. i want to ask you for the rationale and going forward, what it might look like with her conference urges the operation. >> we been talking with the pakistanis about the future nature of our security assistance. in one sense, we have delivered a significant amount of equipment under the program to help them develop the counterinsurgency capability. and our internal review in the time of budgetary pressure, we've determined the program had accomplished its subject as it

would focus their assistance elsewhere. we still have requests for foreign military finance for pakistan and our discussions now with pakistan are about the best use of the foreign military financing to help meet our shared challenges. >> one last question, kevin come in. is the acid. >> one of the few areas that decrease activities going forward a cybersecurity, which we'll call for a new service member, increased offensive capabilities. what does this mean to the political military affairs bureau? is there some new set of skills? >> it's a great, great question. the state department

undersecretary clinton focuses on the defense asked that if the legal aspect. there's so many different issues. it's important to have a coordinator. we feed into those types of issues. for example, my organization with foreign policy adviser to the cyber, commander insures we stay willing. when it comes to dod planning, an officer may bureau policy, which helps coordinate dod planning. so that is sort of my piece of it. all these various issues could require the state department to create an organization, a

coordinator that works at the different perez, which have equities insider and you're absolutely right there's a lot of issues related to cyberand we feed into the offers. >> one last question here in the second row. >> thank you. he talked a lot about security assistance with high-profile countries and situations. i was wondering what you think the most important country with respect to security assistance relationship that is not an is people's radar screens right now. >> well, i would say not necessarily country, but one of the great success stories is their assistance in the amazon, which was the organization that is involved in the fighting.

they didn't have u.s. soldiers but we perused our security systems to have other countries in the fight against and it was so successful. al-shabaab is on the run and it could provide a real model. in a similar way, we don't want to put u.s. soldiers, but we can't provide the assistance in surrounding nations to have capacities to be able to counter the extremists. >> what that come i'd like to thank every night we're all on the record. i ask you to join me in thanking and congratulating. [applause]