he offered his willingness to withdraw conditionally from the golan heights, in return for peace and security, very much presented something similar to the egyptian-syrian deal. so if that were to be consummated in the 1990s or in the early 2,000s, syria would have opened up, pressure cooker that burst out in 2011 would have been released in more peaceful ways and i think civil war may may not have broken out. therefore the question would not have the presented itself. secondly, you know, we have groups on. other side of the syrian-israeli cease-fire line in the golan that are linked with isis and with al qaeda, al nusra. they are very peaceful, because they know what the consequences are of trying to shoot at israel or penetrate across the line

would be. so, again, not, not very attractive site of let's say the isis in the actual golan heights, over looking jordan valley. but i think it would not have occurred. >> you mentioned iranian nuclear threat and you mentioned also the missiles that hezbollah has now. do you think the syrian crisis helped hezbollah and iranians or actually undermined their position, in the region in that sense, been helpful to these guys strategicry? it. >> it mixed picture in the arab league, announce the --. .

>> >> but then the state will hold over lebanon so on the whole they have benefited more than they have lost. >> before i open to the audience i will ask a final question we just finished up

book that it seems the leaders of the middle east, why is it that they have so few leaders? what does it take? what have we learned from though lessons from the experience not in your book? >> but not only the middle east. we won't leak -- making the announcement on the ongoing election campaign. one that has been cited and she is in trouble. it is a global problem i think. i'll look always and so to

study them with george washington university here what turns the leader into a statement? they need to have a vision and had convictions and the ability to identify to make the of bold decision to act on them. and carry your people with you. 1942 add very difficult year

and to know that the focus he knows he's to be liberated his country and then if course and so forth. and sent with the leader of the concessions and he does

that aerial show and i spoke with and to rabin from an early stage was a security hoc he wanted to resolve the palestinian problem and believe it should be done in agreement but the security hoc it believes it should win. to explain some of his statements and actions but he was always very high style to arafat and sova 1982 he becomes prime minister and then to give

another chance to spend another four years but is meaningful. and tried to resolve the fundamental problem with the relationship with the palestinians and syria. realizes the only partner you can negotiate with is the plo. and of we don't like to stress very strongly is rabin day care and the real choice was syria to go first. i spoke earlier about secretary christopher we

have to remember the moment and he gives a golden opportunity. why? because it would be better to start the peace process with syria with them out of the country. but those who could send to the israeli public was rabin. it was a very dramatic moment in the key is to sit and wait as rabin comes down the stairs and says we haven't said thank you to

the organizer. he says i will go home so rabin goes upstairs. somebody has it all on video and you can see in his face he was thinking paris or not? if he keeps paris he does not get to keep rabin. so that makes simulator

please wait for a microphone. >> i worked in israel and palestine for five years. thank-you. very refreshing it is different from what we usually hear. it isn't only petraeus that said was to get things done many military leaders of the diplomatic corps say it has to be taking care of our we will continue to be in trouble is there any movement in the political structure as right wing as they are for the people to take that to heart with any

accommodation building unity around that fought? >> it is the issue in politics it is said to negligible. if you look at the elections yankee one but it was a slim majority. i mention 2009 america went to the left but in 2006 to put him on a continuing in that policy and legal most everyone has the following do you believe in signing

the peace accord based on the proposal in 2008 drawing from 90% of the west bank and jerusalem and so on and so forth? it is a done deal 70% approve. so that is your answer. to discuss the issue with the israeli public they would look at how dash and the region and to stay few minutes away. with very strong emotional argument that it will pass an election.

>> from the council foreign relations bakes for your magisterial presentation and r the shout out for the knowledge of both democratic and republican administrations. the with the perception of itself and the strategic power starting at 30,000 feet i would like to go 50,000 for a minute when israel started out with arab adversaries as an effort to mitigate the dangers on its border you identified rabin strategy as the periphery became more dangerous we now have a situation the

relative power with the orientation as a desire to play an activist role at best. but the question is is that strategic oversight? is the one where they could say we are strong the arabs come to us so the price is

actually not worth it and they are so unstable anyway so why invest that? can you address that situation? is there a serious debate? with the passage of not status quo oriented approach? >> he is very much the status quo person and is very careful with the use of his power and is risk averse the country that is always in a state of debate but those military professionals thinking about the region and the prospects and

scenarios. the two most important states is started and peace with them is the stability of the regime there isn't much we can do from both places with israeli support. it would help if we were more imaginatively of the palestinian issue. but there isn't much that we can do in that regard. syria and lebanon there still haunted from 1982 to

one efforts that we made for the narrow but neighboring -- neighboring state so what is the price it is required moving forward with the gulf states and others? i think there are quite a few options without exposing ourselves so that is my argument with my government. >> mr. ambassador i of a retired health care worker

focusing on the palestinian is real issue given as you have described the palestinian leadership that is now considered centrist and right-wing government there is no solution except the demographic that eventually as palestinians reproduce more it is almost impossible to maintain the jewish state can i have your comments? >> the would not refer to that scenario of course, with the israeli debate it is an argument the

blade edges of a demographic argument and the palestinians will become in get to the point of one-man one-vote. and they do speak to many and some say you are not in a hurry we have seen many conquers. this is the way things will develop. so that rejection, i went to meetings with palestinian groups to develop that

dialogue. and said it will fall into our hands. and that is an issue very much on the minds of the israelis. >> i should have said in the beginning this series is sponsored from here at the wilson center. >> how promising is that relationship between the saudis and other countries

and will throw in turkey? >> i should mention to be very for close friends when we inherit them when my wife and i were here in russia. of course, does better to have a relationship where saudia arabia and others it is primarily under the table in collaboration with their son indications to have the

saudi senior princess with a security conference with the israeli defense minister of course, much of that has to do with the issue of legitimacy better relationship and a country like saudi arabia. so even in meetings with roosevelt and he was treated to a very strong statement of the palestinian problem and kissinger was allowed with that presence was not allowed.

to save mr. secretary we accept as a human being. kissinger responded some of my best friends are human beings. [laughter] so not just anti-israeli but also anti-jewish it is very important in the region. is really turkish relationship could be a key to many positive developments turkey and israel had ups and downs in their relationship now of

course, it is a down period in key to normalize the relationship knowing that it will be a close relationship has they ascended to power but to collaborate in places like syria and lebanon. >> i am from the wilson center. something that you talked about with hezbollah after the involvement of syria we have statements recently talking about another war in lebanon.

and talk about a human-rights abuses white d.c. this is a turning point in congress? >>, the first question is a nightmare. and several thousand of them long range in 2006 as very good intelligence soda live

beef was not affected. if there is another war it will take some time to neutralize. and would inflect to me it is the nightmare to all israelis. there is no appetite for such a war right now.

that going into the second part of the question and, yes. they have made several attempts to distinguish themselves. and that is the type of of restructure. and through the changing israelis' outlook and did you have them arguing what is better and now the

majority of the israelis because a victory in syria is more dangerous than the alternative. had to talk to senator leahy about those issues that it is challenging or critical. but the issue is by no way

that has been put to trial. almost everything that happens with the conflict is now off fuelled by television and social media. i feet the prime minister responded to him. >> was. >> mr. ambassador thank you. some time ago the prime minister had a presentation that he tried to include day peace treaty. there was no counteroffer.

are they just wasting their time if i may, personally it is more of a generous offer because it sounds patronizing. land is was born of that movement to accommodation.

summoned his last week's as prime minister more then 90 percent of the west bank to partition in jerusalem if only they would sign on the bottom line and there was no response. in the secretary rice if you read the memoirs write about it and she was stunned and even more so that the lack of response by abbas. this is from those who object i don't think it is

reason to abandon hope if there is no response but in 2008 that doesn't mean in 2016 we should move on with the palestinian issue. >> eight you very much. could you speak to the israeli russian relations there are a number of components there. to the russian base and syria who are fluent in russia and two fans the day mplexion issues.

also the potential role of russian-speaking population with a greater relationship moving towards a regional solution. a very important issue indeed. and it is one specific issue to avoid incidents, that is a technical issue. there is a dialogue with putin manager is limited we

want them to abstain from selling sophisticated to as day end up to dry even a deeper wedge but the those who believe that to run the of all tabor's of one international forum policy with india and other countries and to improve of

the united nations as there is no substitute for israel one with all due respect they are not there with the military support that we need but it is good to diversify. from the point of view of putin is a powerful middle eastern country with the connection this committee cultivates the jewish

community to be cultivated. that first generation of russian immigrants come from a very large country there is the general anti-muslim sentiment the second and third generation. >> a question about turkey. yesterday they gave a long speech in which he communicated they are about

to improve significantly. if you follow him what is very important is he has to get back into gaza. so for him he brings energy with the turkish companies and with the gaza and palestinians that that is what he wants to do. doesn't give that kind of stature?

>> that is a very interesting question. after the incident they were very cozy and to normalize relations. and to make up with israel is the advantage. and after making far reaching demands with the space saving formula. and we have cautioned for other countries against that.

because egypt is the last country on earth to see between egypt and turkey and to see their presence is an cause of. but the diplomat is to find a creative solution without any real influencing them. if there is humanitarian aid to create more housing from the israeli point of view and with those groups with the turkish presence it is

not proving itself in the last decade anywhere from the middle east. >> selfie would is just turkish and trinitarian aid? >> the reason, unlike others is i am not familiar with all of the details or to speak out of turn but it would be more symbolic than substantive. >> at the beginning of your remarks i paid misunderstood the terms of that regional you i heard you state the

split of their rivalry with the analytical starting point. >> not all regional politics of the mideast but if you are loo is looking for some coherence or structural order those that to almost determines between the shiite and sunni rivalry. >> i with george washington university. can you include the relationship between western europe and israel?

>> yes. obviously it has to do with a palestinian issue. and with germany and america with public opinion goes and who are of israeli policy with the european double standards and some of that

is not space present there is the terrible civil war going on in europe and a rise of the palestinian problem? and there is a wedge because there is the rate tweeting backlash. with denmark and holland and so forth. and sometimes these ways are

embarrassing. >> with regard to american policy you mention the stakes of the obama period of the negotiations and the later obama period holding back participation to the extent possible there has been some writing suggesting the president's decision not to go further gave a green light to the chinese to take advantage so what did your

take on that? >>. >> there is no vacuum but somebody else does. and they have prevented all along that resolution but the russians do the heavy lifting the was in the idea. to get obama added that embarrassing moment. that was useful and good as

said dealmaker or the arbiter in the context. and not to have that effective opposition. >> to hear them say we hate what he is doing but we love the way he is doing that. >> you mention saudi arabia and its legitimacy. with that peace plan back in 2002 and doesn't seem to read gotten much resonance. why is that so important?

in those to argue that it is easier to negotiate and to walk away successfully so even by the right being israeli of this approach you are right given these politicians who except the basics of these plans all of that in 2008 so yes it by

looking at some ways at the peace process cannot everything is acceptable but we see some very positive elements that is a good start because germany israelis it is a zero sum game. so approaching regionally rather than directly.

>> to what extent to what extent does that lead to other organizations? absolutely yes. it to have that responsibility given of budget to do this with the few private initiatives and to put the high on the agenda.

>> thank you for visiting the center, back from your fellowship i do remember your time there was a different experience. to ask a very general question historians argue about the role of agency in history and internal is organic that is externally imposed and of the form policy in the middle east as well as tom friedman and the essentially their restraint that these external agencies is neither english -- legitimate with social

engineering israel had an experience in 1982 so there is something more fundamental going on with respect to that role of powers to involve themselves in the middle east region. this is a dilemma and i would ask a historian any general observation about the role of external powers whether putin or obama given as you have discussed have to do with the nature of political order that does not seem to be very susceptible to be influenced from the outside. >> it is difficult to think of the modern middle east it

has been a long time that it dominated the middle east itself so it was that colonial order of the early '50s barely the cold war in the two superpowers. and first ball to be accepted and to be helpless without it.

and that is part of the problem. if people are looking for that type of leadership and help of course, they're like the support or the help without intervention help me do what i want and walk away it doesn't work like that. and they said this deal with the arabs directly veterans out with israel and egypt you don't conclude without

bringing the united states is in. and the oslo accord had to be concluded for the white house lawn. if you don't bring in the united states would you know, it will throw its weight about so if my perspective of a bite united states to become involved they should begin by themselves and then to come in on the final lap because

it becomes involved in then compounds the issue. i would like these relations to begin early end to help conclude. sometimes israeli and arab politicians say but this come from the united states it is easier to say it isn't i that follows those concessions i witnessed quite a few on both sides so

that is another form. >> last question. >> as a former member of turkish parliament in your opinion what is the top three days of the rapprochement with israel? and what are the top three risks for israel to to make the deal? >>. >> first of all, it is to reduce the stability some of his own fears criticisms i can say anti-semitic those

debtor close to him if that can be eliminated second, a collaboration in the region even with very and it could continue ideally to go back to the 1990's. we don't have the space anymore and they're watching this of course, increase with some anxiety that the disadvantage is we may end up giving him the benefit of reconciliation without implementation really be

over lenient to our detriment. >> on that note they give for your patience to the ambassador rabinovich. [applause] >> also thinks for making this possible for us i hope to see you again at another event. thank you. [inaudible conversations]

and

>> there making a desirable falling buying the wayside but lincoln and has decided he will announce a new aid for the effort for the union as human freedom. >> how was it possible for

america us to achieve such in to build an army? in 2620 percent of the manpower the allegiance to stop the fans across the world. to forsaking a round. >> this document how women in world war ii with the hidden army of american women are the main reason germany lost the war. >> one thing that stands out in this time period is a creation of this imagery

echoes back to the ancient times where they were made godlike to celebrate him. >> washington and jefferson the two most prominent examples it is worth highlighting key facets of those who own the sleighs especially those well they occupied the white house. james madison who follow jefferson as the fourth president owned over 100 slaves with a large percentage well he was in the white house and responsible for closing in expanding the compromise which guaranteed the south having a disproportionate influence in congress to uphold the thusly voting interest.

[applause] good afternoon. it should not be this cold in april i came down to end it was snowing.

what the hell? [laughter] we will warm up with the next opportunity with secretary carter. of breach security announcement he has security detail they will watch out for him i will watch for you. if we have a problem follow my instructions. this is the door closest to the steps of there is a problem in the french we go out the back we have an arrangement with the "national geographic" society. or to the national cathedral we will be fined the lead forward to these instructions i had the privilege of working with 30 years we first met at the office of technology assessment and i do remember very distinctly when he

interviewed me deciding and that wasn't up to what it took since that time we have the privilege of working together with your replies please will come ash carter. [applause] >> thanks very much for that war introduction of more importantly for many, many years of friendship guidance and wonderful service not to mention the leadership of this institution since it was founded over 50 years

ago that was one of the preeminent think takes here in the nation's capital. to provide important ideas and scholarship ranging from matters of defense strategy to the strategic future in the asia pacific the growing threats the we have faced to the goldwater nichols act makes up the institutional organization and because of that last piece of scholarship by want to come here today. many of you know, our recent -- recently issued the posture statement the first to describe how we are approaching challenges russia of china and north korea iran and terrorism but

i will speak to you about management questions as we hear detailing in discussing in the coming weeks it has a long history of the command structures and implemented and indeed will bridge to is still being fought it before it was he then established the policy-making officials were discussing the services to explore ways to explore and vice the other historic changes with the joint chiefs of staff and the

national security council they help to strengthen the office and gave new authority to the chairman of the joint chiefs. but it was a goldwater nichols act three -- 30 years ago that is most responsible with memories of vietnam officials from policy makers and after four years of work not to mention strong opinions by my former boss the resulting transformation is what we now refer to as cold water nichols. is solidified to the chain of command to the combat commanders that the chairman

of the joint state - - chiefs of staff to go out of command to provide advice to the secretary in president in strengthen the chairman's role to create the position to centralize the role of the combat and command with respect to the careers of senior officers by requiring them to gain professional experience outside of their service to the advance further all senior officers know these policies today to reflect the reality house service members trade and fight every day as a jury force.

-- a joint force important jointly dash changes were made these were based on the recommendations led by former deputy secretary of defense and as it happens there was another one of the first challenges it has a whole these changes a credit to the work of not only members of congress to pass legislation but also their staff. john was among one of them. but they put it into law to give this generation's soldiers is sailors to grow accustomed to operating together as a joint force. into court draw greater benefits and to set clear

war that is dramatically different this time that we consider practical updates will still preserving the spirit and intent. we can see it in some areas with the pendulum between service equities may have swung too far. with those acquisitions and decisionmaking and accountability. with that subsequent world the fed to nudge the pendulum further to take more steps to strengthen the capability of the joint chief to support management planning and execution

across combat command in in those areas of responsibility with this in mind last fall i asked you the ministry officer. with the department wide review of these issues and with those military departments to identify any redundancies or other areas of improvement and i would like to discuss that with your preliminary recommendations with you today. we'll execute these decisions under our own existing authority. with the implementation with then national descent --

defense authorization act. this area for working together that we have been doing effectively and will continue to do on this topic i apply chairman mckean in each of food that i could speak to earlier this morning and continuing to work closely with all committees because when it comes to these fundamental matters that is what we have to do. work together. and imperative considering those challenges we face today to confine themselves to a functional boundary. a campaign to deliver isil a

lasting defeat. as we have the tueber of iraq and syria our combat command european command african command to coordinate efforts more than ever before. increasingly i have brought strategic command in cybercommand into the operations as well to leverage their unique capabilities to contribute to the defeat of isil. also future nation state adversaries with widening geographic reach and to widen the exposure. it in other cases he may have to respond to global threats across the globe the

increasingly complex security environment with the decision to cut across combat command only at the level of secretary of defense we're not posture to be as agile. with said joint staff in three ways. to help synchronize resources is globally for daily operations around the world to go rapidly to provide objective military advice for ongoing operations not just future planning. in with military strategy making sure our plans indeliberate fashion the

possibility of overlapping contingencies. these changes recognize that in the complex world we need someone in uniform to look across the services of combat command to make recommendations about where to allocate forces around the world into a portion risk for maximum benefit. and those the best postured to do that is the chairman for the joint chiefs of staff. for that intent to enable the of military to better operate in a seamless way while still preserving civilian control in the chairman's independence to provide professional military advice outside the chain of command. both chairman done furred and i agree with the

objectivity as a principal military adviser to the president and secretary of defense. we preachers -- appreciate their reach that same conclusion. >> to continue to streamline the headquarters. to include changes of how we manage ourselves in the president made fiscal year 2017 budget there i'd make clear in each of the five challenges facing dod we must deal with them across not just the traditional their land cn space but also cyberspace. where our reliance on technology gives us great strength and opportunity. but also for her abilities

that adversaries are eager to exploit that is why the budget increase to a total of $35 billion when we should consider changes to the role of the unified command plan. some of you may know currently in the process to reduce the management headquarters by 25 percent we're on the road to accomplish that goal thanks to the partnership we deeply appreciate to meet these targets with the european command actions running contrary because of the distinct demand and they have only further increased

with each growing so to the detriment of friends or allies wheat tend to be more efficient with logistics' and intelligence across the joint staff the combat command to eliminate redundancies while not losing capabilities and much can be done here. the defense department will look to simplify command and control where the four-star positions have made headquarters top heavy or less efficient and they could be. based on greek hierarchy this is true from the of platoon to the accord but it gets complicated reactions we have a deep bench of extremely talented senior

leaders although filled by four-star generals and admirals to do three stars in the future. the next area is acquisition 30 years after the recommendations service acquisition executives it is clear we must do more to deliver better military capability will making better use of the taxpayer dollar. six years ago dod began better buying power as an initiative to improve the acquisition system we're now with our third reiteration and what we are seeing is compelling indications

including areas of cost there is still a constant need for improvement as technology industry and admissions continue to change. so to involve the service chiefs with accountability consistent with legislation of last year and including the defense acquisition board and greater authority for a milestone engineering and manufacturing development work programs are first to find and a commitment to fund them is made as i discuss with the service chiefs comes greater accountability they will need to sharpen which in places has atrophied over the years to be successful

and i also expect them to leverage the lessons they have learned many of them in war or speed or agility to help acquisition professionals deliver greater -- better capabilities. another way we seek to improve is to streamline the acquisition system itself it is currently composed of 35 principles and advisers is likely to feel empowered as a gatekeeper to free it staff time to focus decisionmaking rather than bureaucratic hurdles in from

one documentation in cases where the defense acquisition serves the decision authority that process dictates 14 separate documents be coordinated with the department. while there is a program rhondda right checked. in the last major area to joint personnel management what i call the force of the future the endeavor that i began last year to ensure the future all volunteer force is just as fine as the

one i have the privilege of meeting today. even as generations change the job markets change. we have taken several steps already building on ramps and off ramps with america's great innovative communities. withal combat positions to experience our access into a war to support military families to extend the maternity and paternity leave giving families of possibility of the geographic flexibility and with all officers to rise to

the highest levels of military. in so doing leading to great advances across the military sources. and to strengthen the ability of the chairman and joint chief to accomplish and as we learn what it takes it has become clear to change their requirements in to be more narrow and rigid than they used to be. and to receive joint to duty credit to go beyond planning and command-and-control to have joint experience and other functions such as intelligence and transportation and protection including joint

acquisition. for example, with a staff officer combat and command to of jury duty credit and with service members to call in airstrikes against isil might not in another case taking to cyberairmen and then to take joint credit one doesn't. and while the head logistics' planner does not receive joint credit it to fix these discrepancies to ensure meaningful jury experience. and with that time to accumulate.

for three years to the two years that top personnel will take on command assignments to broaden and deepen their careers. going forward it is important to have these updates of the principal do no harm. goldwater nicholls took four years to write it it has been incredibly successful over three decades to the decades of the reforms put in place that are not driven today but on the contrary of our people operated so coming at this from a different direction and with

goldwater nichols has had and must build on them. and with those challenging threats we have to do with every day and as we do that we take a moment to address the topic of our own organizational structure. because the service members deserve the best defense department and military we can give them. day in and day out all round the globe. with both sides of the river both sides of the aisle to come together as goldwater did 30 years ago to give men and women in uniform what they need to succeed. . .

[cheers] [applause] >> and i forgot one technical announcement. at the end of the presentation, he needs to get a clear run out there. and so there is so much that we can draw upon. we are selecting questions from

colleagues. we don't need speeches and i've got some good questions and i have also asked other people as well. does hold them up and we have people as well. so let me just start, mr. secretary, because you talked about a new cybercommand. and this is a complicated thing. probably any future war that we fight will probably begin in cyberspace. and so how do you see that we integrate and how is that coordinated the situation? >> i have given the cybercommand in its first wartime assignment and we are seeing how that is going to play out.

and it's very important in our fight with isis in syria and iraq. it needs interrupting their ability and interrupting their ability to plot, including against us here. and anywhere else against our friends and allies around the world. interrupting their finances and ability to pay people and dominate the population on this territory that they have tried to establish this nasty ideology and as you well know, john,

because of this, it is really not just cybercrime. i mentioned that. and we are increasingly finding that problem and so we want to make sure that we have not artificially created barriers. it's a that is the change that i am looking for. and so i looked at joe dunford for that every day anyway. so as a practical matter, i have to depend upon them and so the

world has got more integrated as well and then there is the question of how important or powerful is the chairman, and the situation. >> welcome i look to each of them. so i know personally, i don't think institutionally. and so we have different principal responsibilities. i look to the whole crowd. and this afternoon i will be going with the whole gang.

all of the service chiefs and service secretaries and then i will spend the afternoon and dinner with them. and we will spend the will they talk about everything and we have the contingency planning and the whole deal. and i have a whole bunch of complements, by the way. since i became secretary and since i have had to name almost all of the joint chiefs of staff and the combat commanders. people say you are a really great guy and i say, yes, you are correct. but i have something else to tell you. you'd say the same thing. because the dimensions are so deep. these are incredibly good

people. and so i am operating as the joint chiefs, helping the chairman provide professional military advice on operations and i look at them to help manage with the service secretaries there the individual services and i look at them to take care of their people because that more than anything makes our military the greatest. the combatant commander is focused on their day-to-day duties. and so they play a role that was probably not his appearance. and so what they buy and how they organize and train and equip, i actually ask people and i asked the senior people to do it all. most of them without exception are capable.

and i always say, look around the room, it is just. when you look at that it doesn't seem like a very good thing. >> secretary, you talked about this complex in the world. there is a set of activities in northern northern africa, that is in a different command and there is attacking our allies in paris and brussels and it suggests about what you said. you're going to have to focus on the chairman to be the integrator of it and these challenges. can you amplify it? >> yes. >> somebody has to decide every

day what we looked at and where. and that changes day-to-day and we tried to move things from one to another. and that is -- that has tremendous consequence. and the thing is that it has a tendency in which we desperately need at all. and we don't have that. so there needs to be a global integrator and that is not made clear. it is made clear in the original situation. it's made clear that the chairman is the principal military advisor to me and the president and i very much want that. and periodically as we move forces around, it's giving me

bad advice on where the things ought to be and how they ought to be used. and that is the self evidently required in today's world and was not not part of the original conception. as a practical matter, everyone knows that i look to do that but i think that it's worth writing it down. it is important to clarify that that is a requirement of the secretary of defense that he will make of the chairman joint chiefs of staff in today's world. >> i have a couple of questions. and by the way a couple of questions here about this battle. and there are some very encouraging press reports about the momentum of this. and would you share with us how you're currently looking at it?

>> well, we have to get these guys beaten. and as soon as possible is where i am basically coming from. and we are looking for every opportunity that we can take to do that. and of course, our overall strategic approach is not just to defeat them but to keep them defeated which means you have to take a look at the next stage as to who is going to keep the peace afterwards. which is why we try to work with local forces and that is difficult. that is a necessary part of the strategy. we are doing more every day and looking for opportunities to do more because we need to get this going. so i am confident that we will defeat isil. the sooner, the better. and so what that has us looking

at is every conceivable way that we can do that. that is why i mentioned cyber. years ago, even the very few years ago, doubtless not have occurred. but here we have a real opportunity. these guys are truly using this tool and we need to take it away from them. that, in addition to everything we do in the air and on the ground and so forth and so on. and so we are gathering momentum and i would like to see it over with, first of all in syria and iraq. and so everywhere also around the world. >> i am not going to drag her to american politics, but it's startling to hear candidates talking about how nato is no longer relevant. i know that you met yesterday with the secretary general. how important is it now for our

future? you described a very challenging world. >> since you raised the subject, and i really mean this on my own behalf and on that, everyone else in my department, i know that this is an election year and we have a tradition in this country which is in the defense department we stand apart from that. so i'm going to be very careful about ever addressing anything as part of the political debate. and so i just need to preface anything i say on that subject in basis. i did meet with the secretary general yesterday and i met with the president last night as well. i had dinner with him. and we were talking about the

things that nato is doing and can do going forward. if you think about nato, as you know, you and i did this, they waged a successful cold war in a peaceful and principled way. there's a lot of question about what is going to be next. then the balkans came and it turned out to be instrumental in that. afghanistan, it turned out to be that it remains that way and in many other ways around the world. today we are looking to it for two particular things which are very necessary. one is to stand tall against the possibility of russian aggression which i'm sorry to

say has become something that we need to be concerned about that we were not for a wild. and i regret it, but it is what it is. also the possibility of hybrid warfare and that phenomenon. hardening our friends and allies against that. secondly helping us in the counter fight against isil. and so all the members in this fight, you can add value and that is the reason why i was talking to the secretary general about the period for a lot of smaller countries, it is hard for them to do anything on their own. and to join something ad hoc. but if they get into a structure it is easier for them to make a contribution. we are looking for all the contributions that we can get. as always we would like to contribute.

nato is a mechanism for doing that. so it turns out that even after they found the mission accomplished but they have proven to be many ways in which they have found that not only possible but necessary to come together. one last note is that you cannot take for granted that one of the reasons that i think that we do so well as a military, just bragging on institution, as i said first and foremost its people, second the world's preeminent innovative society, always the first with the most, including this. but the other thing is what we stand for. i don't just say that because my evidence is that we have a lot of runs and allies. why is that?

because they like what we stand for. they like our people. they love working with american service members. they are not only competent but they conduct themselves well and i think it is a great credit to these young men and women how much like they are to work with. or you can look around the globe and say where is it that we deeply share the values to which we are very committed. so something that brings us together, protecting something we share, that is pretty important. for all those reasons we have a lot to talk about. >> secretary, you are testifying these days about the budget. you have a bit of a were previous year because it was a two-year agreement. but the program of record is larger than the budget caps that are in-line.

your successor is going to have to wrestle with him there. we don't have enough money to do things that we have to do. what do you say to the american people? >> that we need to come together, as we did behind the bipartisan budget agreement. it is the only way. i can't do much about that as a kateri of defense. but as a citizen and if you have your eyes open, you know that the secretary of defense, what i know is that our biggest strategic risk is the collapse of a bipartisan budget agreement going forward. the restoration of the sequester caps, we know that we are in real trouble and it's been consistent in my testimony. i am extremely grateful for people coming together, very grateful that it was possible to come together.

we all know that we can do the math. you can't balance the books on the backs of discretionary spending. and so you've got to get in the other parts of the budget, much bigger than somebody who has an executive branch responsibility, even a vital one like mine can influence. but that is the way that it has to be. if we get that into sequester we are in real trouble. so for me and the rest of the department, the biggest strategic risk resides in the possibility of the collapse of bipartisanship and restoration of sequester. we are in real trouble if that happens. >> a personal comment, i'm very disappointed in the presidential debate. this is more about national security obligations. secretary, you're going to asia.

i know that you're going a couple times this summer. we have continued building in the south china sea. lots of listening about people in the region, where is america. can you share about this? >> sure. >> we have a new phase of the rebound thing. so we are doubling down on some of our investments qualitative and not dictated in the asia pacific region for the simple reason that it is the single region of most consequence for america's future to empower half of the world's population and half of the economic activity. so it is essential and it is important there as everywhere else that there be a system of peace and stability. america has been a military power that has been the critical ingredient of that for seven years.

so we want to keep that going. of course it would have to be different because the dynamics are different. though we have been instrumental to an environment where first japan and then there was the japanese miracle and then the south korean miracle and then taiwan miracle in a southeast asian miracle. and so all which are great. but you cannot take for granted the environment in which everyone was able to rise to fill themselves and their own way. that has been good for everyone. but again this region has no nato where the rules of world war ii are not healed. you can't take that for granted. the south china sea is just one example of that. there are a lot of other claims in the south china sea and some of them are pursuing military activities in china is not the only one that are underway, particularly over the last year

china has been the most aggressive in that regard. now the president, talking about this just a few days ago, we will see whether china needs the word that made the last time that he was here about military activities. but for our part of reacting, we are reacting as part of the balance unilaterally. but the most important thing is that countries in the region are reacting and that is why we are being asked so much more to do so much more. so you're correct, i will be traveling in the region. i will be working with other countries who want to do more with the united states, particularly in the area of maritime security because they want to do that keep a good thing going out there. and we are committed to that. >> you mentioned that they are

increasingly getting close. i know that you have devoted a lot of time. what are your thoughts? >> well, yes, i do spend a lot of time on it. i think the word that i have used with respect to this is destiny. there are two very great nation and they share a lot. and that includes a democratic form of government. commitment to freedom and so i talked about values earlier on. and sure, it is a different culture. but like us it is a multicultural melting pot determines work together. and so they have a lot in common in spirit. we also have a lot of common interests deal strategically and

geopolitically. one of them is to keep a good thing going and the whole indo asia pacific region. so we are looking to do more so they want to do things independently, they want to do things their own way. they don't want to do things just with us. all of that is fine. we are not looking for anything exclusive though we are looking for as close of a relationship and a strong of a relationship as we can. because it is geopolitically grounded. the specific things we are doing with them are twofold. one is that we have to rebalance from the united states, which is their strategic eastward. they are grasping one another which is a good thing. second we have defense technology and trade initiative

which is an effort to work with india to do something that they want to do, which is they want to improve the technical capabilities of their own defense capabilities. and they want that kind of relationship. and that is what we are working with. that matches very much up with the prime minister and his initiative. and so we are very much aligned in terms of what the government there is trying to do strategically and economically in what we want to do with the defense as well. there's a lot of stuff to do. when i go over there we have a want of things that will be announcing at that time and i want to announce that beforehand. >> we are coming to the hour. let me just say that there's a lot of concern about the increasing portability and how

are you thinking about this. >> it is interesting as you have your military system and a satellite is fixed in this. and there is no turning to hide in. you cannot dig a hole or anything like that. so there you are. so it is an inherently vulnerable situation.

so an operations center, the first time we have had one a couple of weeks in colorado springs. his job is very specifically to do that and despite the constellation you know what that means, it means protect insofar as possible from disruption or destruction and to think through what you will do if despite everything the enemy has some success against that consolation and what to do next to make sure we have a good operational.

>> i've had the privilege of watching this remarkable -- for 35 years. we have to let you go. would your please join me with your thanks. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] c-span's "washington journal," live every day with news and policy issues that impact you.

our c-span campaign 2016 bus stops are in the country visiting winners in this years studentcam competition reason airbus visit metropolitan arts institution in phoenix arizona to present awards to winners in the west division and the first price video rethinking reform prisons in america. the classmates from an ardent christian payne and alexander walter wansley can price for their video on gender wage inequity and the workplace. our campaign dust-up in los angeles with a ceremony for third prize before heading to rock in california.

c-span extends a special thanks to our cable partners time warner cable and comcast for the help in coordinating our studentcam visit to the committee. they sure to watch the 21 entries at 6:50 a.m. eastern. richard carter at the consumer financial protection bureau director appeared before congress for the 61st time on thursday. he testified before the senate banking committee to deliver the agency's s