next senators hold a moment of silence and speak about the mass shooting in orlando, florida. you. you appear from senate majority leader mitchell, minority leader harry reid and florida's senior senator bill melson. this is 30 minutes. ask >> the senate majority leader. >> i ask unanimous consent the senate observer moment of

silence for the victims of the a orlando victims. the senate will now observe a moment of silence for the victims of the orlando attack. >> madam president. >> the senate majority leader.e >> above this capital the american flag flies at half- half-staff. a symbol of national -- relies taken far too soon, a symbol of national solidarity for families left the hind, plunged into

despair. isil claims terrorist that committed this horrific act is one of the quote soldiers of the caliphate. our intelligence community oreri work to establish whether this terrorist act was directed or inspired by isil. either way i will call him what he really is, a coward. a murderer, who claimed allegiance to a group that crucifies children and the heada women. this terror -- terrorists sought to spread fear and sadness and suffering. couldn't destroy our common bonds of humanity. every act of compassion, every outstretched arm to a friend, every calming word to a strange

a response to his cruel ideology , a reminder of who we are as americans. let us recognize each act of heroism that night and let us never forget the debt we owe to first responders. the men and women who rushed toward danger and put their lives on the line for victims they never met. local law enforcement will continue working with the fbi tn determine the exact nature of this crime. whet details. and they will learn for instance whether this attack was isil directed or inspired, whether the terrorist communication with isil and raqqa or simply following tactics set forth in tibet., isil's on line magazine, it leads to a larger point. it's no longer an open and

lyrical question whether the followers of isil and other islamic terrorist groups will attempt to strike us here in the west. they have and they are going to continue to do so. we need to do what we can to fight back so we can prevent more of these atrocities. that is exactly why the senate needs to be briefed on theco president counter isil campaign understanding the president's plan with respect to isil is gin critical especially given thatnd the war in iraq and syria will outlive the life of hise've b administration. that is why we have been asking the administration for briefings on its strategy for a very long time. i expect this now will happen very soon. we will also be receiving a briefing on the orlando attack this wednesday. but today is a day for face

remembrance. we saw the face of evil thiswe d weekend. we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow americans this afternoon.for we grieved to the victims and we say this to their families and to orlando. you are not alone, your nation is here with you and we won't act down in the face of terrorism. on one final matter at like to say a few words about ae colleague we lost this past weekend. george voinovich was the oldest of six children and until his late teens and aspiring doctor. he realize he didn't get along with the scientists so he joined the boy scouts and he got involved in student government.

he told his friends that one day he would become mayor and he governor. he was right. this was the guy voters chose te turn around cleveland after a wrenching fiscal crisis.e mayor voinovich came to office with a simple motto, together we can do it and together they dido debts were paid down, jobs were added in slowly the rust belt became comeback city. his success propelled into the governor's mansion where he served two terms and then to the u.s. senate where he served another two terms. here the sanity was at the a forefront of a number of important policy debates. he was a navigator for more efficient and effective government. he was an advocate for all of the above energy approach and the son of eastern european immigrants cited his work two

rounds of nato expansion as one of his proudest achievements. when nato secretary-general officially announced the decision to invite bulgaria a stone you romania slovakia and slovenia he recalled this was one of the truly thrilling days of my tenure as a senator george said.ne senator voinovich have a storier legal career that took them from cleveland to columbus tolu washington and around the world. all along he kept himself guided by his catholic faith and anchored by his family.h the he ultimately retired to spend more time with the people who really matter. the top of that list was the woman who made them whole. if you don't think story romances can start a cleveland republican club then you didn't

know george and jenna voinovich. george and jenna were best friends. they were political confidants, they were deeply in love.entral here in washington you could find him strolling through the capital to work or to st. jo's the when she came to visit the and office george would greet her with a kiss and a hug. when the voinovich's flew back to cleveland which was most weekends they will with hold would hold hands and say a prayer across the aisle to prepare for takeoff. and when it was wheeled down jenna would put ohio's senior senator to work on their modest home in cleveland. they purchased that house in the 1970s in the same working-class neighborhood where george was raised. they spent the rest of their lives there together, the same a house. they never got around to installing an air conditioner. too expensive george said,

george voinovich was known for many things in his decade of public service. he was honest, he was who plainspoken, he was loyal to those who worked for him and yes he was frugal. janet may not have appreciated it when the heatwaves hit but these are qualities that served him well in office. when asked about his legacy senator voinovich said he just wanted to know he had touched people's lives and made thingsth better. acros the mark of its impact across his city and across his state are clear enough to see. i there is the voinovich school of leadership and public affairs at ohio university. the voinovich trade center in au columbus, the voinovich hm at fame and there is the george the voinovich ridge.

the bridge named for a man known for building bridges of his own went dark in his honor last of the city of cleveland, the state of ohio and the citizens of our country have lost an outstanding public servant. many of us have lost a goodenat friend.e the senate marks his passing with sorrow and will keep janet and the rest of the voinovich democr >> madam president. l >> the democratic leader. >> before we start the subject

of the day one of the subjects of the day is as senator mcconnell is indicated george voinovich. he was a fine man. he died yesterday morning. he was calling a friend had passed away at his home in cleveland like senator mcconnell talked about. he was one of the most experienced public servant withl whom i have surfaced as public service began 53 years ago as ohio's attorney general. from there he served in the house of representatives, county auditor, county commissioner lieutenant governor mayor of cleveland and governor of ohio and then in 1999 he brought his wealth of experience to the united states senate. w he was well-regarded for his preparation and hard work. he was courageous and george was

one of the few senate republicans who thought the bush on b in both instances george voinovich was right and the other republicans were wrong.otd senator voinovich voted toep repeal "don't ask don't tell" and bucks the rest of his party asking for background checks on firearms purchases at gun shows, again he was right. his colleagues were wrong the entire senate mourns the voinovich family. i sent my condolences to janet and betsy and -- and seven grandchildren. george voinovich was a great senator missed by those in ohio and the united states.

madam president everyone is in a state of shock and sadness today. a it's one of the worst mass shootings in modern american history. to facts continue to develop andon i've had a long conversation this morning. but we do know this much. a shooter pledging allegiance to isil opened fire on the lgbt bookality in orlando, florida killing 49 people and leaving dozens seriously injured. this was an act of terror and in the every sense of the word. this attack on the lgbt community an all-american's. my heart goes out to the victims especially those that were killed and wounded and first responders who were on the scene and the one police officer was wounded. for

every member of the house and senate had time for quiet reflection yesterday to ask what we could have done to prevent this tragedy. i had time to think about it. mr. president, madam president i am so sorry. i'm heartsick, i am basically sick by our inaction. it's shameful the u.s. senate has done nothing, nothing to stop these mass shootings. this is is this what we want for america? i don't think so. c we want to live in a country where someone who swears allegiance to isis can walk into a store by a salt weapons of explosives and murder dozens ofd americans? i don't think we do. schoo in that country, is that a country where one -- because

this is the country or be thatsi now who think -- and congress. we p the senator from california proposed legislation that would prevent fbi -- tears from purchasing firearms. today the fbi legally purchased all the weapons and explosives. it's beyond me how republicans go home knowing they let terror suspects continue to buy assault weapons. senate republicans have voted against expanded background f.b checks and assault weapons ban. how can the same republicans campaign for re-election in good conscience knowing they voted against every sensible bill to address gun violence? not some of them, all of them. for example how can the senator

from florida who is interested in running for re-election how can he speak of running for office again when he voted to elect a potential terror -- lede a potential tears by assault weapons? if everybody did junior senator has voted against every gun safety measure. he was quoted saying with what happened yesterday might reconsider. he had better reconsider his gunboats. voted against background checks, assault weapons ban and legislation limiting the size of a mission cliffs herd i asked him this is what we want for america, mass shooting after mass shooting each attack worse than the previous one? but we still have much to learn about their land of shooting but we know one thing for sure, congress -- to prevent these mass killings, anything. why? because republican obstruction because of the republican obstruction we are doing nothing

we are failing every one of people killed on sunday, their o families and the whole state of florida, the whole country.'re n families and we are failing everyone who is died in these mass shootings and there are thousands of them. those who've lost loved ones to mass shootings, thousands of them i repeat, tens of thousands as president obama said yesterday quote to actively do nothing is a decision as well and when my republican colleagues have made that decision, doing nothing. it's time we tried to stop the plague of gun violence that we have a responsibility as lawmakers to prevent the shootings to enact commonsense reforms, nothing radical. proven to stop these attacks and save lives.loophole we can start by closing the loophole that allows terrorists to legally purchase weapons and explosives. a

remember everybody who voted ons this thread everyone in this chamber should be able to believe the suspected terrorists shouldn't have guns. is it more than commonsense? i don't think so. we should do something to expand background checks to ensure that suspects and criminals don't slip through the cracks. we should do something to limit the size of magazines committees clips. there's a reason for gun stores to sell these clips that are that they come magazines designed for mass killings of human beings. you don't hunt with them. our nation can no longer ignore the fact that everyday innocent americans are being gunned downd in cold blood. we can no longer ignore the people. the overwhelming majority of voters support these proposals claiming -- in december poll by one of the foremost -- and

america nearly 90% of americanss in favor of expanded background checks. doesn't matter what state you go to, this was a nationwide poll. massachusetts, iowa, doesn't matter where you go. more than 80% of americans wanto to close so-called terror loopholes preventing people on watch lists from purchasing firearms. inspiring the public demand fort action center province continued to cower before the gun owners of america paid the nra is really bad. o gun owners of america is worse than bad. these two organizations are competing to show how extreme they can be to push for more guns in fewer protections i not do the statement i made they

will send out these fund-raisin, calls, redistricting take away our guns, send us some money. these two organizations are can competing to see how extreme they can be in pushing for more guns if you're protections. republicans are content to go along.legislat republicans are so turf fight at the extreme right there refuse to support legislation of the.r majority of their own constituents. the nra and the gun owners of america mean more to them than the people they represent. not do you know what terrifies american people? it's not the nra, it's not the gun owners of america. mass shootings scare the mac and people come innocent victims being gunned down at nightclubs holiday parties, schools, moviet theaters. that is what scares the american people.

republicans need to find the backbone to stand up to groups like the nra and gun owners of america. senate republicans are stalling mental health legislation because of gun safety measures by not only are we stalling but senate republicans arere threatening to include a provision on current background check system. we need to say more of the gun lobby's talking points about how more guns are the answer. more guns a or how security guards would -- the pulse nightclub had an armed officerff in the same but that didn't prevent this tragedy. is that a pushing for more guns it's time to make it harder for terrorists and criminals to get guns.

it's time for congress to do something to stop the mass do slaughter carried out in our communities. how else can you describe that?- 50 dead people, 49 plus the -- killer. 49ead 49 dead people, is that enough to get our attention? and some that will be paralyzed. is that enough to get our attention? it's time for congress to do something, something to stop this mass slaughter is being carried out in our communities. going forward democrats are going to continue to supporting continued to push -- gun w violence epidemic and as soon as we can we are going to force this terror loopholes. we can do this as soon as possible. there is no -- suspected if republi there's much we can do but not if republicans are serious about

this and the starkly as been proven they do not care.e. so i hope republicans will findp the courage like georgean voinovich to help us pass meaningful legislation to help protect the american people. and by the way george voinovich was a good republican. when the chair announced the business for the rest of the das >> at a previous order the leadership's time is reserved to the previous order the senate will resume consideration of s. 2943 which the clerk will report. see a calendar number 469 s. 29 for a three bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2017 for military activities for the department of defense and so forth for further purposes. >> now president. >> the senator from florida. >> madam president i have just returned from a command center

of the emergency operationsr, a center, temporary one that has been set up in the middle of south orange avenue, very close to the pulse nightclub, not far from a hospital where so many of the victims have been taken, where nine of the victims died in the care of the doctors and e where they are our up to 50hom people, some of whom are still fighting for their lives. needless to say, orlando is shocked. we didn't know that a place that sometimes is called the happiest

place on earth could be one of the saddest places on earth. the indeed, the "orlando sentinel," the entire front page is dedicated to a statement by the paper entitled, our community will heal. will our community heal? well certainly in what we see with the long lines snaking around the block at the blood donation center, where it is literally going around what would be the length of two

blocks, people standing in the hot sun with him all his to donate blood, that says something about how the community will heal. indeed, when we had our office in orlando opened on sunday, the kinds of calls of expressing grief and shock and just unbelief along with the messages of convert, convert that has been quite a contrast to the 95% of the hundreds and hundreds of calls that the orlando office has received today.ay

95% of those calls have been hateful. what does that say about us as a na nation? will we in fact he'll? what does it say about us as a nation deep inside? lost where have we lost the teachings in almost all the major religions?n clearly in the holy scriptures of the old testament, clearly in the new testament and also in the koran, and you will recognize these words if i stayed in the old english, dou unto others as you would have them do unto you.

put it in modern english, that is to treat others as you would want to be treated and yet what we find is that in our society today, there are folks that want to divide instead of unified. and this killer is a good example. i have spent two days with the fbi. i've been on the phone and i've to the secretary of homeland set security, i have talked to our intelligence community. it is the senator's opinion that once the dots are completelyon rapidly connected, the fbi is doing a great job, and by the way you talk about something good, what about the cooperation

, the coordination, almost seamless between local and state and the federal governments. that .. thing. that's unity. that's how we do things in america. and yet, as the dots are being connected, we'll find out that, connected, we'll find out that, yet, as of the are being connected we will find out that yes, this shooter was isisn how inspired, and that is a whole set of issues, and how are we

going to protect ourselves in the future. we are also going to find that this shooter was inspired by hatred. and we will find that hatred wasn't directed as his father has already said in interviews toward the gay community. and so, here again we have another terrible tragedy. be i have had a number of calls from our fellow senators, 11 of those calls came from richard blumenthal, he is from connecticut. he has a reason to be sensitive about this because of the sandy hook elementary school shooting. twenty children and some six adults gunned down needlessly.

maybe that was a middle case, case, may be part of this one in orlando was a mental case, but it is it driven by hatred, maybe through isis, a hatred of what america and of freedoms, and of a free society being willing to be able to speak what you want without fear of persecution, or maybe it is a hatred about a group of people. it's exactly the opposite of what is taught in all the scriptures. and so, as we heal in orlando, it will take a while. you can imagine those families of the ones i have lost, you can

imagine the families down at orlando health hospital right t now, grieving, and hoping, and praying that those victims fighting for their lives are going to make it. so america, we are going to have to dig down deep and find out who we really are. you know, i really know who we are. we are a character of a people that is compassionate, generous, kind, respectful, we are, as americans, we are ladies and gentlemen. we can express ourselves as has been the tradition on the floor

of the senate, in the heat of political debate, we can sharply differ, but we can be respectful of the other fellows point ofntl view. that's america. and until we finally come to that conclusion and insist on this aberrant behavior is stopped. until that happens, we will still be grieving. madam president, yield the floor. >> coming up tonight on c-span2, a look at how the army is dealing with a decreasing troop levels and lower funding. then, the afghan ambassador to the u.s. on security issues in his country. that is fall by a discussion on the role of the u.s. coast guard

in combating drug trafficking, and other maritime trafficking issues. >> c-span's "washington journal", live everyday with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, three members of congress will join us to discuss the mass shootings in orlando over the weekend. democratic california representative eric -- ranking member of the intelligent subcommittee of the cia talks about the role of the u.s. intelligence today, and in the future. then, the chair of the homeland security subcommittee on oversight and management efficiency, pennsylvania representative scott., pennsylvania representative scott. , on homeland security and domestic terrorism issues. senator tom harper of delaware, member member of the homeland security and government affairs committee discusses threats to u.s. security. be sure to watch a c-span's "washington journal" beginning live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on tuesday morning.

join the discussion. >> coming up on tuesday, hearing hearing on the issue of the visitors overstay their visas and calls for new entry and exit tracking system. the house homeland security on border and a maritime security will take up the issue live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. >> we are going public. we will be watch by offensive by people across the country, and i would help as i said before that the senate may change, not as an institution but maybe kind of more efficient body because of televised proceedings. >> the proceedings of the united states senate are being broadcast to the nation on television for the first time. not that we have operated in

secret until now, millions of americans had sat in the galleries and observed senate debates during their visits to washington. but today, they can witness the proceedings in their own homes. >> and in effect the senate floor has been kind of a stage, the senators have been acting on that stage, the audience is in the gallery, and by our action today we haven't really done that situation we have in large the galleries, we have pushed out the walls to include all of the american people who wish to watch. >> commemorating 30 years of coverage to the u.s. senate on c-span2.

>> now look at the demands of the army amid troop level and funding issues. army vice chief of staff, general daniel allens spoke up heritage foundation. he also offered condolences to those affected by the mass shooting in orlando florida. this is one hour. >> [applause]. >> good morning. it is my honor to introduce a general alan to you this one. we'll have a few remarks. as you know, the challenges facing every today are significant from historically small size of the army, increasing threats around the globe so the army really is facing potentially a turning point. general alan is the 35th vice chief of staff of the u.s. army. he took that post last august, he is a native of berwick, maine, graduate of the u.s. military academy at west point. previously served as commander of the united states army forces command at fort bragg. he also served as commanding general.

he also served as commanding general 18th airborne corps, the first cavalry division, a number of other roles leading up to that point, chief of staff in iraq. joint assignments include the the joint improvised explosive device organization, operations director, general alan is perhaps the most uniquely qualified for this conversation because it is his history of serving in leadership roles at basically every level of the army. from platoon through division level, staff assignment and telling to the joint staff level. he served in korea, granada, egypt, panama, saudi egypt, panama, saudi arabia, kuwait, iraq, and most recently in afghanistan. also masters degree from the naval war college. a little bit of a navy thrown in there as well. without further do, let me introduce to you, the 35th vice chief of staff of the u.s. army, general dan allen. >> [applause]. >> will i don't know about you but i get a little bit tired

when listening to my bio. it tends to wear me down just thinking about it. good to see to see old friends here today. thank you for joining in. it is an honor, first of all to be here today, but before but before i begin, brief introductory phase of remarks, i do want to extend our heartfelt condolences to all of those stricken in orlando and all the families recovering from that tragedy. obviously it reminds us that even here at home, it is a dangerous environment. i know that our hearts go out to all of the families that are working to the horrific events of this past weekend. we certainly in the army are all too familiar with this tragedy, but it is something that most

often brings us together to address. so where to go from here and how do we go forward. i suspect as a nation we will do so. with that is an opening, we in the army have been focused on this very unstable world for the last several years. we certainly do not see conditions in the world improving in fact, we see instability on the rise virtually in every combatant command area of operation. so what does that mean for the army? for the army that means that we have prioritized readiness to ensure that we can deliver the forces and the capabilities that are needed by our combat commanders to enhance stability in these very unstable parts of the world and respond to the crises that emerge. the challenge for us in the current fiscal environment, most of you know since 2010 by the time we finish the drawdown path

that we are on we will have reduced 120,000 soldiers from the strength we are at in 2010. so at a time when crisis around the world are on the rise and instability is on the rise, the forces available it to the united states army to provide trained and ready capabilities and responsibilities are in a reverse vector. so we are constantly working to ensure that we balance as best we can, the delivery of ready forces and ready capabilities to meet emerging demands. while still understanding the challenges of the future and building the force that will need for the future. the challenge that you have in a suppressed fiscal environment is, at least for the army readiness must remain number one, and that means we have a tendency to consume our

readiness as fast as we can generate it. into many respects mortgage our ability to build the force that we are going to need in the near future. so, that is a tough environment to be in, but it is the situation that we face. i will try to calibrate a bit for you what i mean by the demands that are army faces. today, bowel 187,700 total for soldiers are serving around the globe. in 140 different locations. those are as i mentioned total soldiers, but only 5000 of those soldiers are from the national guard and reserve. so meeting our day-to-day current operational tempo we are operating as a total force in doing so which is a good new story. we are sustaining sustaining the operational readiness of our reserve component. but it does come at risk because

as most of you know, the reserve capacity is part of our search capacity to respond to a significant crisis that as yet today has not emerged. so we have to balance how much of that available force and reserve component is being leveraged to meet current operational tempo. right now for the army, we are meeting about 64% of the combatant commanders plan needs. that the department of defense delivers and 64% of% of what is being provided to combat commanders comes from the united states army. that is what we know about when each year starts. then as is always the case, there are emerging demands that come out that are not planned for. the united states army provides

about half of the emerging demands that comes at us. that tempo and demand signal has been very steady. the number i cited for you nearly 188,000 troopers, the variance on that in the last two years has been less than ten percent. the demand signal is steady and it describes to wire chief of staff of the army and secretary of the army have placed the priority on readiness. they continue to meet that demand that of trained and ready forces. now simultaneously, we have focused on transitioning from a principally counterinsurgency focus force to one that is ready for high spectrum combat operations. for many soldiers in the united states army, the force that entered into this war had the

benefit of about two decades of focus on that type of warfare. so the average battalion commander going into a combat situation had six-ten combat training center rotations where they prepared for that type of operational demand. our current telling commanders in many cases are experiencing their second or third decisive action combined arms of maneuver and a high-intensity combat environments. the good news is that is on the rise, we have provided every brigade combat team that has gone to the combat training center this year and opportunity for that type of environment, even those preparing for advise and assist missions in iraq and afghanistan. so we build a bench of trained

and ready leaders that can respond to these types of situations. so the readiness trends, while our search capacity has not been growing, because the emerging demands have continued to place a high premium on that, we had had been able to build the leadership experience of our tactical commanders to be able to respond to high-intensity combat should it emerge. so i am comfortable with the trends line we are on in terms of achieving our readiness goals. i am less comfortable with where we are at in terms of modernization. we have the trade-off that you face, specially especially in the united states army, our primary weapon is the soldier. so rightfully so about 60% of our annual budget pays for

soldiers and our civilians. about 5050% for soldiers, about 10% for civilians. so that leaves 40% less to address readiness and modernization. about 22% of that is consumed in readiness generation and that leaves about 18% for modernization. when you look at the seven - 800 portfolios that we currently have for equipping our army, that gets spread very thin. we have been forced to prioritize our modernization efforts to address the emerging demands, particularly in high-intensity combat and we have a very focused effort on divesting obsolete or redundant systems so that we can apply increased funding toward our priority needs.

my expectation is that this picture that we are currently facing is not going to change in the near future. so we must look internally to the best of our ability to make the most of what we have, to address the emergent needs that are out there, and i think the part prioritization that we have undergone over the course of the past year to address that has been very helpful to us in that effort. it it is an uncertain world, and unstable world, but i am often asked what is it that keeps you up at night? my immediate immediate response to that question is nothing. i'm so darn tired by the time i get home i sleep very well thank you. truthfully what enables me to sleep very well is the quality of the leaders that we have in the united states army at every point. on a daily basis those leaders are performing extraordinary,

heroic actions, they are making tough decisions in very complex and unpredictable environments. they are making extraordinary contributions to stability around the globe. so i would love to talk to you about those leaders or any other topic that is on your mind, with that that concludes my prepared remarks and i look forward to your questions and your areas of focus and interest [applause]. >> thank you all, doing think the vice president for the hearing. i. i thought we just have a conversation but a few comments that were sparked by your remarks. i will kick it off if you have a question that i will get to you if you raise your hand. we have some microphone please wait for the microphone and state your name and

affiliation. we'll broaden the conversation in the time that we have. >> so one question i want to ask you, one of of the things that heritage does every year is index with the u.s. military where we try to gauge and a consistent way the level of u.s. military capacity. , so one of the concerns that we talk about in the 1970s and again in the 1990s is this idea of a notion that when you add everything up at the end of the day not have enough trained and ready forces to conduct the operations that you have and to prepare for the future. having to make compromises somewhere in that triangle. in that leaves you vulnerable more in a bigger way than just looking at the raw numbers. my question is, how concerned are you about that today, how do you do find risk, and where do you see the u.s. army in terms of it? >> i think you highlight the daily challenge that are cheap and secretary face, and that is, how, how do you deliver the most

capable force you can in a resource constrained environment? you cannot have it all. that is just a rough fact. so our focus on readiness and ensuring that no soldier, no unit is sent into a mission for which they have not been adequate adequately prepared, adequately equipped, and expect to be well led. that promise is when we will adhere to. now the downside of that is, we are definitely facing the potential that two - three years down the road the ability to ensure that we deliver the most modern equipment possible is where we have accepted risk. there is a number ways you tackle that problem. fundamentally it is a math problem. so we have begun to look at how we prioritize prioritize delivery of capability to a smaller number of units rather

than try to spread the butter for 35 years across the portfolio. we know that by doing that their are couplet dynamics that play, technology is changing so fast that we think by the time you feel a smaller set you are going to be going after newark, more modern capability anyway. so it is less of a problem that it may have been in the past. i think we're all of us struggle is, should we get into a scenario where it is appear competitor that requires a massive response from the united states military and at the end of that pipeline you're going to stand a chance that some of those forces will not be as adequately prepared and equipped as they should be. >> so really it's taking risk in terms of modernization capacity,

it it will get you so far but then down the road is where the risk really rises up. so trying to square that, you you mentioned the active force, the army reserve, so i know there's never been -- so to put it bluntly how big is the army national guard these days? with what's the relationship like and how people dealt with the apache issue and how is the relationship going? >> first well when i say say army, i mean total army. so that is tends to be how we communicate. we communicate is one army, we are one army, we fight and plead as one army. so first and foremost, your army is doing very well, thank you very much for your interest. as you know the national commission on the future the army brought forward a number of recommendations on how we could

deliver a more capable force in the future. sixty-three of them in all, actually one of the recommendation is so important made it twice so there's actually 62 that we are focused on. there are a number of those that include increased capacity, increasing focus on delivering readiness, and as you mention, one of the recommendations retained for the apache been telling in the national guard. between our unfunded requirement list to congress for their presidents budget of this year, and the budget that we are in the current stage of preparing, you you will see a number of those recommendation inaction and the challenge that we face, to be brutally honest is that the national commission brought forward a great and state, a better future future army, and a number of ways to get there, but

it was not provided means, and a strategy strategy has to put all three together. so what we have done is looked within our budget to get after the most important issues first, some of those clearly involve increasing our readiness, delivering more training center rotations to our national guard combat teams which you'll see next year's budget. reestablishing a brigade in korea, that is a critical capability, the commission rate made a recommendation on a we have a resourcing strategy to get after that. of course the four apache battalions, whether that is addressed in the currents and eaa or we address it through another submission, we attend to get after that to the best of

our ability. i think what is most important is that we are working together to improve the readiness of the total army, all of its components, that is not an easy challenge. thirty-nine days of training in a given year does not a ready unit to make. we we have really have to address how we increase the resourcing for those units most likely to have to deploy on a very tight timeline in response to a contingency and ensure that we have additional time and funding, additional additional training for those units. >> since most of the constraints are about means and resources, let me ask you a few forward-looking questions. i note much of the planning and the pentagon at least with this notion is that we have to operate under a security budget that were in. that's project forward to a new administration and a difference

of national priority and perhaps loosen the expanding into the military and services. let's look at two things, first of all if we could grow the force instead of shrinking it, what you do? would it be more deployed forces, a kind of forces would you want? what would be first on your list? if i could build up the capacity of the air force is where would you take it? suffice to say that u.s. of forces is a policy decision, sore political leadership will decide, are we going to change our posture or stance, clearly there is recommendation in the national commission's report that address where we should have additional forward presence. the european commander in his confirmation hearing made a clear statement about where his

druthers were on sustaining the rotational force presence that we have there now. as you know in eastern europe starting on the first of january, we will have a full-time presence in the army per grade, we have committed to resourcing that requirement and the question was asked of general scott, given the choice would you rather have, ford station or rotational, and he stated his preference to have forward station. now from the army's perspective, there is a lot of benefits, particularly for ford station forces, but there's also sustaining cost elevate. we have to weigh that and respond to the policy decisions that are made. suffice to say, we know what the capabilities in the army are most under stress, and the

direction that we are on right now to reducer and strength, we know which capabilities that we need. so, we will be prepared to deal with that should there be a change in direction. >> will give you the same question to you in terms of modernization. so if you had additional resources and you could directed toward modernization, what would you do with it. >> we have already prioritized within our current modernization plan so it would be a matter of addressing those priorities, we have high response requirements to deliver protective systems on our combat vehicles and in our aviation platforms. we have great needs to modernize our aviation portfolio both in terms of an improved engine and eventually a new aircraft

platform basically. we have critical needs and addressing cyber vulnerabilities across our network. we have got to continue to get after that. we have already sustained to our focus, despite all the cuts that we took a modernization, we preserved our s and t portfolio so that as emerging demands come out there, we have a focused investment strategy and that, but my expectation is as we continue to look after competitors out there, there is going to be gaps that we have to prioritize and get after. that is a critical focus as we move forward as well. >> the mask one more question and then i'll bring it the audience as well. there's a lot of reporting about the army trying to increase the efficiencies with the resources

that it has currently. so different initiatives, reducing the number of unemployable, have more of your force in the field, look for ways to not have people rush to spend your fun so you can find a way to recycle that money and use it more efficiently, so from your perspective, could you address some of those things and which ones you think are actually going to deliver for the army in terms of actually bringing back some resources? >> we must be good stewards of the resources we have been provided. we know we can do better and we have a number of initiatives underway to ensure that we deliver on that. for instance, we very much have excess capacity in our infrastructure across the department of defense footprint, the united states army come about 33% access to current strength levels.

so we know the likelihood is not very high. but we have to right size within our own capacity to ensure if we can consolidate our current force strength into the buildings that are in the best shape and set aside those that are in poor condition or failing. >> you can give those to the marines. >> know, the marines will take care of their own internal issues. i have no doubt in the leadership's ability to do that. but you have identified one of the most pressing problem so we have and that is our personal readiness. quite frankly it is the number one variable in delivering ready forces in the future as we come

down in size. we are struggling with about 10% of our four-speed not available. the majority for medical reasons. so we have to find ways to ensure that we get them the help they need and enable them to transition more quickly so that we can get a ready replacement back into the system. >> on that particular issue do you have a realistic goal of what kind of percentage you could recoup if you dealt with that part of the force might efficiently? >> the fact of the matter is across our total army we have 100,000 non- deployable soldiers today. >> and that's with people in schools and stuff like that. >> know that's predominantly soldiers that cannot fill their position and a ploy perform the tasks for which they were listed in doing. so we have about 80 plus% of that is in the medical realm.

we know we can gain efficiency in terms of speed in which we transition these folks back to full readiness or back to another phase of a soldier for a life journey. but suffice to say, we we're probably talking maybe 10000 that we can expect to get back in by those means. we have to work with the veterans administration on the vast majority of the rest of them to ensure that we transition them to veteran administration care as effectively as possible and again so we can deliver ready forces. >> so is it primarily a resource challenger just a process. >> that process now takes too long. we need to shorten it.

were working with the veterans administration leadership to do so. >> i will open it up to the force of you have questions. >> in general, and with breaking defense. i asked him about the technology conference, mr. roper's office, from robotics and big data and cyber, to direct energy. i come back down to earth like here, what part of that third offset in vision is for the army into what degree, is there a bunch of cool things that you

guys just can't get to in the budget with modernization where it is. even if it is in active protection for example. >> what were pursuing the third offset approach because it does enable a focus on what we need 15-20 years down the road which we must maintain a critical focus on. we know particularly in the area of nuclear defense and long-range precision fires that there are very specific capabilities and we are working very carefully with doctor roper and his team to address gaps that we have that we know they can help us close.

so we are focused on building the future army while delivering the force that is needed today by her combat commanders. >> it you reset it interesting .1 thing that we have here now that is actually highlighted in the commission report is the increasing possibility of operating in the theater where you don't have your superiority, let alone the right. and so we look at the analysis and we say would be nato's capability to control it be and how do you balance it? so what would your mix be, well let's just have more air force or let's go back on these capabilities, what would that mix of solutions look like to? >> the bottom line is we are

better as a joint force and we have to take a joint force approach to it. we have the best navy, army, and air force in the world. we have to keep that way. we have to fight together as a joint team. we are specifically looking at what army capabilities are necessary and frankly, we believe the army is going to play a role in seizing at least temporary control of airspace to enable destruction of enemy capabilities that that enable the joint force to deliver only what they can deliver. so we are custom in the united states army to have to fight in a contested, close fight, we expect we expect that continue to be the case in the future. we believe we deliver the type of forces that can operate in that highly contested environment and create conditions favorable to our

nation. >> vote that look like? would it be more organic capability and brigades, would it look like more deployable to theaters? >> i think you're going to see a very distributed force that can harness the joint effects in a very decentralized way and create condition that enable us to have the kind of outcomes. >> right so question up front. >> general allen, thank you very much for highlighting all of these efforts. i michael cross, soldier, no you longer young, five contingencies. i've been in three armies. the drafted army, the the hollow army, and the professional army.

you highlight the soldier obviously. the soldiers everything to her citizen. what worries me is the morale of the force and the support of that force it by the nation. my question is going to be from one of the statistical indicators for retention, for recruitment, for medical care, for post stress care of the soldier, you mentioned 100k on deployable, you mentioned 180 plus k that have been ripped. how that have been ripped. how's the morale is my question? >> the morale is good in army today and i would say that is true across the entire army.

the major the army is focused on it each and every day. he is specifically spending time on capitol hill making sure they understand that some of the efficiencies under the current any aa will create a condition in the armed forces, not just the armed forces where it is death by founders and cuts. a little cut here, little cut there, what is 1% here. it all here. it all adds up. the bottom line is, what has enabled us to be the trusted professionals that we are today is this great all volunteer force that we had built. that all volunteer force, as you know emerged from the post- vietnam era and has become a professional envy of the world. that we need to be very, very deliberate in adjustments that

we make and to ensure that in pursuit of 1,000,000 dollars there or 1,000,000 dollars here, that we are not destroying the very trust that enables us to continue to bring great patriots to serve in our armed forces. i will tell you, there is what i believed to be a national concerned that is not been fully addressed, it's a small percentage of the current 18 - 24-year-old publish-year-old population in america that conserve in the military. the last survey that was done was about 360,000 americans in the 18 - 24-year-old realm that can meet the prerequisites to serve in the military. the army needs 120,000 just to sustain its current force. we are competing against all other services, businesses, universities, and that segment of the population. if they don't see a great

opportunity for service in uniform, then the sacrifice that is inherent in the service will begin to weigh on their decision process and that is something that we have to be very focused on. >> could you just talk rick's second where the army is in terms of this? >> i think they do a pretty successfully of doing what you want. >> speaking to your original question about morale, one of the indicators of the strength of the morale and what we are looking at the last few years we have had to actually ask people to leave because as we have gotten smaller we have gotten over strength for the force that will be in future.

these people that are asking to leave our professionals. most of them, over 50 over 50% have two or more combat deployments. they have answered the call and done good service for the nation, but as we have gotten smaller we have had to ask them to consider another phase of their journey as a soldier for life. that is but not an easy task to take on. recruiting is where we see the greater challenge. it's a very competitive environment, frankly there is still still many youth in america, not a lot of parents want their child to join in army that is at war. new/. so were competing against parents, were competing against a very prolific job market, the economy is in pretty good shape so they are not being forced to consider service in the

military. so again, that's what we are watching very carefully as we move forward. we know that we will be strained to this year meet the objectives that we have been recruiting. we have put more recruiters on the street we're putting our very best out there. we all have to stay after it. >> right here another question. >> i will get your question, i promise. >> hello sir. i would like to get your take on what i observed as a declining emphasis on work that you and i have done together which is in the inter-agency, non-kinetic space, talking about space, talking about civil affairs, technological operations, peacekeeping operations as well as security cooperation, all the non- kinetic stuff that really is what teachers, prevents,

stabilizes. you talked about the current threat to really been one of instability. so, i would love to get your take on how we reconcile the fact that this is really one of the areas that i have seen the most declining interest and resourcing, yet it being the most important for the force of the future, for the threats of the future and most importantly and what you describe is a visit clean suppressed environment. one of the most cost-effective. it is not hardware intensive, it is not smt intensive, it is up here intensive. it's mental hardware. side love your take on how to reconcile it. >> is a part a part of the 40% requirement with the day-to-day operations? >> yep you did the fundamental math, it's not 40% we can't me, but most of what we cannot meet is based on demand that exceed

supply. in other words, they are asking for a capability that we do not have insufficient ready capacity or its performing another task of that is higher priority. but morgan, to your points, we have been very focused on continuing to deliver what the combatant commanders need for both security cooperation type activities as well as institution building, many of the developing parts of the world. the the beauty of that effort as you highlight is that it can be effective in a economy of for stroll. so if you look at the continent of africa as an example, we have a few thousand soldiers over there hitting well above their weight class on a daily basis, talking sergeants and lieutenants with strategic effects by building the capacity

of our allies and partners to be able to contribute to stability in that region after we have finished working with them. it is a constant balancing act. we are major proponents of supporting what the combatants need to shape and prevent because we would much rather stay in that phase then what we are currently experiencing afghanistan, iraq, syria, and other places. there is always going to be tension, i know it's based on the highest capabilities on a daily basis, civil affairs, psychological operations, many operations, many of our enabling capabilities like engineer support the commitment level that we have for those forces speaks to the fact that they are being employed by her combatant commanders so is it enough,

clearly i know where you feel on that. but it's a balancing act of how much can we give and how do we meet the most critical needs. >> thank you, john harper with the defense magazine. you touched on the modernization priorities but on the individual's soldier level, what kind of wearable technologies are you hoping to pursue to pursuit to increase the capabilities of the individual soldier. >> we have been focused on soldiers for a number of years here. as a soldier who came up to art to an after decades of service, reducing the weight that our soldiers carry, giving commonality on batteries for the multitude of enabling

capabilities that are soldiers carry it, having solar powered recharging capabilities so we are not dragging generators everywhere we go. the network radio that we are delivering for soldiers today is extraordinary. it is giving the capability for squad leaders to do that which only company commanders could do only a decade ago. so delivering greater capability to the edge, if you look at the individual body armor that we crossed the berm within 2003 and compared it to what our soldiers are today, it's amazing, both as function in weight, most importantly, survivability. we have reduce the weight of our combat helmet for every soldier on the battlefield.

the challenge that i struggle with frankly is the vice that i work with new capabilities coming forward. every time i come around here it's a constant struggle, but it's not new there's a great pamphlet written about soldiers ability of a nation, about six years ago that remains as true today as it does them. that's what we remain very focused on. today, the battlefield, a team leader a team leader or squad leader can deliver just about any enabling capability that exists in the joint arsenal and that is exactly what we must be able to do. as we move forward in that kind of environment we expect to be operating in. >> thank you very much.

you just mention the challenges and complexity of challenges that continues to increase. at the same time, the world. [inaudible] in that case there are be other countries competing with the usa. in their operating on relatively thin ice, how do you think the u.s. will be able to really match those forces of our adversities.

he also mentioned in afghanistan, and like to know what was the biggest challenge that you had to deal with in afghanistan when it comes to degree of difficulty? thank you. >> first of all, in the environment that we face today and the environment that we expect to base for the next decade it is going to put a premium on the united states leadership. so we are not going to be able to back away from that leadership role, many of our partners and allies around the world that smaller before we started doing so. so we are going to have to play a strong role, but we will be dependent on partners and allies. so as you look at the types of activities that are underway in virtually every theater around the globe, we are working closer

with partners and allies on a routine basis to ensure that whatever capabilities they bring to bear, that they are interoperable with ours, that is going to be a critical factor factor for us as we go forward. those of you who have been paying attention in eastern europe, you know that we have had a series of multinational exercises there of the last two years. there is a major exercise going on as we speak that poland is actually commanding this operation and we are providing forces under their leadership. as part of the exercise we projected forces from the global response for subway from wartburg north carolina into this exercise, we have conducted a combined forced entry operation with forces of

multinational partner as well as the 170 third from the station in italy. so this very focused deterrence by partners is going to be huge part of how we address increased ability, p or competitors, and deliver the best possible deterrence that the nation can afford. in terms of challenges that we face in afghanistan, what i will tell you, i was just there over memorial day weekend and the afghan security forces continue to form admirably in a very, very highly contested environment. they have taken very high casualties but they continue to defeat the television and --

talo there is the ability to enforce over time so there's not just a campaign capable army, but a national, sustainable force as we go forward. the the most promising sign has been to put the right leadership into the formation. and the result when they do that is pretty significant in terms of enduring effects that they are trying to achieve. it is a commitment that needs to endure and it needs to be a commitment that we continue to lead and that are nato partners continue to support as well. >> i'm going to give justin the last question. but i want to squeeze in warmer.

what i hate about the ministration as they come up great ideas at the 11th hour. so so we talk about the new personal policy maybe not doing finding other ways to bring in technical people at different levels. it's really interesting personnel management ideas. some thoughts about things we might be able to continue to go back and forth, i wish they would've started seven years ago but okay, great. of those ideas, anything that you would really want to think that this is something we need to carry them in time forward regardless to the next guy or girl sitting there? . . . .

attract talent and enables us to hire in a more responsive way than what we currently can. is better for the department of defense and certainly better for the united states army. i think the other aspect from the army's perspective on particularly the latest initiatives that were rolled out here in the past week, is it gives the secretaries of the services the authority to use those tools that are needed, and that's important. want to have a toolbox that enables you to adjust as you need to, and if you don't need it -- >> getting beyond that industrial management approach to human capital management.

having a flexible tool kit that allows you to get the talent you need when you need it. >> we all know what life in a bureaucracy could be like can right? >> a few months ago general milly used the phrase, high military risk when talking about i belief conventional, kind of threats. can you unpack that in a way that makes sense outside the pentagon, outside the beltway? what does high military risk mean to the army and what drives that assessment? >> our current directive has us focused on delivering the ability to defeat a competitor while denying the objectives of another near simultaneously. while sustaining our commit. s on the homeland, sustaining our current tempo of operations

against violent extremist around the world, and ensuring that we can deter iran. so, when you look at those set of tasks that we have been given, and the force that we have available, that's where general milly drew that conclusion, and so when you look at one competitor in a theater of war and you're simultaneously deploying forces to deny the objectives of another, therein lies the stress as we have gotten smaller across all capabilities, and so that is the genesis of that comment, and it is a fairly fundamental math problem. it's the combination of capables and capacity.

in other words, we have to have sufficient ready forces that can deliver on the timelines that the commanders need. that's where we're in distress. >> the enemy can count. i know that -- we have hit on a lot of those today and i really appreciate that. so please join me in thanking the general. thank you for coming. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> coming up, afghanistan's ambassador to the u.s. talks about security issues in his country. then a discussion on the role of

the u.s. coast guard in combating drug trafficking and other maritime security issues. later, senators hold a moment of silence to the victims of the mass shooting in orlando, florida. c-span's "washington journal" live every day. tuesday morning, three members of congress join us to discuss the mass shootings in orlando over the weekend. democratic california representative eric swawell, franking member of the intelligence subcommittee on the cia, talks about the role of u.s. intelligence today and in the future. then the chair of the homeland security subcommittee on oversight and management efficiency, pennsylvania representative scott perry, on homeland security and domestic terrorism issues. and senator tom carper of

delware discusses security. join the discussion. >> coming up tuesday, a hearing on the issue of visitors overstaying their visas and calls for a new entry and exit tracking system. the house homeland security subcommittee on border and maritime security will take up the issue, live at 10:00 a.m. eastern, once c-span3. >> at politico.com this headline: runs on the hot seat over gun control as senate democrats press for yet another vote that would bar suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms, joining us on then phone with more details, jake sherman, senior write are for politico. congressional democrats waste nothing time going after republicans. what can we see this week?

>> guest: i think what we'll see as members of congress file back into town, democrats are trying to up the pressure. they've done this many times. they want to obviously increase regulation and tight 'gun laws. republicans have been very has tenant. you're starting to see the faultlines of this debate form. and what republicans are saying i that congress should focus on radicalization and what they believe is the problem, the -- what they think is the cancer of radical islamic extremism and not gun laws. republicans' point is that gun laws would not -- new gun laws would not prevent a motivated terrorist from finding a way to kill americans, but with donald trump at the top of the ticket, and control of congress kind of up in the balance over the next couple of months, this will be a very difficult political issue for both sides, especially vulnerable senate republicans, in many states, new gun laws, tightening restrictions on guns,

is a popular position. so we're going to see this kind of form over the next couple of days in washington. >> but for those who follow come closely this came up back in december, and it essentially failed in the senate along a party line volt of 45-54. did the shooting in orlando over the weekend change the dynamics in any way? >> guest: i don't think it did. we'll see because a lot of republicans will privately say, it's the tough argument to hold to say that terrorists, who are suspected terrorists, are not allowed to be on airplanes and have other sorts of kind of restrictions against them, it's a difficult argue tom hold they should be able to go into a gun store and guy a gun. but the dynamics in congress have not changed. one of their own was shot in the head by a crazed gunman, gabrielle gagay gifford in arizona, and a number of children killed in a school in connecticut, and none of this loosened the tight grip of the

gun lobby, would say 0, on the political position the republicans have held for decades which is congress should not institute new restrictions on firearms. >> this comes at the same time that house speaker paul ryan meeting with his leadership team. tomorrow house members get a classified briefing from national security team that includes the fbi director and the secretary of homeland security. what new do you think we'll learn in the next 24 hours and members of congress will be learning that's attend these briefings. >> i think members members of cs won't be learning minute now. the administration officials are hesitant to give out details because they know members of congress like to discuss what they hear behind closed doors, which is a difficult proposition for the administration, which is trying to conduct a very high level and sensitive investigation. i think what we will see is how paul ryan will react, and if paul ryan, kevin mccarthy, steve scalise and the rest of the republican leadership time,

have some sort of response on the floor legislative or politically to kind of get in the right position when it comes to keeping guns out of s suspect terrorists' hands, and my guess is that republicans will focus narrowly on the issue of combating isis and being careful about who -- immigration laws and who the country lets into our country, into our borders itch think that's where republicans will focus their energy and say there are no gun laws that can prevent a motivated individual from getting a gun. >> we are talking with james sherman, a senior rite for -- writer for politico. a colleague rote: donald trump's tragic victory lap. what's this about. >> what glen was arguing in the piece, which people have been talking about issue is that donald trump, immediately turned the conversation about the tragedy in orlando to -- tried

to turn it to his own political benefit. he says he has been right on islamic extremism from the beginning. he has been saying that the country needs to get smart, tough, on extremism and that is kind of what his takeaway was. i was right, thank you very much. we saw at in the speech help went after hillary clinton very hard in his speech in new hampshire this afternoon, and said she is unfit and unable to be the commander in chief and that donald trump actually expanded his remarks on basically barring anybody who is from a country of a suspected terrorist, which is a broad expansion of his previous proposal to ban muslims from the country. but the point glenn is making instead of focusing on the somberness of the country and trying to bring people together, donald trump made it about himself and his -- what a lot of people have been saying over the last 24 hours is donald trump

has reacted to this terrible attack in orlando. >> yet what about the long are-term impact of what happened in orlando, florida? will this resonate during the course of the campaign or change the direction of the trump or the clinton campaigns? >> i think that it will kind of further heighten sensitivity about -- the narrative of the campaign, which is about keeping our country safe. donald trump is taking a different approach, which is he wants to bar, again, all muslims and actually people from states that have suspected terrorist ties from the u.s. an overhaul to immigration policies like never seen before, and hillary clinton's point is that is not what our country is about, and i think this will kind of tighten the focus, sharpen the focus, on homeland security, immigration policy, and keeping our nation safe and that is a big issue heading into november.

>> all the details available online at politico.com. shake -- jake sherman, thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> madam secretary. we give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. [cheering] [cheering] >> the afghan ambassador to the u.s. said his country grieves with the american people following the attack over the

weekend at the orlando, florida, nightclub the ambassador spoke at the hudson institute on security issues in afghanistan, combating the taliban and the u.s. role in his country. this is an hour and 20 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> welcome to the program. afghanistan fighting the taliban. i'm john walter, chief operating officer of the hudson institute. thank you for joining us here at the foreign policy center. next september 11th will mark the 16th areas of the attack on america by al qaeda.

the war against the taliban and other extremist groups last most all of those 15 years. costing the u.s.-afghan, allies, many lives and military and resources in an effort to stop this threat and give democracy to people of afghanistan. efforts to find a negotiated settlement have been disappointing and the taliban may now game power. an opportune time for this program. how should we understand the current state of the war in afghanistan, since the taliban -- what should be the way ahead? we are grateful to be joined by afghan's ambassador to the united states, hamdullah mohib. before becoming ambassador to the united states he served as deputy chief of staff of the president of afghanistan and helped to draft and implement

bilateral, multilateral agreements, including the u.s.-afghan partnership leading the discussion is ambassador mcconey, who is a hudson institute fellow. ambassador to the u.s. in 2008 and 2011 and widely respected for mapping a difficult partnership at a difficult time on the global war on terror. please join me in welcoming our guests. [applause] >> thank you, john, for that very kind introduction. it's a pleasure, hosting ambassador mohib, has been ambassador in the united states. he is a respected afghan public

servant, having worked on u.s.-iran relations for a while and a number of other things, including realizing strategy in afghanistan which those were critical of the u.s. role in afghanistan is very important that afghanistan hag made an effort to increase self-reliance, obviously it has serious challenges, and we will be discussing those challenges today. as a part of our discussion is dr. mohammad taqi, a medical doctor by training, a well-known columnist and somebody who has had an active role in pashtun nationalist causes in pakistan. let me begin inviting ambassador mohib to make an introduction where you see afghanistan at the present juncture, the challenge of the taliban.

why do you feel that the iran peace process, which president obama invested heavily in, has not moved forward, and why do we hear the taliban resurgence, which is not always completely manifest itself because -- not going defeat the taliban nor are you in a position where people will say, the taliban are winning tomorrow. so, it's a kind of stalemate. why does that stalemate exist? yawed yawed conversation [inaudible conversations] >> ambassador, colleague from the diplomatic corps, government

officials, journalists, and friends of afghanistan, good afternoon. from the out set let me begin by offering my sincere condolences to the american people and the families of the victims and the community florida, and the u.s. government on this tragic event of yesterday morning in orlando. we condemn this act of terror and hate in the strongest terms. terrorists have only one goal, to use violence to divide people. time to stand united and in solidarity against terrorism. as the people who have suffered from terrorism for many years, continues to be one of the most frequent victims of terrorist attack, we share the grief of the american people. this comes at a time during the month of ramadan, a month of

compassion and generosity. a month that puts our blessed life in perspective. a month that increases our understanding of the difficulties of those who are less fortunate than us. a month that encourages to re-evaluate our behavior toward other people, be compassionate and generous. i want to thank the hudson institute and ambassador haqqani for inviting me today to speak about what for my government is the most urgent priority. security and stabilization of afghanistan. this is not just our priority. afghanistan is fortunate to have many western partners and regional partners, who understand how critically important it is for afghans to live in peace and to be able to

focus their full attention on recovering from years of war and develop into a stable, self-reliant, opportunity-rich country. so many of our fellow neighbors have already done so successfully. in 2014, as nato's mission was ending, our very young afghan military was thrust into the leading role in fighting our common enemy. since then our forces have become stronger, more disciplined, and more capable. it is said that although the afghan military was 12 years old in 2015, this year they're 20 years old. they've made eight years of progress in less than 12 months. we're now fighting an enemy, or shall i say enemies that are more brutal. once we only faced the taliban.

we're now attacked by faceless terrorists whose agenda threatens not just afghanistan but regional and world security. i'm talk about daesh and al qaeda and other groups that seek to destagize -- destabilize our region. the former, which pits out of -- have murdered some 600 afghans in the last six months, mostly young people who refuse to join its ranks. a term means total loyalty and cover and cooperation in return for its support. if it wasn't clear before, it should be clear to the world by now, afghan soldiers and civilians are dying in a war that has been imposed on us. a war that was not chosen by us. a war that was not caused by us.

here in america i often hear that afghanistan seems like a yesterday's war. but for the afghan soldiers, standing guard at the gates of the city, threatened by in the enemies of peace, that war is very much still happening. so afghan civilians, children, women, killed by brutal suicide attacks, that war still very much happening. afghanistan is a poor country with big potential and big am, mys and we have a government with the knowledge, expertise, and vision to change our destiny, but instead of spending all our budget and energy on rebuilding infrastructure, creating new avenues for economic development, or investing in our huge youth population, we are spending a sizable amount of military operations. to fight off attacks from

enemies largely supported by and made up of foreign militants. this is not just afghanistan's fight. thus is the world's fight. afghanistan and its neighbors are at the forefront of this fight. it's regional problem that requires a regional response. and that is why we have been working with our neighbors, and regional partners to built a consensus on fighting our common enemy that is terrorism. we have been work with our neighbors to end the distinction between good and bad terrorists. as if there is such thing as a good terrorist. we have been working with our neighbors to play a positive and constructive role in afghanistan. the afghans are a strong, resilient, and proud people. a people that despite decades of war, have not been beaten. we are still working on rebuilding our country, undeterred by the challenges.

those who wish to gain influence in afghanistan must by now understand that investing in our development and rebuilding our infrastructure, and in contributing to peace and stability and generate goodwill in afghanistan, in the last 1,000 years. regional stability and peace is increasingly every nation's need. more than ever before. and the stability begins with afghanistan. we want to -- with elements of taliban who have legitimate political grievances that can be worked out at a negotiation table. but we also have the job of protecting our people and country from violence that we have endured for far too long. attacks like the one in kabul on april 19th, that murdered 70 people and wounded 400.

so to us, afghan lives mother and we mourn every life lost to this imposed war. we're proud of the afghan security forces who have done a remarkable job so far. also welcome the news that president obama has expanded the man mandate of u.s. forces they can now provide support on the battle fields and close air support in offensive battles against the taliban inch addition to the invaluable training, assistance, and intelligence support they have been providing already. this development should strike fear in the hearts of the enemies of afghanistan, who have already suffered multiple defeats at the hand of the national defense security forces. this year during this year's spring fighting season.

also killed or arrested more than 36 taliban leaders in the last 18 months, almost half of them were shadow provincial governors. the afghan national defense and security forces have new technical and military capabilities, including air force and helicopters. they have proven themselves to be formidable on the field of battle. coordination has greatly improved, and logistical supply change has improved. recently the taliban tried to retack the city but were defeated before they could launch an attack. these recent security related developments increased capacity of afghan forces, their success in the spring fighting season. a decision by in the white house to expand the mandate of american troops, attacks in kabul and what they revealed about the operations of the

enemy and the death of -- an impediment to peace, created an opportunity for afghanistan and its allies to turn the security tide in our favor. but there are also positive developments outside the security sector that are helping stabilize afghanistan. afghanistan that just signed the -- agreement with india and iran, creating a new corridor for the first time. that fifths us access to the border. it gives us an increased connectivity to the world. ...

>> >> the only way left is to except and conform to the desires of the people to the international community with the best way to control terrorism to put more pressure of those that use

it for political gain. finally it their message to our neighbor, he should work with us to strive so hard to realize it is hard work to create a prosperous region not a ground for conflict and violence. [applause] >> with being an ex ambassador in dealing with the language. ion visualizing the map and you're not talking about me anbar.

but the administration now to keep american troops for a little while longer while you are confident about the fact that it takes several years but is still leaves a few years to compete with the army that has existed since 1857.

>> for those who use terrorism to make distinctions between good and bad terrorist in the next point other than the countries to the east and since he is from the country my question is what ever happened until last several efforts of working closely with pakistan and not just in the tribal areas but

traveling between two positions that are not very far considering the an impediment to peace that debate that has been set back? only because the peace process was not. >> you can interpret as you which since i remember it

makes sense of things i remember people praying for peace. even now weddings and funerals for we were collectively to gather and to keep those doors open with a quadrilateral process

and how to proceed with the peace process and that was a clean line but those promises that were made on paper if there would be a shift because as we see in the united states terrorism has no boundaries to recognize those boundaries and those root -- loyalties. >> is in the interest of our obiit neighbors to have peace and instability in the

country to put on a faster pace to give the opportunity to take a break. >> anders stanley mean i understand to pray for peace and somehow it just hasn't happened unfortunately the pakistan a perspective seems to be as our guest for many, many years and i think the pakistan reestablishment instead of having become much closer friends with that hospitality year conflict nor pakistan is the

end he is between the two countries. i would ask the doctor to get into a discussion with the current ambassador were the former ambassador so why don't i asked you to diagnose so the discussion can move forward? we must remember americans have an interesting relationship so really what you mean is they are irrelevant but the truth is history matters in this situation refiner solves has a background with the war

against the soviets in the pakistan a government to be together is supported the taliban but first it was the extremist groups then 9/11 have been banned american guide interested again it seems that they are conjoined twins with tremendous difficulty they have had many victims to sip to have the official pakistan the perspective so let's hear it from you as the standoff in uh province

they both the key was an impediment and pakistan and the officials insist that the elimination would set back. >> so let's talk about what is happening. with the major tragedy it is much closer to us than we

think. this is our you associate and then suddenly it is the situation in and as the catalyst of a radical as long this is not an organizational tool so it is closer to home much closer than you think and ahab

operated there and on the map of i have confined a laser pointer. okay then i can pinpoint. [laughter] this is a seminary that was started at the turn of the 20th century right next to it is the special services group the elite forces this

is the home of the pakistan army. but the aeronautical complex and home to nuclear not too far about one hour drive where do these terms come from like the madrasah? said graduates have to come through 1970 a bed with the election campaign this is just to give a quick perspective you heard of that not too far from here

and is producing a lot of radicalization 81 of this sort. three of them? of the bad there is a problem so we talk about that a little bit more. it has existed for the last 69 years and to support that and through the political parties that was toward the handle so -- also. there is one that is

operated right here. so that means it is the of fountainhead of knowledge that is "the fountainhead" of jihad. that is not too far from those regions and they set up shop for what they have been talking about. but the day after they were eliminated as expected to be a cogent response but they did not hear that.

there was some mumbling and then making up with this disingenuous problem and to ask the u.s. to bomb the hideouts. so it takes us certain audacity to say that if someone is killed if someone escapes from your operations that is from the retired army major, it is ironic that instead of the

introspection that we get this and with the recent history with the military high command and has taken out the leadership from the get-go. the teacher of the suicide bombers and this is not the lower rank is the top position and i am pretty comfort -- confident they could take that out and now what happened we don't know but i can certainly forecast despite all that he would not seek specific action those that were stationed in

that if eliot. >> what happened to? when he was taken out the pakistan any armed forces spokesperson ended is one of the elite army and what has to go through for promotions the motto is in farsi and is there the next day the comment made was that a global phenomenon of terrorism and extremism as how attractive but when

there were taken out for four days the taliban should have been gone and they said we will fight global terrorism the with the former taliban whose name translates into fear of god or something so this was happening it is a very dusty terrain right here.

here is covered -- catarrh. the home of the pakistan the army the army's selection recruitment center of this all of this was happening. immelt was is discovered but the point is that so is it

possible for people to get in and out like that? so she sat here and plotted. >> but we want to open it up. >> share. >> the question what is the nature of the taliban the call will attack those

receptive the responsibility for that then it is in a certain area of pakistan but the question and arises so what exactly is pakistan's role in that? this has been done historically but when civilians are being subjected them they are dispatched with their heads back to their families. so low there is a question about that.

so when pakistan is bush we hear we have leverage there is money and logistics trading but that is coming from somewhere. but one thing i want to say is potentially it could be a drawback. as they go out with the most famous cases so much so that those leaders that try to make them their family they are called to war to fight.

that is an issue. with the inability to reduce the taliban. but -- potentially the relationships are domestic. they have been nurtured and raised and was paid dash pakistan the senator. so the blow back could be contained so i will just up there and we can discuss that.

>> before i open the floor i will ask a couple of questions. first is to the ambassador to say very candidly so that if pakistan holds back the peace process to up the anti-by eliminating those that they were presenting what is pakistan's interest? wide eating pakistan has not yet decided from the

government's perspective we did say and reach out as a huge political cost to itself with the and declare hostilities ended one way the discussion and amongst the pakistan me with the policy that is an encouragement to us. so that effort was already made and from my personal opinion of what is happening

and may have been stuck in the past now is a different time in the era for the policy setters to a stuck in that era. >> basically the national strategic debt briefly? >> i recently heard a performance it he used the word cost of four that was perpetrated as they were slaughtered and then he had the nerve to say it was collateral damage. >> cry masking the benefit the several thousand live in terrorism what you think

that they want? >> they want as a fifth province they can do anything that they want their bike to have an unstable or unfriendly and fewer job metrics, this is the paradigm they seem to be working under the the nazi high this ecosystem if you have to create the village of jihadi there is intellectuals and so much support structure but somehow i got into their head of the civilization to be subdued by a 69 year-old

country. >> with your interaction with american officials can you find there is of better understanding? i have been saying this for 60 years the best way to have a friendly government is city trying to create and then try to export to afghanistan. to me it's scenes have they distributed that? but then they have to be even-handed with elsie with

the benefit would have been of a the benefits to become agitated and then to learn from history when we learn that force does not work? >> i think if pakistan wanted a friendly policy that would go a long way that is what we need with a friendly effort. you can take an afghan to help force or by asking i

said you cannot taken to heaven by force. so what you say at of a concern of the india factor? sova to they really want to have the strategy to focus? would that be possible? from the haqqani network would dash end pakistan's concerns? if that is exaggerated what have you done? >> suffering through lot we

have made that clear to all of our neighbors so that does include pakistan. >> but there is that potential so you do understand from that perspective that may not apply to india. >> those are the bilateral issues those of the problems that we should be resolving to answer your previous question this is the better understanding about what is happening in afghanistan, i

am assuming that was understood. >> do you see that repetition the momentum of a similar action? even those that are heard rumors? that was appended to peas for many, many years. should we expect, many as we move forward we cannot say what their actions would be but that proved what we have

been saying for a long time including yourself they're not just attacking the afghan civilians to involved in kidnapping san suicide attacks sources said justin threat to west with afghanistan or our partners in the region. >> my last question to you so what can the u.s. do? what you see to break the stalemate that the u.s. has its own interest with

pakistan so therefore the united states does not want a total breach united states has started to reach out to iran so what options does it have? >> first of all, and would ask is there any historical precedent to investing in several billion dollars per year? but then they turn around for a terrorist group with u.s. interest with the servicemen and women so has this ever happened? but i cannot think of a historical precedent so of

that has such duplicitous but they have there are many of complaints. >> bearers the bass -- the best of allies so realistically what can be done? the u.s. has invested heavily to arrange talks with the taliban so how can you wage war and make peace at the same time? to bring them to the negotiating table those then said they would never do

that so that could be represented and i have written them myself but the taliban i don't think it is an enemy but that pakistan the government but the people are four or five years behind the curve that is how it played out and then they declare that and then in 2005 they are regrouping the u.s. is still cropping up but they coated response so they would ask to take some type of action to say that the haqqani network that would not get

that establishment to act and they said i don't have enough men and then suddenly turns around to conduct a an operation with 50,000 troops so there's something wrong with the perception but then it takes another four years and i have heard social me one specific targeted haqqani network. i want to know one name.

>> from the policy-making that is a line from "gone with the wind" so i take your point so any comments before i turn to the audience? >> i do want to talk about two things and one was the refugees. having ben the refugee i know that nobody wants to be if there is peace they would return to their homes if

they cannot go after that leadership that is a success that is happening every day. but howdy you tackle something? >> it is not disputed with many officials legally afghanistan does recognize and to have the lines drawn by the british in 1893 cell

talks about sealing the border in the end it will come down to the people said pakistan that should not play the game they have played. but you cannot put a price on a. but that's has, it's very short debate echoes to long i will interrupt. and introduce yourself briefly into the microphone. >> i come from a small city

south of afghanistan i am studying entreprenuership. as a war victim might see what goes on out there. and as you have made it clear it is an issue between the two countries the borderline really has not been accepted as the actual border so these issues which it doesn't want to give a backed so that is why we have the taliban it is very important here. >> you are coming to the point you're going to lung. >> given the of lobbying that goes on to train the

military police but we have drug dealers and child molesters it doesn't help to reduce. >> frame your question i take we were trying to risk says the united states are there at the same time is united states during the conflict? >> yes session of the u.s. remade the interventionist? and let it sold its own issues? >> anyone brave enough to answer that? >> if we have u.s.

counterpart from where we see it as our perspective that yes well we are working on the self-reliance strategies we're trying to reduce our dependence and some of these were spent for development there be no need for u.s. support. >> i will answer your question if the united states is helping them ty are really helping them there they continue in just to give the fish and they're not necessarily helping them to become self-reliant so

that should be the principal to give us leverage for re different perspective. >> one old colleague mentioned the madrasahs. there is hundreds of these my question is very simple. where they coming from? so where does the money come from? >> there is the question of

the findings that is home grown the you would see the wilcoxes and sometimes business concerns that have been induced to do that but then as is mentioned in the book they would handed over so there is enough blame to go around. >> those including the state interest of that coming

together. right here in the middle. >> so what would the united states want? i think what is happening to deal with iran and india and the u.s. and the relationship and also to give a message to pakistan to come and join the force the way it can be a part of it.

so my question is what is china's position? so perhaps the ambassador can? >> i think have a simple answer. china has its interest and it acts like the united states with its own interest. and since it has a damaged relationship with others in the region and i the chinese china does have an obligation to support pakistan it zero ways is a d.c. 44 country to influence

>> to quit questions there has ben a lot of talk about corruption and domestic instability pushing towards the taliban government's by the predictable order with that in the international community do to prevent that? you alluded to that in your presentation but there is that question of dash its asian and that taliban brand

is maybe it is too much of a simplification said the thing separating the nationalism will help to reduce the terrorists climate? >> with corruption there taken great strides with a source of corruption and then we took that away in centralized that to go to the major contracts have a country with $400 million and a relative context as part of a new development partnership that was

immediately put back back into the economy so we are taking steps in a real understand without a government you cannot get people's loyalty completely. which they do there behind the anti-corruption. >> there is one perspective but that is the ambassador referred to that was a

progressive liberal with the islamism of the taliban. best buy to political parties from president karzai. >> right here. and then i will take here for question is to save time. >> with what is happening with us taliban if they take with their leadership since the last leader is said to

along those lines? >> it is open to all of those who wish to join the process to end the conflict. to be fragmented what makes the differences are they willing to join to be a part of the lead democratic process people camp participated different levels so with this point it would be a great job to protect and defend against a threat so it is difficult to say if the fragmentation has

reduced or to be more proactive. >> i have noticed talk about afghanistan we know where they're looking and sanctioning. so in terms of controlling those but all those other going to school every day. >> three will put those questions together.

>> i think this issue is more significant statement introduced herself. >> i think this should be addressed as most of that generation it is between the two states. >> it has a regional perspective international perspective going back to the liberal democratic party

went everybody was walking around. they do not have the clue or the connection. >> eight understand your point so how the huge national committee aided the radicalization but china and its role. >> we get the point. >> keep your questions brief please. >> but it's it's in the best interest and my second

question with the state of israel has the same mindset and then has ties with it? >> i worked for several years to develop the mining sector. and we're also working with pakistan so i just want to make a contrast and observation this sociological point does a few the people may anti-american and just as an

observation and not talking about the government put them assad. and then to make a connection or a lot of afghanis are feeling the same way. >> so several comments and why it was progressive with the communist support support the agenda so how do you think that what they're

suffering right now with that a correct judgment with a comment from the nationalist movement. >> aid space for them i wish that i did. they made a mistake. and of the famous back to see any politicians i think that is what happens they were supported and we saw some of that and there is an active rekindling going on. but there is the discussion

we should have that another time when you are in a household that is what the constitution situation and what that is. . . that is something that we need

to let the leadership pursue. we will remain standing on their two on fee. if set action were to succumb they would think long and hard that they should not be leaving it up to. [inaudible] >> several questions, i would make an observation before that on the subject of what happened in fighting the soviets. >> that war ended in 1989 with the draw of the soviet union. so it did being bringing down the communist bloc, i think that sometimes the responsibility must be taken that were taken in pakistan especially after 1989. for example pakistan kept it a very long population and these

are people who were not even born when that war was taken place. so i understand the concern and the question, but i sometimes feel that in what is going on now it kind of whitewash is what happened in between. there were other factors that were at play here. but go on, you have several questions, some of which i note diplomatically want to just not necessarily want to but i want you to respond to every question being asked by the audience. >> welcome i have to say that patience pays off. in the beginning if you if you remember i set up a couple points. one of them was about the extremism that you mention in jihadist him. while i agree the lady here that from a historical perspective we have to look at it and we learn from history move on, we don't

stay stuck in it. yes, what i wanted to say was while they may have had extremist elements they were not extreme, by the majority, the freedom fighter is one thing to be their country of primitive vader. but elements that lead to it and being stuck in that history is something that we should really get out of. was dubbed the has happened many decades since then. today, it is the different situation, different relationship, the regional politics never thing has changed so much. on the question, afghanistan is it in broiled in own internal issues, so many that we have to

deal with it, it's not our place at this point to involve ourselves in whatever we feel, however humanitarian of a project, it's difficult for us to get ourselves involved and to get our resources to address an issue that while we are still to solve and move towards a stable -- so let's all pray that afghanistan becomes stable and peaceful and hopefully the whole region, we will pray for you all to become and our neighbors, it's in our interest to have peace around us comments your interest to have peace in afghanistan. so at that note to prayer let us bring this afternoon to an end. it has been a wonderful discussion. discussion. i would just say that the united states, it ignored afghanistan

between 1989 and 2001 and as a result 9/11 happened. but then the united states and the people who think about the issues also need to look at the big picture, and see how we can actually find a solution in which the taliban can be forced onto the table or off the map. either those solutions would be acceptable to us at this audience. so. so thank you for joining us. we will soon -- those of you who are not already on the hudson mailing list please give your names to the young people here who are working with us and we look forward to staying in touch. >> thank you very much. [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> c-span's "washington journal", live everyday with news and policy issues that impact to you. coming up tuesday morning, three members of congress will join us to discuss the mass shooting in orlando over the weekend. democratic california

represented eric -- ranking member of the intelligence subcommittee of the cia talks about the role of the intelligence today and in the future. then, the chair of the homeland security subcommittee on oversight and management efficiency, pennsylvania representative scott perry on homeland security and domestic terrorism issues. and senator tom harper of delaware, member of of delaware, member of the homeland security and government affairs committee discusses threats to u.s. security. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal, beginning live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on tuesday morning. join the discussion. >> coming up tuesday, hearing hearing on the issue of visitors overstay their visas. and calls for a new entry and exit tracking system. the house homeland security subcommittee on border and a maritime security will take up the issue live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. >> our c-span campaign 2016 bus continues its travel throughout the country to honor winners from the student can competition. recently our bus stopped in maryland and washington d.c. at montgomery blair high school in silver spring maryland, 41 students were presented with awards in

front of classmates teachers and elected officials for producing 14 winning videos, including the first prize documentary called driving forward. charles grider $13000 for the documentary on infrastructure spending. they also also made in washington d.c. where mark jackson both received honorable mention for their videos and were awarded $250 each. and david for duel and ali rashida, $1750 for their winning videos on money and politics and poverty and homelessness in the united states. a special thanks to our cable partner, comcast cable for helping coordinate these visits in the community. you can view all of the winning can view all of the winning documentaries as student can.org. >> next, look look at the u.s. coast guard, the common spoke about the role in fighting drug

trafficking, dealing with migrants at sea, and u.s. policy in the arctic. from the center for strategic and international studies, this is about one hour. >> good morning everyone. welcome to csi's, i'm kathy hits director of the security program here and together with our partners at the u.s. naval institute and daly who is taking a seat representing hit them today. where happy to bring your maritime security dialog. today we're especially happy to be inviting you to speak on the u.s. coast guard, admiral paul. >> that always connected come here about 17 months ago so this is a great update on everything that has happened for and with

the coast guard. in the meantime which is both significant. he, as you may well know has extensive operational command experience in the pacific and the atlantic, and of of no, he was the federal on scene coordinator for the deepwater horizon's bill and he directed there more than 47,000 responders, and 6500 vessels and 120 aircraft dealing and 120 aircraft dealing with the largest oil spill in u.s. history. so i think you can agree that he has both the extensive international experience in the homeland experience necessary for any coast guard. sorry about that, you can be a very core, not as well. >> before we begin today i want to go through safety procedures. we have doors behind us and then we have the door behind me that leads to the back of the building and this leads to the

front of the building. the star normal safety precautions that we relate to you. and i would be here to direct to you in case of fire alarm goes off. i want to also thank our sponsors for this event and for the whole series and that is martin international and hunting ingles industry so thank you for making the series possible. without further do, over two. >> thank you kathy and it's a good to see some a family faces here. first of all is a somber week, let's face it 49 at the last count and i know there are families morning and it is always mindful the threats that face us on a day-to-day basis. and certainly those are the threats that we always look at and the coast guard and maritime domain as well. but what i like to open up with here first is what i came into this job just a over two years ago.

on day one we put up mike, not direction, and usually that's a tendency to let me wait six months and i will study and see what's going on and then i will provide my direction. but i realize i only have four years. so you you don't have six months to waste. so the first day one we put out my direction and the first piece of that was about service to nation. though i broke that down to first of all strategy needs to drive our budget. for nearly 225 years we have always looked at here is our our budget now what we do with it. we were doing what was left over, really not looking at what our unique authorities are and where do we plug and play on a global scale, not just just here in the homeland but worldwide as well. so not just strategy driving budget, but also intelligence a driving operations. we have been a member of member of the national intelligence community now for 14 years. but it is not just driving the operations, it is also driving where you do not operate. where you apply what i would say

risk a base decision-making. we have 11 statutory missions, and historically we would try to fill all of those 11 buckets up equally but recognizing some of those buckets are already pretty healthy. i looked at our international fisheries enforcement and we had a compliance rate of over 95%. then i looked at what was happening in the western hemisphere and on any given day we had intelligence on over 80 or 85% of of the drug flow ultimately destined for the united states. eighty - 85 percent, but on the best of days we could target 10%. that means over 70 or 75% of that gets a free pass. so he started looking at the external environment and waste said put a series of strategies together, i cannot forecast out ten, or 15 years but i can

suddenly look out five years which is what we did last year and we put out a five year strategic intent. looking at those socioeconomic influences, not just here the united states but on a global scale. what is happening in the european union, where you have countries that are struggling economically and get you have a and yet you have a rising training, you have a rising southeast asia and many of the maritime nations of the world are not trying to build navies, they're they're trying to build coast guard's because they see their most intrinsic threat in the maritime domain is human trafficking, illegal fishing, smuggling and the like and of course natural disasters, search and rescue. in fact at the international sea powers symposium in 2014, i felt like the agenda was hijacked

because it became very coast guard like. but many of the maritime nations of the world cannot afford and they could not duplicate the best navy in the world and that is our united states navy, second to none and always will be. so my plug for that as well. but we recognize that discretionary budgets are not going to grow anytime soon. we also recognize there will be a change in administration. so factored all of that and as we tried to look out over the next five years of the coast guard. and where to our authorities resonate globally where we bring the best return on investment? then we went out with off with a number of regional and functional strategies, one of those is our strategy for the western hemisphere. when i arrived in the job that year we had 68,000 unaccompanied minors, primarily from, primarily from the countries of hunters, guatemala, and el salvador leaving those countries in the hands of the human trafficker to make safe arrival in the united states. so the first thing i did as the chairman of the interdiction committee, within the office of the national drug control policy, i went down with a number principles here in d.c.

and we met with presidents of the tri-board of regents. we met with the president of colombia and panama as well. we said wire these young children leaving? probably the most sobering account of this was when i met with presidents around and el salvador. he said is like this, the parents right now are taking their kids out of school because they are afraid that they will either be co-opted or forced to join a gang. this is a country right now that has 40% unemployment, 50% poverty, and now and now you're pulling this next generation out of a higher education and so where is el salvador going to be in the next 15 or 20 years? then i asked there in the hunters, guatemala and i say why the violence? a year ago honduras was the most violent nation in the world. the murder rates were perching nearly 100 per 100,000.

president hernandez said the problem is when these are drugs arrive in and they land in my country, the first thing that we lose is rule of law. the money is so great that i cannot pay law-enforcement enough to please this activity. so if you can keep this offshore or prevented from coming on sure, i can then address the security environment of my country, but as soon as it's like money flowing from the sky but in this case it arrives in bales of cocaine. and again, 75% of it is it getting through, he said if you can do that then you can have an impact. so again, intelligence driving operations and driving how we manage risk. we double down on our coast guard presence in the transit zone in the western hemisphere. we do not do by yourself, we had great support by customs and border protection and hsi within the department of homeland security and the national dea, fbi, just to name a few others. all in on this as well.

so last year we removed 191 metric tons of cocaine and we took 700 smugglers into custody for prosecution here in the united states. prosecution right here is about 98%. the prosecution rate in honduras was 2%. so you do not have to be a math wizard to figure out where you get the best return on investment. so we have continued that effort this year as well, if you remember last year 191 metric tons, over 700 smugglers, six months into this year, six months into this year we have removed over 245 metric tons of cocaine. we are on a slope to remove over 400 metric tons and take 400 smugglers into custody as well. it's not just the volume, it's the ill-gotten gains, it's what this is doing to regional stability and central america. so when i look at the

cooperative strategy for the 21st century strategy for the 21st century and we are written into that as well, the navy is and must be deployed elsewhere, and they are weather three positioning of the pacific in the mediterranean, but we start looking at where those gaps are it seems leads to significant one in the western hemisphere right now. at a point in time when they're really doing a lion share of our coast guard activity with law-enforcement teams and parked in those platforms and there are no in service. so we have double down there. we've also looked at the arctic to the north and it is no big secret that the waters of the arctic's opening and with that we have seen about a 300300% increase in human activity in the arctic. i was up there last year when shell was drilling in the burger oil feel and the tchotchkes see. conservative estimates are that 13% of the worlds oil and about 1,000,000,000,000 dollars worth of minerals reside on the seafloor up in the arctic

region. it's probably not profitable to exploit that when oil is hovering just north and south of $50 a barrel. are they going to stay that way forever but if nothing else you can look at the oil and gas that is up there as strategic of the united states. we can also look at the fact that we have done extensive see mapping beyond our traditional 200-mile economic exclusive zone up in the arctic and it's nearly twice the area of the state of california. but we have seen other nations out there doing scientific research and establishing a pattern of operating in the very same area as well. recognizing that the united states is the only arctic nation that is not ratified the law of the sea convention. we are seeing more and more human activity, the cruiseship crystal serenity will depart this august and they will transit through the bering strait, through strait, through the northwest

passage and eventually return to new york. an area that was charted about 5% of the arctic is it charted into what is 21st-century standards. and not that long ago i was on the icelandic coast guard vessel and as captain i went up to the chart room and there on the chart the data for that chart is 1915. when shackleton, on the endurance was rewriting history in terms of man's or resilience, fighting mother nature. but now, now, you have crew shipping activity findings very same orders. today, the coast guard still flies the international ice patrol following the sinking of the titanic 104 years ago. so what happens if we have an event, a cruiseship if you will that finds an uncharted identical or these are not icebreaking cruise ships that are up there, so we start looking at what our needs are.

the united states can't do it alone. so just this past week i was in boston and i met with all of the heads of the arctic coast guards, all seven other countries and we had the lead. i was the chair of this, we had russia there, and this is no easy feat, but it is the one area where we have an open dialogue with their russian counterparts in terms of how to re-frame the strategic environment of the arctic. they too are concerned with the amount of human activity, shipping going through there, what if you have an oil spill and russia admits that even with the fleets of icebreakers the fleet of icebreakers that they have, they do not have the capacity to deal with the challenges in the arctic. the first thing that we need to do is set up a communication protocol. an information exchange where we can communicate with each other 24/7 and share the main awareness of what is happening in the high north latitudes. so we will meet one last time to

finalize the operating guidelines for the arctic as well. you might say well will be other crew shipping activities, i know what the price per passages if i want to book affair of the crystal serenity, for what? and if i'm in the crew shipping industry this is a business, so you might want to get in on this business and i fully anticipate that we will see more and more crew shipping into this a very pristine environment coming up in the future as well. so we are not done there. we also looked at what is happening in the cyber domain and i know all of you follow cyber. i look primarily through the maritime transportation lens, i was out at long beach earlier this year and it looks like something out of star wars, even though that is where george lucas got that design for those robots, but there are these autonomous vehicles moving containers across the yard and there on man's. in fact, they are not even,

they're using natural gas so there's no carbon, very little carbon footprint. but they put they put transponders down beneath the tarmac of this entire tainer terminal and they're using a gps signal but they realize that if there's a disruption in the gps signal they have resiliency. in fact, this robot this robot wanted sensors that is battery pack is down, they also run battery it will go to the charging station, the robot pulls it out puts another one in, they go back to work. i don't think it cost all that much per hour to move these things around. but it's a huge investment. but we have seen ships that had been disrupted by cyber. we've seen mobile offshore drilling units move off their drilling circle which means that blowout preventer had to kick in shut in that well because that main control council lost the ability to communicate with the thrusters and so now you have what could've been another

deepwater horizon but in this case that blowout preventer worked and it hasn't happened in more than one occasion. it's a big big cost to the industry, literally millions. the cost roughly 1,000,000 dollars a day to rent, or lease of mobile offshore drilling unit but when you look at lost productivity type reestablishing control, obviously the cost goes up as well. so industry is keenly attuned to operating in the cyber domain. even something as fundamental as you have to replace the part, how do you know there is not malware in that part as well. so we have reached out to the international maritime organization, we've held a number of town halls and normally industry does not want to be regulated, yet they realize that if were going to change behavior it may require a regulatory regime, best practices of how does industry stay ahead of the cyber threats of today. our financial sector, about 95% plus is behind a bona fide firewall in protecting very sensitive information. maritime

transportation system on the other hand is about 25%. about 90% of our global trade moves by sea. so it is a very vulnerable segments of our economic prosperity, but more importantly our economic security and with that our national security. another area i'm looking at is within the energy sector. when we wrote this energy policy, oil at that time was going for $100 per barrel. every day a new tank barge was entering the mississippi river, this was, in fact we saw 50 fold increase in barge traffic carrying bock in crude, you saw what happened a week ago when a train derailed a very strong light ends, very volatile substance but there is also a heavy into this as well. it's about the about the same specific gravity is water as the wider and lead out and then it sinks in the water. now some lady mindful of earlier

this year we had record flooding in the interior of the united states which means you have high river conditions and so there's a big difference pushing a barge downriver versus upriver. when you're going down river it's like going down skyline parkway with a double semi with no breaks. it is very difficult to stop these things. we saw a number of bridge collisions. mud most of these were green barges because they were not moving crude at the time. but when that sinks and it gets into the water intakes we need to make sure that we are ready to respond to those scenarios as well. at the end of the day we need to keep that inland highway bars open and robust. at the the same time we inspect all these barges, we are just starting to push lng into the global market right now.

there's a lot of competition out there, i think we'll see a supply glut of lng in the near term but the united states sits on the highest volume of natural gas as any other country in the world. huge, huge economic potential there. and why that's important to me is that we regulate. so that we regulate. so he gets back to our regulatory roles in our inspection regime. if i'm not training that next generation to be in front of industry rather than liking it, then we will become an impediment and not a facilitator of this commerce as well. we are paying very close attention to that. the next piece. the next piece of that, we are investing in the coast guard like never before. we are building, we just build the second phase of our response cutters, hundred 54 feet in length, just doing yeomen duty in human duty in the straits of florida today. several occasions we've probably evaded a mass migration from cuba because we had enough shifts out there to stop them

and interdicting most of those folks trying to find a better life here for the united states. as a master we be sending the ships to the mediterranean or gnc, there's an opportunity cost if you do that. if you do that we have a migration problem and a challenge in in the united states as well. so we go to the aid of the e.u. and then we leave our maritime borders exposed and those are the decisions that we have to make so we look at that as well. we also are visualizing 14c27j fixed wing aircraft. these it we acquired at no cost from the u.s. air force, there are mission rising any of those to help in our isr capability. this year we were awarded materials for our ninth on

national security cutter, program of record was a. but there was funding to go ahead and build a ninth one of these as well. is there work for nine national security cutters, absolutely. in fact, this absolutely. in fact, this last year two of our national security cutters, stratton came back a little less than one year ago with 32 metric tons of cocaine on it. that is enough to literally kill this room to the city going with her cocaine. the other one did not do quite as well, they fill this room about three quarters the way to the ceiling, but they interdicted three self-propelled semisubmersible's which the only way you finally sister intelligence. that's where this government comes into play and it's the ability o