to the bottom line here, they've really made no significant matters of fire. >> not that i'm aware of, no, sir. >> turning to another area of inquiry, could you shed some light on the talks that are in progress if there are such talks as mr. karzai has acknowledged in the past few days there are apparently involving the three parties, talent income united states in afghanistan? >> yes, sir, there have been. i don't think either general burgess are kind of the authorities on the negotiations with the taliban. i am sure the special representative for afghanistan, pakistan and marc grossman is

far better informed about. but i'm sure there have been dialogue. i'm sure president karzai is through directly or intermediaries has been discussing reconciliation issues with the taliban. >> you are aware that such talks are ongoing? >> yes, sir. i believe they are. >> what is the need down for releasing these currently incarcerated taliban insurgents if those talks are ongoing at the moment? the maxtor, this is part of confidence building. i think that started as kind of a separate track and there are some reciprocity consideration, which are preferred to talk about in closed session. >> i appreciate that.

i just say i would see no need for that kind of release if in fact they are ongoing and inside the adversary have an interest, a self-interest in talking. i personally would question the need for any such release. apart apart from the security issues that have been raised by my colleagues from the hampshire, senator ayotte and others previously feared let me ask you if i make him a general question and i understand he may be reluctant to go into detail in this setting, but if you could characterize whether they are differences in the threat assessments from our intelligence about the iranian nuclear capability and the potential response to israeli intervention there and the israelis intelligence

assessments, if you understand my question, which calls for a general answer, i am not asking for detail. >> your question, to make sure i understand it, to be in the israelis largely agree? and the answer is yes. >> do you agree? >> sir, i do. and we have at least discussions for many years. i have personally been involved in both my previous life and displays. and generally speaking, our assessment struck with each other. they comport. >> thank you. let me ask a final question and you may not think it is a directly relevant to all the questions you had so far, but we have been in discussions with secretary panetta and general dempsey about the overall budget

of the department of defense and the platforms that exist. in terms of platforms for intelligence gathering, are there particular areas you think the expenditure of resources poses a threat? in other words, to put it more simply, where diminished fountain impedes or imperils intelligence gathering on the united states? >> well, sir, we are going through our own trust in the intelligence community since a large portion of the national intelligence program is embedded in the dod budget. so we were kind of given the same production on a proportionate basis.

so way or the node for the first time in 10 years of cutting intelligence resources. we've been on an upward slope for the whole decade and that is going to come to a halt. and so, we will have less capability than we have had in the last 10 years. that said, i've been through this before. when i served as. in the early 90s and we have the peace dividend after the fall of the wall and a profound cutting, intelligence community didn't do it very well. so we try to profit from that experience and place stock in those capabilities that make us resilient to not show so we can't respond as we need to wherever hotspots or crises occur in the world. so as the department of defense into the far east or the

pacific, we will do that as well and obviously is a major equity for us in the intelligence community is support to the military. where we're a fat dude, i think, to get to your question is, for example, as we drawdown in iraq, obviously we have a much reduced footprint across the board to reduce intelligence. that was fat but fidelity that we previously had on iraq and i anticipate what might shot down in afghanistan and intelligence resources are drawdown proportionately that we love so not have fidelity that we have today. some of that context, yes we will do some capability, but the premise that the intelligence community and the organizing principles i have tried to push

as a result of my experience 20 years ago is those capabilities that enable global coverage to include for areas such as russia and china and enable us to adapt and be resilient depending on what the crisis of the day is. >> thank you very much both for answering my question and for being so forthcoming. thank you. >> thank you very much, senator blumenthal. senator brown. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i won't belabor my point but i agree with most of what was fat. i want to emphasize how important is that we ensure israel has every evening service to close any capability to ask with respect to iran. you both you agree with that recommendation or suggestion? >> yes, sir. both of us have been proponents for sharing intelligence with

the israelis. i'll be going there next week to engage with the israeli intelligence officials and discuss that very point. >> recommit thank you. and also to add him a little bit more, my colleagues have mentioned syria and how the people are enduring serious tax from a solid. earlier this week the head of al qaedl on the slums in the countries joining syria to join the fight against the assad regime. given the president and administration continued to say it's not a matter of if but when we will fail fall, are we prepared for the situations are possible possible state where a car that enjoys the state and refuge and from which to coordinate attacks? what is the plan? >> it is a great question because who would succeed or what would succeed is a mystery.

we certainly do not know -- hideout what this would do. i quote that i read in my oral remarks here at the outset of the testimony, quoting the roman historian pliny said the best after that ever is the first first aid after that i would have that kind of goes downhill. there is no identifiable group that would succeed him. and so, that would be kind of a vacuum i think, that would lend itself to extremists operating in syria, which is particular travel some the might of the large network of chemical warfare, weapons storage facilities and other related facilities that are in syria.

>> i agree. i have a concern that al qaeda and iraq is moving towards syria and consolidating themselves are now. do you have any incidence of that >> yes, sir producing evidence of extremists, sunni extremists. i cannot think of them specifically as al qaeda, but similar ilk who infiltrating oppositionist groups. in many cases probably unbeknownst to those opposition groups. >> just to shift gears, before shooting and other recommendations regarding information sharing. but status of that? can you tell me a little about the counterintelligence community and what they do to help leaders in the ground identify potential break down site when we saw fort hood? >> i am not sure i -- >> in the wake -- key reforms have yet to be completed particularly in the area of information sharing which

continues to put our nation at risk for homegrown terrorism. are you getting all the information you need from u.s. agencies to test our domestic threats coming to think? >> i'll put it this way. we have come a long way in the last 10 years and information sharing. it is a big focus for me, for the opposite direct or of national intelligence sharing vertically across the agencies as well as horizontally and vertically as well as federal private sector. there's been a lot of work done towards that. it's an emphasis area for me and i do think we have made great improvements. but at the same time of course we have had episodes like wikileaks, which reminds us that the need to balance the sharing and security. so we always have that fine line

to draw within those two. but i think we have improved, but there's always more to do. >> thank you both. >> can you bear much, senator brown. senator udall. >> mr. chairman, i'd like to yield to mr. mansion. i know he's got a scheduling conflict, but i think to keep my place. >> burgess flip-flopping. >> we appreciate those courtesies. >> thank you, mr. chaiman. i am reading a book called becoming jobs by jim clifton. i would recommend it if y'all haven't seen it. basically the coming jobs will be the biggest war facing this world. who is fighting for jobs and basically breaks it down 7 billion citizens in human beans on this great planet earth. 5 billion over the age of 15, 3 billion seeking a job of some sort.

only 1.2 billion for my jobs in the world today. so we can see the mammoth problem we're facing peer but that, what i'm asking is what you can do intelligent past events, do you consider the impact of unemployment and what it will have on the stability of the population and how that increases likelihood of unrest and terrorism? >> absolutely commissary. i think the point, even more basic than jobs is if the project in the future what the world supply of food and water is going to be in the face of the growing population. you project out the population of the earth is going to be in the face of declining resources. and yes, absolutely we do account for that entering any kind of intelligent assessment and indelible illustration of that was arab spring because of the conditions which actually still at his.

the population bulge of high numbers of young unemployed people rising economic difficulties of deprivation. the lack of political freedom of expression. and of course one of our major insights into that is in social media, which has become a major bellwether for the attitudes of people. so to answer your question is asat you consider that in disruption. >> thank you. general, following when i read this book and i was thinking the amount of money we spent in afghanistan, knowing when they leave it hadhe only economy they had success. knowing that the terrorists have her ability to foster terrorism will be the same and i have a very hard tireu still there andw

i've talked to everybody and i feel very strong. what i will say is based. nort possession of u.s. drone that crash in december and will not reverse engineer them. so they will have it their disposal. why on earth did we not design or request the design of distractio they lost the strong center in a circumstance that we could have destroyed them so they could not have been reproduced back to use against us? >> i'd be happy to discuss that with you in closed session, sir. >> but is this a session at kim jong un f and what does it mean for north korean nuclear program and the six party talks going on? >> sir, what i tell you so far is as we watch the succession is

unfolding as we had thought it would. it's actually moving as has been designated in at this time we see no change to any of their policies than we actually see no impact on the way they conduct business at the present tim qae, al-shabaab, formally joined al qaeda this past week since somali americans travel from the u.s. to join al-shabaab and patrons national government and i'd like to know from you, what are we going to be doing to respond to this threat? all, i would play down debate the significance of this union between al-shabaab and al qaeda. i think these are two organizations -- al qaeda is an organization under season is in decline. al-shabaab for its part is under pressure by virtue of both

ethiopian and kenyan incursions into somalia. they have lost territory and are under the gun. so i think we'll continue to do what we have always done with these two organizations. al-shabaab for its part has been largely focused on regional issues. that is within the horn of africa as opposed to project and a homeland threat. is bothersome of course at the number of foreign fighters recruited the debris and train them and fight. >> finally, general, to both of you are, on tuesday, general dempsey texas i'd do governments in egypt is where the film is $1.3 billion of aid from the united states. we have been a solid partner. according to press reports, the same government, general dempsey spoke of his living power to

anti-american factions. some are campaigned to end u.s. aid to egypt. based on your intelligence assessments, will we be able to rely on a future egyptian government to uphold the 1979 peace treaty with israel? >> that's an excellent question, sir and i think that will depend very much on the continuation of the transitional process in egypt, particularly when they write their constitution and what the constitution may or may not pay about the treaty with israel. i think under any circumstance circumstance -- acampora s-sierra see how circumstance of any government that emerges after the staff transition our hands often june, that there won't at least be a review of the treaty. but how that will come out, we

don't know. >> let me just say thank you to both of you for your outstanding service for this country of ours. but that, i want to thank my gracious colleague from colorado. >> teeny mac, senator mansion. senator graham. >> thank you vote for service to our country. i think is mentioned at the intelligence budget is certified to admit defense budget. secretary pineda said if we did sequestration, if we take another five to 600 billion on top of the 487 being planned, it would be devastating, irresponsible and the department of defense site. what i had same effect on the intelligence side? >> absolutely. >> would you agree with me if america ever needed a smart intelligence network it is now because the enemies we fight really don't care if they die, they just want you to go with?

>> .another reasons, yes, sir. and if i may add, provisions as they pertain to intelligence are even more onerous because it would not have any latitude to move or pick and choose where we would reduce. a stipulated price that every programmer has to take a proportional head. so we would be a face with the prospect traversing a letter to employees, which would have a devastating effect but the employees who weren't as well as virtually every major acquisition system we have in the intelligence community because they would all be wounded. destroying. >> i would have a hard time saying as director of national intelligence that i could face a group like this to any degree of confidence that i can find

adequate intelligence >> america would go blind in terms of intelligence gathering. >> it d time. >> let's go to iran. keep this 30,000-foot view. the regime school, didn't she think his survival? right? >> yes, sir. do you think they've made a decision that may be the best way to survive is to develop a nuclear weapon? >> well, sir, we've said consistently that they will base this on a cost-benefit analysis. >> t. think they are trying to develop a weapon? to think that is their goal? >> they are putting themselves and put the sustainable infrastructure to enable them actinic that decision. yes, sir. >> to think they are building power plants for a peaceful nuclear generation purposes? >> that remains to be seen.

add to your data tension that comes to make a nuclear weapon? >> i do. >> you're not so sure they are trying to make it? >> you tell whether or not they are trying to create a nuclear bomb? >> they are keeping themselves in a position to make that decision, but certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time. >> how would we know when they've made that decision? >> i'd be happy to discuss enclosed. >> i am very convinced of developing a nuclear weapon. it seems logically that they get a nuclear weapon and nobody really features going to bother them. >> let's talk about are your capability in the hands of the iranians. is that a good out on for the

united states national interest if they were able to achieve capability? >> a nuclear weapon and the means of delivering it. >> the reason being is that it created nuclear arms race. >> that is certainly unlikely outcome. >> arab and sunni states would not have a nuclear trump card. >> correct. >> the likelihood of a terrorist organization been able to access nuclear materials in the hands of the iranian would be greater, not less, when you think quite for publicly so. and of course that is the nexus as a terrorist group and weapons of mass destruction. >> when president obama says it is unacceptable for them to achieve nuclear capability, do you agree with that? >> sir, i do. spin with the congress will do containment of nuclear-capable iran is not a good national security strategy, so we'll be back in a president and i'm glad

to hear you agree with that proposition that we should not as a nation continue nuclear-capable iran announced effect of the sanctions may work. i hope they do. i'm not into believing all is lost. do you also believe that i'll license should be remain on the table from capability? >> is a personal view. that is not the intelligence communities. >> just personally. >> certainly i do. >> that's what the president said in a certainly a crew of 10. >> let's get back to iraq. has the security environment deteriorated since we left iraq militarily? >> i think it is about the same. we have recently done an assessment on the prospects in iraq for then next 18 months. i think video is while there are challenges and certainties, we

believe at least for the next year or so that the iraqi government will continue. it appears that the sunnis at this point believes that their best prospect for protecting their interest is to participate in the government. >> so you believe that us withdrawing all of our forces from iraq has really had no effect on the iraqi security environment? >> i wouldn't say no effect. >> which is a minimal effect? >> i think terrorists are enable both capabilities that they no longer have by virtue of our absence. at the same time, as indicated in the statement, dated reasonably well and they have a reasonably capable ct fours. >> do you know what the vice president and vice president tried to indict him days after

we left and not before? >> i do not know why the timing of it then i guess the implication would be our president is they are. although, we're doing all we could diplomatically. i don't know why the timing. >> is it generally viewed as the sunnis and kurds that when america left iraq that would save them to iranian influence? >> sir, i don't really know how -- >> had the tact the sunnis and kurds? >> i would suggest that you do. >> when it comes to afghanistan afghanistan -- >> there's no suggestion they are concerned. >> i suggest you sit down with sunnis and kurds. now, afghanistan. the strategic partnership agreement is really the last card to be played in many ways, if not correct?

the afghanistan? >> i am not sure what you mean by last card that is certainly an important -- >> ester treatment, if i could have 30 additional seconds, i'll be quick. the bottom line is that we have an american military presence post 2014 at the request of the afghan government and people that would allow a counterterrorism capability, american air power, that would always give the edge to the afghan security forces and probably be the end of that militarily. you agree to construct? >> idea. i think that it be a very positive thing, not only in afghanistan, but regionally. >> the best way to negotiate the taliban is saying they'll never take that over militarily. you need to get involved in the system? >> at a minimum, the talladega would not provide a reservoir or safe haven for the likes of al qaeda. >> thank you.

>> senator udall. >> mr. chairman, good deal to a colleague that senator hagan who chairs the subcommittee has to present on the floor in a few minutes. maintain my -- >> you've got no competition looked at the moment. senator hagan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. is certainly thank you, senator udall. i want to follow that senator graham's question concerning iraq. i also want to say how much i appreciate both of you being here today testified that in addition your leadership and long-term security interests and our country. it's a thank you. and you're prepared testimony, you state al qaeda in iraq, despite his speaking capabilities chemise capable of high-profile attacks and some shia militant groups will continue targeting u.s. interests including diplomatic personnel. what the intelligence committee's assessment of capabilities of iraqi counterterrorism force us to continue similar operations

against al qaeda and iraq and the absence of a u.s. versus? general burgess. >> i retired their assessment is that the ct fours that was left there is a capable force, but also a q. i is a capable and formidable foe. so while the iraqis have some capability, there are certainly some things that we are still looking at doing to help them from an intelligence standpoint. >> man, we put a lot of resources against that as the u.s. and we work with our iraqi friends. >> thank you. let me go to libya and their weapons at titles. when gadhafi's regime, it was discovered yet undeclared stocks of chemical weapons as well as large quantities of conventional weapons. can you tell