i can tell you the average increase in sales over that four-year period is averaging 9% per year. and what's important about that is the average increase in all the other save-a-lot stores is less than 2%. so our folks know good healthy affordable food is aed goo thing. folks got to eat so they're coming to the grocery store and it's doing wonderfully successfully. we have a movie theater under construction catty corner from the grocery snore a senior building we build. you can clap, it's good. i'll invite you to the grand opening in october. four screen, 375 seats. the exciting part is a lot of times in our work in our communities we struggle with just the basics. something to eat, a place to live, important but that's not what a thriving community looks like. you have to have entertainment. so in october we'll open a movie theater. in toex that we have a two story community service building where we'll provide health care services and retail opportunity, maybe a subway maybe a jimmy john's. how do we build a sense of

community? how do we make sure we're driving resources in a specific place? we partner with another school district called the normandy school district that is undercredited. that's struggled mightily for a whole host of reasons. we've done a couple things in the pre-k space. we work with another organization called united for children, they work with 15 of our 35 licensed pre-k facilities in our geography serving over 800 kids. our vole to give them the resources to say to those providers how can we help you provide better services? how do we make sure they're ready for that first day of kindergarten. don't need more research. we got all the research we need. invest in our little ones invest in them early and often and they will be successful. when they get to kindergarten for the last three years kindergartener receives a savings account. so we have 800 kids with college savings accounts already. after this next school year

question eel have over 1,000 children. 500 and growing in their name telling them "you can go to college. you can do this, it's just a matter whereof." let's figure that out along the way. we have a program at the high school called viking advantage. again, the financial opportunity that jason talked about. child and their families saves a doctor, we match it with three to pay for college. we have almost 200 kids participating, some of them recently this may graduated from college. so what we found out is not -- i don't have 100% like dr. anderson but we're 85% persistent rate. kids staying in college. getting in is not easy but, quite frankly, the harder part is finishing. so we have 85% of our kids firning, going through college and graduating. how do we drive resources in an intentional way to say that you can be great, you can live to your dreams and expectations and our job as adults is to support you as long the way. in the health space we do a program called passport health. over 300 people participating in

running clubs, cooking clubs, taking care of yourself recognizing that you can change some of your behaviors and you can get healthier. again, if you don't feel good, the rest of life is complyeplyicatedcomplicated. how do we get people to be healthier. how do we provide opportunities to say i want a better life, i want something better for me and my family. our job is twofold. we're a doer. we like to get stuff done. like to build thing, at the end of the day we want to provide programs and support programs that we run st. louis's only freedom school by the children's defense fund. we're proud to be the only freedom school in st. louis again providing great opportunities for children. at the end of the day, we believe and one of the hardest things sometimes for folks to understand is this notion that community building happens at the speed of trust. so how can you be in community over and over and over again band with folks during the good times and not so good times? ribbon cuts and ground brakings

are great but the real work happens day in and day out when folks stumble and you pick them up. the real work happens when you say to them we're here no matter what we won't go away. we want to be in your child's life to make you successful. >> well i think that i'm certainly picking up a theme from our panelists here and that is that we need comprehensive approaches to these issues. if we continue to silo people, if we continue to just work in certain channels without branching out and trying to have a more wholistic approach we're not going to be as successful as we could be. as you've heard from the diagnosis and the recommendations a from the study to what is being done in one

school district that faced a lot of challenges to community building which is at really the heart of what you're doing. and i think, you know sometimes people when they hear our three panelists, they get excited but then they say to themselves "well, who's going to do that? that's complicated? how do you break down the bureaucratic barriers and get more people involved to be able to produce these outcomes?" that is a challenge, i would be the first to say that. but it's a surmountable challenge. . if more developers cared more about building communities instead of buildings we would have more people doing exactly what you're doing and we need to all be in effect apostles missionaries for this view point and try to get more people to

think like what you're hearing up here. then try to take it to scale. so if it works in jennings normandy and the surrounding community, let's make sure it keeps working but let's move from there to provide more support for more people trying to do exactly what you've heard. so this is very exciting to me. before i came near afternoon, i didn't know about any of this. that's why i think it's important whether you're running for president or just being a person you actually listen and try to learn from people on the front lines doing studies doing the hard work making a difference so i have to thank you for giving me a lot of great ideas about what others can do as well. [ applause ] >> secretary clinton along that line, i want to acknowledge our city treasurer.

tischara, would you stand, please? [ applause ] in the city of st. louis she has developed the same type of college savings plan that chris talked about. every child entering kindergarten in the city of st. louis will receive a college account with $50 given by the city. it's a new program that she is in charge of and i'm going to quote her from a place we were together yesterday she says if st. louis can find the millions of dollars necessary to build a football stadium -- [ cheers and applause ] -- for a team that doesn't even want to be here. [ laughter ] then we certainly can find the money to support our children. so i want to salute her as well.

[ applause ] they gave me a little leeway with these first three rows so i padded them with brilliance. >> can i just add that one of the recommendations and for the sake of all is actually universal child development accounts for every baby fwhornborn there st. louis city and st. louis county. we know from experimental work in the state of oklahoma that children who have these accounts have better social and emotional functioning than children who don't. mothers of children have lower levels of depressive symptoms and higher expectations for their children. we've been working with treasurer jones, very proud of the work she's been doing. we want to make this universal and also like you wed is voter registration, opt out. so every child get this is you have to ask not to get it. i think we can do that as a region and we're going to work towards that. [ applause ] >> you know, i think it's important to look at what cities

like st. louis under the leadership of the treasurer is doing and what some states are doing and i have to tell you as i've traveled around the country talking about universal pre-k, i get to a point in my presentation where i say "and probably the state that is leading the country in providing universal pro-k is oklahoma." i'm not talking massachusetts or california. i'm talking about as we say in politics a deep red state. and therefore it seems to me that it's a good idea to talk to political leaders and business leaders. i mean, my goodness, if oklahoma can do it, certainly missouri can do it as well it seems to me. >> it was important on this panel that we not gloss over the fact that we have some serious challenges here. in minute those challenges are rooted in the foundational sin

of this nation which is racism. racism showed its ugly ned a different way on august 9 when michael brown, jr., died. our next panelist, brittany packnet is the ceo of teach for america here in st. louis. but she also is a progressive fighter for justice and an activist on the front line ss. because of her positioning there, she was chosen to be a part of the president's task force on policing. though she can speak on many things i'm going to ask her to speak on this divide and the need for police and community reform. [ applause ] >> so i greatly appreciate the opportunity and the invitation and i will willingly say that the seat that i occupy could be

occupied by many in this movement and this work and young people in particular. so i want to acknowledge that because i come to you both with lessons i have that learned on the streets and through the lens of ferguson and in classrooms but and also some ideas. so the first lesson that i learned was a clarification for me about what leadership is. and i was able to codify this definition paying very close attention to what young people did in ferguson. and so i figured out that leadership is proximal. that it mains closeness to the issue without fear of retribution or danger. that it is consistently truthful. so truthful about the stakes, truthful about the facts. that it's consistent. that true leadership keeps showing up regardless of how dangerous it is. and lastly that real leadership is unapologetic and when we know what's right we continue to fight for it. and so i will say as i have

audience with you that not only is the kind of leadership we have mean? fergds and west baltimore and cleveland, all around the country, that's the kind of leadership our community will demand from our public servants. [ applause ] what it is also critically important to me to recognize in particular as an educator is that when young people displayed that kind of leadership, it didn't require a program or organization to inspire them do that. they already possessed those assets and if we look at young people as full beings who have a great deal to offer the world to think about what they can give us we can learn those lessons. community programming is important. church programming is important. organizing is important.

so until policy decisions match the effort we are seeing on this stage and see across this region, we're not going to get free. [ applause ] . the other thing that i noeknow that august 9 confirmed for me is that kids can't learn if they're dead. so the conversations we're having about education are for naught if they end up like mike brown, tamir rice, ayanna jones. so as much as i'm going to have a conversation and have ideas rooted in my experience as an educator and someone who trains teachers, it's rooted in what i have learned from ferz and the

idea that anybody who touches the life of a child, teachers or police officers need to see their own humanity in that young person. [ applause ] so three very quick things. the first is an idea that in education circles we call culturally responsive pedagogy or culturally responsive leadership. it is the idea that you are seeing a child as their full selves but also recognizing the assets they are bringing into a classroom given their background. so if a child is from ferguson jennings bosnia, mexico, they bring unique skill sets and a unique view point on the world and that is actually how we should teach. layered on to what officers do, we constantly are having this conversation about antibias but when you're talking about being a culturally responsive leader and public servant we're not just talking about mind seths, we're talking about knowledge and skills. here's what i mean by that. so we all come with implicit bias.

we should train people away from the bias and set a hiring standard for people who interact with young people for people who have license to carry guns in our communities so there should be a minimum bar of anti-base and anti-racist mind-sets that officers and teachers come into the classroom with. it's also often times we talk about structural diversity. we talk about diversifying the teaching force diversifying the police force. we know nationally only 2% of teachers are african-american men and at teach for america nationally we have done work such that over the last two years half of our incoming brand new teachers have been people of color. above 20% in the national teaching corps. so it's possible to go and find these folks but we also have to make sure we are getting beyond structural diversity and tokenism in representation, so when we talk about getting beyond mind-sets, we talk about knowledge and skills. so knowledge is best built by immersion. we are in the fifth week of training our new teachers at teach for america st. louis

right now. not only are they in school rooms teaching summer school in st. louis public schools and getting on-the-ground rigorous training. we're sending them on home visits. we're sending them down to learn at the feet of elders and people who spent their entire lives working for it laboring for this community. if we assure that knowledge comes from a textbook or a police academy or education but immersing yourselves in your community and learning from the people who truly hold knowledge there. the people continuing to hold that community. the last piece is skill. and skill has to continuously be developed. it's not you have no do anti-bias training. it has to be that we are consistently evaluating people based on their skill. based on the evidence we see from their operations. so when a teacher is doing well in the classroom they should be

rewarded for that. when a teacher is not doing that well they should be coached to figure out if they can do well. and if they can't, the there are lots of different occupations that you can engage in. the same with an officer. right? the same with an inter. and until we have very clear data about officers' records in the communities in which they serve, it's impossible for us to make that decision. the second point -- and i appreciate that you have started -- continued a national conversation about the prison industrial complex, if we are going to dismantle that, we have to go back to its root which is what happens when our young people are criminalized primarily in schools. so so not only can we create national level policy to incentivize the kind of teacher and police officer training i'm talking about we can incentivize the decline of disparities in school discipline issues because what we know is

that if your first interaction with an officer is negative and your first interaction with that officer is negative and happens when you're very young and you have now learned the lesson that i should be internalizing the idea that something is wrong with me, that i am a criminal, that i am always wrong, that i am always in trouble well then we know what can happen to you. i was a third grade teacher which innocent many states if my chirp were not on grade level in reading that there was a jail cell waiting for them. we could neverdom children to a future of criminalization when they are eight and nine years old. policy structures and incentivizing a different way to support issues in school so if we change punitive measures in school to align with restorative justice frameworks so that children learn how to work out their own issues so that young people learn how to channel their anger and actually move through the world in a thoughtful and professional way we're not only empowering them escape that life of crime, we're

empowering them to be productive full citizens. the last piece that i will say is that this work is unfinished so i was a member of the president's task force i am a member of the ferguson commission, i am a proud member of this activist community, i'm a proud educator until these things go on paper to being the living breathing constitutional rights of every citizen in this country and the laws that are actively passed and protected by our government, we won't see full scale change so for the things i just discuss wed need special prosecutors and investigations and issues of officer involved shooting. we still need police departments and governments to acknowledge the trust that has continuously been broken in communities because we can't move forward unless you acknowledge the harm that's been done. we can not unless we're incentivizing training for

servants who have the ability to touch and impact the lives of children. so i appreciate the opportunity and so much the effort that has been made in the community with our teachers last year on average they made one they made 1.5 years of growth in reading and math in a school year and because we said unless your classroom is rigorous and culturally responsive you are not meeting our standard and therefore we are work to do and we know proof is in the pudding and we hope that will match the good work you have seen and work from here today. >> excellent, excellent. [ applause ] >> we intentionally asked some activists and some people who have been on the ground to be with us today.

would you please stand if you are here and you've been an activist activist. [ applause ] >> and i ask them to stand secretary, so you can see that unlike what the media often represents, we interreaganal, and it is faith people people without any faith and all different races we are in this together and we are not going away. any faith, and all different races, we are in this together and we are not going away. without any faith, and all different races, we are in this together and we are not going away. >> i would expect nothing less. and i expect brittany's very important statement about structural and policy differences. because this does have to be

approached on many levels buts also have to imbed the structural and policy changes and support systems so that when you go one-on-one, whether it is with teachers or law enforcement officers or any other member of the community who has a lot of contact with and power over their fellow members of that community, you can do it to great success with a cod ray of people and if you do it and if the same lessons are not passed down year after year and then in 25 or 30 years you are right back to where we are today. i'm more hopeful right now than discouraged. i know how hard this is. i thank you for serving on the police commission appointed by

the president. and i know certainly he's doing everything he can to put the policy and the appropriations power behind incentivizing these changes. but it has to continue. within of our challenges in our country right now is because of our differences. political for sure. partisan for sure. geography experiences we have a lot of different communities around the country who have different needs different perceptions, different experiences. we're not as good as we need to be on persisting and continuing changes that we know work. so you know, brittany from your experience as anned cater you can -- an educator, you can turn a school around and unless you change the mind set, the change of the people in the school after you leave, it doesn't have staying power.

so our challenge, number one, to do what will work to create better outcomes to share that and to scale it and sustain it. and you can't do that without systemic and policy changes and without incentives. and it goes back to the point about the neighborhood building. the new markets tark credit is something my husband started when he was president. it has revitalized communities and the congress let had expire. so it didn't matter how evidence there was this was a tool could help people in st. louis and many other places around the country, unless there is say strong base of support, political support vocal support, to keep things that work, then we're just on the hamster wheel going around and around. and i think what you've heard from the panelists an the

pastors so we have an opportunity here and shame on us if we don't seize it and support those on the front line of changes and don't make the structural and policy changes in order to support them and those who come after them. that is what i think we have to be doing right now in america. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> i'm looking for greg. i need a time check. how many questions can we take? oprah is smoother than this, but this works. how many questions? okay. you choose. we'll start with this one. >> the first question asked considering the monumental impact the criminal justice and mass incarceration has had on families an communities throughout the united states, what policy changes will you pursue to reverse the current

trend and how committed will you be to healing past injustices? >> well it is a key question when it comes to not only justice but also family and the strength of families. and one of the four pillars of my campaign is to do all i can to strengthen families because without strong families you won't have a strong america. and one of the key problems facing families and african-american faulks is the disparity in sentencing, is the mass incarceration for nonviolent offenses and other minor problems that should be diverted away from the formal criminal justice system. i gave a speech about this a few weeks ago in new york. i'm very committed to this. because when you look at the numbers, they are daunting.

it is clear that there is disparity to go back to brittany's point, disparity in identifying children, starting from the earliest ages with a heavy prejudice against black children. so you've got two kids who are acting out in school and, as i remember, it was some time ago, kids act in school. all kinds of kids act out in school. the challenge is how you better change their behavior and support them and get them on the right track. and so you start at an early age labelling kidding as troublemakers as problems it becomes a self-fulfilling prove prophecy, and we have to get back to a true juvenile justice system and what we have now is just another funnel system into

the adult system and we have to do more to set up the criteria so that african-american men are not sent to prison for doing the very same thing that a white man of the same age, the same background, the jame jurisdiction -- the same jurisdiction does. and i believe we can do all of this in a way that still keeps neighborhoods safe. i've had a couple of people say well, but if you don't send a rot of -- a lot of people to jail went woe get back to a bad crime rate. no that is not the way it works. of course we'll keep people that are too far -- we'll keep those away. but we can't expect to keep the mass incarceration at the rates we now have and supported by an

industry that makes money off of mass incarceration as well as making money off of immigrant incarceration. so i want to have an honest, candid incarceration and use the federal government incarceration and make people in federal and state jurisdictions to change the way they go about imposing criminal justice. i know that everything we're talking about up here takes time and it takes patience and persistence but we have to start somewhere and i intend to tackle this problem because i think it breaks up families and prevents the formation of families and causes great hardship for so many communities and it is not

fair so i think we can do better on all of those accounts. >> tieing this altogether, i just want you to be aware as a part of the ferguson commission we get quite a lot of data and one of the things that has keptd me up -- kept me up at night is the data that says in 2014 there were 1100 black children sent from schools to the juvenile system. in that same year there were only 63 white children who had that same result. i again say that this is a race issue even though we don't want to talk about it. it brings me to the next question. >> reverend tracy can i add a piece to what you just said when it comes to education when it comes to that. because the whole piece of the school to prison pipeline and we all know will call it what it is because there was a big record in the post-dispatch about

suspension and large numbers and i probably couldn't quote the statistics properly but the rate in which african-american students are suspended and put out of school as early as kindergarten literally and it was preschool and some school districts suspended for preschool and the rational in there were i can't afford other alternatives and things like that and it is a mindset piece because personally that is not a belief that i have that you put anybody out of education. that is something you should not take away from you. so you should not do that period. but that becomes a mindset in terms of how you adjust the behavior. so the cycle of aggression is ingrained so people do those things so in jennings we have in school suspension. when students come out of jail, there is really -- or juvenile,

they come right back to high school, there is nothing in between, no counseling, and so we have the jeopards program, and they have mental health counseling and they transition there and then go back to school. and so giving the support and the resources. unfortunately, the mindset for the teachers and the leaders that has to change. and that is just -- to me, that piece is huge. and when you start talking about what needs to change. for us like you, brittany, when our teachers, the first day they go on a home visit on the training. that is part of what they do. but for the leaders we give them dismantling racism training. for principals it should be required. schools should have social justice training in college and none of that occurs. and if you don't do that as a superintendent or a leader, it doesn't happen.

>> and could i add too. and when you talked about what you've done in jennings. and when you mentioned you have mental health and other health care programs i think that is key. because a lot of teachers i agree completely that race is a big part of that. in some communities, it is also economic disparities, they've been poor and always be poor and behaving poorly and we don't want them. we know that people carry those prejudices with them. but i also think it is fair to say that a lot of our kids are coming to school with heavy challenges. poverty is toxic. family disruption is toxic. violence in the neighborhood is toxic. a lot of little kids have developed all kinds of anxiety and depression and all sorts of problems that are not being tended to.

so you have provided your teachers -- in addition to the training and the accountability that you want to invest in them, you've also provided them with an alternative. so if they see that child acting up acting out, unable to sit down unable to behave, rather than seeing it as a behavior problem, see it as a health problem, see it as a environmental problem, because i'll tell you one of the other problems and maybe you don't have it in st. louis is lead paint poisoning. we have so many kids that are so affected by the time they are in third grade. their iq has been dramatically reduced because they have lead in their brains. and so this has to be looked at as you looked at it in a very broadway. and you have to provide alternatives. and the numbers pastor, that you just gar the disparity, is

truly a wake-up call. there will be kids of all races who the best of in tensions and the best training of teachers, they will have a problem with. but the vast majority of kids need something besides being thrown out of school or be referred to the juvenile justice system. [ applause ] >> this turns out to have to be our last question. greg didn't want to say that out loud but he's over there telling me. but all of these questions are important so i'm going to ask if i put them in an envelope, will you promise to read them. >> i will. i will. >> and at some point, during this long journey that you are on address them. i think this question is appropriate to close. america has tremendous capacity, but it often lacks the will for change. can you reflect on how we can

reflect a better will for america. >> that is a profound and really important question. we can probably stay here until sunday service talking about it. let me just offer a few reflections. i want to start with something i said in my remarks and that was this phrase, habits of the heart. i believe in policy changes structural changes, systemic changes, i believe in all of that. and i will propromote it -- promote it as i have throughout my career and certainly as president. but i also believe we need to confront the deep-seeded biases and prejudices that still live within too many of us. and it is something that is hard to talk about. and honestly i think a vast

majority of us could pass lie detector tests. of course i don't have prejudices or biased and we do. and we know we do if we have honest with each other. and that is why i'm hoping there will be more conversations like this across the country where people sit across a living room or in a church like this and people and you will hear people talk and what about x, y and z and you can deal with it and refute it an cop front -- and confront it and unless you deal with it everybody acts like it is okay and it is not. and that is number one. and number two, i believe we have a lot of good solid information about what works. so when you say we have the capacity, we not only have the capacity we have the evidence. we know what you are doing in jennings really -- it is so

admirable and you should have a lot more help than you currently have and there should be a lot more ways to take what you are doing and spread is more broadly. and what britney is doing on training teachers and people in law enforcement be given more knowledge-based, skilled-based training so they can learn more about themselves what they see how they react so they can be more aware and try to be better at serving the communities that they pledge to protect. on health disparities if you live within 10 miles of one another, you may live in a community where the life expectancy is 18 years less or even more because that has happened all over the country. so what is the problem and how do we solve it?

rather than just say, well that is just the way it is and always been. no, that is not true. medicaid would be a big difference. 16 million people in america have health care thanks to president obama's willingness to put will behind capacity. but it is not going to do people here any good if they can't access it. so there is a lot we know about what to do and how to do it. but i will tell you, what it comes down to and i don't want to sound like civics teacher 101, if people voted for people who represent them about these interests, that is the way we run. it still won't be easy but it will be a whole lot easier if you elect people who are actually committed to addressing

health disparity, providing resources to struggling schools supporting developers want to support buildings and standing up to the best possibility training for teachers and law enforcement, that should be a given. but when people don't vote because they get discouraged, that encourages the lack of will. because people who don't have a reason to change they say well, people had a chance. and they didn't come out. the hardest thing to do in a campaign is to convince people to actually take the time to vote. and so i think that is the clearest way to get the will. because if you are elected to deliver on these issues, then you can be held accountable. but if you don't have to go to the communities making the demands because you know they are not going to vote, and you don't have to pay attention to

them, then nothing changes. so let's remember capacity based on evidence for solutions that work systemic change, deep deep changes of the habits of our heart, working with one another to try to support the changes over time, and then turning out to vote. and holding public officials accountable for what they do or don't do. that to me, is how we translate it into will. >> want to thank you for your time today, secretary clinton and thank you everyone on this panel just a slice of the brilliance that is in st. louis. [ applause ] >> now, i must take my oprah hat off and put on my pastor hat because at the drop of a time the people i'm privileged to serve here prepared this place

for you. so christ, the king, will you please stand. [ applause ] >> they never complain at least not so that i can hear it. thank you. reverend karen is going to close us in prayer. >> and we do want to take this opportunity to thank you secretary clinton for coming. and before our prayer i was thinking about reverend tracy began us with a quote from howard therman and there is another one from his book the creative encounter. and he talks about meeting people at the place of their ash tray. in other words, you come to where they are. you figure out what is important to them. and then you enter into a relationship and you begin to build a relationship in which

things can change. where we can begin to change mindsets, which change culture, which then begin to change behavior. so i want to thank you for coming and sitting with us at the place of our ash tray. we realize it is only a beginning and we only scratched the surface, we have so many other that want to contribute and my prayer is that this will not be the last time that you come to this area. [ applause ] >> let us pray. god, we thank you for this time. we thank you for the willingness of everyone to share from their hearts. we thank you for the wonderful things going on this in city. but lord we lift up our collective voices to say it is not enough.

there are those who are still suffering from injustice. there are those still fighting for basic human rights. there are those who are feeling helpless and hopeless. there are those who still live on the margins. there are those that we walk by every day and forget. there are those in places of power and authority. we ask for you to watch over our city. and then lord would you bless secretary clinton as she continues on this journey. would you order her steps. allow her to keep her ears open as she listens to the concerns of those she wishes to serve. [ technical difficulties ]

[ technical difficulties ] >> and more on the road to the white house coverage tomorrow as louisiana governor bobby jindal

announces his plans for the 2016 presidential race in kenner, louisiana, outside of new orleans. serving his second term in offer before being elected governor. he served for the first district. we'll have his campaign announcement live tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. tomorrow here on c-span 3. like many of us presidential takes vacation time. and a good read can be the perfect campaign. what better book than looking at every first lady in history. first ladies. the 45 iconic american women. the first ladies. a great summertime read. available from your favorite book store or online book

seller. defense secretary ashton carter said there aren't enough recruits in iraq to fight the forces there. they planned on training 24,000 troopers but only got enough troops for a 7,000 force. he testified before a committee on combatting isis. the chair of the joint chiefs martin dempsey also testified. >> before we proceed, i want to make clear up front that the committee will not tolerate disturbances in these proceedings, including verbal disruptions, photography, standing or holding signs. and i want to thank our guests at the outset for your cooperation. this cmittee meets today to hear from the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff on u.s. strategy in the middle east.

i think we should acknowledge at the outset this region is not subject to easy or simple solutions and has the devil statesman of many countries for many generations. yet there is a sense we're at a particularly perilous time and the u.s. policy and strategy is inadequate. dr. kissinger testified this year before the se multiple upheavals are unfolding simultaneously. a struggle for power in states, a conflict between states and a conflict between sectarian groups and an assault on the international state system. he further argued that in a time of global upheaval the consequences of american disengagement in greater turmoil. it seems to me that is what we are in fact witnessing. while president obama admitted recently there is not a complete strategy for dealing with isis others argument there may well

be a strategy at work one of entrench. and accommodation so the u.s. plays a lesser role in the middle east and elsewhere. u.s. military personnel are the most capable in the world but i know of no one who thinks that 450 more in iraq will turn the tide against isis. very concerning are recent press reports that in the midst of the reports to remove sanctions, iran is continuing to pay and equip the taliban in afghanistan to sew instability and harm u.s. interests. when one factors in the chaos in yemen and syria the uncertainty about the direction of turkey and the doubts about allies such as egypt and the gulf nations an the continuing threats to the ally of israel, the plain facts show that the condition in the middle east has deteriorated

substantially and there is nothing coming from the white house to change that trajectory. we cannot expect the witnesses to change the last few years but we can expect to hear at military component to reverse this deteriorating trend and to protect american interests. my view is there is no subject for american leadership in the middle east or anywhere else. that does not mean it is up to us to solve age old disputes but it does mean we cannot afford for our own sake to simply stand back. we must be strong, especially military strong, and we must be credible. yield to the ranking member. >> thank you mr. chairman and secretary of defense and the joint chiefs for joining us and the great work for our country and i change the chairman for adequately describing the depth of the problem with the number of failed states and, gosh, just

the different battles going on there. it is an overwhelming problem creating a huge humanitarian crisis and a threat not just to the region but to the globe. i will, however disagree with the notion that a u.s. presence will solve the problem. i would hope that we would have learned over the course of the last 14 years of having a substantial u.s. presence in iraq and afghanistan that the west showing up in the muslim world and saying we're here to solve your problems isn't going to get it done. and as far as the strategy is concerned, i believe we do have a strategy. i think what people are frustrated by is that that strategy -- that u.s. strategy does not solve the problem. and i've had a number of people complain about our lack of a strategy. i've asked every single one of them what should we do? have not got an answer as to

what we should do to solve the complex problems that the chairman described. so as we approach this, i hope we are cautious about our confidence that u.s. military might can solve this proegs -- problem because i think can can make it worse. because i think we can tactically use the u.s. military to help move in the right direction and not think that the more u.s. military we use somehow the better the situation gets. i think that would be a very, very dangerous mistake. as far as the broader strategy it is really simple on its face. we need to find sunnis who are willing and able to fight isis and build a better alternative. and it is not just isis. if isis went away tomorrow there would be another extremist violent group just like al qaeda still is but now isis has

eclipsed al qaeda. it is not defeating one group it is a matter of defeating an ideology. and one thing i do want to hear from our two witnesses about our strategy is in getting the sunnis that would be willing to fight isis and present a reasonable alternative in iraq and syria and elsewhere as well for the people over there. >> we are still relying on the baghdad government. it is still our hope that there will be an iraqi government that is sufficiently exclusive so that sunnis are willing to fight for it. i just don't see that happening. starting with al maliki they set up a sectarian government that did anything to shove people into isis. i have heard that he has a desire to change that. but the trouble is the people

below him have no desire to change that and he does not have the power to change that the ministers of defense and the interior and the shias and iran to change their mind. so as we continue to try to do that, i fear that strategy won't work. i know why we do it. because what is the alternative? how do we offer the subbies -- sunnis a reasonable place to but if they don't have support from baghdad and i think we need to start thinking about it and put pressure on them. what can you do to encourage the tribe in syria and iraq to turn on isis? it is not easy. and again i'll just close by saying we could drop 200,000 u.s. troops in the middle of this it wouldn't solve the problem. and i sincerely hope we've learned that lesson and then we don't go deeper and deeper into

that, costing more lives and more treasure while only making the problem worse because the bottom line is for all of the faults and failings the one dependable problem they have with the muslim world is to stand up and say we are defending the muslim world against western aggression. that is a message that has widespread far more support than the violence psychopathic groups that he is pouz it. we have to find a way to build partnerships that has to be locally driven by sunnis in iraq and syria and elsewhere to reject isis and that ideology and build a better future for the pop and that is no easy task i understand. but i do look forward to the testimony and the questions and hopefully we can learn more about how to go about being part of that solution. with that i yield back.

>> without objection, your complete written statements will be made part of the record. thank you for being here. mr. secretary, the floor is yours. >> ranking member, all members thank you for inviting me here today. thank you for keeping a wide-ranging and long-term perspective on the challenges and opportunities for america and its leadership around the world. just a couple of weeks ago i was in singapore vietnam and india and next week i'll be in germany, astonia and bell jaw for a nato ministerial. i understand your focus on this meeting is in the middle east but i would be happy to answer questions about anything else. the middle east is undergoing a period of groat social -- great social and political turmoil with cross cutting geopolitical

developments. our strategy in the region -- america's strategy is grounded in america's core national interests. that is the foundation. tailored to address specific circumstances in specific places iraq syria and iran and so forth. and it has the coalition of a coalition of allies and partners. our core interests for example drive our actions to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. similarly, they dictate that we not let up until we have destroyed isil and al qaeda affiliated trts throughout the regions that propose dangers to -- >> there is a disturbance in the

proceedings. the committee will be in order. >> pardon the interruption, mr. secretary. please proceed. >> we will not let up until we have destroyed isil throughout the region that pose dangers to the homeland and to allies. the past few weeks serve as a reminder of territories bend on harming our interests whether in libya, syria or yemen that we have the capability to reach out and strike them. meanwhile, the security of israel will always be one of my top priorities. and the chairman just returns from israel this past weekend. and we'll continue to hone important relationships with our partners in the gulf. bolster their security and ensure freedom of navigation there. the pursuit of our nation's core interests in the region is the

strategy based on tireless diplomacy backed by formidable military power and to buttress and leverage the contributions of others and especially as noted those in the region themselves. that is why we have 35,000 forces postures throughout the region enabling us to strike isil and al qaeda trts and that is why we are ensuring the military edge and working with our gulf partners to make them more camable of working against external aggression and supporting saudi arabia and protecting the people from houthi attacks and supporting attacks to prevent lethal equipment from reaching houthi and forces in yemen. and that is why the united states is supporting efforts to

pursue political crises from yemen to syria. while i'm prepared for a range of questions related to the d.o.d. role in the middle east, i would like to focus on the immediate issue that the committee is interested in, namely the u.s.-led coalition strategy to defeat isil. isil presents a grave threat to our friends and allies in the middle east. elsewhere around the world, from africa and europe and parts of asia because of the steady metastasis and the strike in this country. isil must be and will be dealt a lasting defeat. the strategy to degrade and ultimately defeat isil constructed by president obama draws upon all of the national security agencies of the u.s. government, intelligence law enforcement, diplomacy and

others. the strategy and its associated military campaign involve a global coalition reflecting both the worldwide consensus on the need to counter this threat and the practical requirement for others to do their part. and the counter isil strategy has nine so-called lines of effort reflecting the breath of this challenge and the tools needed to combat it. and the first and most critical line of effort is the political one led by the state department. in iraq this involves building more effective inclusive and multi sectarian governance. each of the other lines of effort requires success in this line because it is the only way to create support among local forces and local people. that support being necessary to make progress against extremism stick. the next two lines of effort are

interconnect interconnected. to deny isil safe haven and is conducting a bombing campaign from the air, advising security forces on the ground and training and equipping trusted local forces. i will address our current military execution of the two lines of effort in a moment but i want to under score a crucial point about our campaign in iraq and also syria. it requires capable, motivated legitimate local ground forces to seize clear and hold terrain. that is the only way to ensure a truly lasting enduring defeat of this movement. the fourth line of effort is enhancing intelligence collection on isil which is lead by the national counter terrorism effort. and the fifth is disrupting the isil finances led by treasury

and state. lines of effort six and seven both led by state and the national counter-terrorism center is to disrupt the flow of foreign fighters to and from isil both of which are critical in today's connected and network world. the eighth line of effort, providing humanitarian effort to those displaced by or vulnerable to isil as led by state and finally the department of homeland security and the fbi are working together to protect the homeland, the ninth so-called line of effort by disrupting terrorist threats here. the execute of all nine lines of effort by the united states and the coalition partners is plainly necessary to ensure over all success. let me turn to the execution of the d.o.d. two lines of effort beginning with the afr strikes -- air-strikes against

iraq and syria. this effort has produced some results in limiting movement and impeding the command and control. it has ebb abled -- enabled key akmeefment and including anti-isil forces who took the key town of tal abid. and they are buying critical time and space to carry out the second line of effort which is developing the capacity and capabilities of legitimate local forces. the ground campaign is a work in progress. the iraqi security forces were degraded after mosul fell last june when four divisions dissolved. the combinations of deserters and ghost soldiers who were paid on the books and don't show up

and don't exist greatly diminish their capacity however understanding these challenges does not show the local forces to fight and prevail on the ground. we can and will continue to develop and enable such local forces because we know from experience that putting u.s. combat troops on the ground as a substitute for local forces will not produce enduring results. that is why d.o.d. seeks to bolster iraq security forces to be capable of winning back and then defending and holding the isil controlled portions of the iraqi state. saw in ramadi last month was deeply illustrated the importance of a capable and motivated ground force. in the days that followed, all of us president's national security team at his direction another hard look

at our campaign across all nine lines effort. at d.o.d., i convened my team, before during and after my trip to the asia pacific and indian ocean region to examine our execution of effort and see if the president's approval was required for any enhancements that were identified. at the meetings as the white house and the pentagon we determined what while we have the right to the framework, we determined that our training efforts could be enhanced and are thus now focusing on increasing participation and through-put of our training efforts, working closely with the iraqi government and stressing the focus on drawing in sunni forces which as noted, are under-represented in the iraqi security force today.

we also determined that our equipping of the iraqi security forces had proceeded too slowly. this process was early or sometimes delayed by bureaucracy in baghdad and also in wash -- washington. and that is why we are expediting material like anti-tank capabilities and counter ied equipment to the forces including kurdish and sunni counter forces and we believed we could have more tailored advice and including out reach to sunni community. and that is why on vic from chairman dempsey and my recommendation last week president obama authorized the deployment of to the military establish we could and the iraqi securityforces.

situated and fall this is location sunni leaders agreed expedite recruitment fighters. our forces will provide services location and we effort and to iraqis the effort roll isil anbar province. and kerry have agreed the campaign starting improving coordination respective linescheffort. is

street slowed by a lack of trainees. we simply haven't received enough recruits. 24,000 iraqi security forces we envisioned training at our site by this fall we've only received enough train about 7,000, personnel. while the united states is open to supporting iraq more than we are, we must receive support from all parts of the iraqi government. there are positive signs. i've met with the prime minister and last week with jabory from the parliament and they all understand the need for multi sectarian forces and the

leadership failures and because of the sovereign multi sectarian iraq is more likely to ensure a lasting defeat of isil, the united states must continue to work with and through the iraqi government in all of our actions, including our support for kurdish and sunni tribal forces. our need include and sectarianism the lasting isilharder, easier. the situation in syria is even more complex because of the lack of a legitimate government partner and many competing forces there. regardless we will continue striking with the long reach of our air-strikes and operators. we will continue working with syria's neighbors to impede the flow of foreign fighters into and out of iraq. it has been challenging but the

requirement for capable and motivated counter isil ground force there also means we must persist in our efforts. in conclusion, i believe that success in this campaign can and must be assured. it will take time and require consistent effort on everyone's part. the entire u.s. government, our entire international coalition and most importantly the iraqi and syrian people. together, and with your support including your support for america's troops and their families for which i and they are ever grateful, we will achieve isil's lasting defeat. i'd be happy to address your questions. >> thank you. general dempsey you have already had a number of interactions with which committee in the first six months of this year for which we are grateful and that is the reason i told you before the hearing i'm not going

to say goodbye to you even though the date of your retirement approaches. so thank you and the floor is yours. >> thank you. it is good to be back and particularly to talk about something of this important. and ranging member smith, it is good to see you back. i know you've been in fight from a distance. and other members of the community. i do appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning to discuss the increasing disorder and the military component of our strategy in the middle east. the middle east is unpredictable, unstable and increasingly complex but our goals are quite straightforward. we seek a region that issin hospitable to our enemies and protects our core interest. i characterize the middle east in three convergeing sets. and three we struggle for legitimacy because they are not pluralistic or not sufficiently

accountable to their citizens. iraq, for example, is still working toward a national unity government. and second the sunni shia government has come to the fore. there is a tug-of-war between sectarian regional powers. and there is moderate and radical elements and into that space fits isil and others. the three challenges, as they intersect, make for an environment that will test the resolve of the region's security forces. and enduring stability cannot be imposed from the outside in. it must be cultivated from the in side out. and importantly owned by regional stakeholders. positive transformation will be achieved over time by, with and through our regional partners. within this context the role of the united states military is

taking against the transregional threat of isil represents, in my judgment, an appropriate level of effort. i would under score, as secretary carter emphasized the military component is one of a much broader strategy. military power alone will not solve this. i don't think anyone here would disagree with that. we own two lines of effort of nine. our two lines -- of our two lines of effort, one is kinect kinectic, and the other is the train and equip mission. the nine lines of effort should be considered in the aggregate. this campaign focused on partners taking responsibility for their own security. as i said before, this is an iraq first strategy enabled by the coalition but not an iraq only one and again certainly not a military only one. we continue to pressure isil and

syria and to actively reinforce and harden our partners in the region. would you like to emphasis we are at the beginning -- at the beginning of a complex nonlinear campaign that will require sustained level of effort over an extended period of time to promote durable regional stability over the long-term. we are constantly evaluating our approach in making sure we are resourcing it appropriately. balancing with our many other global commitments. let me thank this committee every day for supporting our men and women serving around the world. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. mr. secretary, let me just follow up on what general dempsey said. a primary line of effort of the department is this train and equip mission. is it your judgment that 450 more folks, not allm who will be

trainers, some are security but the 450 more folks going to tip the balance to make that train and equip mission successful? >> the move -- the numbers are not as significant as the location. it is in the heart of sunni territory and i think it will make a difference in the per forlance -- performance of the train and equip of the sunni fighters. we've seen that since we've established that presence there. and also the an bar prove since center is located there and another function of those people being there. it doesn't take a lot of people but it is highly leverage to be in the center with the iraqi forces so we can help them with their -- their command control and planning and discipline.

those are the purposes and the benefits of the move to takatom. it is not sufficient but it is necessary to get sunni forces into the fight in a way so they are motivated as well as trained and equipped and that is the purpose, mr. chairman. >> so what is the reasonable time period for us to check back and see whether this is working as we hope? >> i honestly this is reasonable for you to ask in weeks, because we're already getting an in flow of sunni fighters and putting them through the training program. we have the capacity to do that. and as i mentioned in my testimony, we have haddin capacity of training over the last month because the iraqi government hasn't furnished us with paid recruits. and that has turned around and it has to stay turned around for us to stay successful in an bar.

>> and i know we have questions about the isis fight. i want to ask the strategy to deal with iran influence outside of the nuclear talks. i mentioned in the opening statement about the iranian's equipping an paying the taliban who are fighting us and our allies in afghanistan and they are providing support to the houthis in the civil war or whatever one wants to call it going on in yemen and the primary force propping up assad in syria and continue to have a presence in lebanon which is not good. what is the administration's strategy for dealing with iranian influence other than the nuclear talks? >> well thank you. and iranian malign influence in the region is the other major

challenge to our strategy in the middle east besides isil. so those two stand above others. and i think i would go back to the foundation there, which is the checking that malign influence and defending our ally israel and keeping our kmietment -- commitment to our gulf alleys who were here a few weeks ago, is to provide the foundation for the security to our friends and allies and to check iranian influence, which as you indicated, one sees them seeking -- iraq, just talking about, but not just in iraq but it is elsewhere around the region. so it is another very significant challenge for us. and it really is the reason why we are postured in the way we

are in the middle east. the chairman just got back from israel and working with our israeli partners on exactly those kinds of israel, by the way, and he's been working with our israeli partners on exactly those kinds of checks. >> well, i appreciate the fact we've got folks over there. i still haven't heard quite an approach because it seems to me like their influence is expanding, and i'm not sure we're dealing with it. i'll yield to mr. smith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the chairman and i met last week with the sunni leader of the iraqi parliament. one of the things he said during our meeting that surprised me a little bit as we were talking about, you know, the difficulty of getting broader support from the baghdad government and sort of shifting focus to where could the sunnis in that path between sort of anbar and up into syria

where isil is, you know, most dominant, and he expressed disappointment, frankly that, the other gulf states, saudi arabia, uae, or even turkey to go up north did not seem to really be willing to provide much support. even jordan as well. for the sunnis in that area. number one, do you agree with that assessment? i tend to take this guy at his word. and number two, why? it would seem to me that, you know, defeating isil is something that would be very, very important to saudi arabia amongst the others there. why aren't they doing more to help those groups that want to resist isis in that part of iraq and syria? >> that's a critical question, and it goes back to something you said in your opening statement about other sunni and arab forces countering isil.

and i, too, met with him last week, who said the same thing. i think he was speaking on behalf of a number of the sunni forces, political forces in western iraq who would like to see more support and recognize, as i think you noted and the chairman noted in the opening statement, that americans and westerners are -- can lead and enable, but if they get too high a profile, that becomes a problem in its own right. >> exactly. >> therefore, the more -- all the more reason to get others -- sunnis involved in the fight. now, the heads -- one thing i'll note is the heads of state of the gcc were here in washington, and we went to camp david about three weeks ago. i would say that this was one of the major themes of our conversations with them. the other one being to get back

to what the chairman said, checking iranian maligned influence, which they're also concerned about. their concern about isil is genuine, but their actions, i think, can be greatly strengthened. that was one of the principle things we talked about. getting them in the train and equip program -- >> i got all that, but why? what, in your opinion, having worked with these people, why isn't it happening? >> well, one reason is that they simply lack the capacity. so we talked a lot about building special operations forces that had -- as opposed to air forces. we have enough air forces. we're looking for ground forces and capable ground forces is one that are skilled in counterterrorism, counterinsurgency and so forth. >> and that's one of the key questions. sorry to interrupt. but that's where we've got to go. that's where we've got this

fight -- we had this fight in the senate and also in the house side over whether or not to directly arm the kurds. to basically skip the baghdad government and just get the forces to the people who are actually fighting and in some cases fighting successfully. you know, shouldn't we be shifting a lot of our focus to that and basically saying to baghdad, time's up, you know, you've got your relationship with iran, with the shia militias. doesn't seem to be much we can do about that. you continually push the sunnis out. we got to shift our resources to people -- i mean, you mention it. we expected 24,000 iraqis. you got 7,000. i mean, at what point do we shift the strategy? believe me, i understand the implications of that. the concern is about the fracturing of iraq, bu said many times before, that cow has left the barn. iraq is fractured. you can make a pretty powerful argument, in fact, that iraq is

no more. so when do we shift that strategy and start building the capabilities of other partners who will fight? >> well, sectarianism in iraq is the principle factor that brought us to where iraq is in isil. it was prime minister maliki and his relentlessly partisan or sectarian manner of governance. now, we have with prime minister abadi who i've met and the chairman may have met also, someone who i believe is genuinely committed to behaving in a decentralized federal liesed, but multisectarian single state. personally, he's dedicated to that. i think the chairman asked the

question, does his writ run throughout iraq? that's what we are waiting to see. in the meantime, we are arming the kurds. we are arming the sunnis. we do it in coordination with the iraqi government, but in a way that doesn't delay as it was a few months ago that assistance to them. but we're still doing it through the government of iraq because we're still trying to support the prime minister in maintaining a decentralized but single unitary iraqi state. >> and just a quick thing on iran. and obviously, i mean, if we just had these extremist sunni groups to fight, i mean, that would be enough to really challenge us. but then when you throw in iranian influence and how it, you know, stirs up the region, it definitely creates a higher level problem. but i do just want to make the observation, as awful as iran

is, number one, this isn't really necessarily helping them to have to fight multiple wars outside of their own borders, to have to fight in syria, to fight in iraq, to fight in yemen. that can be draining, as we well know. so it has a negative influence on them as well. and whatever one may say about iran, the difference between them and isil, isil wants to kill -- they wake up every morning, you know, anxious to kill as many americans as possible. so as we're balancing this, it's a very difficult balance to make. you know, defeating isil, i think, should be at the top of that list of concerns. that's just an observation. as bad as iran is and trying to figure out some way to get them to stop having that malign influence, all for it, but i think we really need to have our number one focus not just on isil but on that broader ideology that motivates people to attack us. final quick question.

there have been some reports that, you know, the assad government is weakening. where do you assess the chances that they might just fall, that assad might, you know, he's unable to replace many of the troops he's losing now. is it possible that assad just up and leaves because of how bad things are going? and then what? >> two observations on that, and the chairman may want to comment on that as well. first of all, we would like to see a transition in which assad disappeared from the scene. so that his regime as another source of fuel for extremism is eliminated. that is -- it is possible because his forces are much weakened, and they have taken great losses.

they're having trouble -- their forces and reserves are depleted. they're increasingly isolated in the damascus area and in the alawite areas of northwestern syria. i think the last thing i'd say, congressman smith, is that the most -- the best way for the syrian people for this to go would be for him to remove himself from the scene and there to be created, difficult as that will be, a new government of syria based on the moderate opposition that we have been trying to build and support and helping them strengthen themselves to retake all of syrian territory. that would be a desirable path if he did remove -- was removed

from the scene or removed himself from the scene. >> thank you. >> thanks, ranking member smith. that was the purpose of my trip to the region actually, was to discuss with regional partners a scenario in which the regime would either collapse or assad would depart for one reason or another. it's generally the consensus there that in the near term it's probably more likely that the regime would limit its -- would go over to the defensive and limit its protection of the shia and minority groups, leaving the rest of syria essentially ungoverned or governed in ways that wouldn't be positive for the region in the near term. so we're working with our partners on the near term. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. forbes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, the country owes you a great deal of gratitude, but i

only have five minutes, so i'm going to say thank you for all that you've done for us. mr. secretary, thank you for being here today. we're talking about policy and strategy in the middle east. one thing that i find a little disconcerting from people i talk to is when we find individuals who have held your job in the past as secretary of defense who indicate rightly or wrongly that the president's heart may not always be in some of our military operations. it's also disconcerting when we hear the president rightly or wrongly suggest that we may have no winning strategy in the middle east. but it's also disconcerting as a committee. we're not always in the policy and strategy business, but we're in the resourcing and capability business here. and we look at just some of the gaps we have. we know that we're going to have a gap this year for our carriers where we will have certain

regions of the world that will not have a carrier presence for weeks when we perhaps need one or two. we also know that in 2007, the navy was able to meet 90% of our validated requirements. this year we only meet 44%. we've had testimony from the air force that they currently have the oldest and the smallest air force since the history of the air force and that less than 50% of their combat squadrons are fully combat capable. so this committee on a very bipartisan basis has worked very, very hard to try to close some of those gaps, to reach some of the numbers that you need. we voted out an ndaa bill, 269-151, this committee voted it out 60-2. we have passed a defense appropriations bill 278-149. by all likelihood, it looks like a conference report will come out and those bills will be before the president in september of this year. you probably know we have 12 appropriations bills. the first one up before the

president will probably be the defense bills and the president will have 11 days to sign them. now, you were kind enough on an unsolicited basis the last time you were here to suggest to us what your recommendation would be to the president about vetoing bills. now that you actually have a real bill to look at and to analyze which helps fill some of those gaps, can you tell us whether or not you would recommend that the president veto that bill if it's substantially the same bill that's passed on a bipartisan basis out of the house, both on the ndaa and the appropriations bill. >> thank you, congressman. and let me just second what you said about the chairman. he's been my battle buddy now for a number of years as i had various jobs and he was chairman, before that, chief of staff of the army. i'm very much going to miss him. he's been terrific. you're absolutely right about resources. you are absolutely right about resources. we cannot continue to be the

world's finest fighting force if we don't get a budget -- a budget picture, a horizon, in front of us. what -- i have not changed my view from last time i saw you. i really fervently hope that everybody can come together, both parties -- >> mr. secretary, i don't want to cut you off but i have a minute and some left. here is my point. we don't always get to pick the bills we hope we can have. i'm sighing if a bill comes substantially the same as the ndaa bill and the defense appropriations bill that passed the house, would you recommend to the president that he sign that bill or veto it? >> the president already said he will veto the bill. >> i am asking you your recommendation. >> i support that.

>> you would recommend he would veto these bills, you would recommend that? have you done an analysis the risk to the national defense because the result would be that you get at least $25 billion less -- >> let me describe the risk going one year at a time and budgeting. >> i am just asking -- >> i know what you are asking. it's managerially harmful to do things -- >> mr. secretary, you will have $25 billion short if that bail fails, but you would still take that risk -- and by the way, that risk would put us according to general dempsey, at a place where we could be below the minimum age for where we would need to be for our national security. let me just end up, mr. chairman by saying this, i think it's unimaginable we would send 450 troops into harm's way and still look their families in the eye and tell them we would veto the bill that would get them the resources we need.

with that i yield back, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman i would like to reiterate i have not changed my view. we need a multiyear budget. we have a long-term strategy. we have people the very people that congressman forbes just referred to who have careers, who want to know what their future is going to be. this business where we have a budget one year at a time and i'm not blaming anybody for it. it's a collective thing where our country needs to rise up and get it together in this area. it's very damaging to the institution that i feel responsible for and am responsible for. the other thing i would say is i travel around the world, and this looks terrible. it gives the appearance that we are diminishing ourselves because we can't come together behind a budget year in and year out.

i continue to hope and believe that we can come together behind an agreed budget that has a multi-year horizon and allows us to plan and execute programs and recruit and retain people in the way that i think we need to do. >> thank you. >> mr. secretary, i don't disagree with anything you just said. when we vote, it's yes or no. i think that's the point on the veto. it's a yes or no. so that's the thing that i think is concerning to me. ms. davis. >> thank you mr. chairman and both of you for being here, and general dempsey i appreciate your service and all that you contributed. i think there's obviously controversy and concern about your response. i appreciate the fact that it's a direct response and we would like everybody to get to yes on this one.

we have to work harder on it. so thank you very much. i wanted to first just ask about what you talked about as the first critical line of effort really here, which you say is a political one. my concern is that with limited security that we have, i am not sure the state department, even if they had the resources, and that's obviously a great concern, if they are really able to do their job in iraq. i would like you to respond to that, and along with that really does go the fourth line which is how we communicate and whether we are doing that effectively. those are two important things. and the third thing i just wanted to ask you about briefly is, you know, the issue about resources. you mentioned the fact that we need to expedite delivery of equipment, that we were not doing a good job with that, and i think my question is, why did that take so long?

there are issues around certainly baghdad, as you mentioned, but within our own policies as well. what are we learning from that? so that doesn't happen in the future. thank you. >> thank you. on the political front, which really means trying to support prime minister abadi and the government of iraq to govern in a way that it can collect and support from sunnis and collect and support from kurds and collect and support from shiites who are not affiliated or directly supported by iran and create an iraqi security force that can defeat isil and turn iraq into a place where people could live in a decent way. that is an essential task. we need to assign that very closely with the military line,

which is why secretary kerry has just come back into town, and i are meeting and our teams are meeting specifically to make sure those lines of effort are synchronized. messaging. i would make one note about messaging, which is an area where i think we are unnecessarily hobbling ourselves. we, for example, had a website that simply described the fact of our campaign and what was going on. it was tuned for an audience in the region so they could come to a website and learn about what we were doing. so we were telling the truth. but we were denied the authority to operate that. we were told that was not an appropriate thing for the department of defense to be doing, and i would like to have that authority. >> denied the authority from?

>> my congress. with respect to training and equipping, this is one of the situations where there is plenty of responsibility to pass around but i would not put it all on the iraqis and i would not put it all on us or on congress and on the pentagon, but let me tell you what happened. you passed the money for 2015, the appropriations bill in december. the money came out in january, went through the omb process, and then there was in your bill the requirement that we only spend 25% of it until we report the last 75% and we met that requirement. that really, i can't say, was the limiting step. the limiting step for us to expend that money was building the training sites. what we did do in the meantime while we were waiting for the money is reach into all kinds of other pots that we have, excess

defense articles and so forth, and so we tried to fill the gap. now, the gap is closed now and that money is flowing, but it was not all on the iraqi side, although they were an impediment. we're back on our feet now. i'm not going to try to excuse something that took longer than it should have. thank you. just quickly with the two seconds left that i have, on the resources that secretary kerry and the state department are going to have and the backup security, i want to be sure that we get a full answer on that. thank you. >> be happy to provide that. >> both mr. smith and i would be very interested to know or to followup who denied centcom the ability to put up a website with the facts and on what basis they denied snit

we have worked for years to update the restrictions on these sorts of issues and we are very interested in fixing the problem if part of the problem is with this branch of government, so if you ask your lawyers to do that, that's very important. >> thank you. chairman klein. >> thank you mr. chairman and gentlemen for being here today. i was looking at the preparation sheet here for today's hearing and it says this is a reference, quote, united states policy and strategy in the middle east, and i think we've concluded we don't have the strategy and in fact the commander in chief said we really didn't have a strategy. i'm a little mystified about what we're doing here since we don't have a strategy. i am looking at the situation in iraq, and i was over there just in baghdad a couple months ago around easter timeframe and talking to some of our troops there, and we got over 3,000 troops on the ground, boots on the ground, and they are a

little frustrated because i don't think they understand, and how could they, what the strategy is if we have not clearly articulated that. now we are going to send 450 more people over there again, again, to execute a strategy that we don't know yet. as i look at iraq and, as you know, chairman dempsey, i, like a lot of members here, have been there over and over again and watched the situation change, and it was at one point where we looked like we were doing really well after the surge and then we saw isil or isis or daesh come across the border and baghdad reportedly being threatened. i guess my question is where are we in iraq today? are we winning, losing? is it a stalemate a quagmire. what is iraq today?

>> i never volunteer. if you call on me i will answer. i have been in the army for a long time and you don't volunteer for things. >> we volunteer in the marines all the time. >> and then you call the army for the logistics and things. >> we will fight until the last soldier. >> where were we? >> are we at a quagmire there or it is a stalemate or what is going on? >> let's talk about the personal pronoun, we. this has to be them. if you're asking is the united states winning, that's the wrong question. >> i'm sorry. that's the question i'm asking. we have soldiers there, and we are flying strikes there, are we, the united states, our western allies, are we winning our losing? >> our military are. the military campaign in support of a 60-nation coalition and the iraqi government, we are on path

to deliver that which we have committed to clifrg which is security forces, not just the isf but the peshmerga and the sunni tribes. this is a far different approach than if we were to decide ourselves that it was our responsibility to defeat isil inside of iraq. as the secretary said, it's my military judgment that enduring victory over isil can only be done by those nations who have more to gain or lose than we do. >> so i guess that -- that wouldn't put it stalemate or make a quagmire, makes it sort of winning? >> you famously heard stan mckrystal talk about the fact that al qaeda is a network and

to beat a network, we have to be a network. most of you probably know on the surface it looks as those lilly pads are free floating but they are not. they're tethered to a network of vegetation underneath. they are a network. we are trying to build a network that will enable the regional stakeholders to confront this threat because frankly, that's the only way it will be resolved. >> okay. i will accept that answer, except it underscores where we started this thing. we don't have a strategy. you articulated a piece of what would be a strategy, the strategy is to build a network and it's not clear what that is. i think we need to clearly articulate a strategy of what we, the united states, are going to do in cooperation with in alliance with or whatever that

is going to be with the friends and allies. when i was over there, the arab states are now increasingly engaged. as you know they're flying strikes there. we also hear strikes are going without success in many cases, without bombs being dropped. we have work to do there and i think we ought to start with that strategy. i yield back. >> thank you for your testimony, and both of you for your service. mr. chairman, especially with you, you obviously with all the expertise and experience you will with you when that time comes and you will leave big shoes to fill and i thank you for all you accomplished and your service. mr. secretary, can you convince me and the american people that our strategy in iraq right now in trying to hold that country together is the right one given the fact that it doesn't seem

like the iraqi people are willing to fight for their own country, evidenced by the fact that the soldiers that we helped to train, when isil came in, they basically took the uniforms off and ran, and it doesn't seem to me that -- you mention the sectarian violence and the sectarianism that exists, are we trying to unofficially hold together in iraq that doesn't want to be held together, and are we asking our men and women in uniform to go into a situation and put themselves in harm's way for an unofficial effort to hold that country together? would we be better off focusing on another strategy that had a more realistic look at what the local people there want, and pursue a strategy that will then

allow us to focus at defeating isil. beyond that, with the president's decision to send 450 additional advisers to iraq, i would like to know how the move is coupled to a strategy and how it would dress in terms of the results that we would like to see from our efforts and those of our allies and partners and the ranking member that we mentioned, how the leader of the iraqi parliament was disappointed that we don't have more buy-in from the nations in the region. i want to make sure as well as my colleagues do, we are asking our men and women in uniform to risk their lives for actions that are disconnected from a larger strategic effort. >> thank you, congressman. some of the parts of your question echo the questions that

mr. klein was asking, and we will start with one thing, and i can't thank him, but we very much appreciate it when you visit our people. it's important that they have an explanation of what our strategy is, and with respect to iraq, the critical ingredient of the strategy is strengthening local forces. we believe that is possible. it will take some time and the american role in that is to train, equip, enable and assist those forces once they are built, and that's the american role in a coalition. so that's the approach to defeating isil on the ground in iraq and recognizing only their

defeat on the ground can be a lasting defeat, a sustained defeat. and so that is the approach where we are taking on the ground in iraq and syria as we discussed earlier, there are other parts of the counter isil strategy that are very vital. they don't happen to be our responsibility. but on the intelligence side which is very challenging with this group and the messaging side, foreign fighter flows that can come in and potentially come out of this country. there are a lot of dimensions to combating -- >> before my time expires -- >> the strategy on the ground in iraq is as you described and as the chairman described. >> are we trying to hold together an iraq that doesn't want to be held together? >> i believe that there are some

indications that there can be a decentralized but multi sectarian unitary iraq. i think we ought to give them a chance because that's the best outcome. sectarianism is not a good outcome there. we have been to that movie. >> thank you, mr. chairman. your time has expired. >> thank you for what you are doing to protect our country, but i have a question building on previous questions about why we are not targeting known isis assets? for instance, everybody knows where the headquarters of isis is in syria, i believe, a large multi-story building. we know there are convoys of oil, crude oil being taken to turkey and sold to raise money for isis and that's a lifeline

for money as far as i look at it, and i can't imagine that it's a military decision to not take out known military assets, so there must be a political reason. mr. carter, what is the political reason or why are we not targeting known isis assets if the intention is to degrade and destroy isis as the president has said? >> congressman, the target types that you described are authorized. leadership targets, indeed. fuel, which is partly used the finance this movement, legitimate target, we do strike those targets. i think the only limitation, and i will let the chairman elaborate on this, that the people managing the coalition air campaign have, and this is a coalition judgment, not just a

u.s. judgment, is to try to avoid civilian casualties. and that is for obvious humanitarian reasons and also because it's not going to help what we are ultimately trying to do, which is get isil expelled from these territories. >> so you are saying no targets are hands off? >> no, the categories you named are hands on and we have struck targets and we need to strike targets like that and that's definitely part of the campaign. i'll ask the chairman if he has anything to add. >> the commander who holds the authority for strike decisions and the collateral estimates, he has the authority. nothing that happens in washington, d.c. is limiting him from the use of the, by the way 397 strike aircraft and 1,600 pilots flying these missions over iraq and syria every day. it's really a matter of ensuring

the targets we hit are the targets we intend. to do otherwise would further complicate this and make it an almost impossible situation to sort out. >> if i can switch gears to iran. i know it's the middle east we are talking about, but iran is part of this. recently ali hee nan spoke on the controversy and knows more about iran and nuclear negotiations than anyone in the world. he said you have to have two things for the deal to work, or iran will get a nuclear weapon, they have to be unannounced inspections by us or our designee, and without those two elements, a deal simply is not going to work. would you two kbree with his assessment or not? >> i certainly think that a good

deal, and we will go back to what the president said, which is absolutely true, which is no deal is better than a bad deal, but a good deal has to be verifiable. with respect to iran, you raised the question, as i said iran is up with isil are the two big challenges to the stability of the middle east and u.s. interests associated with the middle east. and our role in the nuclear negotiations is we are not part of the negotiations, per se. we don't sit at the table. i have the responsibility to make sure the military option is real, and believe me, we work on that to make that real. second, we have the responsibility to have the posture in the region that we do to check iranian influence, and then last, we're very committed to the defense of israel, so we have a big role and it's not

part of negotiation, but it's a very, very big role and we take it seriously. >> the only thing i would add, as we have had this discussion with regional partners, if there is a deal i have got work to do with them, and if there is not a deal, i have got work to do with them, and we are committed to that work. >> thank you both. ms. tsongas? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you both for being here, and i think it's important for us to hear from you this week, as the house will consider a resolution involving ongoing operations in iraq and syria, and i imagine you are aware of it. it has been nearly one year since the president outlined his plan to counter the threat posed by isil a war waged not debated

by congress in 13 years. since the president announced his plate, the united states spent nearly $9 million a day or nearly $3 billion overall and at this rate it will continue. meanwhile, regional partners are pursuing efforts in iraq and syria that may or may not be in concert with those of the united states. all of this has happened without a robust debate in congress about the u.s. strategy, although we are starting to have that here today, and the costs which we have not yet addressed, and the end state in iraq and the greater region. i believe it's a debate that is long overdue. i appreciate that you are here today, and general dempsey, we will miss you. i always appreciated how forthright and the thoughtful you have been in our discussions about not just what we are doing in the middle east but more broadly across the globe. i have a question for you that really -- i would ask you to

think back a bit, because ten years ago this fall you assumed responsibility for a time for training, equipping and sustaining the iraqi security forces, but after over a decade of training, as we know, most of the iraqi army remains a hollow force and we are challenged with that. with 450 new american advisers being sent to iraq and with your unique perspective in mind how is today's america's train and equip strategy adapting to make sure we are not again standing up a force that will fold in the face of stiff resistance? is it just enough that we are going to now seek to recruit sunnis into it? i think it's much more complicated than that. what are the lessons learned to give you confidence these efforts will prove successful as you leave your very unique place in the american military effort? >> thank you, congresswoman. i have a couple thoughts. one is in terms of the strategy