happening on the internet on very large screens. there were children in there, dogs, cats that were in there elderly people in wheelchairs were in there, and we watched what was happening. we watched the polygon come up. everyone got quiet. it came up just south of the national weather center almost touching it. the polygon stayed lit where the tornado touched down, and what i did not realize was the police force in oklahoma have helicopters that are deployed and orchestrated in to observe what is happening, and so the tornado passed through the police force helicopter came in, and what we saw was the following: there was a house completely gone completely gone. tv camera dwelled that and

then we saw a door open and two small children got out the mother and father got out, and the cat got out and there was no house and they just looked at one another and i thought thy would have all five been dead without what we had, and it was the polygon that simply said go to ground and they did. that is a real event. in my final acknowledgement, i'd like to thank also not only the hu but the ams and john may president of ams at is here, and dave taylor, president of bal is here. we want to move to room 2325 for a continued discussion face-to-fashion. thank you to eveone and i

particularly thank the panel. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> in his first press conference as defense secretary leon panetta said automatic across the board spending cuts would be a doomsday mechanism, and they would only happen if they did not find specific ways to cut the budget. see the news conference with secretary leon panetta and a chief chairman, at a role mike mullen, and the o'clock p.m. eastern on c-span -- at 8:00

p.m. eastern on c-span. it is senate majority leader harry reid says there's an agreement on a bipartisan compromise to end the as a shutdown which left 74,000 transportation and construction workers out of work. "the washington post," writes that they will pass legislation that will clear the house but the transportation secretary ray lahood would use his authority to waive those cuts. the article says the current deal does not resolve underlying disagreements, in particular over the house gop's demand that the long-term reauthorization weakens unions. they expect the senate to accept a measure on the faa as early as tomorrow. j kearney briefed reporters about the partial faa shot down. this briefing had been before the announcement of a compromise.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. welcome to the white house. this is your daily briefing. before questions, have a couple of announcements. last week, the president announced historic fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks that we drive which combined with steps already taken by this administration will save american families $1.7

trillion at the pump and reduce oil consumption by 12 billion barrels by 2025. building on that, next week the president will hold two events to highlight this administration's ongoing commitment to saving families and american businesses money at the pump, cutting our dependence on oil and creating cutting and jobs. tuesday, the president will travel to services in springfield, va. to announce first of their kind of fuel 50 standards for work, trucks, buses, and other heavy-duty vehicles. it will save american businesses to operate and own these commercial vehicles tens of billions of dollars in fuel costs and will dramatically reduce oil consumption and cut pollution. thursday the president will travel to holland mich. to tort and advanced battery facility. while at johnson controls, he

will highlight the key role that innovative technologies will play in helping automakers establish the standards spurring economic growth, and creating high-quality domestic jobs and cutting edge industries across america. those are my announcements. mr. feller? >> the president said yesterday he would want the faa to speak to be resolved this week. can use it say whether the prison had any role in getting the solution? >> the president has had a role in this, spoken with the speaker of the house and the members of his administration are actively engaged in trying to find a solution that will put 70,000 americans back to work. we hope a solution can be found and congress will take the action necessary to ensure that

those americans to go back to work. at a time when we're trying to grow the economy and create jobs, it is simply not acceptable for congress, because of a political dispute or political disputess not to take the measures and has in the past to allow for these jobs for these folks to stay on their jobs and continue working. since some of these jobs are construction-related, this is a lost opportunity. you cannot get the construction season back. for those folks who have not had a paycheck, this is day 13, and they need this money to pay down their mortgages and car payments and to make ends meet for their family. >> is progress being made? >> the conversations continue as we look for ways to resolve this, and we hope that congress will take action.

we cannot be more clear that it is inappropriate for congress to go on recess leaving this issue unresolved. when our political disputes in the overall authorization bill and it gets wadded up with politically motivated agenda items. i am not saying that they may not represent sincerely held views, but they should be set aside to allow for an extension that permits these hard-working americans to go back to work. >> the stock market took a deep dive today. any reaction to that? >> i don't have a specific reaction to the market. markets go up and down. we are obviously watching the situation in europe, and there is no question that this economy has faced headwinds this year, a variety of them, including the

earthquake and the tsunami in japan, the increase in oil prices, energy prices that resulted from the unrest in the arab world and the situation in europe also. our focus has to be on the things we can control, which is to take necessary measures, working with congress, to ensure our economy grows, that we create jobs. we took an important step towards creating economic certainty in this country by resolving the debt ceiling crisis earlier this week but these are big issues and our work is not done and we need to continue to focus on what we can do to make sure our economy grows and it creates jobs. >> any details on any kind of birthday bash for the president? >> as has been out there the

senior staff will toast the president later today to mark his 50th birthday with him and then there will be a birthday gathering with friends and family this evening. >> is this market drop, it doesn't have anything to do with the debt deal, as far is you are concerned -- does it have anything to do with the debt deal as far as you're concerned? >> i am not qualified to make that analysis. i have not heard that or see that reflected in the reports. our view of this is that what the compromise did not achieve the kind of super sized deficit reduction that we sought, it did stop the uncertainty around the perception of the possibility that the united states may default on its obligations for the first time. that was a good thing. a major accomplishment in this

was in the final days of this, the republicans were insisting that whatever process that became law would force another vote on this raising the debt ceiling, another clash and conflict over this, create more uncertainty in the next six months. the president adamantly opposed that and ensured that this compromise extended the debt ceiling into 2013. it also has, up front, deficit reduction of $1 trillion, and it sets up a mechanism for another one $0.50 trillion. while these measures, while not enough are positive and should have a positive impact on the economy. >> a lot of reports today about secretary geithner. can you shed light? is he expected to stay on? >> secretary geithner has not

decided when he will leave, and he said he will be here for the foreseeable future. i point you to those comments. that is what he tells us, and he is obviously a key member of the economic team and his service has been extremely valuable to the president, the administration, the country. but i did not have any more inflation on that for you. yes? >> larry summers in "the washington post" said the economy had a one in three chance of heading into recession. does the president share that feeling? >> i was asked about this yesterday. no that is okay. again, that is a piece of economic analysis. the president believes the economy will continue to grow, that the economy will continue to create jobs, and we need to do everything we can to enhance

that growth and enhance that job creation. i pointed out yesterday that it is certainly the case, and this is an observation about outside analysts, who continue to believe that the economy will grow in the second half of this year. we need to focus on the things we can focus on, which is to take the measures necessary to spur economic growth and job creation. >> i believe the dow jones has gone down more than during the of tarp vote, and analysts are saying this is happening because of the uncertainty in the domestic economy and we are entering a double-dip recession or least real softness or weakness for the u.s. economy. >> the analysis i saw today was not about the american economy in particular, but there are a lot of global issues that affect

the global economy and not affect the american economy. -- and do affect the american economy. we strongly believe that we will continue to grow and create jobs, and we need to take the measures necessary to do that. we have encountered in this calendar year a number of economic headwinds that could not have been foreseen, the earthquake and tsunami in japan that disrupted global supply chains the unrest in the middle east which had an impact on oil prices, and the situation in europe. so you know, obviously that has hurt the economy globally and slowed growth, job creation, but we believe that job growth and job creation will continue. >> what is the president doing? we know that he went to fund raisers last night. what is he doing on this?

has the president asked congress about all the things that they need to be done? what is being done? >> the president is having meetings with his senior staff. he has called on congress to move quickly on things that have bipartisan support and that are in congress' lap. >> he called on congress a couple months ago to pass things. >> congress has the power to pass legislation that the president can sign. the actions that it can take that would create more jobs right now is to pass the pact reform. if it passed the free-trade agreement. as you know, there are other issues the president of purchase and will push hard for congress to take up when it returns from its recess, including extension of the payroll tax cut which this year has put an additional 1000 others into the pockets of every typical american family -- an additional $1,000 into the

pockets of every typical american family. it gives them the ability to make ends meet and puts money back into the economy which, in turn sustained businesses and creates jobs. and he will continue to come up with and proposed measures that we in washington, together, can take to spur further economic growth and job creation. >> as he called the john boehner, are the working on things they could do? >> i know you are not here yesterday, but you were here in the days before that when they worked seven days a week to avert a major economic crisis in this country. i>> the president can walk and chew gum at the same time. >> are you asking me -- >> you have been calling on congress to pass things that you have been calling on them to pass for months. what is he doing to help the

economy? >> he is working very closely with his senior economic advisers to come up with new proposals to help finance growth and job creation. he is working with members of congress to help advance growth and job creation. iand he will continue to do that. there are things that congress can do now to create jobs, and they should. there are things that congress will be able to do when they return from recess to create jobs and restore growth, and they should, and he looks forward to working with congress to do that. >> when the president looks at all of these economic headwinds as you call it, does he believe that he has made the right choices when it comes to the economy we have come into office? >> does he believe that he has made all the right choices? i have not asked him but i am sure that he would say there are always things that in hindsight you might have done differently. the simple fact of the matter,

as everyone in this room knows the recession that this country faced when the president took office was the worst since the great depression. when he took office, there were many analysts who believed we were going to go back to another great depression, that we could see levels of unemployment that rivaled the great depression, that we could see global economic collapse, the necessity of nationalizing the banks that whole industries would go under. that is the world that we lived in when this president was sworn into office. we had a recession that cost 8 million american jobs, that in the quarter prior to end the quarter during which he was sworn into office, the economy was contracting at something like 6%. as you know, for a number of quarters now, the economy has

been growing. for over 15 months, private- sector jobs have been created or than 2 million private sector jobs. it none of this is enough because 2.1 million private- sector jobs is only a portion of 8 million jobs lost by the recession that this president inherited, which is why he has worked so hard and take measures like he did against a lot of dice and the advice of folks now who have to explain -- against a lot of advice and the advice of folks now who have to explain why it was ok for them to lose the 1 million jobs the automobile industry would have lost if the president had not moved to save the domestic although in its tertiary -- the domestic auto industry. and the measures he sought to begin the recovery in this country. is it enough? not even close which is why it every day the president's focus is on the economy and job creation. >> just to continue that thought, what else can the president do?

we often hear from the podium that he is making calls, the congress needs to do more. >> as i said yesterday, there is no silver bullet, and i have not heard one proposed by anyone in washington or beyond that there is a silver bullet to help our economy grow faster or create jobs. >> are there other kinds of bullets? >> in recent weeks, when he was negotiating with congress that seemed to be hellbent on precipitating an economic catastrophe, he also put forward at an historic fuel efficiency standards agreement with 13 major automobile manufacturers at his side that will result in enormous, $1.7 trillion in savings and create jobs and an industry that the united states of america should own in the 21st century, which

is the clean energy industry. he also took a measure to allow for mortgage forbearance for the unemployed, to help those folks who are unemployed stay in their houses by giving them additional forbearance in paying their mortgages. there are small things, medium- sized things and big things this president has done and will continue to do and will look forward to doing, and he will work with congress to do all of them. >> when the faa beyond calling for congress to return and get this funding, vote for this funding, what are the options? what other options are out there? >> you need to restore the 70,000 americans to their jobs? for congress to act to come to an agreement. because of the nature of the recess they are in, they have the capacity to pass a unanimous

consent measure that would allow an extension to be passed, which at the same time the extension has been passed 20 previous times since 2007, that would send those americans back on the job. to the point of the needs for ideas to create jobs and grow the economy i would suggest that perhaps some questions should be directed at congress as to why, in the midst of a situation where we're not growing enough or creating enough jobs, actions taken for political reasons in congress have thrown 70,000 people at of work. yes? >> is there information about what is happening at virginia tech? >> the president has been brief and will be updated. beyond that, we are all reminded, these kind of situations are frightening regardless but when it is happening as it is now at

virginia tech, we're reminded of the horrible tragic events in 2007. we are monitoring the situation right now and i would refer you to state and local officials. >> you said yesterday that president obama received a berth a call from president medvedev from russia -- received a birthday call from president medvedev from russia. it>>did they talk about the comments they made about americans being parasites? >> to my knowledge, did not bring out predict -- they did not bring that up. the relationship has bore significant fruit and that we work together in a number of areas that are beneficial to american national security interests and american interests. >> today, the treasury department said because the debt

ceiling has been lifted, the u.s. that has now shot up to 100% of gross domestic product putting us in the league of indebted countries like italy and belgium. how worried should americans be that we are not in league with italy and belgium at 100% gdp? >> as many of the americans paid attention to raising the debt ceiling and deficit reduction know well now this is an important issue and that is why it was so important for democrats and republicans to come together to ensure that we address the need to cut our deficit, the need to do something about the long-term debt. i think it is important for everyone here when they're right about this issue even now, late in the game, to explain what raising the debt ceiling is. raising the debt ceiling is not additional spending. that is simply saying, you the data sets of america can

continue it -- the net is states of america can continue to borrow the money to pay the bills for those who have racked up. paying soldiers, setting out social security checks, and all the variety of things the u.s. government does in its obligations and responsibilities including paying interest on the debt that it has. there is no question the president has been clear about that he agrees with the idea would be to get our long-term debt under control which is why he worked so closely with the speaker of the house and trying to forge bipartisan agreements a grand bargain that would not just reduce spending in art domestic discretionary budget, but would tackle some of the long term drivers, some of the drivers of our long term debt, which obviously includes entitlements, the need for atomic reform and the need for

tax reform. and he looks forward to trying to do that again. one of the issues that goes to the long-term debt is you can slice and slice the domestic discretionary budget, and in the case of the rhine the budget, the non-defense discretionary budget but you are not really going after the problem. you need to go after the problem, and that is why the president looks forward to this joint committee that has been established through the legislation to work with congress to get something more significant that goes right at the issue were asked about which is our long-term debt. >> we were talking about jobs, undoubtably, the islamic, other disruptions, either. -- the tsunami undoubtably other disruptions, either party had these. are you worried about the message you are sending to the american people that you are blaming it on this and not the lack of responsibility on the jobs credit?

>> no, i don't worry about that, we're simply pointing out there have been factors that have affected growth globally and effective job creation at home. it is certainly our responsibility and your responsibility to inform americans of the facts and those are the facts, just as it is important -- i think i saw on one television network today graphic about the number of jobs lost during the obama presidency. did not note the fact that when he took office, we were in a job loss free-fall due to the policies that were enacted prior to his becoming president. because of that recession america lost 8 million jobs, and this president since he has taken office has focused on what he can do with congress to reverse that, which he did it and they did and then to grow out of the terrible toll of the debt recession dug for the

american people. yes? >> when did the president speak with the speaker? >> yesterday. >> he urged him to call congress back? >> they discussed this matter and how important was to resolve it. >> is there any prospect for congress coming back? >> i don't speak for the speaker, but i can tell you that the call happened at the president is working on this issue. the one thing we can do when it comes to job creation is instantly, if congress takes action, but 70,000 people back to work. >> does the president have higher hopes that congress will deal with that? >> that is another way of asking if there is progress, and i will simply say it is not resolved but we remain hopeful that will be resolved by the end of the week. >> a higher gas prices and the spring headwinds in the economy, although still in existence? >> clearly, higher energy

prices continued to affect the global economy. the situation in europe is one that we believe europe has the capacity to address and is taking measures and needs to take measures to address. those continue. in terms of the effect, i believe the effect of the supply chain caused by the global supply chain particularly automobile manufacturers, caused by the earthquake and tsunami that has certainly diminished. but to ed's point there are obviously things going on that we have to manage, and the economic team and the overall american economy has to manage and does, and then we focus on the things we can do to mitigate the headwinds and to allow the economy to grow. >> is their expectation of the

president of when the unemployment numbers come out in july tomorrow, is there an expectation among the top level folks when the unemployment rate will begin to go down? >> i will not get into the business of forecasting unemployment figures were job growth figures except to say that we need to work together to drive employment up, drive growth up. and if we do that, if we do the things that we can to build a foundation for solid economic growth, to make investments, for example, in education and innovation and infrastructure to allow for economic growth and create jobs, do the things like he has done with the fuel efficiency standard agreement to give further boost to an industry that will be so vital

globally and that america should own in the 21st century that we will see the kind of growth and job creation we need. carol? >> to follow on that, why should americans believe that the white house can create jobs when the unemployment rate has been stagnant and we have record unemployment? >> well, the white house does not create jobs. the government, together, the white house, congress, create policies that allow for greater job creation, and that can be through tax cuts, for example for working americans. everyone who works pays a payroll tax and the tax cut this president pushed for for one year, it is pushing to be extended next year, he could work to do the things i just talked about. the fuel efficiency standards

clean energy investment. he very much supports the creation of an infrastructure bank which has bipartisan support, which require a minimal amount of taxpayer dollars to allow private companies to hire folks to rebuild our infrastructure, which in turn will help create a lot more solid foundation for economic growth and job creation. as i said yesterday, there is not one single measure that will solve this problem. we can also do with this president has done, which is cut small businesses for -- which is cut taxes for small business is 16 times. he looks forward to find other ways that we can do that. i>> the president has been talking about this since he came into office, and the results have not been what you guys want them to be or what the americans want them to be. >> which is why we keep working. >> why should people believe

him, that he is going to be able to do what he has not been able to the last few years in office? >> he will continue to make a case that we will take the measures necessary as a country work together with congress, that will spur greater economic growth and create more jobs. he will make the case that we need to do that in ways -- i mean, economic plans we have seen from others basically include sustaining or expanding tax cuts for the wealthiest americans sustaining or expanding subsidies for industries making record profits, slashing spending in programs that assist middle- class americans and eliminating or ending programs like medicare as we know it.

we do not believe that as a jobs agenda out or anything close to it. itwhat we have to do is reduce our deficit and a balanced way that insurers would not actually are more economic growth prospects or job creation prospects, and we have to take the measures of the cut of which i have been discussing that will further enhance job creation and economic growth. >> it has been suggested that every time the debt ceiling needs to be raised that congress do a dollar for dollar decrease in benefits. >> congress simply allowing that the government should pay the bills that they bring up, and link that to again arbitrary numbers to reduce spending -- again, this is not a related

issue. i would suspect we did not think that is a good idea or potentially helpful to economic growth and job creation. >> a few minutes ago, he said that the president had small medium, and large options to deal with the economic challenges. given the political reality that you just saw play out with the deficit debate, which of those options is on the table for him? >> i gave some examples of things that were smaller in scale, but that will assist people who are unemployed, often if not always through no fault of their own, struggling to stay in their houses out. we have instituted a program that will allow for mortgage forbearance. passing a payroll tax cut, which is small and no one says the mission. if you have an extra $1,000 because fed is not considered small -- because of it, it is

not considered a small thing. there are other things would continue to look to do. passing free trade agreements, pat reforms, creedon infrastructure bank. if congress does that in a bipartisan way if we leverage the small amount of public money, to spur private investment, private hiring, to put people to work right away, preparing roads, building roads bridges, airports, these are the kinds of things that we can do working together in a way that is mindful of the fact that we have to be careful stewards of federal dollars because we have to be careful about our deficit and spend our money wisely. it have to make sure that the programs we found are effective and are doing what they're supposed to do it and provide the benefits they're supposed provide. it would have to make sure that as we reduce our pentagon spending we do it in a way that maintains our security capacity. if we do all of these things at once, and that is what i mean,

when i say there is no one measure that we can take. >> unless i missed it, we have not seen the mid-session review yet. but when did that come out? >> it does not come out yet. >> it usually comes out by now. >> i will get to it. >> the president said the other day, in addition to the free- trade agreement, everything else we have been hearing, there is a timeline for that, there's also an employer tax cut on the table? >> we're looking at a variety of options, joe brianna, and actions that could be taken to

spur growth -- we're looking at a variety of options jk iluliannam. the couple days ago we settled the debt ceiling to speak. you can expect the president to be speaking about these issues in the coming days and weeks. i did not have a specific date or specific proposal to put to you. >> the employer payroll? >> there are a lot of ideas under discussion. i did not want to identify one or the other. >> is there a timeline for nominating a new -- >> i am sure that will be relatively soon, but i did not have a date for that. >> the questions about whether the treasury secretary is staying on.

is that what the administration's economic agenda? >> i think that is somewhat driven in part by the stories about it. what secretary geithner has said it is that he will stay with his job for the foreseeable future. areas, and always has been an administrations, a fair amount of turnover. these are very demanding jobs, and that will always be the case. but the president has a lot of confidence in his economic team. yes? >> foreign policy question. the american troops in iraq, and the decision made about whether it the withdrawal will be slow down? >> we continue to work under the status of forces agreement that we have with the iraqi government that will result in

full withdrawal of u.s. troops by the end of this year. we have said in the past that we will listen to, consider any request the iraqi government might have to further our engagement with iraq militarily just in terms of what we might do there, but that has not been forthcoming, and we are on track to withdraw it -- we are on track to withdraw by the end of the year. there is no slowdown. we're on track to withdraw by the end of the year. >> any specific actions by syria? >> on syria and we see what i can tell you. what i said yesterday i think made clear our views of this. through his own actions the

syrian president is insuring that he will be left in the past in the courageous syrian people who have demonstrated in the streets will determine the country's future. it has become very clear around the world that the actions place syria and the region on a dangerous path. he is on his way out, and as the ambassador said, we all need to be thinking about the day after the syrian president. because syria's 23 million citizens already are. >> any observations on the domestic turmoil in israel? >> i did not have any comments on that. i refer you to the state department. >> on syria you have condemned the syrian regime, but can you elaborate on that? the second question, senator lindsey graham are good there

should be regional pressure on the syrian president. can you please tell us, the think turkey will work further on this? >> turkey is a close ally and partner and we're working with them to put pressure on the regime. regarding the first question, i would simply say, in our view, it is safe to say that syria will be a much better place without precedent assad. i think our feelings about the actions he has taken, continues to take are reprehensible and appalling. we believe that country will be better off without him. >> the middle east peace process, -- [inaudible] -- my

question is how the u.s. will be in the peace process. it >> we absolutely believe and a bill that anyone would suggest otherwise, the path to middle east peace is through direct face-to-face negotiations. it does not come from declarations from international bodies. that has to come through peace talks. as for this country's engagement in the peace process, we have been through administrations but democratic and republican, putting a great deal of effort, trying to do what we could to bring palestinians and israelis together to reach a middle east peace agreement, and we continue to do that.

i think we are an important player and that, but in the end it has to be the two sides that come together, negotiating in working out an agreement that we can help facilitate with our other international partners and would continue to work on doing that. >> is there anything different this time that you believe you will pull this off? >> again, i will not make a prediction. >> all the defense cuts, does the president believe that big long-term, up to $1 trillion defense cuts are the right thing to do anyway? >> no. >> let me put it another way. does he agree with his predecessor that the military complex can distort policy? >> i have not had that conversation with him. i think the president has been very clear when he laid out his from work, at george washington

university and ever since that he believes we can get additional savings from the pentagon budget, which has increased greatly over the past decade, but we have to do it wisely to ensure we maintain our national security. it is a part to understand, and this is very complex, there is the upfront discretionary savings in the agreement reached, within which there is a fire wall that insurers roughly3 $50 -- roughly $350 billion comes from defense spending, and the president believes that is within an acceptable range for reducing the pentagon spending, to meet the defense spending. the trigger mechanism that if the committee does not succeed or if congress does not pass with the committee produces, the

trigger that would go into effect and call for direct cuts, 50% between defense and nondefense spending, would result in reductions that this person police would not be prudent. as commander in chief, he believes they would be too deep, which is another reason why it is so important -- these triggers are created to be on thinkable so they are not pulled. and to create great incentive and pressure on congress to avoid pulling them, and to instead make the hard choices we hope this committee will make and that congress will pass to create further deficit reduction in a wiser balanced way that includes entitlement reform and tax reform. >> do you not think in afghanistan there is an imbalance between and the massive monthly outlay through the pentagon and the political surge from the state department as well? >> i am not sure -- different

actions you take have different price tags, the question. the president has begun as he has made clear he would do when he laid out his policy for afghanistan, he has begun to draw down forces there the surge forces in afghanistan and in a process by the end of 2014 will result in afghan forces taking the security lead in that country. he also believes the state department budget is very important, and at the relatively small amount of money that is utilized through the state department to advance american interests abroad as money very well spent and that we need to be mindful of that as we make our choice is going forward. glen? >> my question is about the midwest bus tour.

what states are you going through, the cities, and what you want to achieve? >> we will have an announcement with more specific sense. that will include locations states and a little more of the schedule. as i said the other day, the president looks very much forward to getting out and the country. he has spent a lot of time here in washington and in the white house of light hearing from americans in the midwest as he does in this and other parts of the country about what is going on at their local economy what they think washington should do to enhance economic growth, enhance job creation in their parts of the country, and that is what this trip will be about. >> when will you announce the cities? >> perhaps before the end of the week. yes?

>> why is he doing it by bus? >> it creates an opportunity to be closer to the ground and more connected with folks in that part of the country. as you know, it also allows for easier travel, in some ways, because the requirements that flying airforce one in and out of certain parts of the country -- it is not always that easy, so it creates flexibility, but mostly it is an opportunity for him to meet with folks in those communities. which i will announce later. and he very much looks forward to it. yes, in the back? >> the senators and the 2012

budget. what is the stance on cutting the foreign aid? >> i am sorry? >> the u.s. to china. >> the u.s. cutting aid to china. am i am not aware of that call. i really do not have anything on that for you. if you want to follow-up with my office, we could make that call. >> talking about tax reform, the president often says he would like to lower and broaden the base. would he expand the tax on corporate as well as individuals? b>> i don't think has been specified. a long time, since the state of the union, the president has said he would like to see corporate tax reform and individual tax reform. in both cases he wants to simplify the tax code, lower the rate, while eliminating a lot of

the loopholes and subsidies that, if you will, bastardize the process. that's in the dictionary. it is clean. and create a situation where a lot of american businesses and industries, that it tilts the playing field and there's an opportunity through tax reform to make a more fair sensible system for businesses and individual. all right, thanks a lot, guys. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> since the press briefing, a temporary agreement was reached on stopping a partial shutdown of the faa. the senate will vote to keep the faa operating until september 16 tomorrow. the president said he was pleased that leaders of congress

working together to break the impasse involving the faa so tens of thousands of construction workers and others can go back to work. defense secretary leon panetta said today that congress cannot balance the federal budget by cutting discretionary spending alone. at his first official pentagon briefing, secretary panetta warned against doomsday cuts that would be triggered if congress is not able to find $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction on top of what is already agreed to. the trigger is part of the debt ceiling deal between democrats and republicans. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> good afternoon. this is my first press briefing here at the pentagon. as secretary of defense. let me begin by saying how important i think these briefings are and regular engagement with all of you, and i intend to continue this on a

regular basis, as did my predecessor, bob case. as you know, just completed my first month as secretary. during that time, i had a chance to travel to the war zones, meet with the troops and commanders there. i had a chance to consult with a number of ministers of defense and hosted four of my counterparts at the pentagon. i have also begun visiting some of the key commands out there. i've visited northcom last friday, and i will be visiting others monday. i will continue to do that on a regular basis. i have also had the privilege of visiting walter reed and meeting with our wounded warriors. finally, i have established, i think regular dialogue with congressional leaders on the hill and have built a very close working relationship with the service chiefs and service

secretaries, and meet with them on a weekly basis. i've been truly impressed with the expertise and professionalism of the senior leaders, and i am proud we will build on this terrific team weeks ahead. we just announced yesterday, the president announced my next deputy secretary of defense, and the senate confirmed two to be the next chairman and vice- chairman of the joint chiefs along with some other folks who were approved. i am very pleased the senate was able to rapidly approve those nominations. i have had the honor of administering the oath of office to add roll when felt this morning in my office. these fine leaders give me a sense of confidence that we will continue to have a great team as

we confront a lot of the challenges we will face as a department and nation. as we lead our efforts to try to meet both our fiscal and national security responsibilities. that brings me to the debt ceiling agreement that was enacted this week. and its impact on our national defense. as i said in a message to dod personnel that i issued yesterday, the reductions in the defense budget that were enacted as part of the debt ceiling agreement are largely in line with the civilian and military leaders of this department what we were anticipating and preparing to implement. make no mistake about it, we will face some very tough

challenges here. as we try to meet those numbers. it but those numbers are within the ballpark that we were discussing with both the president, as well as with omb. and we have the opportunity to make those decisions based on sound and balanced strategy and policy. and with the best advice that we can get from our service chiefs and from the service secretaries on how to proceed to build a strong defense not only now but in the future. thankfully so far this is a very different process than has so often been used in the past when there have been defense drawdowns.

the defense cuts were applied across the board, and the force as a result was hollowed out. it was left under-sized, under- funded relative to the missions and responsibilities that this country must fulfill. and that approach would be particularly harmful because we are a nation at war. we face a broad and growing range of security threats and challenges that our military must be prepared to confront from terrorist networks to rogue nations that are making efforts to obtain a nuclear capability to dealing with rising powers that always look at us to determine whether or not we will, in fact, maintain a strong

defense here and throughout the world. it is that multitude of security challenges that makes me particularly concerned about the sequestering mechanism that was contained in the debt ceiling agreement. this mechanism, this kind of a doomsday mechanism that was built into the agreement is designed so it would only take effect if congress fails to enact further measures to reduce the deficit. but if it happened, and, god willing, that would not be the case, but if it happened, it would result in a further round of very dangerous cuts across the board, defense cuts that i believe we do real damage to our security, our troops and their families, and our military possibility to protect the

nation -- and our military's ability to protect the nation. that is an outcome that would be unacceptable to me, the president, and our nation's leaders. most importantly it would be unacceptable to the american people. the american people expect that our military will provide for their security. rather they expect that we will always protect our core national security interests while meeting reasonable savings targets. as i have said before, we do not have to choose between fiscal discipline and national security. i recognize the resource allocations we face as a result of the size of the deficits that confront this country.

but i also recognize that the department of defense has a responsibility to do its part in dealing with that, and we will do so. but we always have to remember those who are doing their part for the defense of this nation, our uniform. and their families. throughout this process i will be working with the men and women including the service chiefs to make sure we do not break faith with our troops and their families. we have a volunteer force. that is the heart and soul of our military strength and we have to do everything possible to protect that volunteer force. i have no higher responsibility as secretary of defense but to do everything i can to protect

and support them. every decision i make will be made with them in mind. they put their lives on the line . too many have made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of this country. we owe it to them to do this right and to do this responsibly. thank you. >> thank you mr. secretary. i would only add that the chiefs and i fully agree with you. we have no issue with the military budgets being held to account in these challenging times or with the need to make tough program decisions moving forward. indeed, we have long ago braced ourselves for a decrease in defense spending and have worked hard to ease some of that pressure by finding efficiencies where we can. we are gratified an agreement was struck to raise the debt ceiling and we believe the terms

of that deal are at least in the near term, reasonable and fair with respect to future cuts. the cuts required by this agreement over the next ten years are certainly in keeping with the president's previous budgetary direction and we are already hard at work inside the come prohencive review process to find the requisite savings. but we also share your concerns about the devastating impact of further automatic cuts should the congress fail to enact additional deficit reduction measures. the defense department may represent 50% of the discretionary budget in this country, but there's nothing discretionary about the things we do every day for our fellow citizens. from the two wars we are fighting in iraq and afghanistan, to the support we provide nato allies in libya from disaster relief missions like those in haiti and japan to the training and exercises and

joint and combined operations we conduct around the world. the u.s. military remains a linchpin to defending our national interests. to loosen that pin unnecessarily through debilitating and capricious cuts nearly double to those already in the offing puts at grave risk not only our ability to accomplish the missions we have been assigned but those we have yet to be assigned as well. i just returned, as many of you from a trip to afghanistan and iraq. i was struck by the degree to which the debt and the state of our economy preoccupied our troops. you probably saw the media coverage there was hardly an engagement large or small this issue was not raised. i found it encouraging that the troops were informed and interested. on the other hand i found it lamentable they needed to be. our men and women down rage have enough to worry about just

getting the job done. they shouldn't be concerned about whether or not they will be paid to do that job or whether or not their families will continue to get the support they need during long absences. we can do better than that as a military and as a nation. as i have said many times our growing debt remains the single biggest threat to our national security. the military exists to eliminate or mitigate security threats. so we will do our part in this regard. we cannot allow that effort to go so far and cut so deep it jeopardizes our ability to deal with the very real and very serious threats we face around the world and we cannot allow it to break the all volunteer force upon whose backs we place the burden of national defense. a balanced approach is what the chiefs and i seek and sensible cuts are what we expect. we look forward to working with you mr. secretary, as you lead

the effort to make these difficult, critical decisions. thank you. >> mr. secretary, as you start to look at the defense budget that doubled over the past ten years, where would you see the best opportunities for saveings on programs among health care and all those other benefits and mr. chairman, do you think that these cuts as they progress will affect the pace and drawdown in afghanistan and troops and equipment the u.s. can leave in iraq beyond the end of the year? >> with regards to the first part of your question we have -- and it's ongoing a comprehensive review to look at all areas of the defense budget.

and the service chiefs are looking at all of those areas and will ultimately make the recommendations as part of this comprehensive review, which i look -- which my goal is to be able to use that comprehensive review to inform the decisions and strategies that we have to make so that's going to be key to what decisions we make and what areas we look to for savings. >> from the standpoint of the troop presence if you will, in iraq and afghanistan and actually other places around the world, i don't think there's a decision now that isn't going to take cost into consideration. we have to do that. you said our budget has doubled. a significant part and rightfully so is the investment in our people and their families over the course of the last ten years because of who they are

and what we've asked them to do in fighting these two wars and the stress they are under. i would argue with the strategic comprehensive brell the secretary described that a balanced approach looking at obviously, our operational costs, the investment in our people as well as in programs and where the service chiefs are is recommending very strongly that we look at all of these and given the strategic aproach, i just -- approach, adjust accordingly. i have no expectation with what i have seen from secretary panetta, certainly the president, that we will send people in harm's way without the support they need and the resources necessarily to fund that support. i expect that will continue whatever the outcome is in iraq or afghanistan or somewhere else.

>> how can you make any of the claims you said today and yesterday, $400 billion can be implemented an the se quest ration could cause great damage when you don't have the backdrop completed yet. >> we're not sitting in the offices doing nothing at this point, but i'm basically having a number of discussions with the service chiefs, with our budget people, with our policy people to talk about all of the areas that need to be considered. and we are waiting obviously for the review itself as it goes through. that is not stopping us from the ability to sit down and have discussions about how we would have to implement the savings requirement we are facing. >> secretary gates implied he

would inform the republican cost of the risks inherit to cutting $400 billion. do you intend to make this public so this debate can take place? >> i think the most important responsibility we have is to make public the recommendations we have with regards to our budget and that will reflect some of the decisions and recommendations in the review. i think what the american people are entitled to and the congress and obviously the president is a presentation of just what exactly our defense system will look like, not just today but in the next five and ten years. and that will reflect a lot of the decisions that went into making the final recommendations to the country. >> mr. secretary, so is it fair to say you are drawing up contingency plans in case the cuts are triggered?

>> no, i'm not. we're focused on the number that was part of the debt ceiling agreement, which, as i said, is very much within the ballpark number that we had worked out with the president and omb. i feel confident that that number is manageable. and that we can achieve it in a way that will protect our national defense. i'm not even -- i'm not even beginning to consider what would happen with regards to se quest ration. all i know is that from the review we've been doing from what we have to deal with in these numbers that anything that doubles that would be disastrous to the defense budget. i'm going to give congress the opportunity to have this committee work. i think that is what we are all looking towards.

i think the president and everyone part of the debt ceiling agreement believes and hopes this committee will exercise their responsibility to look at other areas of the budget other than just discretionary to come up with the kind of numbers that have to be part of the deficit reduction agreement. >> mr. secretary, i understand the review is ongoing. you inherited a military which has grown in size significantly not just in terms of the budget but in terms of manpower since the start of the two wars. do you think you need a military that big? can you shed personnel since the wars are won and done? >> look, i'm not going to get into the particulars of what we will or will not decide here. i think it is fair to say that the goal here is to design a defense system that will meet the threats, not only of the

future, not only of the present but of the future. there are three areas we absolutely have to protect. we have to protect our core national security interests. we've got to be able to provide the best military in the world. and we cannot break faith with the troops and their families. those are if key elements that have to be -- those are the key elements that have to be part of what we decide. >> can i add to that? the question presumes we have dramatically incressed our end strength. our focus on end strength is in ground forces. if you look at the focus on end strength in the army or marine corps, both of which are currently, e67b before this decision are starting to come down. the army is 570,000, their program is set to come to 520,000. the ma arena corps is 220,000.

the navy dropped its in strength by 50,000 tfment air force came down 50,000. if you look at the totality of the buildup given the challenges we have had, it has not been that significant, relatively speaking. >> mr. secretary, on your recent trip to iraq you were quite emphatic in urging the iraqis if they wanted american troops to stay beyond the deadline at the end of the year they needed to make that request soon yet this week vice president joe biden is quoted in "atlantic monthly" as saying that deadline has already passed. it is too late. all american troops will be out by the end of the year. now, is that the case and onthat is there a dispute within the administration about whether to keep american forces in iraq beyond that withdraw date, if they ask?

>> i think everyone appreciates the comments that were made yesterday after the talabani meeting in iraq. and those comments and decisions are now being reviewed to determine what the next steps are to be. one thing i can assure you is that we will always maintain a broad and long-term relationship with the iraqi people. and that whatever decision we make with regards to our military presence will be done in that context. >> and just like you said you had contingencies to consider and looking forward to the budget, what sort of numbers are you thinking about in terms of how many american troops may need to stay in iraq beyond that deadline? >> you know, that has to be part of the process of discussing

exactly where we need to go in the next steps between now and the end of the year. we have -- i think we appreciate 2 fact that made the decision to engage. the question is for us to engage and decide what that will look like. >> yesterday's senior defense official said in his opinion there should be no more cuts, pentagon budget cuts from the supercommittee. they should look to taxes and entitlements. do you feel like that is a realistic position? >> you know, let me -- well, let me for a moment put my old budget hat on. you cannot deal with the size deficits this country is confronting by simply cutting the discretionary side of the budget. that represents less than 2/3 of the overall federal budget.

you've got to, as the president's made clear, if you are going to deal with those size deficits, you have to look at the mandatory side of the budget 2/3 of the federal budget and revenues as part of that answer. and while, you know, while i'm commenting on that, let me just make a point on the discretionary budget. you know, discretionary budget has taken some pretty serious cuts, both as a result of the continuing resolutions from last year as well as the decision that was just made in the debt agreement. and you know, when you look at national security, i think you have to look at the broader context. national security is not just dependent on the defense budget. it's also dependent on the quality of life in this country. which involves the domestic side

of the budget. it's also dependent on the state department budget and their ability to conduct diplomacy abroad. all of those areas are con tined in the discretionary side of the budget and i think all of them represent in a very real way the security of this country. i would hope that the leadership in the congress would take the time to look at the areas they should be looking at if they are serious about dealing with the deficit. >> so what is the answer to that? the answer would be no? >> yeah. i think -- >> is that what you are saying? >> we were already taking our share of the discretionary cuts as part of this debt ceiling agreement. those are going to be tough enough. i think anything beyond that would damage our national defense.

>> d.o.d. is spending more and getting less for it. some of the other things that are driving that are likely to continue. how are you able to deal with that in your budget review as you go forward? >> as you know certainly in the course of the last couple of years, we focused very heavily on the efficiencies aspect of who we are. that continues to be the case in terms of the review that is ongoing right now. in this interim process of this comprehensive review, to look at our staffs, to look at the overhead that exists here and we recognize that resources that are going there are not going to those that are out on point. i mean, there is a trade. or -- and we're also -- we fully recognize that, you know, at some level depending on where we take the cuts or what the

cuts are, that fore structure comes -- that force structure comes into play dramatically. programs that can't meet schedule, that can't meet costs their cost and schedule requirements are very much in jeopardy and will be very much under scrutiny if you will, as we go forward. i'm confident we can meet the targets that we've been given thus far. it is in that review that we've understood or do understand if there -- if those cuts were to double we'd look into that abyss, if you will, and we know that that is my view is, the service chief's view, that is very dangerous for the country. so all of us are looking at better ways to do this, more efficient ways to do this while

continuing to focus in stride on these national security requirements, the demands of which are still out there and will be in the future. >> you said that you hope sequetration won't happen. as the military likes to say hope is not a strategy. you said it would be unacceptable to you and mr. chairman, you said you could not allow the -- you and the chiefs could not allow the cuts go so deep and so far to risk national security. so with respect, the question is sequestration happens just how unacceptable sir do you think you could continue in office? >> i didn't think it was going to sequester me. >> you are both putting some

very serious cards on the table. >> i didn't come into this job to quit. i came into this job to fight. you know my intention is to fight to make sure that hopefully some commonsense prevails here and that the committee is that is established does its work and looking at these other areas of the budget. i have to emphasize with them the dangers of sequ serks tration and the impact on our national defense. i think mike and i and others here have the responseability to educate the leadership on the hill of the dangers if they allowed sequestration to take place. for part of the record, i was involved in the conference on graham ruddman. i know what sequestration is all

about. at that time the decision was to use this tool to force the right decision. it hasn't worked. i don't think it will work. but it was the approach that was taken in the past. congress made the decision not to proceed with graham-ruddman, not to proceed with sequester. so every time the trigger was about to take effect it was postponed. >> another impressive thing is twice now within a couple of months you have had -- before you came here, sir you have had to say to the troops, you do not know if they will get paid. i don't know if any of us can recall that happening. that has to be very difficult. how do you command in a war where the troops come to you time after time and wonder if they are getting a paycheck? >> i try to address that in some of my comments today. i think putting them in a

position where they have to worry about this and their families is something we just have to make sure in the future, in the future debates doesn't occur. we have a significant number of our younger force the younger part of our force who are married and bho are living paycheck to paycheck. that was the source of the question the other day when i was in afghanistan. all of that said, throughout my career, when pay starts being discussed it combs to the top of the list for our troops. it always has. i just don't think we should put them in a position to have to ask that question. >> talk about the threat for a second. as you are doing this review, talk a little bit about how the

crises you perceive to the country. national security feeds into this. obviously, in your last job you worried a lot about that every day. when you were in afghanistan on this recent trip you said you thought al qaeda a big focus of the last decade, was a strategic level almost defeated. obviously, there are offshoots but what do you tell the american people, number one, the real -- of national security, but how do you match that with what the defense budget should look like? >> that is really the fundamental issues we have to deal with, identify those threats and make sure we are prepared to confront those threats. clearly terrorism and the terrorism networks still remain a threat out there. even though we've badly damaged al qaeda and their ability to conduct attacks in this country the fact is they still remain a

threat. threat coming out of yemen. a threat coming out of somalia. and elsewhere. that means we have to continue the pressure to deal with the threat of al qaeda. in addition to that as mike mentioned, we've got two wars that we are still dealing with in afghanistan and iraq. we have a responsibility to try to bring those wars to a stable conclusion and that's what we're trying to do. in addition to that, we have the threats that come from iran and north korea and the need to continue to watch them closely. and with the danger being they could achieve some kind of nuclear capability. in addition to that, then the responsibility is obviously to be able to project our power in the world in order to make sure that rising powers understand

that the united states still has a strong defense. all of those areas are important national defense areas we have to pay attention to. mike? >> in terms of asian security what is your level of concern with north korea and chinese military? >> having just visited china recently, both south korea and japan, i think we are all concerned with continuing -- sustaining continued stability in the region. north korea has historically generated prop gations where they killed 46 south korean sailors, three south korean marines. the sourt koreans are not going to tolerate that anymore. south korea is a tremendously

strong, long standing ally that we are very supportive of and we continue to work with them to try to ensure that stability. that is a lengthy discussion i had when i was in china with my counterpart. there is concern throughout the region with the growth of china the pace they are growing their defense. the capabilities which in many cases what we call are anti-access. they would like to see the united states stay out. and we're addressing those issues. my counterpart came here and i was able to go there and we could restart military to military negotiations -- not negotiations i'm sorry relationships. i hope we can sustain those -- that relationship and build on it over time. it is an area of great concern. certainly growing concern as china builds. what we speak to when we talk to china is transparency.

what is your strategy. why are you building this? typically the answer in defense is we see other capabilities that are not just defensive. the unity of the region with respect to the south china sea is very important. we need those disputes to be settled peacefully. that is what we are focused on. >> to go back to that question. could you give us more details of who will be in charge of the negotiations with the iraqi government? do you think the chinese mission can last for more than two years? the training mission can involve, yes contractors without u.s. troops. i think obviously general austin who sheding our forces there and the ambassador are going to be the ones that will be the primary position. >> i have a question about

growth action. some in the procurement sector felt he lacked power as undersecretary and where will his replacement come from? having worked with him in the time i've been here, but in past capacities as well i just find him to be someone who is serious minded and very capable and a good manager for the department. that is the primary interest that i have is making sure a deputy understands his department and can help me manage this department and i think ash will do an outstanding job with that. with regards to his successor, i asked for a whole list of individuals that we think can

replace him and that have an industry knowledge that i hi is important to that job. >> i would only add to that, i have been in that acquisition a long time in my career and i watched secretary carter work inside acquisition for the course of the last couple of years and i have been incredibly impressed with how he focuses on he is a bright capable guy to understand that. he has interacted exceptionally well, and we need that. he has made a huge difference, and i think he will continue to do that, should he be confirmed. >> two questions, on the war that has not been mentioned libya. he warned of allies becoming exhausted in libya.

are there more steps in the near term that the u.s. will take to break that stalemate? second, i think that you have an additional request from the nato commander. i was wondering if there was a decision on that. >> i will not comment right now on what additional steps we may be considering. with regards to working with our allies i do believe that nato has done a very good job at conducting the operations in libya. we have been working within the nato context. we think they have made some pretty good progress. the key, obviously is for the opposition to continue to exert itself, to bring pressure on the regime. the combination of nato and the opposite -- and the opposition has weakened to the regime and given us the ability to. diplomatic pressure on gaddafi

to step down. >> i will not comment on what commanders have asked for in terms of operational requirements, but respect to i.s.r. there is not a combat commander that i know, and i know a lot, would not want more. it is something that we look to adjudicate in proportion all the time. >> about the alliance, especially in nato, ours is not the only country facing serious budget problems. many of our european allies are facing them. can you talk about what you see the future of nato being and what future challenges are for nato considering how many countries are in tight financial times? >> i think bob gates made some excellent remarks with regard to responsibility of nato

countries to be able to put up their fair share in order to make sure that nato remains strong. i am a believer in those partnerships. i really am. i think it is not just enough for the united states to maintain a strong national defense. it is important at other countries work with us to assume the responsibilities that an increasingly difficult world is presenting, not just to us but to other nations throughout the world. my goal will be to do what i can to strengthen the partnership with nato, and i think one of the keys is we have to work on an approach that tries to develop some kind of resources for nato so it can be strong for the future. i think it is important. i think it plays a very important role in terms of world security but i think much more needs to be done to strengthen the partnership.

>> mr. secretary first, will command congratulations. -- welcome and congratulations. you have both been in pakistan, met the officials there, inside and outside. second what role do you think that india will play in terms of security in afghanistan and the region are concerned? >> with respect to just out of afghanistan, with respect to the threats growing in afghanistan clearly we had some expectation that they would move to these spectacular assassinations, and we do not dismiss them. they're very serious threats in

that regard. the taliban suffered pretty significantly last year. they no longer in many places on the battle space, and we expect that to continue, and that is what they have moved to and we're working hard to protect our forces and also provide enhanced security for the senior afghan officials which are targeted here. and the second part of the question? >> india -- >> as you know, i have felt for a long time this is a regional issue. you talk about south asia. it is a south asian and regional challenge that all countries have the united states has vital interests in the region, so that the countries that live there, and we'll have to continue to work to address these challenges or they will get worse.

i am encouraged specifically with the discussions between pakistan and india in recent weeks and months. at least if i understand both governments, those will continue and i hope they do and i consider those i consider that to be a very positive step. >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. >> russian president dmitry medvedev and made a new appeal to the syrian president assad to carry out reforms and reconcile with opponents saying it would be risking a bad fate of the rush -- if he failed to do so. next, discussing the anti- government protests in syria. this is hosted by the london- based front line club, a charity organization that promotes

independent journalism. >> we do start on time. we know how busy you are and we have a lot to cover, so i will not say much at all except to encourage you please, this is your meeting. if you are not hearing the other side explained please say early, did not wait until the end and say you are disappointed. say it early. i sat and too many audiences board, and we intend it to discuss this life changing issue properly, which means with you telling us where you want us to go. we intend to keep our discussion in four area. we will end with predictions. we will update the situation on the ground, the protesters, the regime. those are the topics. welcome, everybody. could i ask the panelists to introduce yourselves and give us in a statement that a short your question or your briefing for us

tonight, the thing you most want us to know at this critical time? >> thank you, i am the chief editor of syriana opposition television in london. i'd like to frame the debate on syria in a way that i think is most accurate, in a way that i think best reflects the reality on the ground. >> which is? >> that is not a struggle between opposition and the government but between the desire for democracy and a dictatorship that does not what democracy to flourish. >> sue? >> i work for bbc "mnewsnight." >> can you hear? no?

>> my name is sue. i think i was the first broadcast journalist to get into serious about a month after the trouble began. what i like to talk about is a point that the burmese monk once said to me, can any revolutionary movement, can any people succeed when the government shows an insatiable and consistent appetite for firing on and murdering its own people? >> my name is daniel. i am a freelance journalist. i was the deputy editor of the current affairs magazine in damascus. >> do we have an application? if so, let's put it to use. >> i will speak up. i worked as a freelance journalist in syria and i

arrived in damascus in the mid february. i guess what i'd like to talk about is the growing movement and syria. -- the growing movement in syria, which may be disorganized and chaotic and have many different elements to it, but there is a movement of people that i think people of the world should listen to and do everything they can to understand. >> i am a management consultant in the u.k. as well. i came from damascus 10 days ago. i% the point of view that the best way forward for syria is to keep the current government and have a change from within. my message for today is that so far the media coverage of the

violence has intensified a. -- has intensified it. it has sent the wrong messages to the demonstrators, and now the syrian government, even though it has many points to declare, cannot give it to everybody else in the world. so this is what i would like to talk about today. >> my name is chris phillips. i also recently completed the international identity in syria which involve me living in syria for two years. i could talk about the economic situation of people want to, which can probably be best summarized as absolutely dire, but what i would like to race to the floor is the issue about sectarianism in syria.

i met many people who would suggest that sectarianism is not as prominent in syria as the media wants to portray it, but i am very worried about recent reports of attacks on different groups, and i would like to raise that point with the group. >> thanks. we're coming with this question. would it the two journalists give us their best view, an update if you are locked into the news, the security council if you could update that or if you see any social media reporting during the meeting. but sue and daniel, will you tell us what the situation is and other cities? you start sue. >> in the past few days, the army has fought back the regime, has fought back. they estimate 140 fatalities and many more wounded.

it became a little enclave trying to prove how syria could government themselves before the army decided to move in. ramadan has always been an explosive month for syria. in syria, it could be arrested if a group of people meet in a public place which is why it during ramadan when thousands go to their mosque every day, it is a focus -- it is a chance to set off demonstrations. this is what had happened, and the army was waiting for it to happen. and they retaliated in a brutal way. >> last week -- >> sorry, what we want to hear you, daniel. give him a microphone. very close. start again.

>> i was in the country last week, and at the time it was still part of this enclave, if you would call it. there was no security on the streets, no military, no police. when i arrived in the city, the streets were full of young kids among barricades, standing in the streets. mostly, they were carrying sticks and so on but there were young kids, mostly teenagers. as we traveled around the city, i saw no evidence of violence, weapons, though there are weapons all over syria. syria, it is very easy to get hold of guns and ammunition, but people have not used them, or on very few occasions people have

used weapons. the situation there now remains restrained as the people have faced military, security, torture, and they have not carried out a full insurrection. >> in the syrian uprising, at what moment is the tank put down? >> i think we are in the first week of ramadan. i think if the regime, after ramadan, if the regime emerges stronger than what it is now then i think we could very well see the beginnings of a civil war in syria. the slogan from the beginning of the revolution was "death over

in dignitydignity." there is no going back, as far as they are concerned. they know if things go back the way they work, there will be a network of informers. however, after ramadan if the regime is visibly weaker, i think it could spell the beginning of the and theend. >> chris phillips, but do you agree with this assessment, the whole arabs bring it is condensed into three weeks in syria? if the uprising succeeds in three weeks? >> i would not say the entire arab spring is condensed.

it is certainly at a key juncture, the gloves have come off by the regime. there is no pretense anymore that he is some kind of reformer, some kind of character who is not willing to use violence. he has clearly been involved and is clearly willing to use force. the one thing i would say in order for civil war to break out, you need another side, you need people fighting back. one of the reasons that the peaceful movement is taking that slogan is they know full well if ever there is a regime, if ever there is justification there will be smashed. it is not like libya where there is large segments of the military with hardware switching sides.

>> we are the update of the situation on the ground, so i will come back to that. what is your view? you said you did not want a change of regime? what is the critical nature of the timing right now, in your eyes? >> the situation will not wait until ramadan is over. the civil war is already starting. in my humble opinion, this is the reason why the regime has toughened up. if it had not, the other side would take matters into their own hands. that is my perception. syria right now is very much pulverized. what i have seen in damascus the past 10 days, since when i visited a couple weeks back, is myself during the 1980's growing up idolizing the president idolizing the military. that is how diehard supporters

are being reared at the moment. the general feeling is there are sectarian problems. in homes there has been a lot of sectarian tension. they told me the people on the streets do not listen to the wise people of the other majority the sunni people. >> is the regime right to tighten up now? that if they did not people will take things into their own hands. -- >> if they do not people will take things into their own hands. >> anybody else? yes, you, madam? if you would like to use the microphone. >> hi, my name is fatima.

i can say first i did not find until now one single sectarian slogan on the web pages by syrian activists. talking about syrian rule, you need to parts equally. it is a regime empowered by extreme force and civilians fighting against it. i think any kind of reform coming from within the regime -- >> what is your update, what is happening? is it three weeks to decide be syrian uprising? >> no one can know what the future will happen. i don't think three weeks will see the end of it. i don't think that is realistic.

>> houses situation on the ground right now? -- how is the situation right now on the ground? >> unless we have media, we don't know. we don't know what is going on. >> first of all slogans of sectarian nature were there from day one. there have been many. we have seen them, we have heard them and if they are not reported to you, i don't know who your sources are. second, a lebanese colleague of yours went to hamas and he said this is the kind of part of syria. the media is not reporting. >> how can we if we are not

invited in? >> look, some bbc journalists did. >> not buy a vacation. -- not by invitation. >> we will have other views. thank you for giving yours. it is largely your fault. >> that is not true. but i have not come up with sectarian slogans. the people he is referring to come to be quite honest, going back to the sunni majority, that is simply not true. in fact, in 1971, when the president visited hamas they slaughtered about 30 sheet for

the president. but put that to one side. >> the protesters have been keen not to do anything that might be interpreted as sectarian. i am very disturbed by calling it the kanduhar of syria because it appears that you are employing sectarian languish when you describe the population that way. it is not being bombarded the way they are bombarding the hamas. >> the question of the update of the situation on the ground, but do any of you on the panel wants to move on from any part of that? we want to know your updates. have you missed an important point? sue?

you mentioned one. >> the start of sectarianism and the country. i have heard sectarian slogans at demonstrations, anti-regime demonstrations. they are perhaps maybe one person and the crowd shout something, everybody else says, no, this is not what we are about. we are here as one people against the regime, and this is a widespread feeling. >> when we talk about the vision and syria, you have to look at the various divisions. a lot of them are economic as well as sectarian. i was speaking with various people, and it was interesting but sectarian violence that took place took place in the poor neighborhoods, a recent economic migrants to the city involved. it is not the establishment that had been a longtime the merchant class, it was a small

segment of an economic strata of society. that analysis is often missed by the media. >> you have explained that there is civil war blooming or under way, there are casualties in the city but you don't want change, the rest of you want change. we will come to the regime in a moment, but for now we'll talk about the protestors. you have been living in damascus daniel, as a westerner. who do you think the protesters are? and who has the right to tell us who they are? >> the second part, i think the only people who have the right to determine who they are are the protesters themselves. as i mentioned before, it is a very disorganized movement, and there are many different actors different people involved. there are exiled groups to have links with networks within syria. there are also local

coordination committees who over the last few months have become more organized but began as a very disparate groups of mostly young men. there is a women's movement. it is an entire spectrum of people's movements. >> sue? >> a movement of discontent. i want to make a basic point that you cannot forget the demographic of syria and indeed much of the middle east. 60 percent of the population are under 30. the perception i got from some young people i spoke to in syria without the deep frustration with the status quo, corruption the inability to get houses jobs without bribes or knowing the right people. they get very impatient with the government's paranoia of always blaming israel at outside forces. i was told time and again, the

discontent, the humdrum of every day. >> how these disparate groups communicate? in tunisia there were social networks, al-jazeera english was an influence in egypt at the time. how are the groups in syria communicating? >> they do use facebook, social networking twitter, and also simple means of communications, arranging and coffee shops. in many ways, there is not a coherent organization. >> how would you answer the question, who wore the protesters? >> it is not a top-down revolution at all. in an embryonic stage, civil

society is emerging in syria. these youth groups have emerged in syria, first at a neighborhood level, the which level -- village level, and now they are organizing themselves on a city wide or province-wide level and now a national level. the young people in syria, but also women's groups. women have been very active in the revolution. two of the most active figureheads in syria at the met are women. -- at the moment are women. it is a very diverse mix but i would say it all comes under the banner of civil society vs. the militarized society of the

regime. that is how i would describe the battle in syria at the moment. >> free people against militarized society? >> absolutely. >> a you have the protesters just like he said, who for dignity reasons they did not want to bribe a policeman anymore. they want equal opportunity in regards to economics, so on, so you have these factions. you have another faction that is influenced, i think, from the outside. with regards to this particular faction, it has a certain on the ground presence. for example, when i was in damascus and a couple weeks back the taxi driver said -- we were going to this restaurant, and there was a demonstration

pro-government demonstration at the time. the taxi driver said, don't you think this is provocative? some people are dying and the other people saw the burning in the streets? i said, yes well, some of those people see you out on the streets all the time seeking to confront that much. at the end, we may not get any democracy at all. . there is a dignity. but there is the economic problems. a lot of people cannot find a job. if i am an engineer that does

not mean i will have an opportunity to express my skills. i will have to be friends with someone. >> are you saying people are dying because they want to be engineers? >> no. they're frustrated. >> wire they putting their lives on the line? >> they want a regime change. >> that is their right. >> it is feared how the change the regime, from the inside? -- it is. how do you change the regime, from the insect'inside? >> the question is what do you know that we do not know? >> i know what people tell me. they are afraid in their houses

that he might cause a shift that cannot be ended very soon. >> i wanted to follow up on what you said. in syria, the biggest and most divisive force is the regime. for 40 years they have used the different sections. there is always one person from here. they use a very cleverly. >> i spent last week in beirut. >> pointed at your mouth. >> i had some interesting

organization with close leadership. what i heard gave me the impression of what is going on in syria. it is not going to be contained. it'll stretch out to lebanon and turkey on the side of the turks in the north of syria. they protect their own from the protection. it will have to come in. >> i read the slogan. i think the "new york times"

thought it was important. >> my experience was that the syrians to have fled to beirut for having an uncomfortable time. there were knocks on the door. >> what do you think they what? >> there be a very clever in the

way they use it themselves. we can change the regime. we have to keep the existing power structure. we may be need to curb some of the changes in code walk to the opposition to become part of the government. this is the road map. this is the idea that they can stay in place. our lives can go on. he mentions of medina's judd a --hmadinajah -- ahmadinajad.

as a people have their rights for the assets. it is natural for there to be a reaction. it is illegitimacy. there once call on these external forces. they're saving give for the syrian people. they will be fighting it. the existence is impressed.

>> some people have suggested this. i wanted private regime. >> the question to you is, what do they want? >> he made a fair point in highlighting this. they initially just wanted to reform the regime. a key point is being missed. it is not necessarily about two is on the street but who is not on the street. there are a key geographical regions.

they are not joining in the uprising. that is the question. until that happens until they join the uprising, it cannot possibly proceed. >> why are they not joining index in? they say they do not like the regime. we did not like them in power. we will not there out are lost with the opposition and so we are convinced where it will go. >> the key question is whether the military and forces will stay there. three options will happen now. there will be a huge crack down. it'll terrify people into submission.

the third option is that they refuse. the biggest is the appeal in egypt. this has not happened in yemen or libya. there's something from turkey. there are embassies about whether or not that is there. >> can you give this a briefing? >> i was there after it came out of syria. he said he no longer obey this. the problem so far has been the senior officers.

>> recently, this was quite close to this. there were towns that were hits. they spoke about one month ago. there's a parallel army. who knows if this will go away. >> the problem with the military is that the machine has a bill. it was designed there. they separated the powers. they're all spying on one another. there in the high positions. that means the chances of it affecting it is far more diminished than the bottom level.

what is interesting about it is deployed is that so far they have been largely using the group for the republican guard. they are expected to be fiercely loyal. they will fight to the death. they are largely being used in these widespread ones. what is interesting is whether or not you get multiple sources of uprisings. >> thank you. >> in terms of international reaction, these are the things that could happen.

they referred it. it is the sense that people may or ken be held to responsible. this is what they're picking up. >> they have made no difference whatsoever. somebody else's shooting at them.

. do you think they're right to do that? >> the army and the security forces are shooting at each other. when this started, this started very early on with an ambush in the army on the way to beirut. >> i do not agree with that at all. there's overwhelming video evidence for the deliberate killing of innocent people women, and children.

yesterday, there was a 10-year- old girl who was shot. there's a very graphic video. we showed it anyway. it is the reality of what is happening in syria. it is very difficult. >> with cannot always hear you. did you want to answer his questions aspects? >> i will not suggest the revolution that started five months ago has been 100%

peaceful. i said it is 95% peaceful. >> is this is a small question. i can give you an update. this was reported by the bbc. they have not been shown. we will move on to the regime of. it is common to talk about this. they narrow it down to a family. >> they are quick to answer that.

people really have confidence. they have huge optimism. they think this is a new one. this has accelerated the process. we believe that you can reform. show us. when he did not it reaches its. >> they have pointed there.

there is a question about doing this. to meet it is more akin to a family. nobody really knows. nobody knows if they're calling the shots are these are decisions made among the small group. >> about the regime. he is a prisoner in his father's prison. i wonder if we did talk about whether that is right. they also suggested a link was there. he was the brother that was not

supposed to takeover. is the stronger than family? >> it is interesting. he has given efforts to make it there. it is the different.

he merged the security army forces together. it is dependent on the various clans surrounding it. there is one more thing about the reformer. it is quite possible that he will be overwhelmed. he is not a politician. he is an optometrist he goes there the process. and he learns how to role in many ways. he is prevent that he is a weak

demand. >> who runs the army? no regime has divided the army supporters as 1975. he is calling the shots. >> he came to power. he made the change. his father's team was still in power. they did not listen to it anymore.

but is very hard to do change. there is a mass of people. there in the top prime minister position. >> he was a prisoner. >> and he is planning this. >> give me one good reason. >> i can give the 10,000. >> it is made up to scare people. >> they had taken to the streets.

he says these are the end products. this is about freedom democracy. these are very simple questions. i think the way things are.

>> would you like to comment deck's? >> was the most popular is this. people are actually cursing. it is the first whenone that they have. it is the system. he decided to live with a continue. this is the system. they explained why there through this.

anyone that was a loyal is there. did the minister of defense. he has been put into the government. there will never lose their jobs. they're quiet comfortable. there is a democracy. they're completely ineffectual. there are these militiamen. another extreme you had a scholar.

he said it is ok to about down. there's a wide spectrum of people that have been coopted. >> there's a widespread ceiling. there was a plan. they have this. they are unified. this is not a process. there was a process that should

fall they're being justified. that backing that follows is dangerous. >> would you comment on the sec's what else is there a? one of the things they have base themselves on is a they have grown its roots. nothing goes on in syria without touching the regime. most of us have had enough. they do not have time to think about this.

they will keep this for another 40 years. >> i've been impressed by the democracy. they're quite proud about what they achieved. the message was sent out. they did not have much experience. it can be a bottom up process. >> what happens next? >> until you action find out how it falls one thing that is

difficult is what is it about? they say they are trying hard to separate the army from the security forces. they're trying to stage a coup. the problem get a situation where they go beyond the armed forces. in reality, they're probably trying to protect as many assets as possible. if that does not happen, but there's some sort of violent confrontation. do not underestimate the ability for a conflict to change the objectives of people. >> we have that from pro-

democracy people in egypt. it is another army person. what about the deaths >> it had a democracy for a while. >> what could replace their aging? let's there is the type of situation that we have. it should be game on. the re-emergence of civil society has an alliance between businessmen and clerics. >> who could believe? >> i could name me some names. we will be free of elections. >> we're very much occupied with three or four people at the top

of the regime. they are not the regime. the regime as hundreds of thousands of people. if you kill the president and his brother that is not changing the regime. >> to you think it has the capability to that minister a whole approach that is it too late? -- to administer a whole approach? is that too late? >> several top members of the government are backing off from what has been done. they were tricked. since then, if they have had to live in exile. this is highly unlikely.

>> they were misinformed. he was not sit on a mission before. he only did it after the assassination. >> perhaps i got the name wrong. >> so far the response has been mixed. what do you expect? what is it that the regime is most afraid? what is the regime was fearful of? would you like to tackle this tax quite sick and ask a question but not at this moment.

there's nothing worth fighting for. they're most afraid of turkey. he embraced this 10 years ago. he went to set of the factories and employ others. turkey can turn around and say we invested in me.

>> we demonstrated this. the way to tackle that is about engagement. it is not that they did not have step to a track, it is another element in deed. it may be fair to mess up. >> israel is not the enemy. they are a great friend for the regime. this is the excuse for everything. this was finished because the

march into the west bank. it is really a huge benefit to have israel there. what they were really afraid of is yes, i deal with turkey. what they are afraid of is essential damascus. they're not able to contain it. plexus the second time you caught our attention to this. you're saying this undecided middle is it. >> you have very small protests.

that is your tipping point. the point was made before about the ability for the armed forces to contain it. that is too great a number to impress. >> i keep hearing over and over again. they're not a lot of demonstrations about it. no is going to go to those areas. the relief in bexar-- there was relief in there.

it is simply because the private sector is considerably larger than any other problems are cities in syria. thousands of people have been if it did. -- benefited. they risk losing their jobs. >> what struck me when i was there on thursday, there was a shutdown. they would have the area itself. it is in order to defend what they do best. it is a demonstrate -- it is to demonstrate. >> syria is a part of a chain that goes there.

another important link in the chain was libya. if no one said anything about how that might impact syria. will lose some support? there is a three legged stool. could this affect the regime? >> this to be something by the opposition. >> how was the economy doing? >> the question was the economy in the food supply, they're talking about the regime. you keep mentioning the economy. would you like to give this a

briefing? the economy is not in good shape at the moment. it is probably not as bad as other people are making out. they like to get a narrative with all the money running out. the currency will devalue. you're seeing a decline in economic ability. consumption is down. all this was through the roof. agriculture has a bad couple of

years. there's still trading with turkey. 25% goes there. this latin thousand barrels a discounts. while the economy is looking back but is not quite as bad as it is. >> to wonder how many new about the oil? >> their 9 million people demonstrating. if the guarantee half of it, you

would see a lot more people. in terms of linking it, there are rumors about this. how will it help the sec's? >> we are with you. the problem that they face is that people will be thinking it.

they probably do not want it to fall. >> we will go talk about possible outcomes. if you are missing things became into a room hoping but do that now. then we will go to possible outcomes. >> i have a question that relates to the future. in yemen every single day there

are pro-democracyies and women learning how to reach for the first time. is there this kind of movements in syria? is a much too difficult for them to gather the facts? >> it is far too difficult. in terms of traveling in the country, it is very difficult. this is the strength of the movement. although there is a lack of education of how to do things. there is not a need for educational programs.

>> they were reporting this outside and that they were being focused on people inside. besides they said they cannot do anything. >> if you protested out what happens to them? >> people told me they were protesting.

people then received enormous phone calls. they said their relatives. they're telling them they have to get your people in london to lay off. it has to stop people from doing that. >> we did a report. it has serious repercussions. what about scholarships and travel bans sex with you just answer this question that we're moving on steel in a moment. >> i think this was exaggerated.

the problem is that you're not hearing it. they were outside the embassy. this is always the subject of intimidation. they were threatened in front of the embassy. >> perhaps. when those people visited it was interpreted by threatening. they're calling things down.

they know people personally. >> we heard you. i think he is a diplomatic one. that happen. >> it is someone who was that what he does not go around intimidating. i don't think he ever stepped out of it. >> there's one very d tel acquisition about the behavior. we're moving around the audience. the do not need to be disappointed. >> the action is sold the regime. what support do the protesters have?

>> there the king to make it about a fifth of all employees. there is a war that they will run out of money in it that they do they have to pay the security forces that do. i do not know what they were to do. >> i would delegate that. i would not want to come in on the deficit.

>> this is something i heard from protesters when i asked the question that journalists always do. i heard time and time again that is playing into their hands. this is our problem. they have intended the recent protests. others say no. it allowed them to go by former colonial power. >> can anybody comment on how the rest of the economy is being affected by a reduction there is

a complete collapse in tourism. can anybody comment on the position? >> i just wanted other times. they're running out of money. after the 21st of june, there were demonstrations. they are refusing to go to the city. they are checking everybody. people are trying to take their exam. they're not selling inside the city.

>> when you said they have not seen anything dx that brought to mind this. this is what you're referring to? they have much better intelligence on the ground. >> that cannot comment on it. what don't you want to comment on? >> they were not on this. their outside shooting in.

it seems pretty unpleasant. do you think that the government could go further? you have to be brief. >> as winning if the government could do more. >> do you think it is a surgical military response? >> they have not the least the full potential. they do a lot more damage. i think they're willing to fight to the debt. -- death. they know if the regime falls it is the mother of all revolutions.

there is a morally corrupt system. many more people will die. i am sure. >> for people who want to share solidarities some how there is the embassy. >> thank you for your question. let's seek the audience reaction. is there anyone on the panel that wishes to disagree with that statement?

keebler saying that there will not be any. it will appear to dig people are saying that there will not be any -- people are saying that there will not be any. >> turkey might bring it to a bubble on the northern part. >> i'm not being rude. what do you know about it? is it because of the refugees stopping there that they have to make some kind of response? >> is a not be entirely for the benefit of the syrian people. we do have the issue of a lot of refugees. turkey does not what trouble to

spillover. we're coming to the conclusion. would you like to give as an outcome? >> i am depressed. people talking that they did not want outside intervention. we have seen a largely ill- equipped protest movement. government has prepared to put it down. they have nothing to fight back on. and did not think it be the outcome for most of them. >> do you think there are more skirmishes in which they are killed by this tax we're not

going back. you have a microphone. there's some pretty bad news. there were a thousand strong executives. it is a weakling. i can see two possible outcomes. they hit a deal with certain elements.

if you continue protesting, this was the war and everyone would be a boozer. we know there are opposition leaders. this is a different issue. the other scenario is a low- level civil war. i think it would be similar to what happens there. these attacks were isolated.

the debate should be difficult for the army. it is hard them to remain there. >> do you reflect what we have heard decks to? do you think that might have been? >> if a suddenassad is not emerge as the winner and do not see how it would be strengthened. i owed reminded that there is historical flavor.

quack's>> your zero possible outcomes? it is sooner rather than later. civil war is unlikely. anything can happen fairly soon. the current situation could continue for some time. >> i am pessimistic on this.

and of the underground movement is well developed. what people feel as if the government will do some of the political situation. >> i would forecast the situation. they have a lot further to go. this is what they can stomach. i think it will grow. they will not reach the critical mass. there will be some kind of internal to