e if america ever needed a smart intelligence network, because the enemies we're fighting really don't care if they die, they just want you to go with them? >> that and other reasons, yes, sir. and if i may add, the provisions as they pertain to tredges actually even more onerus because we would not have any latitude toit's stipulated for us that every single program within intelligence would have to take a proportional hit. so we would be faced with the prospect of riffing a lot of employees, which would have a desk -- a devastating effect on them, as well as effect every acquisition we have in the intelligence community because they would all be wounded. >> it would result in destroying the ability to the intelligence community has to defend this country? >> well, sir, i would have a

hard time saying that, as the director of national intelligence, that i could face a group like this and say i have any degree of confidence i could provide adequate intelligence for the safety and welfare of this nation if that happened. >> in many ways, america would go blind in terms of intelligence gathering. >> over time. >> ok. let's go to iran. keep this as a 30,000-foot view. the regina's goals -- the regime's goals are survival, right? >> yes, sir. >> do you think they have made the decision that the best way to survive is to make a nuclear weapon? >> we have said consistently they will base this on a cost- benefit analysis. >> do you think they are trying to develop a nuclear weapon? >> they are sustaining the industrial infrastructure to

enable them, if they make that decision, yes, sir. >> do you think they are building these power plants for peaceful nuclear generation purposes? >> that remains to be seen. >> do you have doubt about the iranians' intention when it comes to making a nuclear weapon? >> i do. >> you doubt whether or not they are trying to create a nuclear bomb? >> i think they're keeping themselves in a position to make that decision, but there are certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time. >> how would we know when they have made that decision? >> i will be happy to discuss that with you in closed session. >> i take a different view. i am very convinced they are going down the road of developing a nuclear weapon. it seems to me that they develop

a nuclear weapon, like north korea, nobody will bother them. is it a good outcome for the united states national security interest if they will achieve nuclear capability? >> obviously not. a nuclear weapon and the means of delivering it. >> it would create a nuclear arms race in the mideast. >> that is certainly a potential outcome. >> the likelihood of a terrorist organization being able to access nuclear materials in the hands of the iranians would be greater, not less? >> probably so, and that is the nexus of a terrorist group and the weapons of mass destruction. >> what president obama -- when president obama says -- congress

is developing a resolution that says it's not good national security strategy, so we will be backing up the president, and i'm glad to here with your proposition that we should not as a nation try to contain a nuclear capable iran, we should prevent it. i am not in the camp of believing that all is lost. do you also believe that all options should remain on the table when it comes to stopping them from getting nuclear capability? >> that is a personal view not the intelligence community's policy, but certainly i do. >> that is what the president said, and i certainly agree with him. let's get back to iraq. has the security environment deteriorated since we left iraq militarily? >> i think it is about the same.

we have done an assessment on the prospect in iraq for the next 18 months, and i think the view is that while there are challenges and uncertainties, we believe at least for the next year or so that the iraqi government will continue. it appears that the sudanese -- that the sunnis believe that the best process for protecting their interest is to participate in the government. >> do you believe that us withdrawing all of forces from iraq has had no effect on the iraqi security environment? >> i would not say no effect. >> a minimal effect? >> i think there are certain enablers capabilities that they no longer have by virtue of our absence. but at the same time, as john burgess indicated in his

statement, they have done reasonably well and have a reasonably capable force. >> to you know why the vice- president, the sunni vice president, they tried to indict him? >> i guess the implication would be that our presence there although we did all we could diplomatically i do not know why the timing. >> is it generally viewed by the sunnis and the kurds that when we left iraq that was a boon to iranian influence? >> i do not really know how -- >> have you talked to the sunnis and kurds? >> i have not. >> i would suggest that you do it. >> there's no question that -- >> i would suggest that you sit down with the sunnis and kurds.

now, afghanistan. the strategic partnership agreement is really the last card to be played, is that correct? >> i am not sure what you mean by last card. >> mr. chairman, if i could have 30 additional seconds here, i will be quick. the bottom line is, if we have an american military presence post 2014, at the request of the afghan government and people that will allow counterterrorism capability, american air power that would always give the edge to the afghan security forces and probably be the end of the taliban militarily. do you agree with that construct? >> i do. i think that would be a very positive thing not only in afghanistan but regionally. >> and the best way to negotiate with the taliban is saying that you will never take this country back over militarily you need to get involved in the political

system? >> at a minimum, the taliban would not provide a reservoir or safe haven for al qaeda. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator graham. >> mr. chairman, i am going to yield to my colleague, senator hagan. >> of course, senator hagan. you have no competition left at the moment, senator hagan. >> thank you. i wanted to follow up on senator graham's question concerning iraq. i also want to state how much i appreciate both of you being here today testifying, but in addition, your leadership and long-term security interest in our country. director clapper in your prepared testimony you state al qaeda and iraq despite its weakened capabilities, remain capable of the attacks, and some shia groups will target u.s.

interests including diplomatic personnel. what is the intelligence community's assessment of the capabilities of iraqi counter terrorism forces to continue similar operations against al qaeda and iraq -- al qaeda in iraq? >> i would tell you that our assessment is the see the force that was left there is a capable force -- the c.t. force, also that a.q.i. is a formidable foe. there are some things that we're looking to do to help them from an intelligence standpoint. >> how about protecting our diplomatic forces? >> ma'am, we put a lot of resources against that as the u.s., and we work with our iraqi friends. >> let me move to libya and the proliferation of their weapons stockpiles.

when gaddafi's regime fell, it was discovered he had undeclared stocks of chemical weapons as well as large quantities of conventional weapons. can you tell the committee if the chemical weapons are secured? >> yes, they are. >> were these weapons produced by libya, or whether they had help in producing these weapons? >> we do not know, and have not been able to determine that. >> what about your assessment of what happened with the stockpiles of conventional weapons, such as missiles and artillery? >> the principal area of concern are the so-called shoulder- fired anti-aircraft weapons. going into the people's -- going into the people, libya had more man-pads than any other country

in the world. there is an aggressive print run by the state department to recover man-pads, and we estimate we have recovered one- quarter of them, about 5000. there were others that were probably destroyed in the course of the air campaign that were in depots and other storage places. the truth is that these weapons are distributed all over the place, in homes, factories schoolhouses. it is all over. so there is a concern obviously about recovery of these weapons. i would say though, that the transitional government in libya is on schedule and is moving toward elections and reforming the government.

their oil refinery capacity has recovered faster than we anticipated. they are up to we estimate about 1 billion barrels a day -- 1 million barrels a day. their pre-up people level was 1.6 million. there is some room for optimism. >> how did you estimate 20,000 man-pads and there were 5000 recovered? >> that was the best intelligence assessment we have based on analysis of the number of man-pads they had before the demonstrations started. >> in recent weeks, we have seen a spike in attacks in nigeria. are some of these weapons getting into nigeria? >> we do not have any evidence of a direct relationship between the weapons in libya, if that is

your question, and nigeria, no. >> according to press reports, al qaeda, partially as a result of the ongoing political crisis in yemen's capital, continues to gain territory in the southern region of yemen. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula are a cause for concern, it because it creates a sanctuary for external operations. my question is what is the intelligence community's assessment of their territorial gains in southern yemen, and has it provided training for external operations? >> we are concerned about that, particular because of the fact that it could provide a haven for training facilities. we are monitoring that very carefully and also watching -- it is interesting when a

terrorist group like al qaeda all of a sudden has municipal responsibilities and how they deal with that, whether that will be a distraction to their foreign plotting. aqap is probably the organization we are most concerned about regarding potential threats to europe and the homeland. >>we have good cooperation with the yemeni intelligence and security organizations, and hopefully that will be sustained even as the government transitions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you gentlemen. >> thank you very much, senator hagan. senator corning? >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i just have a few questions i want to ask you about the economy. director clapper, on page 20 a part of your report on page 28, you talk about challenges to the global economy and also to energy. i want to specifically ask you about the red lines that secretary panetta identified with regard to blockades in the strait of hormuz. i do not think it takes a fertile imagination to see if there was some sort of action by israel against iran because of concern about their nuclear capability that there would be retaliation, and part of that could well be a blockade of the strait of hormuz which i am confident we could break the blockade. but i want to ask you when 20% of the world's oil supply

transits the straits of hormuz, what is the impact on oil prices of the geopolitical issues that we see in the middle east? in other words does the threat of a possible action by israel against iran and possible retaliation, which would include a blockade of the strait of hormuz, does that affect worldwide oil prices? >> yes, sir, it does, and for the reasons you cite, if the street were blocked, that would have a profound impact on the region and the rest of the world and the price of oil. that is one thing that we have to manage very carefully with the nda provisions in imposing more sanctions on iran so that we do not end up in the worst of

both worlds. you're quite right, it is a very delicate balance here, and it would clearly have impacts on the oil and the world economy. >> the blockade of the straits of hormuz, because of the blockade of the oil trade -- would you see that that would have a negative impact not only on the global economy in terms of the projections of growth? what i'm getting at is we are coming out of a very tough patch and projections about the congressional budget office -- and projections of the congressional budget office are a slow rate of growth and high unemployment for the next several years, and i would like to get your impressions of the possibility of a blockade what

that would do in terms of the rate of expected growth of our economy here and related topics. >> well, sir i would have to take that one under advisement. i'm not an economist and i would want the experts, if there is the possibility for projecting what the impact would be globally on the economy and individually, it would vary for -- from country to country depending on their dependence on oil from the straits of hormuz. it would not be a good effect for a number of reasons if a blockade were allowed to stand. >> we have been debating a payroll tax holiday that the estimate is it would provide an extra $20 a week for a person making $50,000 a year. in 2011 the average family spent

more than $4,000 in gasoline. my concern is in terms of our economy, the geopolitical uncertainty we have been talking about, what impact that would have on families here in the united states and what impact it would have to perhaps dampen if not wipe out our economic recovery. i know you know that is the direction i was heading. let me ask you -- because i'm from texas obviously mexico is our southern neighbor. senator mccain had questions about mexico and it is a matter of continuing concern. the department of justice, more particularly the bureau of all, tobacco, and firearms had a program called fast and furious that you are aware of, whereby approximately 2000 weapons were allowed to walk from gun dealers in the united states by the bureau of of all, tobacco, and

firearms -- and i believe the estimate i saw was about a quarter of those weapons have been recovered. of course, two of them were found at the scene of the death of a u.s. border patrol agent. could you shed any light, or do you have any opinion on what the impact of the transit of those firearms would have on the cartel's and the violence and the crime that we might see as a result? >> sir, this is not an intelligence issue. it is a very unfortunate incidents. obviously, guns, whether in a case like this or by any other means, would find their way to the night -- from the united states into mexico certainly do not help the situation. >> do you know, general burgess

or director clapper -- i am advised mexican government officials were not advised by the department justice and the bureau of tobacco, alcohol, and firearms, about this fast and furious program. do you have anything you can tell us about their reaction to this diplomatic breakdown? >> note, i cannot, sir. it was not -- no i cannot, sir. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator cornyn. >> thank you for the incredible breadth and depth of your work in touching many of the hot spots of the world. i also want to thank you for your services, including many, many years. let me turn you to a comment that secretary gates made at

west point. "i must tell you when it comes to predicting the nature of our military engagements since our record has been -- we have never gotten it right from panama, haiti, iraq, and more, we never had any idea of these missions we would be so engaged." do you agree with secretary gates on this point? if so, what can we do to address that failing? >> well -- >> i presuppose that you would agree with me, with secretary gates, but if not, please -- >> i am a great friend of secretary gates, and i move to disagree with him. i will say as far as our obligation, a responsibility is

to provide as much insight for decision makers and policymakers which we are not. what the implications are, what the threat situation is, what kind of day situation we are getting ourselves into for any military operation overseas. >> general burgess, you care to comment? any thoughts on changes additional resources? >> like director clapper i would probably never publicly disagree with secretary gates. but having said that, i think we have discussed even last year, in front of this committee having this same discussion as we looked at the arab spring, as it was called then. i am one of those that think the intelligence community did in

fact paint the picture of the environment and the situation things that were going on. did we make the tactical call in some cases? no, sir. can we be faulted for that? sure. because there is intelligence failure in operational success as we say. >> secretary gates said that in a perfect record, he did not necessarily imply that our intelligence did not give us some indication or we were not prepared with some understanding of those cultures and societies. many piggyback on your comment about the arab spring -- let me piggyback on your comment about the arab spring. what can be learned in the wake of the arab spring? >> well, we have learned that in our focus on counterterrorism, where we were

in many of these countries engaged with local liaison services on that subject and maybe were not paying as much attention to the backyard that we were in at the time -- so there is that lesson. certainly we put a lot of emphasis on the use of social media as an indicator. it is not a panacea. it is not the cure-all and it is not clairvoyant, but it is an indicator of the general attitudes and tenor of the citizenry, that as well as how the post government may try to suppress that social media. -- how the host government may try to suppress that social media. >> general, do you have any -- >>i read with real interest that

north korean citizens now have more access, general clapper the new media technology. >> well, not much. there are certain elite that have access to that sort of thing, but the general citizenry, unless it is smuggled in from the outside, do not. the north korean regime realizes that, and what social media means in terms of freedom, the outside world, and freedom of information. >> there is an opportunity there, but also fraught with danger for the citizens. let me turn to pakistan. it is a fractious environment, a regime divided. who determines the level of cooperation on counter-terrorism and counterinsurgency?

>> as you may know, sir, the pakistani government is in the throes of kind of re-examining perhaps a reset of what the relationship will be with the united states. that is a subject that their parliament is going to take up. so we will wait for the outcome of that. >> how do you assess the current economic situation of pakistan? >> they have their challenges. it is a tough situation there for them. >> another question of pakistan. your assessment on the likelihood of another military coup in pakistan over the next year to two years? is that a closed session? >> well, the history has been

they have never had an administration that has seen the completion of its whole term. this one may succeed, despite all its current challenges and the court proceeding that is going on there now. i do not think it is the inclination of the current army leadership very sensitive to the independence of the military in not doing that. >> let me ask one last question. would you describe -- i know you speak in plain english but i will put it that way as well -- the magnitude of the cyber threat facing the country? we were privy to some important briefings that you participated in these last few weeks. >> both of the us -- both of us have spoken to it, and it is

quite profound. i highlighted the fact that counter-terrorism, proliferation in cyber are concerns we highlighted in our testimony. national counterintelligence executive, which is part of my staff, issued a report on the impact of economic espionage in this country, which was put out in october which called out both russia and china particularly china because of the grand theft of intellectual property in this country is quite a profound threat. that is one reason why we are supportive of the rockefeller- feinstein bill. >> you included it in your central remarks. thank you for spending the morning with us. >> thank you.

senator chretienshanheen? >> last year in the midst of the libyan operation senator collins and i wrote to the administration. running -- regarding man-pads. considering that these pose a continuing threat and there are an estimated 20,000 still out there, i am not going to ask you to speak to that because we asked the intelligence committee give us a report. i wanted to say that i look forward to hearing from you about that subject because it is clearly going to continue to be a concern. >> it is a concern. you're quite right about the estimates that we had before the

anti-gaddafi demonstrations started. there is a program to recover man-pads, and we have recovered 25% of them about 5000. there are many others of them that we are certain. we cannot count them all, but we're certain they were destroyed by virtue of the fact that they were in ammo depots and bunkers during the opposition regime, the nato air strikes. it will be very problematic in recovering them because they are all over the place. libya was awash in weaponry. we will continue with the program to try to account for

the ones destroyed in demonstrations and encounters. we will continue with the recovery program that the state department team is running. >> how often are we seeing these come up in munitions in libya, as there is continuing conflict there? >> the libyan militias have not folded under the central government yet, and many of them are keeping their weapons for one reason or another. that, too, is another issue that we are trying to watch. >> i want to pick up on the senator's questioning about pakistan which i believe it continues to be one of the most

dangerous parts of the world and especially given the continued back and forth in our relationship with pakistan. can you talk about what the current vulnerability is our of the newark program and the potential to lead to proliferation of sensitive technology or material? >> i would be pleased to discuss that with you in closed session. >> i thought that is what you might say. but can you talk about how confident you are that the pakistani nuclear program has the appropriate safeguards and protections? >> i am reasonably confident. >> and given -- are we also feeling like the next level of military leadership also shares

the same commitment to safeguarding that arsenal that we have seen from the top leadership in the military? >> i believe they do. >> thank you. obviously pakistan's relationship with india plays a role in their defense plans and operations. there has been some small good news in terms of the potential for a thaw in that relationship in the last year or so. can you talk about how you assess the potential for improved ties between the two countries and how that might effect -- how that might affect stability in that region? >> obviously from pakistan's standpoint they viewed india as an existential threat. but as you alluded, there are

encouraging breaks of light in terms of the dialogue between the two countries. i know from having traveled and dialogued that there are relaxing intentions, -- but -- that there are relaxing tensions. they did -- if they did release -- if they did reach some agreement, that would be huge, but there are many factors that i think are going to make that difficult. >> when we were there last summer, i was there with chairman levin and this issue came up. the political readership was there to reassure us that they were taking measures -- the political leadership was there to reassure us that they were taking measures to thaw

relations. was there a commitment at the top levels of both india and pakistan to address this longstanding conflict that has existed between the two countries? >> i think that is probably a fair assessment. i think at the top levels they would both see advantages mutual advantages. >> general burgess, for nearly two decades submarine force is a major party and its military modernization is something we have seen from china. to what extent did those ongoing modernization efforts and focus on expanding its submarine force raise concerns with our navy and our ability to respond

to that chinese build up? >> i think across the board the chinese are making modernization improvements whether it be in their air force, there navy, and other aspects -- their navy, and other aspects of their military. submarines are a part of that. we in defense intelligence and the navy are watching that carefully and we continue to watch their developments. >> thank you. director clapper i want to go back to russia. i chair the european affairs subcommittee in the foreign relations committee, and we have been watching closely what is happening in russia right now the protests, the reaction to putin's announcement that he would switch from being prime

minister to being president again. you talk in your january testimony about his return to the presidency as resulting in more continuity and change. can you talk about how we view, first of all, the impact of demonstrations in russia and what changed that my effect as we look at a change-over in putin's role there? >> i find the evolution in russia very interesting. again, this is another manifestation of the impact of social media. i think the russian government, the russian elite are finding real challenges of putting that free information flow back in the bottle. i often wonder whether mr. putin

will rue the day he decided to come back. i think he comes from kind of the old school and i do not think the old order is going to work in russia. and i think the thousands of people willing to turn out in a bitter bitter moscow cold in january and february is a great testament to some profound change that believe is going on in russia. >> thank you both very much. >> thank you very much, senator shaheen. i have a few questions at the beginning and the end of round two, and if any other senators arrived. first, in response to a question about how long an israeli

military attack on iran would postpone iran getting a bomb secretary defense -- secretary of defense panetta said that at best it might postpone it may be one, possibly two years. does the intelligence community agree with that? >> i do not disagree with it, but i think there are a lot of factors that could play here. how effective such an attack was, what the targets were, what the rate of recovery might be -- there are a lot of imponderables that could affect the estimate. >> has the intelligence community made an estimate of that issue, how long it would take to resume after an israeli military attack? >> we have not come up with a

single number, for the reasons i just alluded to. it would be hard to come up with a number because it would have to be an assessment as well of how well the iranians could recover and how much damage, how effective the attack was. >> you indicated that our intelligence community and the israeli intelligence community are lined on issues relative to iran. do the israelis agree with you that the iranians have not made a decision on -- >> i would be happy to discuss that with you in closed session sir. >> thank you. i do not believe there will be a need today for the closed session, to give us a hope for lunch. director clapper, what is the intelligence community's assessment of the performance of the afghan security forces in

providing security in those areas where they have assumed the lead? >> i think so far, so good. the areas that have been turned over, the initial -- i think it has performed reasonably well. let me ask general burgess if he wants to add to that. >> the intelligence community would agree with what you just stated, and in fact this is one of the places where the intelligence community is in agreement with commanders on the ground in terms of how the afghan forces are performing. >> that is that they are performing -- >> they are performing well when they are backed up. >> thank you. in a dod press briefing, the commander of the joint command in charge of operations in afghanistan describes the signs

of progress by the afghan security forces. he indicated that he gave a positive view of the progress to build the capabilities of the afghan army and the afghan police, and i think, general burgess, you have indicated that you share that view, and i think mr. clapper says the same thing. you share general dempsey's assessment, a couple of days ago, that the afghan security forces are on track to assume the lead for providing security throughout afghanistan by 2014, while still requiring support a coalition forces for key enablers like intelligence?

>> yes, sir, i would be in agreement. >> the question on pakistan. according to news reports a leaked nato report entitled "state of the taliban 2012," included claims by taliban detainee's that pakistan is providing support to the insurgency and it reportedly also portrayed a distrustful relationship between the pakistani intelligence, the isi, and the insurgent groups in accounting that. "there is a widespread assumption that pakistan will never allow the taliban the chance to become independent of

isi control." do you share that same assumption that pakistan will never allow the taliban the chance to become independent of isi control? director? >> i have not seen this report. i think the pakistanis, via the isi would want to maintain visibility and influence. i would not go so far as to say they would not insist on dominance, but they want to have insight and influence in afghanistan, particularly in a post-2014 context. their primary interest is india. >> general in your assessment, does the pakistan military have the intention to take steps to stop the use of fatah or the

province as a safe heaven -- as a safe haven for conducting attacks? >> in light of its other obligations it has lost a lot of soldiers in the process. >> my question is whether they have the intention to stop the -- >> i do not think so. >> sir, i would agree with that. if you look at what the pakistan army has done, they have actually cut forces from 2010 to now in terms of the number that are there because they have a sustained --issue. >> what are the motivations for

participating in the reconciliation talks? >> that is a great question sir. i think they want to achieve some legitimacy. they want to be players in some form in a government of afghanistan. of course, they obviously see us as a key to that end. >> thank you. senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will not prolong this because i am between you and a much deserved break for lunch. thank you for your testimony today. i got to hear some of the opening, and i also listened to senator mccain in his opening. he talked about increasing reports of a link between al qaeda and iran. director clapper last year the treasury department designated a

number of high-ranking members of al qaeda who operate a facilitation the work from inside iran. there is a press release announcing the designations from david cohen, the undersecretary. "by exposing your grandpa's secret deal with al qaeda and allowing it -- by exposing iran's secret deal with al qaeda and allowing it -- that is a troubling statement. what is your understanding of this secret deal, so-called between iran and al qaeda? >> iran and al qaeda have sort of a, to a certain extent, a shotgun marriage. iran has harbored al qaeda leaders, facilitators, but under house arrest conditions. iran is a shia state, and al

qaeda is sunni, so they do not agree a deal logically, in the first place. -- i do not think -- so they do not agree ideologically, in the first place. on the one hand, they have had this sort of stand of arrangement with al qaeda allowing them to exist, not to foment any operations directly from iran because they are very sensitive about we might come after them there as well. there has been this long standing kind of a shotgun marriage, marriage of convenience. i think probably the iranians may think they might use perhaps al qaeda in the future as a surrogate or proxy. >> would they think that they

might use them as a hedge against an attack from the west? >> that is what i meant. they may have that in mind for future use, but i think for now -- and the history has been that they have not allowed them to operate freely in iraq. >> and you think they have not allowed them to conduct operations using iran as a platform? >> i do not think they have, sir. not directly. not in a sense from core al qaeda in pakistan? >> speaking of core al qaeda and al qaeda leadership, your statements to they say there is a diminishing operational importance of the core al qaeda leadership and they play an increasingly symbolic role. >> that assumes we sustain the pressure on them, though. >> that is one of my questions

having dedicated a lot of resources to that effort over the years to go after the core leadership. what do you think our resource level needs to be going forward? what happens to the lower-level al qaeda in pakistan if the final elements of the core leadership are taken out? >> well, they are about down to that. what we have to ensure is that they do not regenerate. that they do not recruit and continue to operate. we will always have to be vigilant to prevent a recurrence or a regeneration of al qaeda leadership centering its planning and -- its operational planning from the safe haven of pakistan. >> if we are successful in the continued effort, how would you

prioritize resources that we are currently using, targeting the core? would you see -- would you think those resources would have to be devoted to the al qaeda threat? >> yes sir, because the franchise, normally aqap, we view as the primary threat to the homeland because of their planning and intend to attack either in europe or the homeland united states. the variants in aqim in africa. as these franchises emerge, drawing on the ideologies of al qaeda, wherever they are, we will always be in the mode of being vigilant to their reemergence. >> i thank you. general burgess, thank you for your leadership with all the

intelligence work that your folks are doing to provide us with the information that we need as a country to respond to the threat. i am continually impressed by the good work of your folks. thank you for that. mr. chairman, i am going to allow these witnesses who have spent a lot of time here today the opportunity now to take a much-deserved break. >> i know you want to allow it, but i will ask two more questions. despite your good suggestion, i will finish up with a couple of questions. the last question had to do with the motivation of the taliban. the next question relating to the reconciliation talks that they are apparently engaging in has to do not with their motivation but what your assessment is of the prospects of success in any degree of

those talks. >> sir, i do not know, and we will not know until we actually engage. >> do you have an assessment? >> no, i do not. i honestly do not know. >> likely to the advance the cause of some kind of positive success in afghanistan? >> they could, and that is the reason such negotiations are being pursued, to see whether there is a path there that may buttress or support a reconciliation and resolution. >> a number of other members of the committee, i have expressed a real concern that the reports that the administration is considering transferring some taliban detainee's from guantanamo to qatar -- it seems

to me that such transfers would be premature and should only be considered after the taliban is engaged in positive discussions on reconciliation. i think you heard at least one or maybe more of our members expressed similar concerns this morning, and i want to let you know that there is some real concern by many members of this committee about such a transfer in the absence of some real progress and real showing of good faith in meeting some of the other conditions. we are aware that the secretary of defense has to decertify certain things before that takes place. but in addition to that certification, there is some real feeling that the people who would be released, even though

they may be contained in qatar, nonetheless could have an effect on the battle, but control or propaganda that they utilize in another way. i want you to be aware of that feeling on the part of many members of this committee. i do not know if all of us feel that way, but there is so much expression that you should be aware of it. my question has to do with this. has the decision been made regarding the transfer of detainees to guantanamo? >> no, sir. >> director, you stated that there has been about a decade of funding increases to the intelligence community, and now as part of the defense budget cuts mandated by the law that was passed by congress that there is now going to be a reduction in the defense department budget, and that includes the intelligence

community budget as well. that would reduce some capability, and the question is whether you are able to administer the cut in a way that any reduction in capability is manageable and acceptable. >> yes, sir, we can. to be clear, that is under the budget control act. if we were to go to sequestration, that is quite a different matter. >> my question was about the budget control act. the request, including the request relative to your budget in any reduction of the budget, has your support? >> yes, sir, it does.

>> your good instinct and your sensitivity, i take that on myself. thank you both for your testimony, to your service to your nation. thank you for the great work that you do. we frequently talked about our troops, and we want our intelligence community to be very much like our troops. the dedication that they show and the risks that they take. we thank you and your families because families need to support the community as we do our troops. we stand adjourned.

>> several live events coming up today on our companion network c-span3. the house armed services committee on a u.s. army budget request. then president obama will speak on the economy and jobs at the boeing plant in everett washington. "washington journal." and the house of representatives is in session at 9:00 a.m. eastern. we will focus on the deal to extend the payroll tax cut