he will discuss the ideas for reform. from 9-10 with christopher anders and charles blanchard. there were reports last week of the obama administration considering using drone strikes against american citizens abroad. guests will talk about that all that, your phone call, and a look at the papers. that is tomorrow. we will see you then. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> up next, a senate armed

services hearing examining worldwide security threats. ther that, members of liberties and oversight board testifying before the judiciary committee about the report of the nsa collection of records. fda and theom the government accountability office discussed the nation's drug shortage with members of the house energy committee. >> watch our program on first lady michelle obama today at and p.m. eastern on c-span live monday night we conclude our series of the to our special togram for martha washington michelle obama. >> she brings financial resources to the marriage as well as her managerial skills. it makes mount vernon and operation and possible for washington to be away for eight years fighting a war. >> there's something about abraham lincoln that she saw the potential and encouraged it. lessons in at that helped polish

them up for washington society. they provided a lot of very important people. she wielded a lot of power. this is right from the beginning. she becomes much more active in her role after 1921 franklin roosevelt contracted polio. she would encourage franklin roosevelt to continue with the medical ambition. >> first lady influence an image from martha washington to a shell -- to michelle obama. >> next, james clapper and defense intelligence agency lieutenant general michael flynn

talk about worldwide security threats with members of the senate armed services committee. , iran'se topics, syria nuclear program, and the pending security agreement between the u.s. and afghanistan. this is a little less than three hours. >> good morning. the committee meets to hear testimony on current and future threats to u.s. national security. we welcome james hopper, the director of national intelligence, general michael flynn, director of the defense intelligence agency. the key for coming today. your testimony is especially a time in diverse

and complex national security threats in an era of fiscal pressures. the department of defense faces difficult choices about how to allocate scarce resources in this environment of reduced budgets. although the recently adopted agreement provide some relief, that relief is partial and temporary. today's testimony will illuminate the dangers our nation faces and underscores the continuing urgency of reaching an agreement to fully and permanently deal with the threat of sequestration to our nation's interests. foremost among the diverse challenges we face is our effort to prevent iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons. we look forward to updated information on a status of the iranian nuclear program and the impact of the interim agreement reached by the p5 plus one powers rate last year. in afghanistan we face an

insurgency whose terror tactics continue to be deadly. i believe the situation in afghanistan has been fundamentally improved efforts to build the afghan national army and police. met or exceeded expectations as they took over all militarylmost operations during the 2013 fighting season and they contain control over the areas where the vast majority of the app and population lives. without the conclusion of a bilateral security agreement, our military will not be able to continue even in small numbers to support the afghan security forces after the end of this year.

that they are undermining public support in the united states for continuing efforts in afghanistan. whoever the next afghan president is, he is likely to be more reliable than president karzai. his signature is likely to instill more confidence than with karzai signature. with two months to go in the presidential campaign, i hope our witnesses will tell us they agreed that the united states and the coalition of which we are a part will be better off waiting for karzai successor to stand the agreement that the afghan people favor as reflected by the consensus of the 3000 member jury. in iraq, the disturbing reflectsng by al qaeda

a an increasingly volatile government to disenfranchise sunni groups. hearing youreciate assessment of the current situation in iraq and of how best we can support the iraqi people without empowering the theki government to narrow -- to further the narrow agenda it has to often pursued. used chemical weapons against their own people, killing hundreds of civilians including women and children. in response to the u.s. threat of using limited force against ability, thekeep international community reached an agreement with syria and a plan to eliminate serious -- syria's chemical weapons by the middle of this year. the mixing and filling capabilities have been eliminated in the first

shipments and they have been transported to a port for removal from syria. syria has missed two important deadlines to remove the rest of the chemicals. we want to know the prospects for completing the elimination of chemical weapons this year. can the impact of this effort on the assad regime. in light of the continuing horrific assault by the assad regime against its own people, i hope our witnesses will also give us their assessment of additional steps that we could take to effectively train and equip members of the opposition in syria. we face a different but no less complex series of challenges in the asia-pacific region. north korea has continued its cycle of provocations and belligerents, heightening tensions on the korean peninsula and among our allies.

last year they conducted a nuclear weapon test and engaged in cyber attacks against south korea. new north korean leader is inexperienced and unpredictable, creating instability in the region. we also look forward to hearing whether the recent willingness of north korea to facilitate family visits signals and he significant change in their policy -- any significant change in their policy. china's recent declaration of an air defense identification zone overlaps with the south adiz and includes the airspace over the islands and failed to follow international norms and increases miscalculations. i look forward to the testimony of our witness as to how we can

appropriately respond to these actions. a growingained campaign to penetrate our computer networks both for military purposes and to steal intellectual property for commercial purposes and poses a threat to our security in relationship. the cyber threat is not unique to china. russia also possesses formidable cyber capabilities. china poses a unique threat because of the, nation of sophisticated cyber capabilities and a lack of restraint and respect for limits on the theft of american technology. a large number of colleagues have said that the espionage

campaign is an intolerable threat to our long-term national economic prosperity and security. we look forward to our witnesses. >> agree with the comments you made. concerned about our national security. trip toed from a afghanistan. it is clear from talking to the troops the diplomats, the foreign partners as complex as any time in the memory and growing more. he stated last year before yearsss and almost of two i did remember when we have had a more diverse array of threat

and crisis situations around to deal with. if think you are exactly right. the reality is our national security is worse off today that it was 10 years ago. world, we are seeing the threats to our security rise from the middle east to africa, to east asia. our allies do not trust us and our enemies do not fear us. an agreement has and nothing to stop the regimes enrichment activities. in fact, this is a reuters yesterdayat was just talking about how to rant military successfully test fired two new to mystically made statees according to television. the general said one of them was

a long range ballistic missile with radar invading capabilities. it goes on and on to talk about what they are doing. they are not really hiding that at all. let me remind our colleagues reports say iran will have this capability. as early as 2015, less than a year away. the head in a sand approach to terrorism by pushing the false narrative that al qaeda is on the ropes and on the run. is al qaeda now operates in more countries in more territories and never before and impose a greater threat to the american interest. balancesia-pacific, our is being undermined by massive budget cuts at a time when our security interest in the region have never been more pronounced. china's military buildup

continues to dominate the region and the dynamics as our chairman gestated. north korea is continuing its long history of erratic, reckless behavior, threatening stability on the korean peninsula and the broader region. just last week we learned that north korea has restarted enrichment activities and some of the nuclear facilities and is pushing forward with the rogue missile a system. in the face of all of this, we are forcing our military to damaging drop in capabilities and readiness. , this hasdget cuts resulted in our naval fleet following two historic lows level of ships.

the armytially shaking to a force not seen since the beginning of the 21st-century. readiness is putting. commanders use the term hollowed to define the ability of their forces to defend the united states. in recent guidance issued to the services, the secretary of defense even acknowledged the stark reality and near-term except ability. the force must be balanced in state. this is deeply concerning to me. the threats are not likely to wait until our forces is rebuilding the future. they will accept a greater risk. >> thank you very much. distinguished members of the

committee, we are here to present the worldwide threat assessment as we do every year. topicscover about five in approximately 11 minutes followed by general fund statement. appearancefourth before this committee to discuss the threats we face. as sinister imhof noted, i made this assertion previously. it is more relevant today. looking back of her mind more than half a century intelligence, i'm not experienced a time we have been upset by more crises and threats around the globe. this includes the diversification terrorism loosely connected and globally dispersed to include here at home. syria secretary war in

its attraction is a growing center of radical extremism and the potential threat that this poses to the homeland. this is estimated somewhere between 75 thousand -- senate 5000 on the low end and 110,000 on the high end. we are organizing within 1500 groups of political leanings. three of the most effective numbers total more than 20,000. complicating as further or the 7500 plus foreign fighters from 80 countries who have gravitated toward syria. ofng them are a small group al qaeda veterans who have aspirations for external attacks.

there are many other crises and threats around the globe to include the spillover of the flood in iraq. this is a symptom of one of the largest humanitarian disasters in a decade. the implications of the drawdown in afghanistan this year is a crossroad with the drawdown of bilateralhether the security agreement is signed. key to sustaining the fragile gains we have made is sustained external financial support. the deteriorating posture in now in control of falluja and violence across iraq a very high levels. more than 5000 civilians were killed in iraq in 2013 which made that year it rocks deadliest since 2007. since 2007.adliest

the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, aggressive nationstate intelligence efforts against us. and assertive russia. a competitive china. a dangers, unpredictable north korea. a challenging iran were the economic sanctions have had a profound impact on the economy and have contributed to the p5 plus one action. perpetual conflict and extremism in africa. violent political struggles among others. the specter of mass atrocities. the increasing stress of burgeoning populations. the urgent demands for energy, water, and food. transnational

crime. the magnitude of human trafficking. the insidious rocks of intensive synthetic drugs. a potential for pandemic disease occasion by the growth of jug drug-resistant bacteria. we live in a complex, difficult world. a comfortents provide and a review of these and other daunting challenges. my second topic is what is consumed a short in her time and energy. i am speaking about potentially the most massive and most damaging theft of intelligence information and our history by edward snowden of the avalanche of revelations broadcast around the world. i will not dwell on the de

bate on the supreme ironies location by his choice of freedom loving nations and weekends of free expression to which he fled and which he rails about the orwellian state this country has become. to is do want to speak the profound damages disclosures of cause and continue to cause. as a consequence, the nation is less safe and the people less secure. what he has exposed has gone way his expressed concerned with domestic surveillance programs. a result, we have lost critical intelligence sources including some shared with us by valued partners. adversariesd other are going to school on methods and tradecraft. the insights they are gaining are making our job much harder. putting the lives of members or assets of the

intelligence committee at risk as well of those iran forces, diplomats and our citizens. changeseginning to see in the communication behavior of adversaries. a disturbing trend i anticipate will continue. has oneclaims that he and that his mission is accomplished. i facilitate the return of the stolen documents that have not yet the next those to prevent even more damage to u.s. security. i want to comment on the ensuing fallout. that theme really national security agency has been killing the public commentary. i started this over 50 years ago. members of my family, father, rod my my life and i'm cut out will -- have all worked in an essay. this is deeply personal to me.

noted, the ment and women who work at nsa had done their utmost to protect this country and do so in a lawful manner. as i and other leaders have said toy times, the job is not target the e-mails and phone calls of u.s. citizens. the agency does collect foreign the whole reason since 1962, performing critical reasons they wanted to carry out. the effects of the on authorized disclosure for the entire intelligence committee. thecapabilities at which united states has invested billions of dollars are at risk or will likely be curtailed or eliminated because of compromise or conscious decision. moreover, the impact is caused by it the disclosures would be amplified by the budget reductions.

the stark consequences of this perfect storm are pretty evident. intelligence can you disease going to have less capacity to protect our nation than we have had in the past. this also note the negative morale this perfect storm has which are workforce compounded by sequestration, furloughs, a shutdown, and salary freezes. this leads me to my fourth link. collectivelyaced with the index capable comparative to accept more risk. it is a plain, hard fact that the committee must manage together with you and those with whom we support. if dealing with reduced capabilities is what is needed to ensure the faith and confidence of the american people and their elected

representatives, we will work as hard as we can to meet the expectations before us. that brings me to my fifth and final point. the major take away or us and certainly for me personally for the sap -- past several months is that we must lean in the direction of transparency wherever we can. transparency, the american people may be more likely to accept them. the president set the direction for us in his each engine his policy to wreck it, and major hallmark of which -- directive, a major hallmark of which is transparency. i am conducting further declassification and to develop additional protections under section 702 of the fisa act. theodify how we conduct book collection of metadata under section 215 of the patriot act and ensure more oversight. clearly, we will need your support in making these changes.

this, we must and will sustain our professional tradecraft and integrity. protect ourinue to crown jewel sources and methods so that we can accomplish what we have always been chartered to do, to protect the lives of american citizens here and abroad or the marriott of threats i described at the beginning of the statement. yriad of threat i described at the beginning of the statement. >> good morning. thank you for this opportunity to testify and for your continued support to the dedicated intelligence professionals of the defense intelligence agency and the entire defense enterprise. many of whom remain deployed, directly supporting allied military forces in afghanistan and around the world. today's global security presents a growing list of increasingly complex

challenges, conventional at the series and numerous asymmetric threats. ungree with the president i -- unprecedented domain. i like to point out three areas. weapons of mass destruction falling into the heads of nonstate actors in the proliferation of these weapons to other state act does. number two, the emergence of foreign militaries with capabilities approaching those of the united states and our allies. number three, increasing tensions in the pacific. as they have publicly and repeatedly insisted, al qaeda and other terrorist organizations aspire to acquire weapons of mass destruction to further their agenda. current instability in syria presents a perfect opportunity for al qaeda and associated groups to acquire these weapons or their components.

the stockpiles are currently under the controls of the regime, the movement of these weapons for disposal or other reasons drastically increases the risk of these weapons or their components falling into the wrong hands. there's also the very real possibility that extremist could overrun and exploit chemical and oflogical weapons before all these materials are removed. outside of syria, the proliferation of associated technology is remains an ongoing challenge. oftenand nonstate actors outpace international detection procedures and export control regimes. missilesy ballistic and technologies to countries of concern by regularly changing the names of the front countries

or avoiding international financial institutions. the techniques grow more sophisticated by the day. shifting to more traditional concerns, the armed forces of china and russia are modernizing and building new weapon systems that can challenge the conventional superiority of the united states. time, both countries are restructuring their militaries and improving command and control to allow themselves to better operate within the combat environment. a marked departure for china and russia. although it'll take time for each to integrate these new we cannot afford to ignore these developments. along those lines, i also want to raise the issue of increasing tensions in the pacific region. the regime in north korea remains highly unpredictable and is perhaps the most destabilizing force in the entire region.

said, the disputed areas in the east and south important also remain flashpoints. the announcement in november that the chinese are stop wishing and air identification zone over portions of the east china sea raise regional tensions with japan and increase the risk of incidents that could undermine peace and security in this region. although all sides wish to avoid ia's conflict, it can lead to an escalation involving force. dia has the broadest customer base in the telogen community. they ran the gamut from the president of the united states in congress to our war fighting combatant commanders. the most important customers we airmen, marines, and civilians who stand in harms way around the world. let me turn mind,

to the budget environment. though there is increasing pressure to reduce defense spending, we are to address our nation's fiscal situation. i would note the demands on the intelligent systems has skyrocketed in recent years. these demands are only expected to increase in the years to come. there one have to be deductions, defense intelligence must be contained to provide timely and actionable intelligence across the entire threat spectrum. i look forward to working with you and your staff as we address the very delicate balance clean this and long-term fiscal health. i would like to take a moment to echo the comments regarding edward snowden. in my professional military judgment, mr. snowden said disclosures have done damage to the department of defense and go far beyond the act of a so-called whistleblower. i have no doubt that he has placed the men and women of our armed services at risk and that

his disclosures will cost lives on our future battlefields. i hope that he will heed the call to return any material he has not already disclosed for the safety and security of all americans. let me close by saying what an honor and a privilege it is to appear here on behalf of the men and women of the defense intelligence agency and the entire enterprise. i thank you for the continuing confidence in their work here at your support is vital to us as well as a national security. answering yourto questions. >> we will have a seven minute first round. let me start with you in ask a few questions about afghanistan. commander,int plusal millie, said in 95% of tactical firefights in which the afghan security forces engaged as they held their ground and defeated the enemy

and noted that at no time did the afghan security forces during this past summer lose any urban area or population center. that not a single district center was overrun by the taliban. do you agree with our military assessmentand their of the capabilities of the afghan national security forces? >> he can chime in. there is no question that the a in a -- the afghan national army has enjoyed tactical national success, particularly when they have had good leadership and the enablers available to facilitate to be a joint campaign. stinson still upset by exertion-- extensive problems. the other difficulty of course is the afghan national army has

andgreat success tactically the contact with the taliban. when something has cleared, it by the afghanw-up tim police. anything you want to add? army and theurely afghan national police -- particularly the army and the afghan national police have made modest progress over the years. couple of things. i think that there is great uncertainty because of the lack , to besigning of the bsa very candid. i think the enabling andbilities they still lack , thetise and technology

airlift, logistics or the types of sustainment capabilities that for still require in order them to have progress on the battlefields. >> thank you. we were going to stick this in the bilateral agreement, what would be the effect inside of afghanistan? >> the effect already of the negative in terms of the impact on the economy. i think the psychological impact, particularly after this last november approved going for it with a bilateral security agreement. we are already seeing a negative trend in terms of the economy.

importantly, an important factoid is the number of the ofp of foreign businesses foreign investors that are businesses. >> can we clear the air tuesday we're going to await the next president? >> it takes a couple to sign this. it is my own view that i do not believe president karzai is going to sign it. this is a policy call. the decision what will be. >> do have an assessment to what it would be inside afghanistan if we just made that declaration? >> we will wait for them to sign the bsa. >> it could have a solitary effect. i suppose it would if we said that. if the joint land that has

been agreed to is successfully implemented, would its terms and conditions diminish iran's nuclear capacity compared to where he ran would otherwise be in six months without that joint plan of action? >> it would. it rolls back the enrichment of the 20% in uranium. on the heavy water facility in iraq. most importantly, it imposes very intrusive surveillance and observation. out by the iaea. it would help to set back the program some. >> in december, and a letter to senators feinstein, you said the intelligence community has

reached the judgment "that new sanctions would undermine the prospects for a successful comprehensive nuclear agreement. could you explain? given the impact of the sanctions that have been imposed already would have been quite substantial, in terms of the contraction of the iranian economy, unemployment, inflation, etc. and the availability to get access to the foreign reserves have been quite substantial. that furthert is sanctions at this point would probably be dead. it is important to remember that the iranians understand our government and how we operate. implicit threat

of additional sanctions is more than sufficient. >> all right. finally, syria. what impact would a more robust row graham of training and equipping -- program of training syrianipping moderate opposition have a question mark could put additional pressure on assad? >> it could help to the extent put through in train more people that are vetted. that would probably be helpful. >> thank you. >> thank you. i had six things i was going to ask that i think director clapper answered. a lot of detail. i want to mention something else about snowden. after, --urse

africom. i think he covered it well in terms of what snowden has done. we hear from an awful lot of people that they treat him as if he is a hero. i look at him more as a traitor. i would like to get from each degree to which he is compromised this and secondly, had each one respondent that i believe the vast majority of the 1.7 million documents that were stolen had nothing to do with nsa or surveillance programs and it disclosed their placed in the hands of of the series. something so that the people will understand that the vast

majority really has nothing to do with the rights that people are concerned about. as i indicated in my oral statement, the revelations have gone way beyond concerns about the domestic surveillance programs. to quantify this, it is a very small proportion of the to tell it he of what he has looked at. the 1.7 7 million is an assessment of what he looked at. we do not actually know what he actually took and what he has provided to his accomplices. i said that potentially this is by far the set ofmaging intelligence revelations in the nations history. >> do you agree with that? >> i absolutely agree.

without going into the details of the types of capabilities or components they have nothing to do with the nsa. wasack when africom started, i was most interested in that. setting it up so they do not have control of their own asset comes back to haunt us. but that chart up, if you would. see how much is going on right now in northern africa and the fact that they are dependent upon you, for their resources. i got back from africa in the yukon headquarters in that general area. i would like to have you comment as to your concern. i was briefed at only 12% of all the requests. met due toing

collective resources. in theern has been assessments that have been made that only 12% of the concerns are being met or are being addressed. it is being budget driven as opposed to risk driven. these are our budget driven. >> i can comment on the threat we see evolving. the map is quite suggestive of that.

either al qaeda or al qaeda wannabes or other terrorists who profess violence. the perfectere is storm of conditions there with large, ungoverned areas. poorest borders. borders. unwilling orer incapable security services able to go after these people. for the most part, they do not oppose a direct threat to the homeland now. they certainly could in the future. africom is concerned, it is clearly an economy of force operation. general rodriguez has done a superb job in marshaling the ,esources he does have particularly in monitoring the situation in south suzanne.

another point i would mention since the president of france is here, the french have capability in that part of the world from their history. they have great access and have laid out a strategy in which terrorism --or sue pursue terrorism. they would look to us and we will try to do all we can to assist them, particularly with respect to intelligence. >> first, i would appreciate you asking the question. i think that map is very telling in terms of the threats that we face in africom. were that number to the coast of nigeria , that distance is about the distance from new york to los angeles. the scale of what we are talking about in africa, -- in africom

is huge. in terms of what africom is trying to do is they're working very hard to build african capacity where they can, partnering with the african nations to be able to build capacity bilaterally and via coalitions. one of the capabilities that is a shortcoming, a major the need foris intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, not just the capabilities that fly but also the human intelligence and other aspects of isr. i think as the director highlighted, the reliance on other partners, particularly european partners that do support many of these operations going on in africa, the alliance is really critical for us. >> my time has about expired. i want an answer from each one of you. i keep hearing these things, different people the it ministration is talking about. al qaeda is on the run, on the

path to defeat. if you look at this chart, it apicts that al qaeda has presence and are now operating. today -- to me it is the opposite of that. yes or no, is al qaeda on the run and on the path to defeat? >> no. it is morphing and franchising itself not only here but other areas of the world. they are not. >> senator reed? us anld you briefly give update on the defense service and how it reads -- how it relates to other agencies and organizations? >> thanks for asking the question. the purpose is to provide human intelligence capability for defense and national requirements. principally for defense requirements. i would just say that in three

significante seen improvements. that is our field presence, which we have expanded our footprint overseas primarily. and with our services, particularly with operations command. and with our great partner in the cia. the last area, which is really part of instilling discipline into this whole system, we have seen a modest increase in our productivity in terms of reporting and production from these capabilities that we have put out over the last year. >> general copper, can you comment on the defense plan from the perspective of the integration with other elements? of are sitting at the apex the collection activities. >> are you speaking specifically to the defense service?

what how you view it. >> i am a big supporter of it. i am a former director of dia and actually stood up the initial defense of human service. what this initiative to me is that it represents greater partnering with the national clandestine services, cia. i am a big proponent of it. i think it is a unique ability, particularly the uniformed officers providing a unique service to the national intelligence community that no one else could do. >> turning to syria. he stated that there are possibly 7500 players. it raises multiple issues. first, stemming the flow into the country.

importantly,as tracking them as they fo trade -- the full trade from the country. can you comment on both points that you are sharing this information with all of the relevant agencies, fbi, tsa, etc. so we do not find ourselves, you know" >> that is probably conservative. there are probably more. this is a huge issue in europe with our european allies. we sharee with us and with them on this. area inthe critical terms of sharing. they are very concerned about it. part of the problem, i can be are more lax,

terrorists as they trample through intermediate companies. work thating to agenda as well. particularly those who may have, even if there are aspirational designs not only a potential attacks on your but attacks here. we are sharing this. ofhink the secretary homeland security recently spoke to this very issue. >> just to be sure i am clear. there is a conscience -- conscious effort to identify these foreign writers in syria to follow be prepared when they come out. is that fair? >> yes, sir. as best we can.

>> let me ask another question. is it your sense that some of the vast amount of information was correct and could reveal agents we have? >> yes. both assets and those of our own people undercover. spoke of weapons of mass destruction which is critical. are these generally chemical or biological weapons? is that what you're talking about? mainly chemical and biological capabilities. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator mccain. witnesses -- i think the witnesses. director clapper, or you say in your statement president assad

remained unwilling to negotiate and sell out of power. -- himselfean that out of power. the that mean it dashes project of anything coming out of geneva? myi have to say expectations about the outcome of geneva 2 has been pretty modest. hopeful what they are talking about, humanitarian issues. in terms of long-term political solution, i think that is problematic. washe premise of geneva 1 the transition of assad from power. that is very unlikely given the circumstances on the ground. >> it takes two parties to have

a negotiation. negotiable. >> i think this map would have looked dramatically different january 2009 than it does today. syria, haveo you seen the horrific pictures, i ensure you have, that have been -- i am sure you have, that have been shown of torture and murder? >> yes, sir. they are terrible. the you consider humanitarian disaster in addition to the 2.5 million refugees or 6.5 million that are isternally displaced, it an apocalyptic disaster.

>> do you believe the documents are authentic? x as best we know. >> it is your personal opinion that they are authentic? >> i have no reason to doubt. it would be difficult to suggest that something of that magnitude to the could have been fabricated. that thetuation is regime and many insurgents believe they can achieve victory given their respective , and other words, the next six months will be basically status quo. . >> what we're facing right now stalemate were the regime does not have the same power to hold onto areas of a clear and with the external support to the opposition.

continue to be a thorn in the side. >> the statement of the president is that it is not matter of whether but when assad will relieve power. nor the testimony before this committee by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the secretary of defense panetta. the shark assad is inevitable. would you agree -- the departure of assad is inevitable. would you agree it was changed on the battlefield when 5000 increasedcame and weapons supplies from russia? would you agree that basically had an effect on the battlefield? >> i was one of those that at the days are numbered. we do not know the number. what has been great is the external support from the

surrogates. >> the rack has become an al qaeda training ground -- iraq has become an al qaeda training ground. >> correct. it is a very porous border. >> when you look at lebanon, curtis dan,ey, even kirk a it is regional. >> it certainly is regional. would want tols return sunday to their own country. >> that is the presumption. >> and the 26,000 that are there ike totremists who would l attack the united states of america. >> not all 26,000 necessarily.

for thethe high-end extremists. professed ang desire older to attack the homeland. on, theonger this goes more foreign fighters go in, etc., etc. likely there is a greater threat to the united states of america. would you agree? >> i would. >> could you tell me in your of theat are some options that we could examine in order to change this stalemate on the battlefield as you described it? there are some things we could do that, at least in my domain, that are probably best left to the closed session. .here are some things

i'm not sure we can do radically increase our assistance. least on my front, which is the intelligence area, there are some things we could do. i thank you. i understand why. there are additional measures we could take that we have not taken. is that true? >> is not my place to speak to those. finally, it is a little difficult for a syrian mother to differentiate between whether her child has been killed by a chemical weapon or starved to death or by a conventional weapon. would you agree? well, absolutely, yes, sir. >> thank you, senator mccain. thank you, mr. chairman,

director clapper general flynn, thank you for your service ands thank the people of your organization as well. as i ask these questions, if they are -- if the answer should be in closed session, i'm sure you'll let me know but one of the things that we worry about, obviously there's cyberattacks but physical dangers and what i always think is what keeps me up at night when i think about what can happen next, and you know, i wonder what your greatest fear is as to a physical attack here in our country? >> speaking of a kinetic attack

against the country? >> yes, sir. >> well, i would worry more frankly about from about cyberand the potential that damage that that could cause if it were a large -- on a large scale basis. fortunately, the state entities that have that capability probably have lesser intention to do so, whereas the nonstate entities that have less benign intentions don't have the capabilities. that's the mode we're in right now. now.that's whime very concerned about think up and comers, if you will, not the first line, which of course to me is china and russia, but to others that have more malign intent toward us as they acquire greater capability. >> general? >> i would answer by really two things. on the cyberside, i think an attack against our critical infrastructure that would have potential damaging effects, our transportation, health care, clearly financial is an area we have to pay very, very close attention to, our energy sector.

side there istic a range of things that keep me up at night. when you see these mom by-style attacks. -- mumbai-style attacks. the boston marathon. we have to work as seamlessly as possible to share everything we have not only in the defense and national side, but on the federal, state and local and tribal level. that is a really important aspect of what we're trying to do in the intelligence committee. >> that's where i wanted to go next was the integration. i think back to 2001 and i think of things that when put together, here's a pilot school, people are being trained there, how good is the coordination

today in terms of all the different organizations talking to one another to say, look, we have something that looks a little off here but we want to put it out to everybody else to see what you think? >> i was around then in the it's the intelligence community, and i would tell you i think it's vastly improved and i think emblem mat exof that has been the integration of the f.b.i. into the intelligence community. that's made a huge difference in terms of penetrating what had been this firewall for many, many years between foreign and domestic. the standard of the department of homeland security has improved that as well. i think there's been a lot of improvement but this is a journey, not a sixed end point. >> in regard to the snowdon

damage, when we look at that i saw a report, i don't know how accurate it was, but they said, he used simple software to pull this off and i guess the fear is -- and you certainly hope there's not a next snowden, but what steps are being taken or how are we making sure that when we put all this effort in that somebody with a couple of different software packages or, you know, their innate talent cannot do this again. >> of course in his case, kind of a perfect storm her film, he -- for him, he was a systems administrator, a highly skilled, technically skilled i.t. professional he knew exactly what he was doing. it was his job as assistant administrator to arrange the databases. he was skilled at staying below the radar so what he was doing

wasn't visible. had he been at fort meade proper, n.s.a. headquarter the likelihood is he would have been detected a great deal sooner. so we are are deploying, the n.s.a. and the rest of the community, is tightening up users and who has access. we are going to proliferate deployment of auditing and monitoring capabilities to enhance our inside threat detection. we're going to need to change our clearance -- our security clearance process to a system that continues evaluation. that all said, though, there are no mouse traps that we could guarantee that we'll never have another edward snowden. our system is based on trust. we've had egregious violations of that personal trust. we have a couple right now and we'll have them in the future.

but our job is to ensure that we can detect sooner and consequently deter revelations of this magnitude. >> finally i want to ask about, you talked about organizations and materials they have that could cause incredible damage, whether it's a portion of a w.m.d. or they have these chemicals here, those chemicals there, it's not always government, it is shadow organizations and others in terms of tracking them. do we have a pretty good idea where these groups are located? and secondly, you mentioned that these attacks are just as likely in europe as they would be here. possibly you look at the situation in chechnya that russia is also a potential. are we working with other governments even when they're not the most friendly to us?

number one. and number two, are we tracking these groups on a constant basis? >> we track them as best we can. this is a tough intelligence program. -- problem. this is particularly daunting in respect to b.w., because there are so many dual applications where it's not evident that something is being done for nefarious purposes. the other thing that helps us a bit as we've seen in syria is that without the required expertise and industrial infrastructure capability, it's hard for these groups to do much with them. but this is something we watch very carefully. and yes we attempt to cooperate as broadly as we can with all foreign partners to include the russians. who have, i think, their level of cooperation has improved as time has gone on here and now that we're into the sochi olympics, particularly with

respect to external threats. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator donnelly. senator chambliss. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen, we often forget that the men and women that serve under you are putting their life in harm's way every single day and in spite of all the difficulties that we face, that you've alluded to, we can never forget the fact that those men and women have done an outstanding job over the last several decades but particularly as you look back from 9/11 forward, they've done an amazing job of collecting intelligence and providing it to your customers to ensure that americans -- america has not sustained another major attack. so please express to them our appreciation for their great work. director clapper, one country that's been a valued partner for

so many years is -- and thats -- and has gotten lost in the shuffle of what's been going on in the mideast particularly and in africa over the last several weeks and months is egypt. egypt has been a strong ally for so many years, a great partner in the intelligence community as well as otherwise. we've had military operations as well as intelligence operations for decades. now there's a lot of turmoil over there. when president mubarak was ousted, the administration quickly threw him under the bus and embraced the muslim brotherhood who came into power. there's been no change in the position of the administration that i'm aware of on that and even if there has been, i can tell you, having just returned

from another trip to the mideast as well as having conversation with other allies from the mideast over the last few days and weeks, there is a strong perception in that part of the world that the united states is still embracing the muslim brotherhood particularly in egypt from a political standpoint. with all the opportunity for training and the -- in the africa region, particularly libya and syria and other countries that are not far away from egypt, give us your assessment as to the security condition of egypt today, particularly as they move into elections and where are we headed there? >> senator chambliss, first, thank you for your commentary about the work of the men and women of the intelligence community, we'll certainly convey that. i think you're quite right to highlight the importance of egypt from the standpoint of its prominence from a population standpoint. it is a centerpiece in the mideast. very strategic ally because of access to the suez canal.

the peace treaty with israel could go on as to why egypt is so critically important. the security situation there is something we're watching and are concerned about, particularly in the sinai and the emergence of a group called ansar al-makpis, a group that's an al qaeda wannabe that poses a threat in the sinai and poses a threat to israel. there are other groups, some of whom were involved in the benghazi attack and other groups in egypt that we're very concerned about. that said, what we have attempted to do and john brennan, because of his long familiarity with that area of the world has, i think, led this

effort for the i.c., have attempted to reach out to the egyptian security services and sustain our important relationship with them, despite all the vagaries of our policy is to sustain a strong intelligence partnership. >> general flynn i was also in afghanistan on that same trip and the feeling of our military, our diplomatic core and intelligence community is exactly the same when it comes to the future of afghanistan and that is, there is just an uncertainty out there that's been created by the fact that no decision has been made by the administration on what sort of force structure will remain in place in afghanistan to ensure that the gains we have made over the years are going to remain in place and that there will be security provided for both the diplomatic as well as the

intelligence community going forward, which is critical to ensure that those gains are maintained. in looking at the elections that are forthcoming and taking into consideration karzai, who i think is off the charts now, in his statement that he's not going to sign the b.s.a., when you look at the candidates who are up for election and i know there's a significant number of them, but they can be narrowed down to serious candidates, it's my understanding that all of those have either publicly or privately said they intend to sign the b.s.a. so what's keeping us now from going ahead and making a decision based on the fact that we know the b.s.a. will ultimately be signed? why shouldn't we go ahead and clear up that uncertainty that exists with american assets on the ground in afghanistan?

>> that's clearly a policy issue, senator, in terms of what the final decision is going to be by the president. i would say, because i would echo what we've already discussed, you know, the level of uncertainty, the potential loss of confidence by the people of afghanistan, by that afghan national security forces, it's a real problem. you know. and the loya jurga that was held last year, late last year, confirmed that the people of afghanistan want this b.s.a. signed. president karzai is -- has stated what he stated. i would just say that for the long term, we need to make sure that we also keep in mind the international community's commitment to this as we go forward. >> among the 11 candidates, they haven't coalesced around a lesser number, all 11 are hanging in there and at least publicly to this point,

president karzai has not indicated a favorite system of -- favorite. what that sets up, of course, is the election and then probably after that a runoff of some sort or -- one or more runoffs to actually come up with an elected president. and then you have to wonder, well, will the first act be to, you know, sign a b.s.a.? so this could be a very prolonged process. >> thank you. excuse me. thank you, senator chambliss. senator king. >> thank you, mr. chairman. couple of introductory comments. i'd like to echo senator chambliss' comment to both of you. senator levin and i went to the mideast in the summer. my wife asked me my overall impression when i got back. i said my biggest single impression suzz the quality of people we have working for us, in the intelligence community and state department and frankly we haven't been treating them well with shutdowns and purr

-- furloughs and pay freezes. i know it's hollow to say we appreciate it but we're not keeping up with what we ought to be doing but i just want you to convey that there are people that realize, sometimes enge we're getting better service than we deserve, frankly. i wanted to make that statement. the second is, i've been coming to these hearings now for a little over a year and every single one that i've been in, the alarm bells about a cyberattack have been sounded. i remember one of the witnesses said that our number one threat was a cyberattack. the next pearl harbor would be cyber, etc., etc. and yet we in the congress haven't done anything. in 2012, there was a major cyberbill that didn't pass and this isn't a criticism of anybody individually but i'm getting frustrated that this institution isn't moving on what we're told is the most serious threat that we're facing. there is some motion and

discussion going on but i for one would like to see that accelerated because you both have pointed out that this is a major threat and it's something we need to deal with. ok. first question. according to a reuters story on the 12th of january, there is significant difference in the intelligence assessment of the civilian agencies in the military about the future of afghanistan after 2014. since you guys represent those two elements, are there differences? and if so, to the extent you can tell us in an open hearing, what are they? and i understand one side is a little more -- not a little more, but a lot more pessimist than the other. >> first, thank you for your commentary about our people and just a brief word on cyberlegislation, i think it's clear we recently recognize wed need a partnership with the

civilian sector and as, if nothing else, a first line of warning. ever since we have done national intelligence estimates on afghanistan in 2007 i think we, the intelligence community has always been probably in the occupying the half of the glass that's empty and others, notably the department of defense, occupied the half of the glass that's full. so there is, i think, some difference, i think we in the intelligence community though are pretty firm about what the future of afghanistan holds. the most influential factor is totained external support sustain the army, which is improving. annex whichtructive

speaks to the russian history. -- you canustrate argue about the comparison between the russians and us and what the afghan people think of them. it in the end, it is external support that will have the most influence in the future of afghanistan. >> you talked about long-term fiscal support, what about troop presence? >> there's a debate about them. to the extent we can advise and train and assist kind of mission that will facilitate the afghan government and ensure its future. >> president ruhani, let's turn to iran for a minute, presents a

different face. is this a difference in kind or just cosmetics? >> i think it's probably substantive but the supreme leader is still the supreme leader. i think rouhani, they've known each other for over 30 years, they've worked together before, so i do think the supreme leader does have faith and confidence in the president. but if he doesn't produce, if there isn't some indication of improvement in the iranian economy because to the extent that it degrades, that, of course, threatens the long-term viability of the regime. so i do believe it's genuine but it's pragmatic. >> does our intelligence community have a role to play in

verifying whether the iranians are living up to the commitments made in the original -- >> yes, we do. >> do you think it's possible for us to have realistic verification? >> i do. because of the extensive additional surveillance authorities that would be given to the iaea. >> final question. i'm sorry, i don't mean to be ignoring you but director clapper, you talked about edward snowdon and the difference between a whistleblower and a person who has done harm to this country. explain why he's not a whistleblower or hero? >> i'm only speaking to it from my standpoint. i've tried to stay out of the debate about his legal status and all that sort of thing, all i can speak to is the potentially the tremendous damage that he's done which goes way beyond his concerns about so-called domestic surveillance.

>> in terms of damage, you mean in terms of damage to our ability to gain information that might be important -- >> the compromise of sources, methods and importantly, trade craft and the jeopardy that's been placed, as many of our -- valued overseas partners. do you feel will be necessary not only to have monetary support but troop presence in afghanistan to maintain the gains the country has made? >> i do. >> thank you. >> senator graham? withjust got off the phone the general about a major issue affecting our forces in afghanistan. i would like to read his statement and explained the .ssue of this

>> let's take this a step at a time. me just read the statement from general dunford. this was given to me five minutes ago. the u.s. force in afghanistan has learned that 65 dangerous individuals from a group of 88 detainees have been ordered released from the afghan national pension facility. provided extensive information about the 88 detainees. agreementse violates between the u.s. and afghanistan. made clear our judgment that these individuals should be prosecuted under afghan law and requested that cases be carefully reviewed. the evidence against him was never seriously considered,

including the attorney general. even the short time since the decision was made. the release of 65 detainees is a legitimate force protection concern. the primary weapon of choice for these individuals is the ied. the primarynized as cause of civilian casualties in afghanistan. .t is a major step backward some previously released individuals have returned to the fight and this release will allow dangerous insurgents back to afghan cities and villages. 88 detainees are the subject of this dispute. forces have evaluated these people as very dangerous to the afghan people and coalition

forces. we've requested they go through the afghan legal system. president karzai has sidestepped his own rule of law and order the attorney general to take an immediatever release 65 detainees without going through the afghan legal 70%em, which has had a conviction rate. we just lost two members of the unit i work with as reservist who are providing mentoring at the main prison in afghanistan. i will be introducing a resolution condemning this action by president karzai and to knowy colleagues that general dunford is in a wonderful job trying to protect our forces. it is a front to the people who have died at their hands. i the 88 people in detention,

consider this a major step backward in our relationship. i don't know what i would tell a member of the coalition force that was killed by one of the 65. i would end with this thought. president karzai in my view is single-handedly destroying this relationship. , outrageousbehavior statements are doing great damage. i want the people of afghanistan to know that i yearn for a supportive relationship, politically, militarily and economically. actions like this make it hard for an american politician to do business as usual. are dealingn, you with this issue when i last saw you. 435 who areolks at

in charge of maintaining security of these detainees and the people in charge of catching these guys that this is a front to them and their work effort and it will not go unnoticed by the congress. i look forward to developing a bipartisan plan to push back as hard as possible. the release is supposed to happen thursday. >> thank you for bird dogging this issue. >> director clapper, general flynn, do we have the legal authority to initiate strikes -- al-nusraissouri in syria and al-sharia? >> you have gotten into a legal area that i would want to ask about. i don't want to give an unequivocal answer to that. >> i went to reassert what you told the committee last week and this week, that the growing

to thee is a threat homeland. is that still your estimate? that.s more nascent than if i had to have a yes or no answer to that i would say yes. >> general flynn, do you agree with that? of what i some type would describe as ct pressure, we are looking at a growing sanctuary for terrorists groups to thrive from. >> they have a desire to drive us out of the mideast, correct? these groups. >> absolutely. they would like to have their own islamic emirate. or an alr al qaeda qaeda affiliate, the goal is to

drive the u.s. out of the mideast entry eight an islamic state throughout the region -- and create an islamic state throughout the region? >> yes. >> attempts against the homeland have been generated by organizations other than core al qaeda, is that correct? >> yes. talked about the perfect storm. sequestration, diminished nsa isability, emboldened enemy, that a fair summary of what you think the perfect storm may be? >> yes. we canll the things control, it seems like budgeting is something we can control in congress. are you agree with that? >> yes. >> can you give a good reason why the u.s. congress would be diminishing your ability to defend this nation given the

threats you have described? >> i hate to go where angels , but we do the best we can with the resources we are given. >> if sequestration is fully implemented, how much more risk will we assume in terms of the nation? >> substantial. i can't quantify that. every year we cut resources, we have less capacity. s we are assuming more risk. >> do you agree with that? >> yes. >> is substantially good word or should it be stronger? >> substantial is a good adjective. >> do you agree with that, general flynn? >> i do. >> when it comes to the russians, this recent release of a conversation between two of thediplomats, do you think

russians intercepted that phone call? >> we don't know. they would certainly be on the potential list of suspects. >> is it fair to say the russians are probably spying on our diplomats. >> yes. >> let's go to iran. if the final agreement reached between the u.s. and all the parties in question allows the iranians and enrichment capability so they continue to enrich uranium, what's the likelihood that sunni arab nations would want the same kind of enrichment capability? >> it is a possibility. i don't know if it would be an individual case-by-case judgment. >> i just got back from a music -- munich security conference.

we told united arab emirate's that you can have a nuclear power program but you cannot enrich. are you familiar with that? >> sorry, sir. >> we told united arab emiratess that we would support a peaceful nuclear power program but not the ability to enrich uranium. are you familiar with that? >> no. >> we just told one of our best allies you cannot enrich. if you have to list in order of the countries that you fear having a nuclear weapon, where would you put iran? >> pretty high. me thatu agree with whatever nuclear capability they possess could lead to an arms race in the mideast? it would be very dependent on safeguards and the limitations of their program. talked to any sunni arab nations about whether they would claim the right to enrich if we gave it to iran? have you talked to any sooner --

sunni arab leaders about whether their country would claim the right to enrich uranium -- >> i have not. >> could you please have a conversation and report back to us in some appropriate form? >> senator graham -- was the answer yes to that? >> he said no. the question was, would you talk with them and report back to us. >> yes, i will when i can. >> thank you, senator graham. senator shady. add aould like to modification to my colleague's agreement about -- statement about the 123 agreement. : terribly offered not to enrich as part of that agreement. voluntarily offered not

to enrich as part of that agreement. up on questions about the impact from edward snowden's leaks and what the agency is doing to address that. you commented you're in the process of changing the clearance process for individuals. what that means and when it will be completed? it has been over a year since snowden defected. i would hope we would have a process in place. --the system we use today is i'm speaking of a top-secret clearance. you get an initial clearance and some period after that, a periodic reinvestigation is done

to update that person's clearance. this is pretty much recognized, a system of continuous evaluation. is inome is -- someone the system, we have a way of monitoring their behavior, both electronic behavior on the job as well as off the job to see if there is a potential clearance issue. our plan within the intelligence community is to declare initial thistional capability by september, and what were calling fully operational capability by september 2016, which is pretty ambitious. this is not something we can do

for free. it's going to require resources. in the meantime, we have to continue with the current system. undertakingjor which is going to be costly. we are committed to it because is not ast system effective as it needs to be. you going to be sharing that change in process with other agencies that might have about aconcerns potential edward snowden in the future? >> this applies across the government. i'm most concerned by the intelligence community, but it applies across the government because it also applies in a secret concept. there have been several news reports in the last week about syria's failure to meet

deadlines that were negotiated as part of the agreement to reduce their chemical weapons. do you think this is a deliberate effort on the part of rida to slow walk getting of its weapons, and can you talk about the role that russia is playing in what is happening right now? >> that's a good question. it is something we monitor as carefully as we can, and given the fluid situation in syria, it is hard to discern what is a genuine security concern, which also could be used to slow roll. regime'stainly in the interest to stretch out this process as long as possible. it serves to implicitly legitimize assad. russia's best interest as ase they view this

diplomatic achievement on their part to broker this agreement. i think they will continue to --ss the regime to move destroy chemicals or move them out of the country. >> is russia continuing to put pressure on syria to do that? >> yes. >> but they're not responding. they haveians claim genuine security concerns. they want specifically to have around containers not just the components, but the mixture. they are concerned about that here it it's hard to argue with that, given the security situation internal to syria.

>> are there other actions that the international community or u.s. could be taking that would complianceore rapid by the syrians? >> that is intel's call. the big thing would be continued diplomacy to insist that they keep at it. there have also been reports on the news about the evacuation of refugees from homes, some of the final folks who are still there who have been suffering andr the siege there, firing on those refugees despite an agreement to allow them to be evacuated or re. do we know who is doing the attacks on the refugees? >> i don't. that't know that we have

level fidelity that we can say szekely who is doing that -- exactly who is doing that. >> i hope we are taking whatever action we can, recognizing this is a policy position and not something you will comment on -- a hope we are taking whatever we can to aggressively go after those people who are firing on the unarmed refugees and u.n. people who are trying to evacuate them. tragic, and the international community is standing by while people are being slaughtered. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator ayotte? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the witnesses for being here and for your service to this country. i want to ask about recent .eports

there has been a failed prosecution of the case in the u.s. courts where the smalley pirate potentially will be released. -- somali pirate potentially will be released. in terms of our detention program -- the president said last may that he would like to get to the point where we repeal the aumf. here's the question. what happens in terms of detaining dangerous individuals, let's say members of al qaeda, if we repeal the aumf and close guantanamo, where do we detain these individuals? if we're in a situation where one of those individuals is acquitted in the u.s. court, a member of al qaeda, and what is our option if we repeal the aumf

and we no longer have guantanamo? i see this as a big safety question for the united states. have you thought through that? >> no. it's a hypothetical circumstance. i would have have to think that through and do some research. >> do you think it's advisable -- given the footprint we have seen for al qaeda, that we are in a position where we can repeal the aumf? >> i'd have to think that .hrough just what repealed, would be done as a substitute or replacement for it. off the top of my head, i don't know. >> it's a pretty big question for us as a country. here's another question i would like an answer for both of you on.

able torow we are him, where do we put him? if we capture the current head tonight, where does he get detained? would it not be important to interrogate him, and could you identify a length on how long you would need to interrogate the head of al qaeda? >> hypothetical question. >> it's a fair question for the american people. if we capture the head of al qaeda tomorrow, where would we put him? what will we do to interrogate him? do we have a place to interrogate him? do we have a plan? >> it would be situational dependent. put aluctant to

hypothetical response to that. as i sit here, i don't know. clearly there would be some arrangement made. we have done this in the past where we have an opportunity to intel -- interrogate him for intelligence purposes. >> how important would it be to zawahirite salieri -- if we caught him tomorrow? >> very important. >> would we want to put a time limit on the interrogation? >> we would not. interrogation is different and some take longer than others. in his case, it would be a very important one. >> the longer the better. >> and so we don't know what the plan is if we capture him tomorrow, where we would put him . i see that as a huge problem,

unless either of you are able to tell me what the plan would be. i guess the answer is no. the answer is no? >> i cannot speculate on a hypothetical issue like that, as important as that is. that is all it would be. >> i would also like to ask both of you -- i saw a "new york january 2014, tested a missile despite treaty. american officials believe russians began conducting flight tests of the missile as early as 2008 and says the u.s. has concerns in russia has tested a new ground launched missile that may violate the landmark 1987 arms-control accord between our two countries.

the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty. clapper, does the u.s. have intelligence about this potential russian violation? have we had that since 2008? >> i'd be happy to discuss that with you in closed session. >> i would also like an answer in closed session as to the start treaty, whether we believe there was a russian treaty violation and whether anyone in the senate was informed about russia's potential violation of the inf while the new start treaty was being debated. >> we take very seriously our obligation to brief the congress, and they were. this would be best left to a close discussion. >> i appreciate that. iran, when we went to the munich security

conference, the foreign minister did we talkot only about the right of enrichment, but essentially what he said is that the hotel rooms in tehran are filled with businessmen waiting to do business with iran. what do you know about efforts being right now done to do business with iran? how would you assess the strength of the sanctions right now, and is there a concern that many are lining up to do business with iran? >> it's true that there are business interests that see potential here for business within iran. there have been efforts made through the government to try to forestall that. >> but there have been efforts made to forestall it, but if there is sense out there that sanctions are unraveling? that is what we have heard from

many people we talked to. >> there may be a sensing of it. in the try to watch intel community is the actual , the performance of the iranian economy. so far we have not seen that. it is something we will watch. >> you have not seen the sanctions unraveling yet? >> i would not say that, no. >> i know my time is up. thosed like to take questions in a classified setting with regard to russian treaty violations. thank you. >> senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow-up by thanking and the courageous men and women who serve with you and you often are unappreciated because what they do is in

secret, but risked their lives. as senator chambliss said, put their lives on the line every day. would just say very often what we focus on is more the failures rather than successes, because the successes are unseen and therefore unappreciated. a little bit like the baseball player who misses a pitch in the third inning, hits five home runs and is told by his manager, you missed that pitch in the , despite the fact that they won the game. theeed to keep our eye on results of the game, not compare what you're doing in any way to a sporting event because it's the most serious business in the world. we need to appreciate the successful work that you do.

said, with great appreciation, i want to follow-up on some of the questions that have been asked techniquesrding the used by edward snowden, which were reported recently in the "new york times." the very rudimentary kinds of , thatre, and web crawler enabled him to scrape data out of these systems. struck. i found staggering the reports of how relatively simple and easy it seemed to be from that report for him to accomplish what he did. seriously anything

that was written in that report of february 8 of the "new york times," written by sanger and schmidt? >> i don't. it's probably accurate. my way of the explanation is, the thought is that once someone is inside the tent, they are considered trustworthy. that was not the case here. throughout the intelligence community we've had a lot of pressure put on us to ensure that analysts are able to talk to one another, able to collaborate or have access to the information they need to do their jobs. nsa created an environment where analyst and others at nsa

have ready access to the information they need, or that they can refer to to help them do their job. stormlays to the perfect i spoke of earlier, where ,nowden as a skilled technician i.t. systems administrator, was and aware of the safeguards, such as a word -- they were built into the system, and took advantage of them. >> would you agree that the focus has been on protecting against outside threats to infiltration or invasion and less so on the insider -- >> exactly. >> a lot of the measures that you have mentioned here in response to a previous question were put in the future tense, what needs to be done, what will be done. it has been a year now since the snowden breach of trust, as you have put it.

perhaps with tremendous damage or certainly with tremendous damage to our nation. what has been done so far to protect against that? has beenately what done is remedial actions in terms of two-man control access tighterases, much control and monitoring of privileged users. that.has been done with >> does more need to be done, in your view? >> absolutely. weneed to go to a system started a couple years ago, a project called eyesight, the i.t. enterprise for the whole community, taking advantage of cloud computing and necessary security enhancements. the mantra of this is tag the data, tag the people.

>> why hasn't that measure been adopted already? is a big but this undertaking because it involves for the i.t. enterprise whole intelligence community. we've been working at this for two years. , and is time to do this laid out over a four or five year period. it is something we started before the snowden revelations. i'm speaking perhaps simplistically and unfairly, but i would comment respectfully that the immense and imminent threat posed by this kind of insider breach of trust would warrant even quicker implementation of such measures. if resources are the issue, i would want to know that, as would other members of the

committee, and anything we can do to assist you. >> yes, the congress can help us. to an me switch gears issue that has not been mentioned that all. of increasedhreat naval strength on the part of china. in particular, its expansion of naval capability in building with ballistic capability. you mentioned it somewhat , mr.uely in your testimony clapper. can you give us an assessment of ofr view of the threat chinese naval capability, in particular submarine capability, and threat to the homeland it may represent. >> across the board, the chinese have embarked on a very impressive military

modernization program across all realms. much of this seems to be predicated on an assessment of our strengths grad. our naval strength and bases in the pacific, etc. isoss the board, whether it their missiles, the missile systems, intermediate range, .edium-range going to more survivability, which includes a submarine component. they have been very committed to this and very serious about it, and happy to go into more detail in a closed session. suggest thatg to we take an opportunity for a closed session. i'm sorry, general, when i didn't ask any questions of you.

appreciate you being here. >> we're going to need a classified session at some point. had questions. senator blumenthal has questions that need to be answered. colleague earlier today asked questions that needed a classified response. rather than try to piece mail this -- piecemeal this, we will on, thisrrange later week or next, sometime you could come over and i will notify everybody on the committee and then tell them what the subjects of the classified meeting are so that everybody can come to that meeting if they choose. senator leahy? clapper, you said in an intelligence committee ofring in january that one

the extremist groups operating in syria, the al-nusra front, has aspirations for attacks on the u.s. , andou elaborate on this tell us whether or to what degree al-nusra has the capability or is close to developing the capability of attacking the u.s.? tenant --s been a theirs, ultimately planning for and attempting to execute an attack on the homeland. this is more aspirational than operational. he has seen evidence of the emergence of training camps that have familiar signatures from afghanistan. areably of greater concern some al qaeda veterans from the afghanistan-pakistan area, a

small nucleus of them who have syria, which has served for a -- as a magnet for many of these extremists, and they harbor designs on attacks in europe and the homeland. >> what proportion of the rebel fighters in this. conflict would you and others in the intelligence community characterize as extremist? what level of influence do you think they have on the entire group? >> the number is somewhere in the neighborhood of altogether opposition fighters, the low range of 75,000 to maybe 115,000. neighborhood of maybe 20 on the top range of 26,000 we regard as extremists. they are disproportionately

influential because they are among the most effective fighters on the battlefield. would you say there is a between relationship the extremist elements and the of rebelrate elements forces in syria? the question is is there a significant relationship between the extremist elements and what we are calling the more moderate elements? >> they are in agreement -- are an agreement of convenience. made disagree ideologically. if it is convenient for them