failed the first screening. it is all about risk management. we are all risk managers. we do different things around risk management, but that's a key. so how would you build a program around risk management. you start off by ensuring they understand it's about business and risks to the business. too many firms, not firms, but too many organizations, the people that are in those organizations think that i.t. risk is an i.t. problem, but it's a risk to their business. so if there was some i.t. issue with the program or something that my excellent trade customer information, are we risking the program, we are risking the business? build it around business, build

it around risk. the risk management 101 would be built on that and once you start that program, it would go into different disciplines because there are operational risk management, never lose sight of the business. that's the key. >> earlier this year, we had recreation done by some department of defense cyber security folks about the cyber attack on estonia a few years back. they took us through what happened had happened and the .ystems that were shut down people began to riot because they couldn't get their money. and military folks, they worry about our banking system. so what is happening, bernadette, to protect our banking system today and what is going to have to happen in

the coming year. >> what i definitely think and companies in general, we need layers of security. when you're building you're security, it is one of the first things that comes into building the program so you understand what the program is meant to do and security should be not, as i said, it should have been one of the first steps when you talk about risk, you talk about security, how we're protecting this program. you have to think sometimes like the bad guy to be able to create something very good. and, unfortunately, we don't do that all the time now. security is an afterthought to what is being done. the program is out there and let's hack it and see the cause. you should have known the cause before, you have to find out if the vulnerabilities are still there and maybe they are not as bad as they were if you put

security into it first. i think you have to start educating the public. it's not just for our industry and what we know. the people have to know, regular everyday people have to understand what the security risks are. not in technical terms, but in easy -- i think you'll have a responsibility to ensure that they know. >> it's a sobering set of thoughts and i'm really gratified that at the school, our engineers and students who work on software projects come in with the security first focus. that's really instilled in them. it has to be. ut when you think about if the c of cyber crime moving from

kims, to organized kims to stay-sponsored things, that throws something that we need to focus on. certainly with the major businesses that are represented through acca and the folks on their stage, are we at the point where we have to think about defenses, cyber warfare being launched against your business? >> i think you do. one thing i want to say here, i'm not part of the cyber division. the f.b.i. has an entire division of cyber agents that work, partner with very closely with the banks and all of the private sectors to rye to come up with ideas and investigate the intrusions. what i would like to say is we nnot do our job unless the corporate, the corporations report this information to us. it's very difficult. we acknowledge the difficulty of a company saying we just had a $500 million loss and we

don't know what happened, it's very difficult for them to talk to their stockholders and very difficult for them to make it public. a lot of corporations may say, we're not going to report this. we can't do our job. it's got to be a partnership. so we get all of our referrals, most of our referrals from the folks that are victim companies. again, we acknowledge that's extremely hard to do and our place in the f.b.i. is we want to work as quickly and diligently and professionally as we can to identify how this stuff occurred so that we can o as much as we can to protect . again, we know that you need to tell us you just suffered a loss, that's very difficult. like i said, these are our priority cases in my division to look at these cases and try to investigate them to the best of our ability and try to determine what happened to, why

you suffered this loss. that's kind of what we do on that. to answer your question, you these gain, i think that fortune 100 companies, they have very good i.t. systems, security systems. we're considered about the smaller companies, the regional company that may be working with a bigger company that might not feel that they're vulnerable, but unfortunately, you are. unfortunately we see these smaller companies are being approached, they're being victimized. they have no idea. so, again, their i.t. group may be one or two people versus we have these folks here have many people that are working in their organization. instead of one or two people, but they're just as vulnerable if not more. we try to get the word out, try to educate and just come up

with a system for your company that best fits your company, that knowing you are targeted. >> thank you. vincent you represent and work with a lot of those one or two people their accountants in their organization. what do you tell these folks who don't have layers and departments or c.f.o. in risk management or security to guide them? >> well, you know, again, as i think maybe the biggest risk in the middle group i would say because if you're a small business owner, cause and effect. it's the root for the customers and the next day you don't get the customer back. so what i think it should create awareness in the smaller organizations if they learn pretty quickly because of their own money that is on the line. hat's a very strong motivator.

as a junior accountant, a bad debt, termed bad debt and later on in life when i was self-employed and i lost $25,000 because a client went broke. now it's internalized, it's here that debt. so for smaller organizations if they think, sometimes maybe the trigger is something small, you hope it's something small that happens and it gives them a lesson, saying like a lot of people are aware, they leave their home open. now the time comes you couldn't do it anymore so you need some sort of incident happening on your street to become aware. so unfortunate things like what happened to target the other

day might be. i think if there is one positive aspect of that, it also creates awareness with the common person like me and small business owners as to who is being compromised in this breach. events like we're doing here and mostly i think here on television, radio, creating awareness is the first step. you need to be aware first before you take a measure. >> it's a great point. 's been said that at least intentionally the accountant staff is the first identifying cyber theft particularly, so that may put additional pressure on c.p.a.'s and accountants to shoulder that responsibility, but shoulder it they must. what do they need to do, the rank and file accounts, the head of the department, the head of the office, what do they need to look for?

are there patterns they should be looking for? what do they need to do to shoulder that responsibility effectively. you want to start? >> the question for me? >> for everybody, but we're going to start with you. >> what's important i think for accountants as well is knowing their business. also when you're an external accountant to an organization, you need to know the business and what's going on in order to identify strange things. in addition to that, i think a lot of things are just common sense what you would expect. if you see people sharing passwords and see people doing things that you think i would not do it with my own stuff, think something is wrong. these are all generalistic. perhaps they can give a more

specific example. >> no doubt. one of the questions i for you is the accountant folks, i.t. folks, finance folks, do they talk enough? do they speak enough of the same language to share the critical information, to share patterns, to share potential information with each other? >> most companies, large companies have the forensic accounting unit that is before you. if they find an anomaly, they bring in the i.t. security people. it's really more of discovery depending on what the issue is. so they work together. there is a whole internet response, process around that. that's really the way it works and that's the way it should work. >> bernadette, can you facilitate those conversations? >> for us, it would come off of the audit side if the group is

audited and there are various anomalies. we handle a lot of different incidents ranging from insider threat to the external. we get information from, whoever the source is, of what is going on what we need to be aware of. >> very interesting. my next question is how wide is the gap? if there is a criticism of cyber security practice in general, it's that it's always reactive. it's dressing the last incident that is a more tangible thing to address than the potential next week or next year or five years. so how has the cyber crimes, cyber security practice changed for you in terms of preparing for a potential attack in the future as opposed to reacting to what happened last week or target in the last year?

>> well, a lot of it has to do you take away, what occurred and why it occurred and then see if that can fit into other areas that might be compromised. prevention, response, and mitigation, those are the main issues you need to focus on when you're trying to thwart the next attack. unfortunately, with the vulnerability, that takes a little bit out of it. they are few and far between, but hopefully we catch them with that type of business plan in place and we're able to mediate the threat. >> interesting. > as the technology evolves, you have heard dynamic defense. the tools are advancing. the tools are advancing and they become tools that have intelligent.

they see anomalies and they react to anomalies automatically. if you think about the way i put it is if you read, if anyone has read "the art of war," raise your hand. i'm looking to see if anyone knows about the book. you should read the book. it's all about business. if you know your enemy and you know yourself, you'll win in battle. so you know your weaknesses in your environment and you know the threats, so we get feeds and you correlate those, so let me give you an example of what could happen. somebody is exploiting a patch, it goes into an alert. we scan as we normally do our enterprise and find that a server that might have personal identification information on it is not patched. we patch that because there is the potential that they come after us. so the point about doing things before it happened, it's

evolving. the tools are evolving. is it perfect? no, but now if you think about the concept of defense and depth and the new concept of cyber threat and dynamic defense in depth, it is evolving to be able to detect and respond automatically. if you wait for people, i know that large companies get billions of alerts a month. i can't imagine how many alerts huge fortune 50 companies -- i can imagine -- get. how do you find those alerts in there that you have to do something? it's all about this dynamic defense and depth and where the industry is heading. is it there yet? it's getting there. right now if you take the external and right now companies are sharing information. everyone knows what is at risk these days. all of the major companies are

sharing information through things like f.s.i.s.a.c. a couple may be having some exploitation going on. they will inform the partners there so that we all have a chance to react to it. all of that is part of the future. it's now, but it's going to continue to get better and develop where things are prevented as opposed to detected only. so that's the point of what we need to do and where we need to go. it's not all there yet. it's getting there. there is a lot more to do and to learn every single thing that is happening and every threat agent and what they're doing and have tools that they are able to do that is a daunting task. >> excellent, excellent point. so, charles, are you getting that kind of communication from big companies from other government agencies, small companies, researchers, the knowledge of this emerging threats and impending attacks?

>> it's much improved. it still has a way to go. i think we doing a lot of partnerships with private industry where much better shared information with our government colleagues. i do think it's much better. is a daunting task when you have the fortune 50 companies, i think we have a solid significant leyson kind of -- liason kind of relationship. it's very do you wanting. we have a vigorousout reach program where we're trying to partner with private industry and trying to get the message out of what people like bob are trying to do and what we're trying to do. we're not there yet. let's just say that. >> do the bad guys still have that first move or advantage?

they're developing the tools? they're motivated? >> yeah, i think so. the f.b.i. has always been, is reactive. we're challenged with the emerging threats. we spend a lot of time trying to determine the emerging threats. it's difficult when you're faces with the intrusions during the day to get out and doing emerging threats. we're constantly trying to develop emerging threats in all of our programs, counterintelligence and counterterrorism is very do you wanting when you have all of this reactionary stuff you have to address. >> interesting, sobering and interesting stuff. sitting in the audience this morning, we have students who aspire to law enforcement careers, to law careers, to business careers, to technology

careers and all of them are here because they are drawn to the opportunities, opportunities in cyber crime and the things that are under the cyber security umbrella. they make great hosts. those of you in the audience, if you haven't talked to one this morning, make sure you do when we break later. i would ask our panel what you see the opportunity for bright, well educated, well trained students as they come out and try to get work in this field? >> let me just say the first thing. i do a lot of mentoring of college students and i actually have done it my whole career. these days, i tell them, if you want to work forever, go into cyber or i.t. security. there is just not enough people there. you heard me in my opening remarks say what keeps me up at night, one of those is that there is just not enough people out there. the government needs you.

major corporations need you. think about the government. ey protect the infrastructure. president obama, what is it, i forgot the name, the executive order. >> right. >> the executive order of protecting the infrastructure of the united states, he needs people like you, we need people like you. there is a huge opportunity. this is a career area that is absolutely needed. if you enjoy this type of stu, but make sure you understand risk first. >> for all of these wonderful apires c.p.a.s this morning, what do they need to know about cyber crime to be effective professionals? the ll, i think that

problem with all of the specialists to educate, there are hundreds of specialists being educated in china and russia. it's just like an arms race, on the one side, we use those specialists to prevent our organizations, our companies, but we should also realize that these same specialists can also turn to the other side and attack our organizations. so i think what we should do, i look at the triangle which is unique to have incentive to commit fraud and carry out fraud and the rationale to justify in your head that it's ok to commit fraud. so two things, i think first of all we should realize that it's good that you are here being educated to become those specialists. i think we should realize that there are specialists all over

the world. to help us protect organizations instead of affecting organizations. in addition to that, i continue to stress it's also important, not only for those specialists, it's important for everybody in the organization to continuously be aware of cyber crime. i'm very supportive that people are really dedicating their life in facilitating organizations and helping organizations. i truly believe if you don't intentionalize this as an organization, if you don't see cyber risk as something that concerns all of us in the organization, i think we are losing the battle here. >> bernadette, how about you, what are you looking for in a young hire? said, , i think as bob there will always be a place in

this profession for bright and talented people and that as the more we know and try to thwart the attacks, unfortunately the bad guys are one step ahead of us. as much as we try to catch up, unfortunately, they show us how we are not caught up. o always be willing to learn more and it can be a very interesting job at times and a very depressing job at times. you have to be able to kind of put both together and say, ok, this is what it is and we're not going to be able to beat everything and try to, you know, make corrective actions for the stuff we can. >> and, charles, you're seeing the dark side of humanity more

often than the light side. what would you advice folks that would like to follow your career path? a need ow, we have an for computer science and our cyber division, the number one priority of the bureau right now, we're hiring i think 1,000 agents and analysts for next year. so the opportunity in the government would be extraordinary. obviously the salary, we can't compete with the private sector. i don't look at that as a negative. if we get quality trained professionals that are going in the private sector, we are still going to be in the long run being in an offensive mode and have a win. we will have people that will stop these things. there is an extreme need for us.

we are a very vibrant program to try to thwart these cyber criminals. obviously it's a very high profile case as in the recent past, so it's actually increasing. it's not actually, it's not something that is waning. we are trying to get out in front of it. we're trying to develop some things, we can be a little proactive, but it's extremely difficult. lot of these people, they're lone act ors. we really rely on whoever they work for to monitor them. typically it's not an organized kind of activity where it's a large group which is a lot frankly easier to go after because there is always a vulnerable person. if it's person getting information, that's very difficult for us to defend.

>> we are almost at that point where we'll be able to take very good questions from the audience. i have a final one, that i would like to ask all of our panelists if i can have you put on your futurist hats for a moment and if you could identify for our audience this morning one win and one loss, one good thing and one troubling thing that you think will occur between now and next crimes ca cyber session. is there five more examples of the target situations? cyber oing to have attacks on electronic installations on the west coast, or are we at a point where maybe our tools are advanced enough that we can otect against those things

and protect our large businesses and small businesses as well. i guess you get to start on this one. >> again, this is nothing -- i'm still very concerned about the utility systems and while i think there is a lot of actors in the rest of the world that are probing the utilities and try to see what they can do to disrupt the services. that would concern me the most. again, nothing inside, it's all open in terms of there were a lot of folks out there who are really try to probe our utilities. i think for a small utility. when we have a blackout in new york for a day or two, it cripples the city. if it was a concerted effort to do something like that, it would be very sobers and hard

to recover from on the short term. i think that we're getting continual attempts to do that. >> i would say the worst is the third party security companies that have access to your corporate information and not using as strong of protection to protect that data. i think the win is we have become more aware of that and making them become more adherent to your information and security policies. if you do not follow them and you are not up to our level, we can't do business with you. >> is big data big vulnerability? >> yes. that's all i can say. >> doctor? >> so interesting you brought up big data. i did a presentation at m.i.t.

about privacy in big data. i think big data is a risk because as you tend to put all of your eggs in one basket, you tend to have the opportunity to ave the breach of the century. so i poll as many questions such as like what is the life cycle of big data? how do you segregate from what you can destroy from what you can't destroy? what about the integrity of the date? i bet if someone did a google search on who discovered america in what we're, you would find one iteration of 1942, someone switched the 4 and 9 in open source somewhere. i think that is a challenge. the good news is i think people are understanding those challenges and people are addressing them. so for the future, given what has gone on, i will say we will

not see a huge change in the amount of bad things happening in the next year. you'll see a larger investment in the tools that i was speaking of for dynamic depth. when you see the things that have happened, i think people are going to invest more but you think because the bad guys continue to invest more, what everyone has to do is make their enterprise the least target, the hardest target to hit. it is like when you put the motion detectors, alarm system and the attack dog in your home, they will go to the next home. you hate to hear that because nothing is perfect. but that's the mission. so in the future, i believe next year we will see about level. i do believe the good will be the fact that if you buy stock in a company that does defense

in depth, you will probably do well next year. >> dynamic defense in depth. hope you are all writing that down. >> i like what you just said, saying if you are being chased by a bear, you need to be super fast, faster than the other people are running so that somebody else is eaten first. the good thing -- well, the best thing and the good thing are the same thing to me. that is what might happen in five years. we here about commercial banks and target being attacked. we can expect and attack on our utilities, for example. what makes those attacks different is that we, ordinary people, immediately see the results of that. we are affected by the outcome. if we are in the dark for one

or two or three days, we are affected by the output. it also turns into a good things. all those things that are happening are also creating the awareness of the vulnerability that we all have, and not only in the commercial sector, but also in the other sectors. and i think creating awareness and knowing that the risks are there and growing is the first step to building resilience that we are able to cope with those kind of attacks in the future. a bad thing is a bad, but it may turn into a good thing in that it may start us building resilience if you like. >> what fabulous answers, and what a fabulous panel. i can't tell you how much i have learned myself this morning and what a great conversation it has been. now it is going to get really good. ladies and gentlemen, there is a microphone to your left on the floor here. if you have some questions for

the panelists, we would ask you to come down and give us your name, your affiliation, your , we y or your university have time for some questions. who would like to go first? sir? >> good morning to the panelists. i am a graduate of the school of business. >> could you be louder? >> my name is lloyd mcneill. i am a graduate of thele school of business as well. i am working as the director of i -- i.t. support services for a college. you touched on the idea that there needs to be an

integration between the concepts of business and i.t. the question is, is that now part of the curriculum development process where even if you're not a specialist in i.t. security, if you are just in marketing or something like that, that is also being incorporated in the curriculum for a business program with a focus on marketing? >> i think for the academic viewpoint, yes, absolutely. i think it is imperative that the business process, and bob alluded to this. he is incredibly well educated. but i think that the business process and that thinking combined with computer science process and i.t. thinking makes for an astute professional so that you have that foundation of theory and the applied business and i.t. knowledge.

you are spot-on. that is absolutely imperative. >> since you brought up my dumatrait, i wrote my drayton developing processes in a project management scenario. taking that agile development and putting that into p.m.p. and project management and merging the two. so you have this agile development stuff, and at the same time we put it into business, which is project management. i think so. but i would also say one other thing. think any business program should have one course in business risk management. i really do believe that. and they should have part of that discuss i.t. risk in it. i think that would be helpful. it would make every student well rounded. every corporation is concentrating now on risk. regardless of what your business role will be, you will

hear about that when you go into major corporations. >> i would like to add to that that this doesn't stop at the end of the university once you raduate. a fellow said in his career, one of the things he has been doing is weaving his career through various departments. it is eye-opening for marketing and other departments in the company to weave through the different departments. once they have that, then they circulate back into business. these people bring a totally new view on their business. in a general sense, i think that if you want to have a successful career, the best thing you can to is weave yourself through the various departments as well.

>> thank you. >> thank you, great question. >> good morning. my name is donovon miles. i am also a pace university student with the d.p.s. program and an architect with i.b.m. one of the things you touched on is utility. clout idn't hear -- cloud and also the computing, and the risks involved. what i hardy were things associated with more traditional organizations, but i didn't hear a lot about cloud computing. i was wondering if you could add something to that? >> when i talked about third parties, you might have been alluding to that, and i should have been more specific. but we say third parties in

talking about cloud computing. you need to use the same information and security practices that you use to protect your data. you need to ensure they are doing that, and that would be in a contract. ou do go over what their practices are. do they have a team that does investigations. you are going to notify us if you have been hacked, how was it done, was our information disseminated? i may have not have said it, but that is what i was alluding to when i said third party. >> thanks. >> my name is peter burgess, true value metrics. my take away from this morning a little bit is that we are dealing with a really, really . ge problem

there is almost no discussion of this huge problem in the public. i would point to the word transparency, which i have not actually heard this morning. it has been corporate policy forever really that things like hacking into the system is a cost of doing business, and we are not going to tell the public. if that had been much more visible, i argue there would have been a massive amount of interest in this subject reash -- rather than almost nothing. what do you think about making companies really publish the bad news about them being -- you know, the cost of this is huge. remember in the case of

piracy in the oil industry, the amount of money being spent to buy off the pirates. it was 10 years later that we actually started to getting something in the public conscience. i suspect the same thing is going on with cybercrime at the moment. thank you. >> a great question. i guess the clear behind disclosing what actually occurred in a hack is that you don't want to leave open a door for someone else coming in and locking at another vulnerability because we know a lot of times there is more than one vulnerability associated with a hack. to give all that information out is detrimental to the company. >> but the disclosure of rely

illegas of customer -- revelation of customer information is necessary by law. >> i think we should acknowledge that sometimes that has not always been the case in the past. i think when it is p.i.i., there is a lot more. it is regulated, but it is also very -- we see a lot more of these examples of this. we are just hoping that we get as much of this information as we can so that we can try to identify who is doing it and try to stop it. >> my name is harry young. i work for a company called new tech. the question i had was about the n.s.a. it appeared that, i guess,

politically they are being handcuffed. they were taking phone records and trying to, i guess, figure out who was talking to whom. that certainly seems to me to be a good way to try and catch criminals. i would like the panel to i guess talk a little bit about the problem that we seem to an with privacy preventing investigative agency like the n.s.a. to actually focus on who is talking to who, let's get the bad guys and lock them up. now all of a sudden it seems that is being stopped because lilly in our country our privacy supersedes catching the bad guys. do you all have an opinion on hat?

>> sometimes the best questions take a little longer to think over. >> i mean does anybody really know what the n.s.a. -- all they were doing, i think, is taking phone records and running them through programs that would show relationships of who is talking to whom, and that may lead us to the bad guys. was there something else going on with that data that was not obvious to me? >> i cannot answer anything about the n.s.a. because you don't know how they operate. i know what you know. i think you are asking a question threes from my standpoint that i could give you an answer. i will say as a citizen of this i want them to do ever they can to protect us from another terrorist attack. i can't judge anything.

>> unfortunately, the n.s.a. has their own regulations and restrictions, and they do their own programs, and i really don't feel comfortable commenting on something they are doing. i would just say when we do investigations, we have to have court orders to do any kind of review of any kind of reports. at is an -- to us it is very -- we have a lot of compliance and checks and balances. like i said, we have to have court orders to look at any kind of records. we feel very comfortable that we have strong over-sight. i am not saying the n.s.a. doesn't, but i don't feel like i want to comment on the n.s.a. side because it is completely different, a different agency. i know they have their strong regulations and requirements to work through.

art of it is just how we per -- perceive it now with the eaves dropping over here and privacy being in the discussion today. >> thank you, appreciate it. >> good morning. wesley basely, new york law school tuned. you talked about alarm systems and dynamic defense. my question is more into charles gilligan and just the general panel, too. what about allowing companies to have a more active defense, even hack-packs, publicizing your arrangements with companies? what companies do, when someone hacks and gets their data, they trace the i.p. address and relay the information back to

the government. what about putting viruses on the computer so when the party goes on to the computers or are corporations and take such information, they could track the information and not harm them so much, but change what they have. >> i don't want to blow it up n my side, but i think we have our cyber division work with companies who have had hacks. they have come up with a plan on how to negate that and to mitigate that. that is kind of not my area because i am more focused on the theft and the human side of it. but i do know that the cyberdivision has a robust plan. when they get notified of an sprution, they work with the victim company and come up with

ideas. they are pretty proactive on how they do their versions. >> anybody else? >> regarding third parties, do you think that corporations should actively go after hackers themselves? >> go after? >> a hacker. >> like if third parties are hacked, you should actively go after them? well, no. what we would do, most likely, wield see what their response is to it. we make sure that who we are dealing with has the same information security standards that we deal with and how we would react to a breach. they may hire who they want to hire to investigation, and we would hire someone to

investigate and compare the findings and see why it occurred. going after them, that would be my friend charles' job. >> thank you. >> dr. gonzalez, what do you think regarding your analogy? do you think it is something that companies could possibly go after? >> sorry? >> do you think it is something that companies can quite go after in the sense of your company is constantly getting data and attacked, make it so they can't open a laptop, close it and go get a latte. >> most companies of small sides or large size have areas they control. i am not sure i understand the question. are you saying my units are left open? lock them down.

maybe i am misunderstanding your question. >> it is more like trying to ive a deterrent to someone who is casually hacking into your company. it is more like they are going to get bitten. you use countermeasures and controls to stop that. you are aware of this program, and you build all that, and all that should be a deterrent. like what i said earlier about the alarm systems, the motion denthors around the house and the dog. , it uild enough defenses costs them too much time and effort to attack you, so they go next door. >> fair enough. >> sorry. i just didn't hear the question well enough. >> we have time for just a few

more. >> i am daniel and a student here. y question is with there being a cyberelement to crime, that pause it is ee easier to go back and see communications from the suspect and also that. do you think there is an investigation of the easy -- the ease of making the breach in the first place? because it is so easy to go inafter the fact and see what happens, then perhaps it is too easy for the person in the first mason to make the attack. there? a trade-off if there is, which would you

prefer the balance to be on the side of? >> your question is, is there a trophy between investigation and incident response. is that your question? >> sure. >> well, what do you think the answer is? you don't want it to happen. >> right. >> incident response is very important. you have to build it well so it is quick and stops whatever is going on as quickly as possible. then you do all of your information. but the pest stephen yo is you prevent it from happening. > thank you. >> good morning. i am with a consulting firm. in listening to you and having spent a good number of years kind of in the industry, could -- could you talk

about how you respond, maybe in the context of big data with organizations. we have been effective about using big data for behavior odeling for organizations. is there a better way of subbanner responding to protect our customers, clients and good business? >> so when you say big data. that is all the information coming in from various feeds and from your own organization. what i said earlier was about the feed from the outside. what ends up happening is you have this billion-billion-billion-billion size database. then you need some kind of correlation inge to pick out dents. ve ips

that is -- incidents. that is one of the most important, you can do with that information because correlating that information will get you to that issue that you can either present or at least respond to quickly. i keep going to that response and incident response. companies do things called red teaming or war games, and they continually sesting their incident response so they can do that. but that data is critical, and yes it is big data. >> we have time for just this last question. >> joshua phillips. i am a reporter with epic times newspaper in new york. i want to talk about the human aspect in terms of what we are seeing in terms of threat. i thought that was very interesting. now just as a brief background.

any focus and my coverage is on particularly china espionage. i work a lot with the human from what i understand, the issue is that larger companies because the cyber security systems are getting better, state-owned enterprises than a large deports are having to go through the human. element to get into the network. i am curious about this new -- lem we are seeing be are here, how large is it? what percentage of human element are we seeing in the larger scale? >> i am talking more about

intellectual problem theft by people inside the company anything. you had talked people brings their own devices in. i have been told this happens suspensionally and unintentionally. people can find a vulnerable employee and then access the computer through that. is this something we are seeing often, or is this something that is just starting to come up? >> it occurs. is it going to be get bigger in the company years? problem. you have to have sets of rules about what you are bringing in and what is allowed. that is how you mitigate that three. that is the betts i can say. >> there are a lot of folks that are bringing in their own computers, and i think it is not nefarious. i think that might be gross,

but i don't think people are focusing on that as a way to beat the system. they are using two computers. and it is ging in, for their convenience and it is a problem. >> and there are applications available to allow you to scan your network and let you know that the computers on your network that are not company computer and should be removed. but you can apply to have it. it is wopped where you don't see really no to everything, but you need control of what everything is done. >> with the f.b.i., we have very few mobile laptops. i guess one of the best ways of

saying it is don't let people do it. . is unrealistic in private it is a little different. we have tighter controls because we don't have that -- you can't use them >> sir, last question. hi, great morning to all of you panelists. love. is kareem i am the c.e.o. of my company. i have a question for the octor. question is you mentioned the book, "the art of war." >> yes. >> i have read the book a long think probably

it speaks about the elements of surprise. as far as cybercrime and surprise, how can you deter the element of surprise, or is it a factor at all? >> so who is getting surprised? the person traitor, the doer of the 0 deed, or are we surprised that they got away with the dastardly deed? >> i just asked you a question, and you are asking me a question? [laughter] -- lassic subbannersecurity cyber security practice. >> they will attack your company or whatever just so after they do it, they will say now the surprise is over.

the surprise was the attack, and now we are going to brag about it. t the nation of the surprise is the action. cyber war. inter-- surprise is a great advantage for adversaries. anybody attacking would want it to be a surprise. you think you will see the element of surprise is one of the things that he always tells you that you need to have, and that you should never be surprised. the other side of that is if you are preparing correctly and doing all the things you can to make you the most hardened will prevent surprise. does that answer your question?

>> yes, sir. thank you, doctor. i appreciate it. >> you are welcome. >> we are over time considerably. we will have some time out in the lobby to ask some questions. and i apologize that we haven't been able to get to everybody. it is wonderful that there are so many questions. we will continue the dialogue next tuesday evening in association with the downtown alliance. cyberl have a number of security practitioners from the downtown tech community speaking about their products and awareness. it is upstairs at 6:00 on tuesday. there is an eventbrite going around. otherwise show up early and we will get you in. thank you for being here. i am honored to share the stage with such top-flight professionals that speak so well. thank you to all our sponsors.

thank you for the research and work that has culminated in this event. a paper is available outside. we look forward to seeing you over a cup of coffee afterwards. thank you so much, have a wonderful day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> we take you live to an event that is just about getting underway at the atlantic council on the future of russian president vladimir putin's foreign policy initiatives and the ongoing situation in ukraine. we will hear remarks today from a former russian prime minister. he is also expected to address current relations between the u.s. and russia. a live look now at the atlantic council. this event's -- event should be getting started in just a moment. live coverage here on c-span.

again, we are live at the atlantic council in washington, d.c., waiting for former russian prime minister mikhail kasyanov

to have remarks today on vladimir putin's foreign policy initiatives and the ongoing situation in ukraine. the associated press reporting this afternoon that ukraine's highly publicized goal to recapture police stations and government buildings is -- seized by pro-russia forces produced little action on the ground wednesday but ignited moscow.g words from the russian foreign minister announcing that russia would mount a firm response if its interests were to come under attack in ukraine. he did not specifically say russia would launch a military attack, but his comments old stirred widespread concern that russia could use any violence in eastern ukraine -- comments b olstered widespread concern that russia could use any violence in eastern ukraine for -- as a pretext for sending in more troops. waiting for former russian prime minister mikhail kasyanov to have remarks on the situation in ukraine.

also the foreign-policy initiatives of russian president vladimir putin.

>> good afternoon, everyone. my name is basic -- damon wilson. i'm executive vice president of the atlantic council. welcome to our conversation today on previous foreign-policy and russia's long-term interests. the discussion with mikhail kasyanov, the former prime minister and finance minister of russia. we are delighted to have you here. the relevance of today's discussion is really driven home by the crisis in ukraine today. i think we will focus on that this evening. we will focus on trying to better understand putin's destabilizing actions and what that means inside russia as well. the origins of today's conversations traced back to last fall when our guest of honor as well as his introducer of freedom house and i, the three of us were on an island in the baltic sea, having a debate on the future of europe, europe whole and free, and where

russia's place was in that vision. it was challenged even then by russian foreign-policy actions in europe's east. we had pointed conversations even on crimea at that time. they were purely prescient -- eerily prescient. it was then that mikhail kasyanov raise the idea of coming to talk about an alternative russian foreign-policy view. we will talk about it and what it means. to kick off is off -- to kick us off, i will invite david kramer to come to the podium today. he has been a longtime voice in washington's debate on russia itself. the president of freedom house, he is a former top state department official dealing with both russia and ukraine. let me invite you to the podium. the floor is yours. >> it is a pleasure and honor to be here to introduce my good friend mikhail kasyanov.

youll be very brief because are not here to hear me. you're here to hear from mr. kasyanov. the current crisis underscores that how a regime treats its own people is also indicative of how it will behave in its foreign-policy. thus we shouldn't be surprised when we see putin supporting bashar assad in syria in the slaughter of the syrian people, nor should we be surprised when we see putin trying to block efforts by his neighbors to move in a more western direction, to -- to democratize, to ride to respect the rule of law, to respect human rights, all the things that are anathema to vladimir putin. these are examples where we see in the latest crisis putin professing concern about the orfare of ethnic russians

russian speakers or whatever phrase you want to use in crimean, in ukraine when he doesn't give a damn about the welfare of russians living inside russia itself. the paradox is quite striking. the situation inside russia perhaps not focused on as much in light of the current crisis is getting uglier by the day in what was already a very ugly situation. just in the past couple of days we've seen legislation being considered at would require bloggers who have more than 3000 visitors per day to register with authorities, possible travel ban on police officers and other law enforcement authorities, further penalties for participating in unsanctioned demonstration or publishing information that is deemed as harmful to the russian government or the russian military. has just left the country, the latest among many russians who decided the situation is untenable. the asylum-seekers --

second-highest number of asylum-seekers comes from russia. dismissal because of the current situation in ukraine. the latest conviction yesterday. it is the latest setback in the court decision. this is the term that putin used in his speech on march 18. it is eerily reminiscent of soviet rhetoric and soviet language. i must say that i'm very proud to be here today with one of those people who has now been identified as a national traitor, mikhail kasyanov, who is called that because of his bravery and his courage. inause it is easy for people the united states, including myself, to stand here or to write columns and articles that

criticize putin and his behavior and his actions. it is so much more difficult for people living in russia to speak out and to criticize and to offer alternative views. we have seen turnout of impressive numbers a few weeks ago, 50,000 people protesting russia's war against ukraine, but there are also political leaders that have to step up and have to muster the courage against serious threats of harassment, arrest, detention, and possibly worse. far too manyare examples of that. for those who criticize the russian opposition for being too disunited, for being feckless, for being on of it -- unappealing to russian voters, put yourself in their shoes and think about how you would act if you were in their situation. it does take a very brave soul to speak out these days against vladimir putin. mikhail kasyanov is one of the leaders in doing so, former

prime minister in russia from 2000 to 2004, minister of finance before that. currently cochair of the republican party of russia, the people's freedom party. one of the most consistent and brave and courageous critics of vladimir putin. it is my honor to introduce mikhail kasyanov. [applause] >> thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, it was a great pleasure for me to be here with you today here in washington this afternoon and to foreign-policyon . we wanted to discuss at length here in washington, the described to you how we could you potentially a brighter future -- how we could view potentially a brighter future.

unfortunately, the situation has escalated so much. the whole world is concentrated on events in russian and ukraine relations. ago we had some kind of [indiscernible] several times mr. putin stated that the newly established states and territory of the former soviet union were independent states had not quite full legitimacy. just sovereignty. if he wouldsed that feel that something should be changed to their -- changed there, he would step in.

theappens soon after 2008, nato summit in bucharest. went to the countries, like georgia and ukraine, just wanted -- when two countries, like georgia and ukraine, just wanted consideration to join the summit and they didn't get the proper answer. a few months after, russian troops invaded the territory of it was a real disaster. there was a real war. a lot of casualties. and it was a special plan designed by the european union with the support of the united states, designed to regulate all these activities, all these problems. and it happened a few months after. business turned to be as usual. they continued to implement

so-called [indiscernible] german companies consolidated and pressed their government into getting laughable gettings, -- into profitable contracts, etc. mr. putin thought and is absolutely right that the west is weak, their leaders just cynical, thinking only about elections, and him, he could perform in that manner we -- he wanted. having in mind that his legitimacy is [indiscernible] elise by european parliament and russian opposition -- at least by european parliament and russian opposition, he neesd to -- needs to draw this legitimacy outside. initially, that was just hissing

and hugging sessions with europeans and other leaders -- kissing and hugging sessions with europeans and other leaders. these days it is a bit different. notng in mind that west is consistent in implementing the promises, implementing -- tough policy go especially for human rights violators -- they are full of different claims from russian citizens, claiming violation of their rights. thataving this in mind, became absolutely clear that anyn is free of any -- for activity. he got a special ticket issued by the west for undertaking those efforts and such activities. now -- putin have again thought before making the

decision on ukraine and crimea -- he thought that the west again would digest everything he could undertake and will continue to have lipservice to so-called [indiscernible] paper, it sounds such a way that all politicians are devoted [indiscernible] , when it happens with russia, they don't form this way or criticize enough the russian government for not keeping its international obligations. appears toituation be a little bit different. mr. putin and his team didn't expect the west would react so in immediate manner and such --

and i will say with such effective measures. effective measures means individual, targeted sanctions. weand my party, we have -- are for such sanctions. they are not just against people of russia. they are not against the russian federation, our state. they are sanctions against those people who wanted to destroy european security, established after the second world war. in fact, i would say these sanctions are already bringing appropriate effect. changes in place, but it is in effect. --se people who are ready these are already creating fear. [indiscernible] got some kindoad of contact with the oligarchs

[indiscernible] they are all ready approaching me, what will be next? other officials [indiscernible] forecommendation would be ,he u.s. government, of course tomorrow. that is the major undertaking. immediate [indiscernible] love this list of sanctions. that is a very effective measure. i would -- that would prevent the discussion -- the promising just to implement tomorrow sanctions against russia. when i was a finance minister and prime minister, i fought with the opposition politics were many years -- for many years just to stop application of [indiscernible] finally we got it.

it is absolutely the right decision. there is new technology, 21st century. , notould not punish people nations, just those violators of human rights or of european security. that's the way we should go. that will bring appropriate force. feeling is that the regime is being already on the way [indiscernible] with the situation we have now, i mean -- it is already inevitable that the region will collapse. but with such potential that we have now, that will add and speed up the process.

why i see and analyze this way, first, we are repeated for a we don't havef, growth of industrial output. already more than six months we don't have gdp growth. thisirst four months of year already show the gdp declined. the figure was announced by the government just a little bit higher than zero. that is already declining. international reserves of the central bank, while they look like a huge -- 477 billion euros -- u.s. dollars, in fact, that is not enough to keep the whole country to live in the same style that we have now. all citizens live on imported produce. imported.d is

90% of medicine is imported. -- it would mean it would mean normal input would not be available for people. moreover, russian statehood is not quite as high because we managed to sell this problem with u.s. and other countries, but corporations [indiscernible] it is approximately 300 billion of debt of those corporations. and if the international banks will not be so eager to make this rollover, not under the sanctions, under instruction, but under software recommendation, it will be much higher, more expensive, and not available for everyone.

it means that immediately, just -- approaching the west on capital markets would be necessary. without the support of the united states government and the government of the european union, it would not be possible to obtain appropriate funds. as long as russian government, mr. putin feels this, there will be immediate change. right now, he is bluffing, thinking that you are not consistent enough and will not the ♪ [indiscernible] he was shocked when he knew the european union adopted those sanctions. he was also sure that germany would never allow -- german industry would never allow his government to endorse such sanctions, but he made a mistake. solidarity shows that not tradable, as mr.

putin thinks and believes. i think we have a very good opportunity to resolve the problem with ukraine and crimea. secondly, just to tackle the problems in russia. my recommendations on ukraine -- first, the western community 25,ld ensure that may announced elections take place and run successfully and the results are credible, the elections are free and fair -- and allvision of necessary organizations and visible for everyone that everything is all right. for is actually necessary stabilization. secondly, ukraine needs immediate [indiscernible] imf will provide the first tranche. but there are many other

creditors. could bell assistance provided under special promises of the government. but one year -- another package is absolutely possible to allow the government to stand up, to be strengthened, to walk out of these reforms supported by the whole world. it is an absolute necessity. help for is moral ukraine government and ukrainian people and their fight for their sovereignty and their territorial integrity. also on ukraine is just to help them to ease dependence on gas supplies from putin. it means they are trying to of the -- obtain gas supplies from

the european network. i think that is very good. russia,ia, in terms of a weakening of cohesion of -- by individual sanctions that will absolute bring effect. secondly, create conditions for ease energy dependence of the european countries. it means alternative sources of energy. we know that leaders of the european union are already giving [indiscernible] time, a short period of they would have a buildup of supplies. that would be absolutely difficult for putin's regime to stop reduction -- production. stop exportation of

natural gas, but you continue to supply. it is inevitable. the third of course is that there is support of russian ordinary people just to continue to ease this region possibly says so they could travel -- visas so they the say could travel, to see how people live, all these things that are necessary to understand what it means in practice. all threeth these directions together we can achieve a real change. now just a special moment when ,he west consolidated

consistent measures possible and necessary. thank you very much. [applause] >> mr. kasyanov look... crisis means inside issia but also in the region want to pick up a few comments you have made him and turned to the audience to bring them into the conversation. first, could you offer your vision of what a healthy relationship, what the relationship between russia and ukraine should be. even in our own debates in washington as there is consideration about what kind of response united states, european union should take in ukraine, there is a recognition that russia has a long-standing relationship with ukraine, cultural, historic, economic. describe the nature of what you think should be the relationship between moscow and kiev.

first of all, i have stated this publicly, absolutely the foreign policy for ukraine is not number one thing. neighbor,mber one friendly state. historical roots very close. absolute nature. we had quite good relations for long periods of time when i was in power. ukraine. minister in we achieved a lot. we settled problems. araine did not pay for quite period of time, and instead of to sayzing and trying pay and pay, we created a special program of reception and support and trade. so we couldariffs

make money on russian markets, produce to sell more. we have a number of enterprises thingsine which produce for russia. it all comes from soviet union time but today it is true. today, ukraine has problems in all sectors of industry. they struggle to modernize their enterprises but i feel they are not quite consistent but open trade, free market with european union, i think also a great benefit. time, russia would lead better integration with the european union. ukraine could also join us.

at that time we were a good example for a democratic government and reforms. , to followrse russian example. there is some debate in european capitals right now about the eu's approach in the run-up to the summit of the association agreements. what was your take on ukraine's process of negotiating the association agreement with the concernsunion, and about a severing of the economic ties that are deep with russia? >> the problem is, the unicode which government made the right thing announcing that one of the goals of the policy would be having an association agreement with the european union. assure peopled to supporting him in eastern ukraine that it was the right thing.

majority of population supported that. but then, two weeks prior to signing the agreement, he started to study the documents and understood from the documents and from signals from mr. putin that this document would kill the whole economy. he started to say i will not sign this. of a not the behavior leader of a state when they had two years negotiation and then after that initialing everything just to say i will not sign it. that is bad governing, bad ruling. maybe it could be better conditions agreed with better negotiation process, but still, at least looking at the political side of the agreement, which is necessary, ukraine as a member of the european council. we establish that in those documents.

the constitution of russia. it is absolutely natural to view it this way. beproduce those laws and to in association in political and civil life. economically is more difficult. but they did not even do this. would be aod there problem and he would lose his position. but it happened much faster. losing his position. looting legitimacy of other reasons. >> let me pick up where you began your talk. you started with 2008 and georgia. clearly, the actions of the west, the united states and europe, failed to deter consideration of further actions in europe in 2008. what will deter president putin right now, what would you be recommending that washington and brussels are considering

undertaking, talks about sanctions? are they sufficient to deter an escalation of an objective, whether it is in the ukraine, moldova, or elsewhere? >> the west should press right on putin to make a statement these armed groups. immediately hand over the weapons to implement geneva agreement. should have a list of individual sanctions. if it does not go this way, again, a feeling that it would be possible to go this way, and then there could be further intervention. we always consider it to be an

important territory. that is why i am emphasizing this important point today. soft the position, but not over press with senatorial sanctions, but to be consistent with pressing. and the demanding of this agreement. pretends he has nothing to do with these provocations, etc. but everybody knows. that is already evidence the secret service is working there. that is recorded. european union already provided that. that is the case. say, comenot, i would to a harsh manner, those so-called green men with the guns who are not russians. he said, yes, our special armed

forces were standing just behind those defenders in crimea, in particular. i think this is absolutely clear, consistency is the only recipe. >> let me turn to your situation in russia more directly. obviously, we've been seeing reports of putin's own popularity increasing in the wake of what happened in crimea. a consolidation of his authority at home and popularity at home. how do you help this audience understand what is happening inside russia, the russian people's reaction to rally around president putin in the midst of this crisis, and what does that mean for actors such as yourself? your ability to gain traction in the public debate or even to operate as a political opponent, political alternative? we alreadyentioned, named traders, a few of us who

allow ourselves to describe our position. access tohave television but russia continues to be a television country. people in the region's continued believe in something is said on television, it is at least almost true. that is why they are under intense propaganda, absolutely for no alternative information. of course in big cities people have internet. now 50 million users of internet. but only 10% use internet for source of information not just for fun. remote, buteven say all other people living in such environment. they want television and russian propaganda right now is very

cynical, very sophisticated. it is not the stupid stuff like it was in soviet union times. people really get after this. you mentioned also, internationally, russian friends in creating western societies. it works. people are just bold by intense propaganda. of course, as soon as putin failed with this operation in ukraine, same people who would have an absolute alternative point of view on putin, opposite. then his popularity will collapse. me ask you a question and turned to the audience. next week, the atlantic council a celebrating the vision of

european union and nato. as you well know, that vision of a europe whole and free was one .o include russia as we grapple with what the future of what the strategy with what our policy is, how do you reconcile the rhetoric and the old strategy? europe whole and free. inclusive are russia, the situation today. remember, coming back, after 9/11, wester here, knew how relations were strengthened between our two countries. two presidents, prime minister, vice president, ministers were together discussing everything.

then we provided immediately a special way for the just ask -- logistics. that was one of our operations. we did not want to just come there because of our historical memory. it was absolutely a great development and putin said he did not exclude in future russia joining nato. my statement was that i dreamed that russia would join nato ,ecause we have common ground but since that time, a lot has such as the speech from mr. putin where he tried to explain russia is surrounded by should consider mobilizing inside the country, squeezing the whole clinical environment. he closed all parties and , endorseo announce

people as a western spice. since then great changes. >> what is your assessment of how that -- why that took place? >> mr. putin pretended to be a democratically devoted leader. to --en he decided grabbing a privately owned .ntity to his own friends and then just trying to first reconsider all privatization, redistribution properties, and that is just the way in, property. exchange, flow of money, which produced state corporations. of course, lyrical instruments are necessary. today maybe it is already going

farther than that. mr. putin believes he is a leader of the world, existing in russia forever, but i think there are demonstrations now of the weakness of his regime. friendsried to consider of external enemies. it means i am coming. we understand it now. manner, justty allow this to continue. i think the regime will collapse. russia should pursue foreign-policy based on russian internal policies based on universal values, the same of what you share here in this

country and other countries, too. >> with that, let me turn to questions in the audience. please, in the front row. for the television audience, introduce yourself and your affiliation. >> csis. i wanted to ask prime minister sanctions, butof sanctions beyond financial to do within order the question of deterrence that were raised. some have argued here in the united states that financial sanctions, although we have become very good at it, is a very potent instrument now, may not be -- these have not been sufficient so far -- and may not .e sufficient to deter putin that we need to bring some of the more traditional instruments to bear as part of a deterrence

strategy, such as deepening the defenses of ukraine, maybe strengthening the potential of ukraine to make a russian occupation if you like of eastern ukraine should have been confronticult and putin with the potential for a protracted conflict, that may, in addition to financial sanctions on him and his allies, , leaving asidey the u.s. or nato should come to the defense of ukraine because ukraine is not a member of nato. we have dates who were not members of the u.s. alliances, but the u.s. has security order to harden them, if you like, against potential progression. evaluatehow you would

that kind of thought? >> first, talking about think -- sanctions, i i would not say who would be productive. first of all, i do not want my country to be punished this way and people of russia. secondly, that will produce a to intensemr. putin propaganda inside the country and to have mobilization, saying the west and announcing the second cold war. we should forget about our disputes and protect our motherland. would be in a rash manner propaganda, etc.. individuals,inst not even sanctions, but limitations of day-to-day to the unitedgo

states, countries in the european union, transactions in u.s. dollars or in europe. that is privileged. they already understood this. i already feel the of this. we should continue this way. that will bring results. ukraine,lking about the most important point, to lengthen the authorities there, the government, so that they have good elections recognized by everyone. that would immediately change the situation in ukraine. , not too close ties for any provocations, promotions, by putin's regime in the eastern part of ukraine. that is absolutely the case.

he is promoting this and every day we see on television. people in their discussion in the families they understand that. ukraine,e people in they are talking to their relatives, they talk to other relatives. for russians, it is not even a secret that russians are there, but as a result of propaganda, i would not say a plotting, but silently supporting mr. putin. although in normal life they are against him. that is what happened unfortunately. altogether works very effectively. >> piotr number one, economic assistance as a priority. retired u.s. diplomat to mr. prime minister, that was a fabulous presentation. . hope you are right putin sounds like a real bad guy. i believe in good guys and bad guys in diplomacy, not nuances.

i hope you are right that he is on his way out. has the west, for the last 20 years, been playing its hand very well and professionally? did we not brag that we won the cold war as opposed to applaud a wonderful, historical development? i remember studying marches about 15 years ago and lenin warned about capitalist encirclement. playt we rush off and around installing's hometown of georgia and other places around your country that would allow other people, not just a lieutenant colonel who never made colonel in the kgb? >> thank you. i think there was a second question. >> heritage foundation. >> there are probably three different serine air -- scenarios in the ukraine right now. one is that somehow, miraculously, mr. putin will

pull the joe biden and little green men and the russians back to russia, liberate the crimea, and will go to status quo. i personally will believe in santa claus before i believe in that. secondly, that they occupy eastern ukraine and force some sort of federalization. third, that they would go all the way to the river and then go .outh to odessa for the scenario, that pretty much all of ukraine will be occupied. what are the implications of the scenarios for russia? are these developments going to change the nature of the russian state, and if yes, how?

how will it change the relationship between russia and europe, and the rest of the world? thank you. for general relations between the west and russia for the last 20 years, i would say, even for me, right now, very much disappointed. i thought we were already past the communist past and we would never come back to such operations. jail, cutting in people from elections, violating human rights. inever thought that would be such a skill that we have now. western leaders also thought that way. maybe he just did not pay much attention to overall e and justts ther wants to engage with mr. putin

and standing in line to get profitable contracts. that isthe issue and the problem, unfortunately. that is why we are all now reconsidering that. many of us were supporting putin in 2000 because we thought he would build a democratic russia. time,s why, at that accepted his offer to work together. i worked for four years as prime mostly hein effect, implement it promises given to me at that time. we managed to put russia out of crisis and onto substantial growth. 6.2% gdp per year. the only reform he did not support but promised, the reform of the gas sector. now we see what it ended up.

as a military tool. why we think -- i would not same mistake, but we made a mistake, too. just an opportunity to evaluate the whole situation. think you mentioned, my feeling, first, the goal of mr. putin at the moment is to press the west. to recognize that his operation in crimea was legitimate and to recognize crimea as a part of digest.to swallow and and he is going to trade with other places like eastern ukrainian regions, even russian

language, some other things like gas debt. debt of the government for utility gas. that is the goal. if you hear mr. lavrov every day, he is saying that. why west does not recognize our rights, annexation of crimea? everything is in accordance with international rules and standards. just providing different examples, etc. governments don't perform appropriately and consistently, in this case, if it is easier to destabilize the whole environment in ukraine, he will be easier to do this. there is a weak government there. oligarchs would have more power inside.

they already have a lot of industrial assets there. a control the assets. they do not want the central government having pressure. they would like more for their operations there and to have some kind of subordinated ukraine. that is what the goal could be. will do not think you start war. that is not the case. believesg in mind, he the west, thinking everything could be on the market, purchasable, and he is ready to .ave transactions when he has universal values like freedom, serenity, territorial integrity, human rights, etc., he does not understand, i like to believe, he does not understand that. western leaders will not trade

there. they will stand by and protect the values. yes, in some countries you can see it this way, but that is , to be would like idealists, to see as reality. >> let me collect a couple of questions. thank you so much for your presentation. i have a couple of questions. rov said today that russia would protect russian interests in ukraine. syria ended in war. do you really believe that this option of all out war of moving russian troops into the ukraine is out? just trading for crimea? if so, what is your feelings? should ukraine say have crimea

leave us alone? do you think that is a good idea? you also said that sanctions work. i personally believe russia can turn into some sort of a north poor,and people will be but north korea has been back mailing -- blackmailing the nuclear for years. the arsenal in russia is much bigger, so it could really work. could russia turn into north korea and stabilize the sort of regime? >> thank you. >> american institute of contemporary german studies. you mentioned in your presentation, in the eu, ukraine, and association agreement. i think you are aware of the european strategy meeting in

september where the advisor to putin on the customs union, in his threats toward ukraine mentioned this idea of joining up with this association agreement, saying it was sick and suicidal. you seem to have a dim view. i wondered if you could clarify what the effects would have been of the signature of the association agreement, and also whether this association and as russiaoms unions, has agreed to mutually exclusive , whether you see any possibility of any compromise between the two types of organizations? >> let me pick up a final question here given our time. >> atlantic council. thank you, prime minister. to support your argument about mr. putin, i have argued you might be a new mikael gorbachev in different dress.

cap not immediately but over the longer term. i wanted to follow-up on what you think putin positive view is for the short and long-term? you have been fairly general and where you think things are headed. i wonder if you could be more specific. to obviously read his letter 18 members of the european community about what he wanted to do. he has leverage over ukraine in terms of gas and the money being owned. what do you think his immediate plans are, how do you think -- how far do you think he will go, what is he doing about the elections, will he move before and after? over the next six months, do you see this turning into a real crisis for the european and world community or simply a crisis for ukrainians? >> given the time, we are going to bring those questions back with a concluding set of comments. possibilities to association agreements to putin's plan. >> to forget about crimea is not a good idea.