we will never find our ways by discarding our moralcompass. we need cool heads, we need common sense, and we must never let fear rule. ladies and gentlemen, in this way i see four imperatives for our common efforts to protect people and uphold human dignity. first, preventing violent extremism demands that we get to the roots. looking for the motivation behind the extremism is a notoriously difficult exercise, yet we know that poisonous ideologies do not emerge from thin air. oppression, corruption and injustice are greenhouses for resentment. extremist leaders

cultivate the alienation, and that festers. -- they themselves arecriminals, gangsters, thugs on the farthest fringes of the faith they claim to represent. yet they prey on disaffected young people without jobs or even a sense of belonging of where they were born. and they exploit social media to bolster their ranks and make fear go viral. extremists have a strategy for hate. we need a comprehensive strategy for harmony, reintegration and peace. second, preventing violent extremism and promoting human rights go hand in hand. time and again we have seen that the most effective recruiting agents for extremists are the very actions

taken against them. all too often counterterrorism strategies let basic elements of due process have respect for the rule of law. shaping testify in additions of terrorism are often used to criminalize the legitimate actions of opposition groups civil society organizations and human rights defenders. government should not use the fight against terrorism and extremism as a pretext against one critics. finish. to incite such overreactions, and we must not fall into those traps. third preventing violent extremism requires an all-out approach. military operations are crucial to confront real threats, but bullets are not the silver

bullet. missiles may kill terrorists, but good governance kills terror itch. we must remember -- terrorism. we must remember that missiles may kill terrorists, but good governance will kill terror i feel. human rights, accountable institutions, the equitable delivery of services and political participation, these are among our most powerful weapons. we must also teach our children compassion, diversity and empathy. education will play a decisive role in school and home alike. and winning the battle for the minds of future generations. fourth, preventing viability ec treatmentism -- violent extremism is a global challenge. violent extremism is not a south/north or east/west issue. it is not confined to a

particular region or religion. it transcends borders and is present across the world. now ingle -- no single country or organization as was said by secretary kerry can defeat terrorism and extremism on its own. all countries along with regional and international organizations as well as political,erer liberties, act -- religious, academic and civil society leaders should join hands to forge a multifaceted response that respects international human rights and humanitarian laws. the united nations global counterterrorism strategy which was adopted by the member states by consensus in 2006 provides a comprehensive framework. security council resolution 2178, adopted last

september under chapter 7 of the charter at a meeting chaired by president barack obama, has put further behind our collect i have efforts -- collective efforts. the united nations is working to build a capacity among governments and bridges between people. make no mistake, when leaders call on communities to isolate themselves or run away extremists rejoice. i'm also concerned by antia-immigration forces -- anti-immigration forces and extremists feeding off one another in a death spiral of intolerance. the community must pool together its collective wisdom and best practices. the united nations system stands ready to work on a comprehensive, multistakeholder plan of action

to prevent violent extremism that will be presented to the full membership of the united nations general assembly later this year. excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, as first such a step, such a plan, i myself as secretary general and president of the general assembly of the united nations in cooperation with the u.n. alliance of civilizations plan to convene a special event in the coming months that will bring together faith leaders from all around the world to promote mutual understanding and reconciliation. we will utilize the mat form of the united nations -- the platform of the united nations to send a powerful message of tolerance and solidarity and reconciliation. honorable secretary, distinguished ministers, llenes, ladies and gentlemen, there is much pain

in today's world. -- in schools and offices, bombs claiming lives every day. it can be overwhelming. it is certainly heartbreaking. at the same time, i take heart at the acts of heroism and solidarity that are so often on display at times of tests like this. i take heart when i read a muslim -- spiriting two patrons to safety in a perilous storm or when christians -- to muslims freeing carnage in the central african republic or when thousands counterrerred bloodshed with marches of solidarity from copenhagen and -- that is the heart we need. our

future depends on it. and i count on your strong leadership and political will to defeat terrorism and ec treatmentism. -- extremism. you can count on the united nations. i thank you very much. thank you. [applause]

let me begin by expressing my sympathy and full support to denmark and to its people after its tragic events. it is clear we have no more urgent task than that which brings us all together today. and particularly as networks of extremism continues to draw individuals from around the world it is evident that the global community must examine our efforts and engage with our own communities to combated dangerous individuals and to prevent acts of terror. i am pleased to say that under president obama's new 2015 national security strategy the united states is laying out a timely and credible vision of leadership to counter akt the threats that we face and to ensure the safety and security

of our homeland. we are engaging in outreach on a local level so that we can foster trust, improve awayness, and educate communities about violence risk factors. and we're working to stop radicalization before it starts by eliminating conditions that lead to alienation and violent extremism and empowering young people and other vulnerable communities to reject destructive ideologies. the department of justice has been extremely active in this regard over the last three years our united states attorney and chief federal prosecutors, have held more than 2,500 engagement related events in their communities. last september i announced a broad interagency partnership to announce a new series to improve local a engagement in cities across the united states through our office of community oriented policing services and other components we have made

additional investments in this work. and with resources outliped in our president's budget for 2015 we intend to support additional efforts to stem radicalization and nurture community resilience. of course as threats evolve so too must our meth odds of combating them. to this end our national institute of justice has sponsored 19 projects aimed at improving our response to radicalization and violent extremism. for example, two projects, one at michigan state university and arkansas state university, study the role that online social media plays in radicalization and will help us develop more effective techniques and partnerships for counter measuring. beyond these new meth odds we are also hopeful that we can use some of the methods and insights gleaned from strategy that is have already proved successful in other contexts

and adapt them for use against the threat of violent extremism. for example, we are learning that there are similarities in the factors that lead to gang involvement and violent extremism. in both instances the sense of belonging to a cause, however misguided, may be a lure for disaffected young people and understanding this potential link may help us tackle the problem of violent extremism. there are several anti-gang initiatives that have had success in the past. and the lessons learned from those experiences could potentially be applied to issues that we are discussing today. now, in order to examine this connection, we have initiated a study at the university of maryland that is exploring similarities between violent extremist groups and criminal gangs. separately at the children's hospital corporation of boston we have commissioned an in-depth analysis of the relationship between gang affiliation and radicalization

among smalie youth who have resettled in the united states. and another project at the university of illinois stoy studying whether there are commonalities into recruitment into human trafficking and recruitment into vile president extremism. these projects are wide ranging and hold tremendous promise i believe as we work to understand the root causes of radicalization. to empower vulnerable communities so they can reject harmful ideologies, and to prevent individuals from getting caught up by violent philosophy including those who are drawn to violence itself and those who become victims of its destruction. it is also critical for us to disseminate information very widely and to learn from others who are doing ground breaking work. through international conferences like the gathering of researchers from the united states, united kingdom and canada, national institute of justices, we intend to bring the findings of best research

to practitioners around the world. ultimately we hope to use the best possible data to implement appropriate strategies swiftly and comprehensively. this work is ongoing and we have a great deal of work left to do. the challenges we all face are significant and we will not reach our goals overnight. but as long as we keep learning from one another u.s.ing one another, and striving to move forward as one community of nations, i have no doubt that we can meet this threat with confidence and also with resolve. as we move forward together we must remain innovative and aggressive in combating the threat of violent extremism. and we must never lose sight of what most frightens those who so fear our enduring commitment to collaboration, to liberty and also to justice. now, at this time it is my honor to introduce a woman whose life in public service

has embodied that commitment, national security adviser susen rice. through her career of leadership and service at the national security council, as a top state department official, as our ambassador to the united nations, and now his national security advisor, she has address the diplomatic and security issues of our time. she has worked tirelessly to apply her consummate skill and deep knowledge to the most intractable global challenges that we face. as an internationally recognized expert on national security, counterterrorism, and many of the strategies for countering violent extremism that have been the focus of this gathering, she has served as an indispensable voice on the issues that animate our partnership today. it is a privilege to have her here with us today. ladies and gentlemen, i want to introduce national security advisor susan rice. [applause]

>> good evening, everyone. eric, thank you for those extraordinarily kind words. i want you to know, as you were singing my praises, kerry is over there questioning every word of your kindness. so i appreciate it all the more. but, eric, i really do want to thank you genuinely for your many years of friendship and partnership. it has really been a tremendous honor to serve with you in president obama's administration, and i know i speak for all of your colleagues and friends in the administration and around the world when i say how grateful we are to you. thank you for all you've done during your outstanding service as attorney general. to make our country better and our world safer. we will miss you mightily. [applause]

and, john kerry, i love you, too. [laughter] i'm the cleanup act, so why will try to be relatively brief, after what i know has been quite a long day, actually a long couple of days. john and i were talking before i came on stage and we wanted to thank you for your extraordinary endurance, your patience in still being here through many hours, but more importantly for your incredibly valuable contributions to making this summit a success. and for all of that, we are very, very grateful. in this room, we of course have leaders from many faiths and backgrounds. we have come from every region of the world to stand united behind a shared mission. to break the cycle of hatred and despair that drives extremism. this summit is a firm rebuff to

those who propagate a false narrative of a world divided. over the past few days, we have affirmed the joint vision predicated upon the dignity of all people. violent extremism is not unique to anyone people or place. it is sown tragedy from boston to paris, from ottawa to sydney to copenhagen. the bottom line is countering violent extremism is essential to the security of all nations and no one can meet this challenge alone. to secure our future against terrorist threats, we have to work together as governments and as peoples. we have to tackle this challenge from every angle disrupting terrorist plots destroying safe havens, and deepening our focus on

prevention. yesterday and this morning president obama clearly laid out the work that we almost do to cut off violent extremism at the knees. we need to discredit extremist ideologies, address the economic and political grievances that can feed extremism, and power local communities, while remaining true to our values. in our meetings, we have begun to build an international agenda for action. and as we return home, we will look to each other to keep putting our strategy forward on every front. first, we have agreed to work more closely as governments to understand the precise nature of threats at the local and regional level, and to better coordinate our responses. together, we will invest in more research and regional assessments that can address

the unique challenges of countering violent extremism in different context. we will share more information about foreign terrorist fighters and secure our borders against extremists returning from conflict in places like syria and iraq. we are working together, including at the united nations, to develop integrated response strategies that draw on the skills we each possess. as part of this, president obama has requested nearly $400 million for the state department to support a wide range of partnerships to counterterrorism, including projects to address violent extremism. the united states will launch new initiatives to build the capacity of partners in north africa to develop strategies that counter violent extremism. and we are going to track our collective progress at future

meetings to make sure that our efforts remain linked up. and to start, as you heard president obama has challenged us all to come to the united nations general assembly this fall with concrete steps that we can take to move forward together. second, as we heard during the summit, effective interventions often begin and grow within local communities. government partnerships are critical, but the best solutions are often bottom up, not top down. we will work more closely with civil society and cap talents of communities which might otherwise be left on the sidelines. that includes, critically, women and girls, who are some of the most effective voices in countering violent extremism.

who is better than a mother to spot unusual behavior in her child and intervene? around the world, the united states is supporting projects to train women, to recognize the signs of recruitment and radicalization in their families and communities, and to devise prevention strategies. we are working to build trust and strengthen cooperation between communities vulnerable to radicalization, and the police and security forces charged with protecting them. in countries where people see law enforcement as a threat, it will take a concerted effort to improve relationships. here in the united states, we are expanding the successful law enforcement training programs we have piloted in boston, minneapolis, and los angeles. and internationally, we are working through the global counterterrorism forum to support committee policing in

the balkans, south asia, the horn of africa,, and elsewhere. third, we will keep working to expand opportunity particularly for marginalized populations. it from an early age young people can picture a promising future for themselves and see a path to reaching that future they will be less likely to turn to violence or terrorism. so when partnership with the private sector and academia, with charitable groups and civil society, and with each other, we are going to increase access to education and other professional training, leadership skills, and mentor ship. the united states is particularly focused on expanding economic opportunity

for young people. we are nurturing entrepreneurship and strengthening innovation in emerging markets. through our global entrepreneurship summits and the global innovation of science and technology programs. our ready initiative to support and foster resilient, i've been real, and dynamic youth. it teaches young people computer coding, and then places them in online internships with tech companies. through the next scholars program, we are providing young women in muslim majority countries with new opportunities in science technology, engineering, and math. we are investing in the potential of young leaders with initiatives in africa and southeast asia, and we are rallying our partners across a broad array of sectors including heads of the entertainment and technology

industries, philanthropists, and policymakers, to expand economic opportunities for vulnerable and marginalized communities. fourth, we are playing better offense when it comes to undermining the corrosive messages of violent extremists and pushing back with counter narratives of our own. violent extremists like isil offer nothing but death. they achieve nothing but the slaughter of innocents. so we will amplify the stories of former recruits who can speak personally about the futility and barbarity of isil's cause. we will lift up the voices of religious leaders who can speak with authority about how isil is in conflict with the peaceful tenants of islam, and we will encourage students and community leaders to emphasize how isil is destroying muslim

communities. as the president said earlier today, together with the united arab emirates, we are establishing a new digital communications hub to counter terrorist propaganda. working with other governments and private sector partners, we are helping influential community members and religious leaders become more tech savvy so they can better contest isil's one line activities. here at the state department we are launching a new peer-to-peer challenge that will encourage university students around the world to develop digital content that stands against extremism. and yesterday, secretary kerry designated the first special envoy for strategic counterterrorism communications to drive our government wide efforts.

finally, we will reaffirm our core values and strengthen protections for a lark peoples including religious and ethnic minorities. we must always take care to protect human rights, including freedom of expression. we cannot advance our cause by suppressing ideas or curtailing speech. offensive speech must be met with more speech, but there must also always be a line between voicing objectionable ideas and incitement to violence and terrorism. as president obama outlined, people who feel persecuted targeted by discrimination, or disempowered are more likely to listen when extremists sell false promises of power, retention, and belonging. there is no one path to violent

radicalism. extremism can take root wherever someone promotes an ideology of us against them. we have to guard against threats that spring from animosity towards any group, whether from anti-semites, neo-nazis, white supremacist or any hate group. so we are going to create dialogs that facilitate understanding and help communities communicate with respect across religious sectarian, and ethnic lines. we will work for inclusion so that people feel invested in their societies. and here in the united states, we will continue to work firm that our country is home to people of all faiths. so let us leave here today with

a renewed commitment to building a world unmarked by terrorism and ideologies of violence. countering violent extremism is a difficult challenge, but it is not an insurmountable one. our timeline for success may be measured in years, if not decades, but we will prevail. and that is because together we offer what terrorists never can -- a positive version for a more just, more equal, and more peaceful world. and at its most basic, that is what countering violent extremism is all about -- nurturing those better angels of human nature against the demons of hopelessness and hate. if we succeed in moving towards

the ambitious agenda we have set for ourselves at this summit, we will not only strengthen security for all of our peoples today, we will bequeath to our children a safer and brighter future.thank you so much for your partnership in this mission. thank you for coming together and thank you for the work we will continue to do. [applause] >> please remain in your seats as the press to parts. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> i wasn't planning to say anything. i cannot tell you how impressed i am and how full the room is, incredibly attentive everybody has been. a profound thank you from all of us in the administration, president obama, the state department. we have a lot of work to do. let's go out and get it done. thank you. >> today a discussion on the

number of foreign fighters joining the isis cause. speakers include a former commander. live coverage starts at noon eastern on c-span2. >> officials from the obama administration talks about countering violent extremism and groups like isis. bob schieffer moderated the event. it is about an hour. >> it is always the complement to meet thank you for coming. we try to stay on topic but i don't think we have never been

as hot topic as a panel on terrorism or terrorist extremism. because there was just two days of this over at the white house and that is where we want to start. the senior adviser, he is the senior security analyst. visiting lecturer at harvard. he served as deputy assistant and national security advisor with the bush administration and is that the treasury department before he came to that job and also i did not know this and a former federal prosecutor who served on terrorism of prosecution teams prior to 9/11.

adjunct senior fellow on the council on foreign relations the first ever special representative to muslim communities from the government. she has been a lyrical a pony in the george h w bush and barack obama administration, appointed the first ever special rep in 20 09 by hillary clinton. she was awarded the distinguished honor award. a senior national security correspondent for the daily beast. she was the pentagon

correspondent and reporter and a bureau chief for the mcclatchy newspapers throughout the middle east and cairo. she has covered the war in iraq. she had one stint as their baghdad bureau chief. she has been all over that part of the world. what we start is this summi they had at the white houset. i would like to hear what the headlines are. >> i think the white house was trying to draw attention to the notion of the lineage from al qaeda hasn't ideological underpinning. the white house was willing to gather people around this issue. the obama administration came

to power not wanting to focus on these issues. the nature of this movement has forced this upon on. the headline is the white house is committed to providing leadership and talking about this issue and the creation of grievances but generational struggle that is impacting muslim communities around the world. this is a long-term challenge. president obama is recognizeing that. >> what do you see as the headline? >> it is really striking. the ideological and the violent ideology. the president pointed that out.

building the ecosystem from which the bad guys are recruiting. the reasons why the ideology is important. just sitting back, the president started off very carefully looking at muslims around the world. he inserted this plea to muslims to say, i am working with you. here we are in 2015 and this is the speech that he gives. muslims need to help me lead in this effort. that change is very important to me. the final thing when you look

at the creation of this white house summit, three days of events, they were trying to say government cannot do this alone. guess what -- not only can government not do it alone, but we need the private sector to get these ideas off the ground. >> you are concentrating on the military part. you have seen this from overseas. how do you think this will be received in the other parts of the world? >> the language, the terminology, seven months after striking in iraq and syria. a threat that demands military

action, in terms of what that threat is. the direction the conversation has taken. how we use -- if we put too much of a focus i fear we are playing into the game that people are going to fight, a battle of islam versus the west. if the discussion doesn't happen, how much is about ideology hijacked version of islam, for about governance, poverty? it is part of a bigger discussion. i think for the region's not taken about islam and the binary question.

>> i want to talk about some of the leaders. that is something we need to talk about. you helped repair george bush for a summit very much like this. did he say anything different than what president obama said at the summit? >> in some ways the discussion is a little bit like groundhogs day. the conversations are largely the same. we struggled to talk about how you describe the ideology. you do not want to offend your ally or describe the threat in terms of a war on islam.

president bush made these precise points in 2007 for the 50th anniversary of the laying of the cornerstone of the washington mosque. they tried not to offend. we had debates and they were not resolved. there was an important speech the president wanted to give. this is the way the debate was resolved. some call this evil radicalism and others, fascism. this ideology is different from the religion of islam. a violent political vision. he then goes on to explain what that is. the point was to describe the underpinnings of what the

struggle was about. it is important to focus on the language. they are struggling with some of the same issues. how do you walk that divide with not offending while also identifying the fact that islam is a way of a part that they identify themselves. it is part of their own mythology. how do you confront it if you do not recognize there is an islamic component to it. it is reflected in this speech. >> i could hear barack obama making this speech. >> walking through how not to offend was important.

we were thinking about the history of our country. american muslims do not feel like we're looking at them as a special threat group. a context of the message from washington to communities around the world. what are the hooks to play over and over when the president says something. it is a careful dance you have to do. my former title, i cannot tell how much time we spend on that title. the bad guys want you to believe there is a special world in which muslims live. a little petri dish.the lexicon

matters. we took a lot of time to think about what that is going to mean. nobody is thinking through the elements of speech and what matters it was to a domestic audience. one thing we were thinking was how do you talk to the american public about the role of islam in america? they do not know that islam came here at the time of the slaves. i do not want to give an american history lesson. i learned on the job. is america at war with islam? is this what is going on?

we must know the timeline of america history to be proud of who we are. thank goodness the way every president has spoken about it with dignity consistency -- consistently. >> we are almost like counting how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. we always seem to be surprised by the events that have been. there is something called isil. they are cutting people's heads off. they are taking hostages.

when the pilot was burned, the king put on his fatigues and led the charge. they launched a bonding campaign. when these events happen, we are overtaken by events. if the president has something scheduled he goes off and the congress takes off for washington's birthday vacation and everybody says we will debate when we get back. that is a part of the communication here that bothers me. the president said i'm not

getting very good at the optics of this thing. but i wonder does that concern you? that people love that part of the world don't understand we take it seriously? because we're launching hundreds of bombing campaigns. they understand what that is. >> one of the reasons we see this over and over is literally it is the same people of the islamic state was born out of al qaeda and iraq. it was very similar to the campaign of 2005 and 2006 against the troops. it just happened to go that much faster. so in this effort to say we don't want to spend any more money, there is a.

sure victory. you can keep fighting but if you have prisons and you mix groups together and release them five years later and allow them to practice what they have learned then how do you have any hope of ending the problem? how much can you depend on a of military with the systemic problems that have the stein -- define the region. so eager to say that things are done because that peace was very fragile. it is a not something that you declare victory on. if the war in syria ended

tomorrow, we would still be going with this for a decade plus because you have the fighters coming back. we are so eager to say that we can walk away. this is a problem that will manifest itself in some way and maybe for the generation after. >> you raised an important point that this ideology manifest itself in the real world was -- and the one concern is that we think of it as a long-term challenge, how do you inoculate these communities and deal with some of the underlying

conditions. but the reality is in the current environment that ideology manifest itself in violent ways. you have groups that are adapting and they could have strategic impact that have a much broader impact based around anti-semitism. this was not a 9/11 impact. it was an ideological manifestation of this threat. the longer they exist, the longer and the more attractive this narrative is too young people in muslim communities around the world. that perpetuates the ideological

problem. you have hotspots where the ideology is moving in interesting ways. sexual slavery that we are forced to watch videos but also the emergence of polio in somalia, syria, western pakistan. you have the desecration of the cultural heritage of cultural genocide led by these groups because they try to change the shape of history and identity. we talked and all of the dimensions that are happening are important but there are real world manifestations and we have not figured out a way to react to it today because it will have long-term implications.

>> what is the message these people are putting out? >> so those data points talking are consistent as i travel around the world. they are having a crisis of identity. a generation growing up every single day since 2001 with the name islam. it has had a profound effect about the difference between culture and religion asking those questions that any teenager is going to ask and it has allowed a megaphone to the bad guys. they are going to their parents to ask questions should i dress this way. i don't want you to play with

the kid that is a muslim. you see a complete shift in the way the world will be. 1.6 billion people are muslim. 60% under the age of 30, a gigantic number. that is the part that scares me. we may say it is horrible and that person that is struggling, this isn't about how rich or poor or how well educated but how they feel about themselves . i have seen that and witnessed it firsthand. and to your point earlier about what scares you, the thing that terrifies me is the inability to connect the dots. we're so focused on the region and partnerships that everything

else does not matter. so when you come back in and you are overwhelmed and you know very well of that actual ideology is impacting those kids, it doesn't matter but the -- syria is on fire and i get that. we kind of dismissed that. it does matter because this generation's ideas get connected to each other. some girl in denver says, i get that. >> can i say how that plays itself out? in the early years after 9/11 we had to go after big fish and there was a terror problem. there were just a few people if we just got them and that is

, that people -- it is hard for us to picture here. if you are the average egyptian living off of $200 per month it was the country that was so and that has been sustaining people for decades. the president in egypt has brought back the practices because of the ongoing threat. you would here, at least we are not yemen or libya. and now people, it is so fragile. a relentless twitter campaign. they are pushing and pushing. you go from being lost and not having any real hope to being

offered the greatest opportunity ever. from being nothing to defending the faith. i would see in these kids. i don't think they start out angry. you would see it with kids in the muslim brotherhood. someone is giving them a purpose. i talked to some kids who are starting to join jihad e-groups. they were 19 and 20-year-old kids and they would talk about their rage and they would say, i felt rejected by my country. this is not a push to be an ideological hero. they are kids. they were just started out.

just a needed a little attention could turn things the other way. >> what should we be doing that we're not doing? >> you have a lot of groups in civil society that are willing to confront and counteract the ideology. the problem is and has not taken scale. the summit has the ability to convene and network. you have seen some of that at movement.org and others are out there. i think identifying where the ideology manifest and confronting it. we need to find creative ways where may not have manifested

yet but confronting it and figure out who are the right actors to do that. i think that is where we need to go in this has to be a global effort. >> it is a 360 degree thing. you cannot do things in fits and starts. minneapolis is doing it this way. you can expect a graph of nice things happening. there needs to be a john deed every day -- a drum beat all day, every day. a lot of people get very uncomfortable about that, but it has to be a consistent generational all day everyday thing that they are seeing. if we only say this is happening right now because there will be foreign fighters or this is only happening because we are now in

this part of the world, when you look at it that way you are missing things. the thing debts could that the thing that scares me about the foreign fighters are not the ones who have gone and come back but what is they're in the ecosystem that is still going. you have to be able to poison that ecosystem for that growth to happen. the other piece we have not done a good job about it all, not just our country but around the world, combined world, combined what we no about how kids get radicalized with the mental health workers that can help those kids get out of that process, not when they are early radicalized. i am talking about the conveyor belt that leads them up. >> talk about the military situation. what is going on right now? >> egypt on monday launched airstrikes in libya.

egypt has a problem on both sides. in the sinai in the east, the population has been ostracized they don't get government resources, homes have been rated and destroyed, certainly after 2013. and so there are a lot of fighters coming in, already radicalized. meanwhile, you have a collapsed state with competing governments backed by rival militias and egypt has been a current to go in the libya and try to take care of this problem because a lot of the trainers, weapons equipment travel from libya to the sinai, literally a direct -- you can see it happening. they were eager to do something about it because they see it as an existential threat, and in

many ways it is. at the same time i would argue this has been exploited to justify his own government, the way you took power and to mitigate those who say that this is not the state that we wanted to emerge from the arab spring. they were looking for a way to get into this and take on libya. and then the video was released showing the beheading of 21 people, most of them in egyptian's, 90 million people in egypt. a lot of them are workers. so christian, remarkable that the kurdish national outrage sectarian differences defining these were gone. you can understand, just outrage that this could happen. and so even those strikes, a day of strife, they would argue the response to the public, a serious military effort because you are really saying much.

much. and egypt we will say officially it's not a part of the us coalition. we have a problem in north africa. they are asking the us for help. a mixed response. the overthrown. you have an egypt that is trying to consent the spread of viruses. at the same time an extraordinary relationship. the us military response responses that we should not they are exploiting that you had a group. the threat and that they are using isis rather than actively

joining the islamic state. it's true now, but it can change quickly when you have to ungoverned spaces that are riddled, riddled, riddled with jihadists. >> how would you sum up where we are in this? i must say, i'm the only one that remembers vietnam. vietnam was the good news that we always got, it was never quite as good as we were told that it was, and the bad news was always worse than we were told it was. how do you think the situation is right now? are we winning this war? are we holding them in place? yemen happened.

where are we? >> i think i think we have to check ourselves. these are 10-foot giants. their conditions and the environment that plague. there is a unity. we have huge advantages with our allies, but to answer you broadly, i think the threat is growing more dangerous and more diverse. diverse. you have more geographic safe havens for these groups operate. you have this ideological ligament that ties these groups. and so the pentagon statements on this are almost in opposite to what the problem is. it doesn't matter what better these groups are flying. the fact that they can operate and are effective is really the problem. and i think what you have is the lower for foreign fighters. now numbering over 20,000, deems sort of word by this pied piper dimension of the social media, attractiveness of this narrative, some of which is just

heroic identity, and really we are facing a much more dangerous and diverse environment. counterterrorism officials, all my all my old buddies have to testify and talk about this. they talk about a more diverse threat from a geography, nationality, and group perspective. the perspective. the challenge to your earlier question is how you get ahead of the problem, anticipate, perhaps even predict where the new challenge in the knew threats we will come. that is difficult. that is what the intelligence community has to do. from a policy perspective the challenge is how you shape the environment so that you are able to have a minimum contain the reach and in maximus terms actually end up defeating the. i think we are very far away from seeing that end goal. >> threat to the us homeland today greater or less?

>> i think it's greater for a lot of reasons, reasons, but i want to say one thing before i get to that, we should do. one thing, we know the tools that we need to scale up and mobilize. they're are the tools that governments must do that we haven't done. our government and governments around the world is going to be controversial, but there are countries in the world were building an ecosystem that is helping this ideology tries, and we have tried to parse this conversation in a thousand different ways. as far as i am concerned until we are honest about what is going on we can get past it. what there doing on the ground not just talking about textbooks. i'm talking about building a systematic approach globally that is changing the environment for millennial's so that within

one generation they are moving in a particular way. we never talk about this, this but for me if your going to be serious about stopping this you have to win this ideological war. if you are committed to winning it you need to be committed to talking about why the bad guys are so advanced. they're are many elements. diversity of issues including, if your sitting down the pike, you no, you want something from the west but it's a very good job of moving women in a different direction and why were catching up. for me from looking down the pike and stop being so politically sensitive about what we're doing because if we're talking about defending the homeland he can't defend the homeland if you are not being

clear and precise about what not just a group threat but the ecosystem in which they drive. to your 2nd.about where we are in terms of the threat, in the bush administration right after the danish cartoon crisis, we were totally caught offguard. our country was caught off guard. the same thing could happen in copenhagen could happen. it's all fine, but in 2006, 2007, we were not where we needed to be. we got a little cocky about where we were because we felt like her narrative was different. this can't hit us. a little bit of an approach of because were so different we never colonize, colonize, all these other things going. they are more free small these kinds of things, but we have some resilience.

in 2015 it's come home and it is hear. and the things that we see happening in europe are manifesting in communities in america that we don't like to talk about. parents of kids who are looking at there kids asking themselves questions, how do we get in, how am i a 2nd and 3rd generation parent having to deal with this crazy situation where i have a kid who now has an affinity to something so crazy that i would've never imagined. we calibrate that is happening on the ground and understand and not trying to build the fear of all mongering environment. i'm simply saying, there is so much data, so much about recruitment. it's time to be practical and clear and calm about how we talk about it and in that way you can build the kind of -- the issues

that are needed at the grassroots level to make sure our communities are not infected >> it's interesting. >> audience questions. >> it's interesting, you talk about the 2nd and 3rd generation. it was so -- we're so grateful to be in the country that you just tell with it. it's amazing. just inconceivable. there wasn't the internet twitter, the sort of -- you're lucky to be hear. it's so fascinating to me to hear how second and third generations think. i grew up with a different mentality. and terms of the homeland, there's good news and bad news. the us has relatively few

fighters coming back. a hundred and 50 from this country. much bigger compared to 6,000. 1,000 from the uk. the challenges -- and i look at this from a military perspective, the expectation is we are the worlds military. so when something happens in france or the uk the expectation is that the us military we will respond. the us was supposed to be taking on the aqa threat. one or two depending. went to yemen. and in the expectation is the us military has the largest military. and military. and so the threat to the homeland becomes a 2nd order but it is not necessarily because of foreign fighter comes

back but a reaction to something that happens in europe where they have different problems in the us does. >> let's go to the audience. right hear on the phone. tell us who you are. >> hi. i am the executive director of the nonprofit that supports military and veteran families. we deal with a lot of the after aftereffects of the decisions that are made in dc. two questions, do we actually have a strategy? and what does warning look like? i no it's a long-term thing. thing. how do we articulate that to the american public? >> it's an excellent question. a great question. what when i was in the administration we did talk about this. we try and articulate the mechanisms for what that meant

how you intervene, counter this ideology and how you deal with identity issues. that's a very difficult strategy to articulate. in terms of this administration the president west point speech, the speech, the most recent articulation of the counterterrorism strategy of large. we're going to go after terrorists when they imminently threaten us. we are going to support our partners regionally to deal with these threats, and to the.about friends, we will rely on key partners like the french to deal with problems in north africa. and from an ideological perspective we are going to rely on communities of interest like those assembled at this white house summit to actually help counter the ideology to do it the community and national level. that is the thumbnail sketch of the strategy. the question of how you actually implement that when the threat seems to be morphing quicker

than our strategies are adopting. and when you putting artificial limitation to the types of resources and forms of american power that we are willing to invest, and that's why i said at the start one of the interesting things, investing in this will we have to deal with this ideological problem. it really wasn't the attitude through most of the administration. there administration. there is a lagging strategy and lagging resources as a result. >> the veterans and military? is the military strategy. the not going to put forces on the ground. essentially we are the air force for the iraqi army and the rebels that have yet to emerge that we are trained in syria. the airpower the airpower is going to go after isis and limit

there ability but they won't have that many tanks. then i can have the ability to move, take territory which is important. it allows them to exploit populations are things like that. to build something knew. in the iraqi army is going to come through. they we will be able to leave the ground forces some.to take advantage of the sort of containment. the problem is i'm not sure iraqis see themselves the same way. there's a fascinating story. and how do you get the majority shia military to risk their life back in syria the problem becomes the rebels. considered a moderate rebel.

the military said they have identified and that will be the basis for ground force in syria. as the military strategy. the government that can sustain military gains sense that they're is not the ungoverned space. >> how long will it take to train these iraqi troops that are going to be the ground force? >> well, they say that they hope to have forces in place by summer. the military is talking about its campaign. we are training forces that we will allegedly be a part of the campaign the starts in march and april. we are talking about weeks. >> is they're any indication that any other country will put

any kind of ground forces and? >> know. >> a lot of offers to hold our coats. >> a lot of offers to do airstrikes. intelligence gathering, but what army could take us on? so i have never heard the egyptians say we have a great -- >> basically speaking to put together the kind of force you would need it will take some time. >> the conservative estimate is three to five years. >> you have the courage and, incredibly courageous and forceful and pushing back, but they are going to take most. you have the debate with turkey as to how forceful they are going to be. the challenges everyone wants the us to deal with facade in addition. he's not going to commit turkish resources. >> what he believes would have

taken. >> it to five so, i mean, they would of been a fight. it would've been an area that they talked about. that's why baghdad. you have yet to see them take on a real, sustained force. baghdad is so valuable that it would've been a fight. >> let's go over here.

back hear. >> the daily foundation. it has been a really strange week in the realm of ideas. we had an article earlier in the atlantic. the islamic state is very islamic and it's foolish to talk about these things without entering realistically and seriously in the realm of ideas. to what extent does the allergy have consequences? what role does the united states playing talking about theology? do we combat the seriously theologically driven threat? >> well, i want to say one thing you. do we have a general in charge of ideas? do we have somebody who wakes up every day and looks of the ideological war and says this is

our going to play the battlefield? we don't. [inaudible conversations] >> so it is not just that piece. all of the other things that we are putting into the bucket of the soft power that that person doesn't actually control. and so the integration of both of those things, i mean, in my view is we think about all of these pieces, including the theological piece heat part of our government is doing things in there own way and there is know one actually working it. i believe in our constitution and believe that they're is a clear line between church and state. and i don't think anyone in the united states government should be sitting around talking about what religion means. that is dangerous. and as somebody who was a special representative to muslim communities i never ever quoted the quran.

being a taxpayer did not put me in charge of telling you what the quran means. so i have a very hard line on this. i think that's this theological conversation we're having, it's very dangerous. were not sitting hear pondering the meaning of these things. you know, one 5th of the planet is muslim, and they are diverse. all over the world cultures and heritages have impacted the way that they practice there faith command we need to honor that. there is a lot of controversy about what is and is not islamic, whatever that might mean. i happen to be an american command i happen to be muslim, but i'm not qualified to sit hear and tell you something that was written at the top of the profit means this today. i don't feel comfortable doing that. it's dangerous water when you

start to put things in little boxes. of course these bad guys are using the inspiration from there interpretation of religion to do terrible things. and i absolutely believe that muslim parents around the world can accept that. and to do everything that they can't just stop the kids from being recruited based on the faulty premise of what the religion is. the work through and start telling people who is a good a good and who is a bad muslim. the final failsafe, the kind of approach that we are taking which is only talking about muslim and shia, they're are a lot of minorities that are left behind. as far as i'm concerned it is not for me to say it was more or less. i we will not say it's good or

bad. the minute we start talking about this walk down a dangerous path. >> over here. right hear. [inaudible question] >> back in the 1960's we had a lot of young people hitting radicalized to conduct violence. we had in this country the fla the red brigades, all these groups were being radicalized. people's nice middle-class children were robbing banks, banks, killing people, taking hostages. how is this different? >> i think it's a great question. and a lot of the countermovement that we have talked about have tried to learn lessons from that time , from the anti- gang

initiative in certain communities in part because you have certain strains, the recruitment of radicalization that looks an awful lot like this. they're are certain strands that are very similar. one of the key initiatives to counter extremism is an attempt to gather former extremists of all stripes to learn lessons, to galvanize them and then to go out and try to counter the ideology. so it's a great question. the main difference from my perspective goes back to this question of theology because the difference between what you described in terms of the nationalist or other terrorist movements of the 60s, 70s, and even 80s or the cold war which is often looked to as a model for how we engage in ideological battles is very different from dealing with the transnational a transnational set of actors and networks that are trying to

hijack religion and really are trying to use elements of the theology and mythology around it to reshape identity and are trying to redefine the vanguards for muslims around the world. this was in part bin laden's doing, to create a muslim awakening that would imbue this ideology, this notion that the rest of the world of islam bears a religious obligation to fight, and on the grievances are actually to be acted upon. the theological dimension in this transnational context, the 21st century, that really is the difference between then and now. >> i would just say this, this and it will be our last comment. it is different because the stakes are so much higher in the weapons are so much to more dangerous.

but the fact is they're are know nuclear weapons out they're. if one of these groups got one of those weapons there is know question, i would think, in anyone's in anyone's mind that they would use it in and you talk about killing hundreds of thousands people and not just a few. there is always -- you know, in every movement from the history of the beginning of mankind there has been a string of violence that is to. but i think at no.are the stakes higher than they are today because of the danger that these weapons pose. that is just my opinion. that we will have to be our last. thank you so much for coming. [applause] >> thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> ireland government starts at noon eastern. the national governors association winter meetings start latter-day in washington d c. they will open a meeting at 10:00 eastern. you can watch it live on c-span. >> the guard towers are gone

the memories come flooding back for so many people who had lost such a big part of their childhood. some buried the memories and the history of this camp. now more than 60 years later. >> the only family internment camp during world war ii in texas and what she says is the reason for this camp. >> the government comes to the fathers and says we have a deal for you. we will reunite you with your families. if you will agree to go voluntarily. i discovered the real secret of the camp. they had to agree to voluntarily repatriate to germany and to japan if the government decided

they needed to be repatriated. the crystal city cap was humanely administered. the war division used it as a prisoner exchange in the center of the program. >> coming up, washington journal great desperate --. coming up the national resource defense council discusses the train accident in west virginia that caused a massive oil fire.

our visits to traditionally black colleges concludes. >> there is a complicated history between the middle east, the west, and none of us should be immune from criticism in terms of specific policies. the notion that the west is at war with islam is an ugly lie. host: a lot of ink and conversation about the presidents summit. we want to talk with you on "washington journal" about the summit and the approach to combating terrorism. he said