so now is not the time to undermine what of our critical allies in the arab world by disapproving heart of it on sales package that will improve saudi capabilities. >> mr. president, i take the floor today strenuously argue against the proposition being pushed by senator paul and murphy and others to deny arms sales of about $500 million to the kingdom of saudi arabia. the package that they're trying to exclude the $110 billion farm bill is precision guided munitions that would be used by the f-15s, the package of joint direct attack munitions, pave laserguided bombs. the bottom line, the package we're talking about, the precision weapons that the saudi air force and military could use in operations against iran's proxy in yemen and other threats that the kingdom faces. the flaws of the saudi government are real. they are known to me, but my friends on the other side, particularly senator paul, constantly put saudi arabia and iran on the same thing. i think that is a very unwise analysis to suggest that saudi arabia is as bad as i ran. it is just missing the point big-time. the iranian

we are contemplating not helping an ally who will fight the threat of iran. in 2016 almost every democrat saw this as a good move to help saudi >>hange >> i was not a big fan of president obama of the one i thought it was right in step with him and president from his right to deal with this iranian aggression there is no bigger threat to the middle east or america than this iranian regime in the hands of the ayatollah that is a religious nazi so i hope that you will vote for what is best for america's to empower our allies to contain the threats that we commonly enjoy ato be in the cross hairs of the ayatollah. and they want to destroy israel and they want to destroy us in the idea that we will not have an ally in the fight is inconceivable with the ada that we will vote now for the arms package because trump is president is disappointing to my republican colleagues if you really think iran is a threat then don't vote because you are sending the wrong signal. i yield back. >> my friends or marks are fresh on people's minds i will address this correctly. >> th

the idea of not helping an ally willing to fight is inconceivable. the idea that we are going to vote for an arms package because trump is president and all of you voted yes before is disappointing. to my republican colleagues, if you really think that iran is a threat, don't vote with senator paul, because you are sending a wrong signal. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: there is a different president today, but there is a different policy and that's what this resolution is about. let me be very clear about what we are talking about here today. senator graham would have you believe that we are about to vote on the entirety of the $110 billion in arms sales that was proposed, that was unveiled by president trump during his visit to saudi arabia. that is not the case. we are voting today on $500 million of that $110 billion sale. you can still be friends with saudi arabia and sell them $119.5 billion or $109.5 billion worth of arms rather than $11 0 billion worth of arms. the arms we are talking about, precision-guided m

who is the person i see as an ally? is donald trump an ally? is vladimir putin an ally?y? or is emmanuel macron an ally? i think we are in europe quite clear — i would go with angela merkel and emmanuel macron any day. but it's a choice that the united kingdom has to make. do you believe that putin and trump are allies or do you believe that the ones who live 100 kilometres away are actually the most credible ally in a world which is more chaotic than ever? a very interesting perspective and i want to come back to some of those global points you've just made because i don't want this entire interview just to be about britain, that wouldn't be right given your position in europe. but a final quick point on britain. in your heart of hearts, do you think it is still entirely possible that britain will actually reverse its decision and decide it doesn't want to leave the european union? who am i tojudge? if i would be a british citizen then i have the right to vote and the right to be part of this debate. i'm not. and i think that this is a choice that has been made in the u

allies i don't know. the mystic and i think that we don't underestimating the loyalties felt by many syrians towards the regime or the fear at least that the regime when that regime should be replaced that they would be in. fear of the you know i have to jump in here gentlemen i wish we had a whole lot more time but we don't many thanks to my guests in london and in new york and thanks to our viewers for watching us here next time and remember. to. put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president. to the press this is what. people are. interested in. the recent spat between the gulf states has highlighted yet another middle eastern conflict while turkey is siding with iran against saudi arabia running tensions between the sunni's into the open wanted to encourage jump into the fray instead of trying to pull the strings from a distance. the . testing in the way that testing is being ules is a really big part of the problem because it has actually now rolled the curri

who is the person they see as an ally? is donald trump and ally? is that it viewed in an ally?macron any day. —— an ally. but that is a decision that the united kingdom is to make. a very interesting perspective. and i want to come back to those global point you made. i don't want this entire interview to be just about britain, that would not be right, given your position in europe. but a final point on britain, in your heart of hearts, do you still think it is possible that britain will actually reversed its decision, and decide that it does not want to leave the european union? who am i tojudge? ifi not want to leave the european union? who am i tojudge? if i would bea union? who am i tojudge? if i would be a british citizen, then i have the right to vote, and the right to bea the right to vote, and the right to be a part of this debate. i am not. and i think that this is a choice that has been made in the united kingdom. i believe that no deal would be very bad for the uk citizens, and would be bad for european citizens. i believe it would be worse than the uk citizen and th

and those without allies stagnate and whither. alliances provide avenues for peace, fostering the conditions for economic growth with countries that share the same vision, while tempering the plans of those who had attacked other nations or tried to impose their will over the less powerful. i can note several examples. i don't want to talk too long, but let me make note of the united states and japan implementing the 2017 defense -- 2015 defense guidelines to enhance regional security across the wider spectrum of operations, cooperating more closely in the asia-pacific. japan is also contributing to the relocation of our u.s. forces to guam, which is a significant strategic hug. -- significant strategic hub for our regional operations. we are working transparently with the republic of korea to defend against the growing threats posed by north korea's aggressive and destabilizing ballisticapons and missile programs. u.s. and australian forces have , mr. prime minister, have shared the battlefield in every major conflict. president

having reliable allies and partners. making sure that the united states does not get attacked by terrorists. at the very top of the list, is preservation of the nation. when i think about the world, and the threats to the present -- preservation of the nation, there are only three, that i can see. the first is nuclear war with russia, and the second is a naturally occurring or man-made or logical, that would kill a significant number of the population, and the third is climate change. climate change is that serious. over the long-term. this decision -- >> almost 200 nations agree with you. >> this decision, almost ensures that we, -- that if it goes through, and the next president does not change it, this decision will make the climate worse and therefore have national security implications with a very significant perspective. the other national security issue here, is that there are specific national security implications to climate change. for example, water shortages. fights, conflicts between nations over water. inst

peace process i mean there's ample evidence mountains of evidence that the united states and its allies particular qatar and saudi arabia and then we have on the side israel participating in all of this i mean this company could have come to an end a long time ago if the if they had been good will there is never been good will all whatsoever these the the western countries still support a lot of these nefarious groups that let them keep fighting so i find it really hard to believe you know this kind of narrative that we want to bring peace to syria because that was never been the agenda we we still have to put wonder if it's regime change is still in the cards considering past recent events go ahead alexander well the great. framework in which we have to understand the war in syria is obviously there's been an internal conflict within syria but that war became internationalized because of syria's central position as the key middle east of iran now iran has come to be seen by various countries by israel by saudi arabia and by the allies of israel and saudi arabia the united states especi

ó is jamesill with me fletcher, supreme allied commander of nato.let's start with a broad question. ?re we in maritime nation maritime not only a nation, i would say we are almost an island nation. we have these two massive oceans on either side. north, and arctic ocean in this benign medical notion -- -- we have a very capable maritime capability and we have an incredible ability to search antsy if we have to. divided.ok is we see china spending on their military. pacific is the expecting to change. >> you can take all the land and the rest of the world and put it in the pacific ocean freight 70% of the world is covered by the sea. pacific is see the they willyard and challenge us in the south china sea where they claim the entire area and at the same time, we remember that russia is a pacific naval power. >> bring of russia and i think of the arctic. a lot of natural resources there. navalt, the bulk of our is going to be? >> probably not the bulk. i would say it will be divided. the mediterranean is going to continue to matter. think of it this w

latest above me for already chilly -- rebuff mean for the already chilly relationship between the nato allies. and -- >> i look for to finally having my day in court. >> he agrees to return to his native australia to stand trial. berlin has rejected a request for turkey's president to address his government during a visit to germany next week. presiden eogan wanted to address turkish people living in germany. the german government said no. why not just let erdogan giv this speech, why they turned on his request -- turned down his request? >> they would not have enough policeman to guarantee security around all events. to be honest, the decision was more political than practical. he stressed it was not appropriate given the tensions between turkey and germany. two particular elements, one, the number of people in germany with turkish descent. they do not love the turkish president to talk about the tensions in the country and export this complex to germany-- those conflicts to germany. a few months ago, we already have a debate in germany about turkish officials being allowed or not being able

it's going to be his allies and that need. one thing i did see the other day around the paris accord, which gave me confidence is, people are stepping up to fill that gab. they're moving past theth president, they're moving past the administration. they're looking around to mayors, governors, and businesses of both parties around an issue that matters. and i think that has to happen. that gave me some encouragement. i do think there will be people stepping up to fill the gap where presidential leadership is missing or completely awol. >> do you think that jim comey will go up to congress on thursday with any of this sense that the world is watching and the world -- there are other victims -- i mean, we sort of take for granted that america can protect itself in most instances from vladimir putin, but the most sort of vulnerable nato laeallies were the ones th needed to hear that we will protect them. do you think jim comey has this sense of this moment in world history? >> i certainly think so. this is kind of like the john de

ally, an important economic partner and a champion of freedom. i hope you've had a chance to look at "the wall street journal" which carries a full page add naming all the governors who participated as well as the mayor of the district of columbia. bds has been rejected coast to coast. [ applause ] >> thank you. ajc continues to work with local, state, and federal legislators, and tomorrow one of our key advocacy items is combatting aides of 2017. it protects states that support bds legislation. one of the co-sponsors is here. it's a staunch supporter and committed jewish leader and a long time personal friend of mine. i'm talking about u.s. state minority leader, senator chuck schumer. chuck has been at the forefront of about every effort to strengthen and deepen the relationships between washington and jerusalem. he's also been a strong voice in expressing issue about iran as a threat to israel, and like ajc, chose to oppose in 2015. he acted out of principal against the wishes of his president and many of his party. we admire his courage then.

scolded our closest allies for allowing the public money. last week, the president announced that they would pull out of the 196 nation paris accord. was elected to represent the citizens of pittsburgh, not paris. in this destructive record, there been multiple signs that american foreign-policy was not so different after all. the president has asserted that nato is no longer obsolete. the iranuck with he has deal affiliate made common cause against terrorism with 50 nations. debate bybegin our of thefor implications america first foreign policy and to step back from the daily title wave of russia gate news and other distractions and tell us whether the administration is pursuing correction in interdigital u.s. foreign policy or pursuing what might be described as this engagement from world affairs -- disengagement from world affairs. ambassador sherman and mr. toand will have five minutes speak. i will then follow up with a couple of questions of my own. i will ask you to write in your own questions on the cards that are on your chairs and

in addition to the evidence provided by the allied. not to intercept every weapon that can come our way but to absorb some of what can happen and prevent that from happening in the first place. these are calculations looking at the evidence themselves and they are all coming to the same conclusion. they don't do shoot to kill like the united states and you never hear from the arms control committee concerned they are going to up the balance. countries are going to their own interest. do in their own interest. they are not going to do anything for you. they've determined their interests to having a nuclear capability. we have tried across the administration to use diplomacy. every other ability to coerce them would not work it makes no incense to remain vulnerable when we have the capability however limited it may be to remain to keep the homeland vulnerable when they have not been able to be convinced. each regime has different things they value and like to hold a risk so they have to take that into account. >> they are extensive but n

those without allies stagnate and whither. alliances provide avenues for peace, fostering the conditions for economic growth with countries that share the same vision while tempering the plans of those who had attacked other nations or tried to impose their will over the less powerful. i can note several examples. i don't want to talk too long, but let me make note of the united states and japan implementing the 2017 defense guidelines to enhance regional security across the wider spectrum of operations, cooperating more closely in the asia-pacific. japan is contributed relocation of our u.s. forces to guam, which is a statistic -- significant strategic hug. we are working transparently with the republic of korea to combat the threats posed by north korea's aggressive and destabilizing ballistic nuclear missile programs. u.s. and australian forces have shared the battlefield in every major conflict. president trump and prime minister turnbull commemorated a key part of our shared history, when our allied efforts in the battle

an attack on any ally is an attack on all allies. that commitment has been so strong across the decades that the alliance never once invoked article 5 during the long standoff between east and west during the cold war. in fact, article 5 has only been invoked one time in nato's history, when the ruins of the world trade center were smoldering in new york city, as the world rallied around the united states after the attacks of september 11, 2001. nato allies did what we always knew they would. they said the attack on us was an attack on all of them as well. since then, for nearly 16 years, american troops have fought and shed blood and died alongside men and women searching in the uniforms of our nato allies -- serving in the uniforms of our nato allies. while i'm glad president trump finally affirmed the commitment of the united states to article 5, i think it's important for congress to do it as well. the administration's hot and cold approach to the alliance caused a lot of unneeded heartburn for our allies and caused even the best

they reaffirm their support for israel as an ally, vital u.s. ally, and important economic partner, and a champion of freedom. i hope you have all had a chance to look at the wall street journal today which carries a full-page page ad naming all the governors who participated as well as the mayor of the district of columbia, and this is a reminder that it has been rejected coast to coast. thank you. [applause] shapiro: ajc continues to work with local, state, and federal legislators, and tomorrow one of our key advocacy items on the hill will be support for -- after 2017, which will protects states that protect state legislation. one of the cosponsors of this act is here with us this afternoon. he is a staunch supporter of the u.s.-israel relationship, a committed jewish leader, and i -- actually a longtime personal friend of mine. i'm talking about u.s. state minority leader senator chuck schumer. [applause] mr. shapiro: chuck has been at the forefront of every effort to strengthen and deepen the relationship between washington and jerusalem. h

allies, now traced to russia. cnn has learned that u.s. investigators believe russian hackers were responsible for planting a fake news report that prompted major gulf nations to cut ties with qatar. the exclusive details coming up. we're also standing by for a new announcement on the investigation of russia's election meddling by leaders of the house intelligence committee. we will carry that for you live. also breaking now, president trump sends a message it james comey. less than 48 will hours before the fired fbi directors sensation sensational senate testimony. mr. trump telling reporters, and i'm quoting him now, i wish him luck. comey is expected to reveal details about his private conversations with the president but a source close to comey tells cnn he does not expect the former fbi director will come to any legal conclusions about whether the president obstructed justice. also tonight, new questions about whether the attorney general's job may be in jeopardy. the white house press secretary sean spicer pointedly and repeatedly re

it is strategic ally. and we're in a bit of a battle with them, but we just signed a new weapons trade deal with them and a new gas deal with them. so, that's a tricky negotiation that we were just watching. >> gary pointed out two things of note in case we forget. when doing business with china, we have to have joint ventures there. we have to show them our technology. we cannot own companies there, but to continue to look at this trade battle sort of america first business of the future where you want to be, the fact that we keep going back to steel and aluminum is interesting. that is on some level yesterday's battle and the internet is the new frontier of power. alibaba and ten cent on one side. amazon and google on our side yet that doesn't seem to be the focussed area that the administration cares so much about. >> even the energy speech that president trump gave yesterday afternoon with riddled with inconsistencies he did boast about a couple coal sales deals to other countries that america is going

they are our friends and allies. and to say anything other than we're with you, we grieve with you, we stand with you is just betrying our own values as well as one of our closest allies. inexplicable and damaging. >> is there a sense in which maybe in europe and allies, in a way, could that make europe stronger and the eu more independent and take more responsibility for their own affairs? >> certainly they will step up, but they will lose and we will lose if we are not able to maintain a great strength which is cooperation. we desperately need that to deal with isis and nonproliferation as we did successfully with the iran deal. we now have north korea, pan democratics, environmental crisis. we have to have our friends and allies to works with. >> or climate change. laura kennedy, thank you so much for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> certainly feels like we're in uncharted territory, but is that really the case? what can we learn from past administrations and what can it tell us about where we're headed. joini

they've reaffirm their support for israel as an ally, vital u.s. ally, and important economic partner, and a champion of freedom. i hope you have all had a chance to look at the wall street journal today which carries a full-page page ad naming all the governors who participated as well as the mayor of the district of columbia, and this is a reminder that it has been rejected coast to coast. thank you [applause] . [applause] thank you. continues to work with local, state, and federal ofislators, and tomorrow one our key advocacy items on the hill will be support for combating aids after 2017, which will protects states that protect state legislation. one of the cosponsors of this act is here with us this afternoon. he is a staunch supporter of the u.s.-israel relationship, a committed jewish leader, and i longtime personal friend of mine . i'm talking about u.s. state minority leader senator chuck schumer. [applause] chuck has been at the forefront of every effort to strengthen and deepen the relationship between washington and jerusalem. he has al

and more importantly to face our european allies and frankly their relocating ability, allies in east asia as well. these are things that need to be dealt with in one way or another, responded to in one way or another and resolved in one way or another, it doesn't say too much about the long-term future of arms-control, agreements are only good if you trust people to stick with them so we're struggling with that little bit but on the positive side in terms of the future of high-level engagement, i believe you have probably seen the aftermath of the killers and meeting in moscow upon some kind of strategic stability dialogue between the united states and asia. exactly what form that will take, when it will occur and who will be involved is something for them to figure out that i can actually report that it's not the environment in which we are not engaging. there's a principal nuclear matter, we are working very hard to reengage matters that relate to strategic's and i say that not just through the narrow prism of which gets a raid against the other person but the broader question also

can learn from and help our european allies who are under attack. and i thank you, and i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman from new york. without objection all members may have five days to submit questions, and without all objection all witnesses' statement will be a part of the record. if you see a red light come up in front of you, that means stop. i'll introduce each witness and give them time for their opening statements. mr. hughes is the deputy director of the program on extremism at george washington university. he's an expert on terrorism, home grown violent extremism and countering violent extremist. martin si martin sillcox potentialized in national security policy. dr. cragen is a research fellow at the national defense university. recently left a position as political scientist at the rand corporation and has taught at georgetown university and the uf university of maryland. mr. homer overseas a broad portfolio of cve and rule of law related subjects and projects and research. she chairs the usip working group or counterviolent extre

history that nations with allies thrive, and those without them do not thrive. >> so we're an ally rich nation, and our adversaryies and potential adversaryies are ally poor, is that one way to look at it? >> that's one way to look at it zblch so we should look to deepen and expand, correct? >> absolutely. >> do you think everyone in the administration gets that and is doing that? >> as you know, sir, secretary tillerson worked closely together exactly on these lines. he leads foreign policy and i provide buffer to his efforts. i also know in terms of homeland security, secretary of homeland security kelly is working with our closer allies around the hemisphere but also further out to try and protect the country. so i see it being a theme that is being carried forward, yes, sir. >> let me just finish up, maybe follow up on a couple of questions senator graham asked about north korea. and i actually very pruch appreciated what the president and vice president did when they invited 100 u.s. centers over to the white house to get the briefing with the president there, the vice president, h

mattis: we will with our allies, yes. uss deweyvan: the conducted an operation within 12 not a couple miles and military type -- not autical miles and a military type operation. the press and chinese protested. what was our response in response to their protest? reiterates: to that we operate in national waters. van: i appreciate your focus on the importance of our allies. you have highlighted that quite speech.your dialogue can you touch on that again for the committee's benefit and the benefit of the american people how important our allies are not only in the asia-pacific but globally in terms of us securing our national security objectives? sec. mattis: there is an awful lot of talk about asymmetric advantages and competitive advantages, disadvantages. our allies and alliances as our asymmetric advantage, especially if you put a list of our allies alongside a list of china's allies or russia's alliances, you can see the proof coming through from history that nations with allies thrive and those without them do not. se

european allies, you know it better than i do, i've talked to our european allies. they needed to hear him reaffirm article v. >> i think if you asked him if he was in favor he would say yes. his sbebt is make sure that the burden sharing was happening. i think we want that in this day and time we're see soggy many threats around the world. we want to know our nato allies are paying their fair share. they're stepping up and acknowledge the fact that we have to be strong militarily and united. i think we'll do that. there's never been a wavering or any sort of thought of changing from article v. we're going to take care of our friends. we expect our friends to take care of us. that's been a long standing rule. that won't change. >> i would love to ask president trump but he won't give me an interview. >>> yahoo! is reporting that in the early weeks of the trump administration there was an effort by the white house to push the state department to begin to lift sanctions against russia. this week trump advisor gary cone wavered on whether the president will reconsider

what does it do to our ally israel? there's been at least a few reports that says israel believes that every time we give $1 to saudi arabia, they need to respond with $1.50. there was a quote from one of their government ministers on this saying he worries about their qualitative edge. i have a quote here from a colleague of mine, a friend of mine who is a rabbi and a friend of the constitution, rabbi nate segal writes, while i understand the president's intentions, we must proceed with great caution due to the challenges and the history of the region. at this time i don't see the benefits of the arms deal for the united states or israel. this is coming from someone who believes with every fiber of his being that israel should be defended. he's worried that by giving weapons to saudi arabia, it detracts from the qualitative edge that israel currently has. imagine what happens if the government of saudi arabia were overthrown. they have billions and billions of dollars of weapons, many of these weapons are the most soph

is it going to be the kurds with their arab allies? that might be unpalatable to say the least to president erdogan in ankara. so i think we should expect syria the remain unfortunately quite a bit of a mess for the foreseeable future. >> well, this, joby warrick, gets very confusing for all of us watching at different times, all the different players. you think about the race to defeat isis and the potential aftermath and the chaos that could be there, as well. >> yeah. you think about the oddity of this, that we are arming a non-state actor, essentially a kurdish militia, who is against one of our nato allies, turkey. these two see each other as mortal enemies, but we're all on the same side trying to reclaim the city from the islamic state. what happens afterward, we don't know. does turkey allow an enemy to control this part of the country? i don't think so. does that mean another war breaks out after isis is gone? it's very complicated and very dangerous. >> what about the role of the syrian government itself at this point? >> wel

and european allies and expanded geographically. beyond this need, we need to fit this and other programs within a wider trends regional strategy that includes a global architecture to address the threat from foreign fighter returnees and virtual planners. >> ms. homer. mr. chairman.oon, figure for the opportunity to testify today. my comments reflect around views and not necessarily that of the u.s. institute of peace. i began my career working on terrorism in europe for the fbi. the tail end of a wave of thatst violence in europe included kidnappings, bombings, and assassinations, generating fear andfeelings of outrage we are experiencing today. the wave of violence in europe today is different to read the groups are less cohesive. we are witnessing not only directed attacks itself inspired -- but celfin's hard. the ideology is rooted in religious militancy. the targets today are more indiscriminate. there's more of a willingness on the part of attackers to die. what has changed has been the response. --nter in this counterterrori

and we need to back our allies, make our allies feel that we are with them, that we have their back inhe struggle against iran. and they felt president obama did not do that. and what they felt in this trip was president trump will do that. so they could not be more happy with the president's trip and the way the president is handling the middle east. ♪ ♪ charlie: take a look at what is going on in washington. we have got james comey testifying next week, talking about memos he kept, both public and private testimony. only he and others know exactly where one ends and the other begins. what is the consequence of this, to have an f.b.i. director perhaps say "i was urged to thwart an investigation into a nominee to be the national security advisor to the president," if in fact that is what he says? michael: so, before jim comey was fired, i thought there were three issues that needed to be investigated with regard to trump associates and the russians. the first, which jim comey earlier said the f.b.i. was indeed investigating, was, did any trump associates conspire with the russians in t

and assurance of the allies. the united states has deployed two thad lad launchers to south korea, but they have delayed the deployment of two more thadd la launchers, and south korea is wait waiting to deploy two more. and the we should encourage them, and those in the mideast such as the united emirates. and the united states has approved for sale for qatar and saudi arabia sale for layered defense systems from iran. in europe, it is one year since n nato has deployed aegis shore site, and four aegis destroyer shore deployed in spain. and more can be on the way to help develop or create the layered theatre systems that our troops and allies and it is zens ne -- and citizens need. and fourth and final, it is time to re-evaluate the nuclear treaty. if russia is going to deploy and test intermediate cruise missiles, then logic dictates that we must respond, because russia benefits more from the inf treaty than the united states unless we believe that canada and mexico are going to be developing intermediate range

, a vital us ally and economic partner and a champion of freedom. i hope you've all had a chance to look at the wall street journal today which carries a full-page ad naming all the governors who participated as well as the mayor of the district of columbia. and this is a reminder that bds has been rejected coast to coast. ajc, thank you. ajc continues to work with local state and federal legislators and tomorrow one of our key advocacy items on the hill will be support for combating aids act of 2017 which will protect states that pass anti-bds legislations. now one of the cosponsors of this act is here with us this afternoon. a staunch supporter of the us israel relationship, a committed jewish leader, and a longtime personal friend of mine, i'm talking of course about us state minority leader editor chuck schumer. >> chuck has been at the forefront of about every effort to strengthen and deepen the relationship between washington and jerusalem. he has also been a strong voice in expressing concern about iran as a threat to israel and like ajc, cho

sullivan: we are an ally -rich nation? and potential adversaries are allied-poor?- sec. mattis: that is a good way to look at it. sen. sullivan: we should be working to deepen those alliances, correct? sec. mattis: absolutely. sen. sullivan: do you think everyone and the administration gets that and is doing that? sec. mattis: secretary tillerson and i work together exactly on these lines. he leads foreign policy. i provide military factors. and buttress his efforts. i also know in terms of homeland security, secretary of homeland security kelly is working with our closer allies around the hemisphere, but also further out to try to protect the country. i see it being a theme that is being carried forward. sen. sullivan: maybe a follow up on a couple of questions senator graham asked about north korea. i actually very much appreciated what the president and vice president did when they invited 100 u.s. senators to the white house to get a briefing with the president, vice president and h.r. mcmaster and all of you. i thought that was very useful, very important. one eleme

having reliable allies and partners. making sure the united states of america doesn't get attacked by a terrorist, there is a whole list of things. at the very top of the list, charlie, is preservation of the nation. and when i think about the world and i think about the threat to the preservation of the nation, there are only three that i can see. first is a nuclear war with russia. the second is a-- is a naturally occurring or man-made biological agent that kills a significant percentage of the population. and the third is climate change. climate change is that serious over the long-term. and this decision. >> over 200 nations agreed with you. >> absolutely. and this decision now almost ensures that we, if this goes through, right, in and the next president doesn't change it, this decision is going to make the climate worse and therefore have national security implications from that very significant perspective. the other national security issue here is that there are specific national security implications of climate

and that is, if i may say, as an ally and a citizen of your ally for over 60 years, do no harm. do not question the alliance. do not question the alliance that is greatly in your strategic interest with europe, but that is also in our interest. it is of great importance for us. and an american government, a white house that questions the validity of that alliance, that questions the validity of the article five mutual defense commitment does more to undermine our security and our safety than many things that the kremlin does. we are all vibrant western democracies. we should not only address those, but we i think as western democracies can address them together, we can look at them together. and i would add only one thing. sanctions do work. perhaps even more as a political statement of cohesion and will and as such they have had a tremendous impact on russia. they have left a deep impression on the kremlin. they have also done some economic damage. but they have above all been an expression of europe's and america's will to stand together against the threat towards ukraine and

closest military allies.ons, saudi arabia, bahrain, the united arab emirates, egypt, yemen have cut off relations with qatar over clams it is supporting terrorism and is too close to iran, which makes the u.s.-led coalition to fight isis a bit more tricky. >> i think what we're witnessing is a growing list of some irritants in the region that have been there for some time. obviously, they have now bubbled up to a level that countries decided they needed to take action. >> reporter: so far there's no indication that the approximately 11,000 u.s. troops stationed there or their military operation also be impacted u.s. officials say. qatar is vital, because the u.s. air force conducts air operations out of an air base there, and runs a center coordinating all air combat missions over iraq and syria. defense secretary james mattis says the war against isis won't be affected. >> i am confident there will be no implications coming out of this diplomatic situation at all. >> reporter: mattis also taking the opportun

russia is not one of our top five allies.ing that you would, you know, for see as being a problem if you didn't disclose this. so, i think that in and of itself is problematic. >> you know, if you ever filled out a form and left that off, nada, would you get in trouble? >> absolutely. i cannot imagine maintaining my clearance at that point. >> james gagliano, if you misreported on a form, would you get in trouble? >> i think if it can be proven. again, the issue here is going to be intent, and that's going to be difficult to discern. but i would say, yes, as a government employee, that would be something that would be fraught with peril. >> james, nada, thanks so much for being with us. appreciate it. again, that testimony from james comey scheduled for thursday beginning at 10:00 a.m. cnn's special coverage begins at 9:00 a.m. >>> all right, the nba finals heading back to cleveland and cleveland finds itself in a 2-0 hole. lebron james not happy about it. we'll hear from him in the "bleacher report," next. looking sharp len.