tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN June 16, 2016 9:00am-11:01am EDT
>> we're going to call this meeting to order. i like to welcome our witness today central intelligence agency director john brennan. you appropriately note in your opening statement that this hearing takes place against the backdrop of a heinous act of violence, perpetrated by a troubled and evil person.
the committee has been consistent in consistent contact from the fbi with early morning hours on sunday and it's been provided a great deal of information on the status of the investigation. i know that your team, along with the intelligence community partners are also working to determine if the killer had any connections to a foreign terrorist group like isil. let me thank your officers for what they do and for the long hours that they are likely putting in to understand this tragedy while also focusing on a wide range of threats facing our nation. director, i know your organization stands -- understands the threat posed by isil and there's been much public discussion about progress, the u.s. led coalition has made to contain isil geographically, to degrade its finance in media operations and to remove its fighters from the battlefield, however, while
progress may have been made against those goals you note in your statement that our efforts have not reduced the group easter rorism capability and global reach. that assessment is significant. i want to take this moment to speak not only to you, but also to the american people. we live in an open society, one that voalues freedoms and diversity. it's recruiting individuals by leveraging that freedom and taking advantage of misguided hate to attack us and in doing so to divide us. isil's global battlefield now includes the united states and we cannot stand idly by. we must take the fight to them. we must attack them where they raise money, where they plan, where they recruit and we must deny them a safe haven. we cannot negotiate with extremist who seek only to kill
and i don't think we will. i'm not willing to accept the events of san bernardino and orlando as the new normal, nor should anyone. we should be able to live securely in a free society and i think we will. and we're not alone, our friends in europe, asia and across the world should be able to go to sporting events, concerts, dance clubs, and experience life with their families in safety. we will unit as a nation and as a coalition to confront isil and deny them safe haven, but we can only do so with a realistic proactive aggressive and awell defined strategy. and, frankly, we have to own it and embrace it. now is not the time to pay lip service to these threats. the sooner we, as a nation, relies that there's only one
path force to take at this juncture, the sooner we will destroy isil's capabilities and ensure the continued safety of our nation. john, i don't make these comments lightly and i'm confident we will highlight, during your testimony, these and other threats to our nation. but before i turn to the vice chairman, i would ask you to relay something to your entire organization. our thanks and our appreciation for their work, your officers work in the shadows often in fear and dangerous environments, day in and day out to keep us safe. they're selfless dedication to their fellow citizens should be commended and we are in debt for that service. mr. director, i thank you for being here today and i turn to the vice chairman for any comments you might have. >> thanks very much, and i don't want to think what you've said. i think you've said it very well
and i'm very strongly in agreement with it. but i would like to talk about a slightly different dimension. i think it's becoming apparent that the tragedy of the last weekend in orlando highlights one of the great difficulties this nation faces with the rise of the islamic state. this enemy is very different from past adversary ris like al qaeda. because isil not only seeks to control territory in several countries, but is taking advantage of technology and social media to recruit fighters and inspire terrorist attacks far from the battlefield. this trend concerns me greatly. according to the president and the fbi director, the killer in orlando was inspired at a minimum influenced by online terrorists material, similar online propaganda played
important roles in the shootings in san bernardino, chattanooga, garland, texas, as well as fort hood, texas and other attacks. so director brennan i hope you can ensure this committee and the american people, because this is an opportunity to do so, that the cia is doing everything in its power to understand how these foreign organizations work and operate. i think such knowledge is essential to help policy makers shape laws and counter isil's online efforts so that we stop them from praying on at-risk individuals and radicalizing them to conduct such heinous crimes. i would like to ask that you update us on cia's understanding of the extent and reach of isil and the implications for those of us here at home and for our
friends and allies overseas. i think there's been some important progress lately and i think it's important to share that progress with the people. on tuesday, the president pubically listed some of the senior leaders of isil who have been killed and i think that's welcomed news. secondly, we would like the cia assessment on whether the 13,000 coalition air strikes against isil have been effective and what sorts of targets have most set back isil's efforts. we know that iraqi forces have surrounded falluja and begun to move into the city. iraqi forces have recently liberated the strategic town and broke the isil siege of adisa. isil has now lost nearly half the populated territory it once controlled in iraq. isil continues to look -- lose ground in syria, as well.
a coalition of local forces is now pressuring the key town amanji which will cut isil's smuggling roots into turkey, hopefully and put substantial pressure on the cap top. in some i think it will be helpful for america to understand whether the antiisil coalition the united states has put together is making progress. if so, how and where? in addition to isil, i would be very interested in hearing from you on other global threats to the united states and the challenges that you believe we face. in particular, i think all of us are concerned about the recent behavior of north korea, the aggressiveness of russia, chi china's action in the south china sea and the instability in north after from ka, in particul --
north africa, in particular. i thank you for holding this hearing and i look forward to the discussion. >> mr. director, we'll be joined by a lot of members as is evident they don't care what diane and say, when they see they you're on. >> speak for yourself. >> oh, no, he's speaking for all of us. >> they'll be here quickly. we, again, thank you for being here, we thank you for what. >> thank you for opening and agency in a work force that i am proud to be part of. i am privileged every day to lead the women and men of cia as they work around the clock and around the world often in difficult and dangerous locations to help keep our country strong and free and our fellow citizens safe and secure.
our hearing today, as you noted, takes place backdrop wanted violence that was perpetrated against innocence in orlando, florida last weekend. we join the family and friends and warning the loss of their loved ones were killed in the attack. we extend our best wishes for full and speedy recover for all those injured. it was openingness and tolerance that define us as a nation. in light of the events i would like to take this opportunity to often committee our assessment and citizens face, especially from the so-called islamic state move to isil. on the battlefields of syria and iraq, the u.s. led coalition has made important progress. the group appears to be a long way from realizing division, it's leader. laid out when he declared two years ago in muslim. several notable indicators are trending in the right direction. isil has lost large stretches of territory in both syria and
iraq. its finance of many operations have been squeezed and it has struggled to replenish the ranks of its fighters in part because few foreign fighters are now able to travel to syria. moreover, some reports suggest that a growing number of members are becoming disillusioned with the group and are eager to follow in the footsteps of members who have defected therefore by reducing the groups inability in its goal to fight. last month, for example, air strike killed an influential isil leader. isil, however, is a resilient and large enemy and we anticipate that the group will adjust its strategy and tactics in an effort to regain momentum. in the coming months we can expect isil to probe the front
lines of adversary ris on the battlefield for weaknesses to harass the force previously controlled and to conduct terror attacks against the enemies inside iraq and syria. to compensate for losses, isil will rely more on gorilla tactics, including high profile attacks outside the territory. a steady stream of attacks in baghdad demonstrate it is groups ability to penetrate deep inside enemy strong holds. beyond is losses on the battlefield, isil's finances are also taking a hit. coalition efforts have reduced the group's ability to generate revenue and forced it to cut cost to reallocate funds. yet, isil is adapting to the coalition's efforts and continues to generate at least tens of billions of dollars in revenue per month. primarily from taxation and those areas that are controlled and through crude oil sales on the black markets inside of
syria and iraq. unfortunately, despite all of our progress against isil on the battlefield and in the financial realm, it has not reduced the global reach. the resources needed for terrorism is modest. the group will have to suffer manpower and money for the terroristic capacity to decline significantly. the branches and global networks can help preserve the capacity for terrorism regardless of events in iraq and syria. in fact, as the pressure mounts on isil. we judge it will intensify its global campaign to maintain its dominance of the global tourism agenda. since at least 2014, isil has been working to build an apparatus to direct and inspire attacks against its foreign enemies, resulting in hundreds of cavities. the attacks in paris and brussels which reassess or directed by isil's leadership. we judge that isil is training
and attempting to deploy for further attacks. isil has large of western fighters who serve as operatives from attacks in the west. the group is probably exploring for infiltrating into the west, including refugee flows, smuggling routes and legitimate methods of travel. furthermore, as we have seen in orlando, san bernardino and elsewhere, isil is attempting to inspire attacks by sympathiers who have no direct links to the group. last month, for example, a senior isil figures to conduct attacks if they were unable to travel to syria and iraq. the same time, isil is gradually cultivating the global network into a more interconnected global organization. the branch in libya is probably the most developed and most dangerous. we assess that it is trying to increase its influence in after fre ka and plot attacks in the
region and in europe. meanwhile, isil's branch is established the self as the most active and capable terrorist group in all of egypt. the branch focuses its attacks on egyptian military and government targets but has also targeted foreigners and tourists as we saw with the downing of passenger jet last october. other branches worldwide, while also a concern have struggled to gain traction. the branch for instance, has been with and afghanistan pakistan branch has struggled to maintain its cohesion in part because of competition. finally, on the propaganda front, the coalition is working to counter isil's expansive propaganda machine. isil paints a crafted image to the outside world the own military efforts, portraying its so-called as a thriving state and alleging that the group is expanding globally even as it faces setbacks locally. isil releases a multitude of
media products on a variety of platforms, including social media, mobile applications, radio and hard copy medians. to disseminate, the group primarily uses twitter, telegram and tumbler and relies on global network of sympathiers to further spread these messages. in some, isil remains a formidable adversary for united states and global partners have exceeded forcing it to devote more time and energy to hold territory and protect its vital infrastructure inside of syria and iraq. and though this will be a long and difficult fight, there is broad agreement to the international community on is t sere yourness of the threat and need to meet it. it dominates my conversation with my intelligence and security counterparts globally worldwide. i frequently engage with them about what we need to do together in terms of information sharing, joint operation activity and being able to
compliment strengths that we can destroy isil thoroughly. now, as you well know, cia is not just counter terrorist agency, we are comprehensive service with global charter. we're called upon to address the full range of 21st century threats. as they often tell young officers at cia, i have never seen a time when our country faced such a wide variety of threats to our national security. if you run your fingers along any portion of the map from asia specific, to north after fra ka, you'll quickly find a flash point and global implications. china is modernizing military and extending its region south china sea. north korea is expanding its nuclear weapons program. and they're reasserting itself in the global stage. there is the cyber domain, where states and sub national actors are threatening financial systems, transportation networks and organizations of every strike inside government. i am particularly appreciate the work this committee to try to come to grips and address cyber
threats we face as a nation. the face of these many daunting challenges, our nation depends on cia and community partners to help keep our country strong and secure. in today's complex world, policy makers depend on cia more than ever intelligence insight and options. if we are to meet the national security challenges that confront us, we must constantly adapt and invat. that's why we announce the effort last year to modernize our agency for the future. since launching our modernization program just over 15 months ago we have taken important steps to ensure our agency fully adapts to the challenges of our time. we still have work to do and some respects we always will. that's because modernization about -- is about more than lines and boxes on organizational chart. commitment to invat constantly so we can keep up with ever changing world. key part of this mindset is commitment to making the work force as diverse as the world we
cover. just last week, the office of director of national intelligence issued a report showing that the intelligence community is less diverse than the rest of the federal work force. as we report that forces those of us in the intelligence community troops about who we are and how we are performing the mission. as this committee knows, unvailed the landmark effort to make sure the work force reflects in our attitudes, backgrounds, ethnicities and perspectives, the nation works so hard to defend. this is a moral and mission imperative. strong cia than it is for any other organization in the u.s. government. diversity not only gives us the understanding we need to operate in any corner, we also helps us avoid and bring to bear a range of perspectives on the complex challenges that are inherent intelligence worker. again, i will like to thank to committee for the support for cia and intelligence community partners through the course of the year and i look forward to addressing your questions.
thank you. >> thank you for that testimony. note to members we'll do five-minute rounds based upon seniority. >> we lead into unique global events unprecedented access to the entire world and highly trained officers who possess a wide range of talents and skills, to extent that you can discuss in this setting, do you believe that you have all the authorities you need to accomplish your mission? >> senator, i believe that we have a great deal of authorities and very important solemn authorities to carry out and we try to do it to the best of our ability. the one area when i look to the future that concerns me, is in that digital domain, which is why we set up a fifth director, first time in 50 years we set up a new director. we oar able to understand all of the implications, vun abilities
and the opportunities that that digital domain prevents. as i know this committee and others here in the congress are grappling with the issue about the role of government in that domain, law enforcement, intelligence and security organizations, i do wonder why -- i do whether or not we as a government have the ability to be able to monitor that domain from the standpoint of identifying those threats to a national security, that we need just the way we have within the physical domain, the mary time domain and aviation domain, the consensus about how the government has an obligation to protect its citizens in those various domains. it's a new domain. it is a new frontier and i do not believe our legal frameworks, as well as our organization structures and our capabilities are yet at the point of being able to deal with the challenges that we need to have in the future, so this is
the one area that i enkoushlg the committee, the congress, this administration, next administration to continue to work on, particularly, as this country is going to be part of the internet of things where virtually every type of electronic and mobile device is going to be connected to this internet, that's interconnectedness gives us tremendous convenience in our lives creates inherent vun abilities whether they be nation states or individual actors 0 groups take advantage of. that's the area i'm concern, the authority not just cia of fbi and nsa really need to be looked at very carefully. >> as you know, the committee is extremely engaged in that side and our focus that we can continue to make progress in understanding what the structure should be in the future. you know your opening statement that cia is not just counter terrorist agency but with a global charter, do you believe your organization focuses too
much of its time and resources on the terrorist threat? >> i think as this committee knows very well, the terrorist threat is enlarged since 99/11, it has presented a security threat not just worldwide but also to loveland, which is why the cia has been called on to help to lead this fight and to take the fight to terrorist organization so we can defeat them abroad so we're not able to carry out their want and deprived acts here in the homeland. cia has multiple missions. we have the mission, both human and technical. we have the all source commission, so that we can move on policy maker and congress with the insights they need. we have the mission to make sure we protect ourselves from those adversary ris we're trying to steal our secrets. we also have a corporate action issue, which involves a military dimension and given our routes in the services during world war ii, since our birth in 1947,
every administration has taken advantage of cia's tremendous capabilities in that action military recommend and as we fight terrorists on the battlefields of syria and iraq and yemen and could be in other areas, i think cia capabilities in this area are going to be called upon in the future. i also would add one other component to those missions and that's on the front, our partners. we need to make sure that we develop the partnerships we need so we can leverage the capabilities because as good as cia is, we're not able to confront all of these challenges globally simultaneously. we need to develop the professionalism. we want to make sure they fulfill the obligations and they're not subject to the womens of corrupt political masters who are going to try to use them for their own political agendas. as we develop these partnerships we're trying to develop professionalism as well. >> you've been at the helm for
roughly three years now. the world's changed dramatically during those three short years, while this is not the appropriate venue in which to go into great detail and discussion of sources and methods. it's a good opportunity to speak to american to educate them about the cia and humanize what is a very opaque organization to most, how is your view of the cia as an organization change during the last three years? >> well, mr. chairman, thank you in your opening remarks, you talked about how cia officers frequently work in the shadows and without the accolades that i think they certainly deserve, i first raised my hand and swore allegiance to this country as young cia officer and worked in ci for 25 years and during those 25 years and subsequent years to include the last three and some three years that i've had the pleasure and honor to lead the cia, i am always impressed with the expertise, the capabilities,
the dedication of americans from every state in this union, of who come to cia, recognizing that they're frequently going to be aligned unfairly because of this representations of their work, but they recognize the work they do is absolutely essential to keep their families ir their neighbors, friends, fellow citizens safe. and so i truly believe that the agency is core and essential to keeping this country safe and secure from the growing threats we face around the globe and coming back to cia and being able to spend every day with cia officers, i am just amazed at what it is that they're willing to do on behalf of their country. i have presided over our annual memorial ceremony last month in front of the wall of honor where 117 stars graced that wall and represent men and women who have given their lives to this country. we do it, again, without seeking
praise, public acclamation, but they do it silently, selflessly, we great sacrifice to themselves and their family. i am honored to be part of this organization. >> thank you. director. vice chairman. >> thank you. >> so the first in listening to your remarks which i think a lot of broad strokes and very interesting, i wanted to ask you about a couple of things that you said. you said that libya is the most dangerous country and the sigh na the most active. you mentioned military and governmental targets. could you explain a little bit more about that, please. >> talked about libya being the country where there's the most dangerous branch of isil outside of syria and iraq. they had several thousands of
individuals who had pledge allegiance to isil. they now control a portion of the libyan coast around the city of sert where they're able to train, develop and to consolidate their position inside of libya, as well as to use libya as potential springboard for carrying out operations abroad. they've attracted a number of individuals inside of libya. so, therefore, i am concerned about the growth of libya as another area that could serve as a basis for isil to consider ri out attacks inside of europe and other locations. that is very concerning, particularly, since libya is right across from europe and mediterranean. the flows that are going there. >> it use to be an egyptian terrorist group which was basically consumed by isil and
group pledged allegiance. they already had a capability. he was in this group that was able to get on board that aircraft in ied and bring it down. >> i was just out in singapore last week where i've spoken to my asian counterparts concerned about what we might see in southeast asia as various organizations there are increasing their interaction and connections with isil. so this is a global challenge. the numbers of isil fighters now
far exceeds what's al qaeda had at its height. we're talking about tens of thousands of individuals. >> can you estimate the number? >> right now we estimate within the syria iraq area, we think it's between 22 fighters it's down significantly from our estimates last year where we estimated they may have had as many 33 or so fighters. in libya, the range can be from 5 to 8,000 or so. inside of egypt, there are several hundreds if not over a thousand hard core fighters inside of the sinai that are a combination of individuals who were formerly of ma tees what else others who have enjoyed. inside of yemen you have several hundred. in pakistan, afghanistan it's in the hundreds the numbers are significant in rock syria and libya, nigeria, you probably have maybe 7,000 or so, again, there are hard core fighters,
there are specialist facilitators and others. the numbers are significant. >> you say they use twitter, telegram and tumbler, those are the most used. explain a little bit. see, i fight this huge personal privacy that any -- you have to keep everything private. and, yet, when you have the electronic world being used as the propaganda mechanism to fuel the long wolf. i use the word inspire the long wolf for the united states that's a big security problem. what do you recommend, i know
it's on the spot, we're trying to discuss a bill on encryption using court orders to ask companies to cooperate in cases of national security, as well as major major crime and it's just very difficult. but yet we see this propaganda. i read those magazines and i see what's happening. the enormous frustration, it's not like you go to library and find something in the stacks. this is a few clips and clicks and you pull up all this material. what do you think the responsibility of the technical sector should be? >> i think you put your finger on two major issues here. you're absolutely right. isil has made extensive use for
the various technological innovations we have witnessed over the past decade, taking full advantage of social media. a large part of the isil are young individuals who have grown up whether it be in the middle east, europe or or places in an era of great technological development. so using these mediums comes naturally to them and they gravitate toward them, but they also are very aware of what mediums provide them the greatest security and the greatest protection from government insight and oversight of that. and they recognize that a lot of these apps provide them the ability to communicate within an encryption and also provide impediments to be able to gain access. i will harken back to what i said earlier, do believe this committee and other really need to have the discussion that is going to be a national
discussion about the appropriate role for the government in an area where the private sector owns and operates the worldwide internet and we know that the internet does not respect sovereign borders. it's not just a question of what the united states is able to do. it's what the standards are going to be across do globe. i do not believe that there is a national consensus right now even within the congress or executive branch about what that appropriate role is for law enforcement, for intelligence agencies in terms of being able to have the basis and the foundation to be able to protect their fellow citizens from what can happen in that digital domain, whether it's with the propagation of propaganda that these organizations are involved in or whether or not they're directing and training and insighting individuals, but also the vun ability of that you are critical infrastructure, as well as our way of life here to disabling and destructive malware that can be deployed by
nation states or organizations that have that capability and the intent is something that we need to come to grips with. we don't want to face the equivalent of 9/11 in that cyber domain. it it's worth debate. but when i think about the government's inability to be able to follow up on a court order and a warrant that grants the government access to some type of device that holds a lot of documents or information that it could be exculpatory about an investigation as well as provide investigative leads to prevent the next attack. there is something that this government has to come to grips with in terms of what is the the authority, the responsibility and the role of the government in making sure that this country is kept safe from those who want
to do us harm using that digital domain. >> senator coats. >> director, you i like to get the intelligence assessment agency's assessment of what it would look like in syria, what the challenges are, what the intelligence shows the complexity, you know, it's a mixed cocktail of opposition groups and so forth, so if isil is defeated, what are we facing. what are we continuing to face in syria? whether a side stays or whether -- whether assad stays or if he goes, there's going to be significant all we have to do
is defeat isis in syria and iraq and then -- everything will be fine. we know that they go to member of other nations. my question is what is syria going to look like if and when that happens and what kind of challenges are we going to have. >> the other -- one is isil. al qaeda and syria. that also has formidable capabilities and a presence in a threat of the country of several thousands of fighters, some of them just engaged in the battlefield against president assad, but also some who are plotting to carry out terrorist attacks outside of syria. what we want to do is be able to destroy those two terrorist organizations. as you well know the u.s. government supports the
moderates who are in operation by the presyrian army. if we're able to eliminate those terrorist groups they're still a long ways to go in order to address the outstanding issues inside of syria. the syrian opposition was generated because of concerns that the soonny majority had against the assad regime that was abusing its authorities and its powers. so there needs to be some resolution of outstanding confessional tensions between shiite and sunny. this is where we believe where assad needs to depart the syrian political scene so there can be a more representative and legitimate government that's able to preside over this syrian country. in addition to that, you have tensions between the syrian kurds and the arabs in the rest of the country. so there are a lot of --
tensions. it's very similar in some respects to that cocktail that exists within lebanon where the multi confessional nature of the country really has been a serious impediment for lebanon to have a functional political system, so we have a long way to go. but the important thing is to detroy the terrorist organizations there, bring the conflict down, stop the bloodshed, bring in the humanitarian assistance that they deserve and need and be able to make sure that they're able to develop a government structure that is going to be representative of syrian people and be able to address the reconstruction of the country, which is going to cost billions upon billions of dollars. >> given the russian involvement in syria now and whatever decisions they make relative to either assad remaining or leaving how does that complicate the resolution for some kind of settlement, cease fire, or whatever. >> well, you know, russian brought its military force to bear last september in syria
with aircraft artillery and personnel as a way to prevent what they saw at the collapse of the regime. they have boasted the regime forces and they are involved right now in carrying out strikes against the opposition. i -- we worked very closely and talked with the russians about how to bring this conflict down. we worked with them to try to see what we can do on the counter terrorism front. i have been disappointed that the russians have not played a more constructive role in terms of leveraging its influence inside of syria to bring the syrian regime and military forces down in terms of their engagement and to be more helpful, as far as negotiating track. this problem with syria is not going to be resolved on the battlefield. it has to be resolved on the political front. secretary kerry has been working
hard and long to try to stimulate traction there. and the russians, i believe, can do more both in terms of restraints they can put on the syrian forces but also more constructive engagement on the political front. >> is assad stronger today or less weaker today than it was a year ago? >> a year ago he was on his back foot, as the opposition forces were carrying out operations that really were degrading of the syrian military. as as a result of the russian military intervention. he is in a stronger position than he was in june of last year. >> is that enhance the ability to reach diplomatic solution, or does it lessen the ability. >> it, again, depends on how russia decides to exercise its influence. but right now the strengthened syrian military and russian unwillingness to use the leverage that it has, has made it, i think, more difficult. >> sounds like the russians have put themselves in a position,
which we hoped -- they'd never be. >> senator watts, chairman. >> thank you very much, mr. director, just a quick comment on encryption since it has come up. it's important to remember that if encryption is restricted in the united states, it will still be very easy to download strong encryption from hundreds of sources overseas. and in my judgment, requiring companies to build back doors in their products, to weaken strong encryption will put the personal safety of americans at risk at a dangerous time. and i want to make it clear, i will fight such a policy with everything i have. with respect to my first question, mr. director. i want to talk about accountability at the cia. the agency's 2013 responds to the very important report on
torture stated that the agency agreed that there were, and i quote here, significant shortcomings in cias handling of accountability for problems in the conduct and management of cia activities. document goes on to state that i quote here at cia must ensure accountability adequately extends to those responsible for any broader systemic or management failures. it has now been three years since the cia said that. is it still the case that no one has been held accountable for the systemic failures that the agency has acknowledged? >> first of all, senator, i want to say that i respectfully disagree with your opening comments. first of all, u.s. companies dominate the international market as far as encryption technologies that are available through these various apps and i we'll continue to dominate them.
although you're right there's the ability of foreign companies to be able to have those encryption capabilities will be available to others. i do believe that this country and this private sector is integral to addressing these issues and i encourage this committee to continue to work on it. the agency over the course of the last several years took actions to address the shortcomings that we have fully acknowledged in the interrogation program. there was individual accountability that was taken as well as accountability for some of those management and systemic failures and be happy to address in a different setting, the details of those accountability steps that, i think, the committee is aware of zbhi want to make sure i heard that right. i believe you said.
>> i heard you say there have been individual accountability and i would like to see the details. >> any type of systemic failure is going to be related to the individual's failure to either provide the type of management and oversight for the performance. and so there is a combination of factors that contribute to systemic shortcoming. >> were individuals held accountable, yes or no answer? >> yes. >> i will look forward to getting that response and i appreciate that. >> surely. >> i think that's very important. let me wrap up with a question about an upcoming policy that we're also going to be tackling here on the committee? section 702 of the foreign surveillance act is up for renewal or exploration next year, the office of the director of national intelligence is disclosed and under section 70 the, the ci ara searches for
specific americans in the year before the cia conducted nearly 2000 of these warrantless searches. my judgment, my judgment, if th evidence that an american is involved with terrorism or espionage, the government ought to pursue that lead aggressively. agencies can get a warrant to read the person's e-mails, and in emergency situations, which i strongly back, they can even obtain the communications right away and get judicial review afterwards. my question is, if there was a rule that said the cia could only search for americans' communications under section 702 of the justice department has obtained a warrant with the exception for the emergency situation or when a person is in danger, would the cia be able to comply with that rule? >> i will have to get back to you. that's a complicated issue, and i don't want to give you an off-the-cuff response. i want to be sure you get the
answer that that question deserves. >> fair enough. i would like that in writing. could we have that say within two weeks? >> we will do our best to do that. absolutely. >> okay. i think two weeks ought to be sufficient, mr. director, and i appreciate the fact that in both areas you're going to get back to me. we'll look at what part of the responses have to be classified and what part can be discussed in public, but both with respect to individual accountability, torture and this question of 702. i look forward to your response. >> thank you, senator. i should point out also, something i think you'll be appreciative of is the agency has hired a liberties member that is a full member of our staff and will be fully involved in all of the activities that the cia's engaged in to make sure we are appropriately protecting the privacy and civil liberties of americans. >> is that point appointed and available to meet with members now? >> has been appointed and is operating within the cia. this is his second or third week. >> please ask that person to
make an appointment at a time of his convenience with me. >> sure. >> thank you. >> senator burr. >> director brennan, thank you for being with us today. we get to see you seoften, seld in a public session like this. in public comments, our military leaders, the director of national intelligence and others say over and over again that they feel we're facing more threats from more directions than ever before. do you share that assessment? >> yes, i do. >> and what kinds of things has the cia done to be more agile in dealing with more threats from more directions than ever before? >> as i noted earlier, we embarked on this modernization effort to try to make sure that we're able to take full advantage, optimal advantage of the great expertise and capabilities that we have within the organization. i am a very strong proponent of
integrated capabilities so that we're not attacking these problems in individual streams. and that's why we set up our mission centers where we have our regional and functional mission centers where we can bring to bear not just our clandestine connection capabilities or all sorts of analytics capabilities, but our open source capabilities and insights, our technical innovation, our ability to bring these different skill sets, expertise together. because as you noted, i think that the array of challenge we face, proliferation with north korea, the cyber domain, terrorism that is plaguing so many countries and that threatens us, instability that is racking these countries, i have never in my 36 years of national security service seen a time when there is such a dizzying array of issues of national security consequence. i am constantly going down to the white house, participating in national security council meetings, principal committee meetings to address these
issues. that's why i want to make sure i take full advantage of the resources that you have provided to our agency so that we optimize the contributions of agency officers around the globe. >> right. and how much has all of those threats from all those directions, how much is that complicated by what appears to be the new addition of substantial self-radicalization in the country? >> these so-cold lone wolves, the ones who operate as a result of the incitement and encouragement of these terrorist organizations, it is an exceptionally challenging issue for the intelligence community, security and law enforcement to deal with. the tragic attack in orlando, we have not been able to uncover any direct link between that individual, mateen, and a foreign terrorist organization. but that inspiration can lead someone to embark on this path of destruction and start to acquire the capability, the
expertise, maybe do the surveillance and carry out an attack without triggering any of those traditional signatures that we might see as a foreign terrorist organization tries to deploy operatives here. so those individual actors, either acting alone or in concert with some cohorts, it really presents a serious challenge. and we're working very closely with fbi, department of homeland security and others to give them whatever intelligence we have that might help them identify some of these individuals. >> i think you've been asked this particular question already today, but let me just say again that i think we're eager to hear from you the kinds of things you need to better deal with this really unique and ha hard-to-penetrate self-radic self-radicalization because you don't have the other contacts that all your other sources may come across. let me ask one additional question about china and cyber attacks. last year, the president
announced a common understanding with china's leadership that neither country would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled threat of intellectual property for commercial advantage. in your view, does that mean that cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property by people from china has ended? >> no. >> do you see any good-faith effort on the part of the chinese government to crack down on this? >> i see some effort by the chinese government to follow through on some of the commitments they've provided in political channels. there are a lot of entities, people, organizations inside of china, some of them operating as part of the chinese government, some parastatal, some working basically on contract. so, therefore, we are exceptionally vigilant about all of the different attack vectors that individuals or countries could attempt to use in order to penetrate our systems and
networks and databases, whether they be government systems or private sector, to steal intellectual property. so, i continue to be concerned about the cyber capabilities that reside within china as well as the actions that some continue to undertake. >> thank you, director. and thank you, chairman. >> senator warner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and first of all, dr. brennan, it's good to see you once again. and i want to reiterate once again personal thanks for you and all of the intelligence professionals who serve day in and day out without necessarily the recognition they deserve. senator blunt and i are leading efforts to recognize some of that service in terms of an oss congressional recognition. we do small things like the intelligence professionals days. but i'm blessed to have a lot of
the intelligence community in virginia, and i hope you will relay to folks at the agency how grateful we are for what you do day in and day out, number one. number two, i do want to raise some concern in terms of your response to senator wyden. i think the issue around digital security is one of the most complex i've ever been engaged with. encryption just a small component part of that. i think public press has indicated that the terrorist in france used telegram, a belgian-encrypted technology and belgian-encrypted company. 2,000 apps a day are added to the iphone store. over half of those are foreign-based entities. and to renegotiate or relitigate the idea of whether encryption is here or not, encryption makes
us safer. now, we have legitimate challenges and issues on how we work through a way within our legal structure to get at information. i personally believe it would make america less safe and do great economic as well as national security harm for us to litigate or to mandate in any way a solution set that would simply push the bad guys on to foreign-based hardware and software. and as complex as this issue is, it's going to only exponentially get more complex as we move into the so-called internet of things, as we think about sensors on our refrigerators and cars. something came to my attention recently. think about our kids' toys, which are now interactive, 6.4 million information of children were hacked into last year. and this is only going to grow
larger. my approach has been to put experts in the room beyond, frankly, the capability of some of our individual members to try to help guide us to a solution set. chairman mccall and i have an approach that way. i still think it's one of the best ones. the telegram based in germany, not in belgium. but the point being that this is an international problem. it is not a problem that can be solved america only. it is going to require enormous collaboration. and what i am so concerned about is that we are -- this issue has perhaps disappeared from the newspapers on a daily basis. we could see some invent using encrypted technology that would then lead us into a quick solution set rather than a thoughtful solution set. and getting this wrong would do enormous harm to our security and to our, i think, economic
pre-eminence. i wanted to raise one issue. chairman burr and members had a trip recently. i think i -- i don't want to speak for all the members, but some concerns about the ability of our european allies in terms of information-sharing. we obviously saw the horrific attack in brussels. but as our nation grieved this week over the killings in orlando, there were, also what you're well aware of, that brutal attack on a french police officer and wife in front of a child, videoed and then exploited outrageously. can you comment on post-belgium and post, again, this incident in france, growing collaboration cooperation, information-sharing amongst the europeans, and in particular some concerns i have with our german allies?
>> first of all, thank you for your comments, senator, about the agency's workforce. and i want to thank all senators who visit agency officers overseas when you travel. it sends a very strong message, powerful message to them that they have the support of their authorizing committee here in the senate. we have engaged sentencively with our european partners, particularly since the paris and belgium attacks, but we have had longstanding relationships with them on the counterterrorism front for many, many years. over the past two months, myself and other senior leaders of the intelligence community have traveled out to europe, and we've sat down with the heads of the internal and external services to talk about our experiences here in the united states since 9/11 in terms of how we have been able to bring together different capabilities, organizational structures, information-sharing mechanisms, i.t. architectures, in order to take advantage of data that's available. and as challenging as it was here in the united states, we were still one government, and
so we were able to operate within one legal system. the challenge for europe, as you know, is that there are 28 countries in the eu with 28 legal structures. and then within each of those countries, they have sometimes several intelligence security services. they do not have the interconnectivity, either from a mission and legal perspective or from an i.t. perspective. and so, we have talked to them about some mechanisms that we can use to better facilitate information-sharing among them. because that's the key is being able to take information, a bit of data, and be able to operationalize it at a border, security point or the cop on the street so they can take action. so for example, we, cia, we share counterterrorism information with what's called the counterterrorism group. it's the ctg. this falls within the eu. it has the eu members as well as norway and switzerland, so that we're able to push out to those 30 countries simultaneously information related to terrorism
so that they have the same information, but then they know they can talk to one another about it. and we've talked to them about mechanisms they could use to set up some system, whether it's eu-based or shangum system-based. they have a ways to go. they have made some progress. some countries in europe are much more able to share information within their governments and systems as well as across the sovereign borders. but this is something that the europeans are going to have to work on, because it's not just a technical or i.t. solution, it is also an issue of how they're going to protect the privacy of their individual citizens as they share information. what is the threshold for putting an individual's name and biographic data into a database, putting them on a watch list? so they are working through that and we're trying to provide as much support and assistance as we can. >> senator king. >> thank you.
i appreciate the question and the answer because i think this is very important. it struck me when we were there that the political rivalries and the ancient relationships between these countries is going to make it very difficult for them to exchange directly with one another. therefore, some neutral europol or ctg, seems to me that's got to be the answer, and i encourage you to continue to encourage them. because unless they get a handle on this, they're going to only be as strong as their weakest link, particularly when you have a situation of open borders and not sharing. i mean, that's a disaster waiting to happen. in fact, it has happened several times. you mentioned that you're a great believer in integrating the cia's capabilities and the reorganization. i support that concept, but as you know, i have concerns about possible loss of analytic integrity when you combine operations, put operations and
analysis in the same box. could you update us on efforts to ensure the analytic integrity of the intelligence as part of this reorganization? >> it's a legitimate concern, and it's one that the agency has had to deal with over the course of many years, because the counterterrorism mission center has its roots in the counterterrorism center that was established in the 1980s, where analysts and operations officers were co-mingled in the same area. i headed up the analytic effort inside of ctc back in the early 1990s. and i was aware that we needed to make sure that we maintain that objectivity and integrity. those safeguards and some of the techniques that we used to make sure that there maintains that objectivity and integrity is part of the instruction in our career analyst program, the
c.a.p. training program that all analysts go through. we also want to make sure that we have the senior analysts and senior managers mindful about the respective responsibilities of analysts. and the rubric analysis covers many different areas. analysis drives a lot of covert action, it drives a lot of clandestine collection -- >> i just want the vo overtime action to drive the analysis. >> and there seems to be that separation in terms of the independen independence. and i must say that the analysts i know are very, very -- they jealously guard that analytic integrity, as well they should. and so, we want to make sure it's built into the system so there is an issue, but i've been satisfied that we've been able to maintain that objectivity and integrity while also getting the benefits of that collocation. >> quick question. how does the intelligence community and the cia in particular assess the iranians' compliance with the jcpoa thus far? >> so far, so good.
so far, so good. >> another question about organization of the cia. seems to me we have to distinguish between effort and effectiveness. do you have a standard procedure that measures effectiveness of programs after action reviews, assessments? we've got to understand what's working. and my question is, is there some systemic way within the agency of assessing what is working and how it's working? >> a number of ways, senator. one is that our inspector general has a regular review of a number of our programs to see how they're operating, make sure they're consistent with the law. but also inherent in those reviews are looking at how effective they've been. but in the area that usually generates the most concern and controversy, which is in covert action, we have set up last year a new office called the covert action measures of effectiveness office, where we have senior officers working and reviewing all of those covert action
programs to make sure that we understand, what's the efficacy of the program? not just whether or not we have reached the milestones that have been established for these programs, but how effect yive h it been in terms of realizing objectives that have been set out? so, a number of ways that we have established these reviews and metrics. we'd be happy to provide you with additional information on that. >> i appreciate it. one of my mottos in life is does it work and how do you know? >> right. >> i appreciate your attention to that. finally, there hasn't been an ig at the cia for 17 months or so. why the delay? is there a nomination forthcoming? i think this is a very important, one of the most important positions in government, particularly in the intelligence agencies which don't have the oversight that other more public agencies do. when are we going to get an ig nomination? >> the inspector general of cia is one of three officers within cia who are presidentially
appointed and senate confirmed, so it's the priority of the white house. we've had an acting ig, the deputy who is presiding over that office. i'd like to think that i would be seen as pression to say that i think such nomination would be forthcoming soon. >> i hope you'll convey back to the president the importance this committee puts on that and we believe an appointment in the immediate future is appropriate. >> i will do my best to do that. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator cotton. >> thank you. director brennan, good to have you here again. i apologize, i have not been present in person. i've been in the intelligence committee's equivalent of a makeshift daycare. i've been listening intently. chairman burn, i appreciate him babysitting my son so i could act questions. we're afraid it would land both of us in child protective services. i did, however, hear his opening statements and many of the opening statements of members of the committee thanking you on behalf of all of the men and women who serve at cia, and i want to associate myself with
those comments. in many cases, they face even more hardships than do our troops. and while our troops get recognition appropriately at ball games or when they walk through airports and people buy them beers or meals, obviously, your officers do not. and they deserve all of the recognition that our troops get as well. i want to discuss cooperation with our intelligence community from silicon valley, specifically twitter and a company called dataminr. according to the "wall street journal" from may 8, as well as some other media reports, dataminr, which is owned in part by twitter and is the only company authorized to access the full, realtime stream of public tweets that twitter has, recently cooperated with the cia. but in just a few weeks ago ended that cooperation. so, our intelligence committee no longer has access to dataminr's information. could you comment on these
reports? >> it appears as though dataminr was directed to not provide its service to cia intelligence community. and so, therefore, we need to be able to leverage other capabilities in order to make sure that we have the insight we need to protect this country. >> so those reports are correct? >> i am not going to dispute them. >> "wall street journal" also reported that the ceo of twitter, jack dorsey, directed dataminr to stop the contract because he was worried about "the optics" of helping intelligence agencies. do you believe that to be accurate? >> i do not know his motivation for any corporate decision he may have made, but i have no basis to dispute that. >> the "wall street journal" also reports that among customers of dataminr remains
"rt," "russian today," a propaganda outlet of the putin government, which putin has said is "trying to block the global monopoly on global internet streams." is russia to your knowledge today a client of dataminr? >> i believe so. i'm not certain of that, but i don't have any information that they had been excluded from their services. >> is it disappointing to you that an american company would sell its product to russia today, a propaganda arm of the government of russia, yet not cooperate with the united states intelligence community? >> i'm disappointed that there is not more active cooperation consistent with our legal authorities that may be available from the u.s. private sector. >> thank you. i want to turn now to the open skies treaty. admiral haney has testified that
the open skies treaty "has become a critical component of russia's intelligence gathering capability directed at the united states." do you agree with that statement from admiral haney? >> admiral haney would be best positioned to make a public comment like that and i'd be happy to look at it and get back to you separately. >> general stewart has testified the open skies construct was designed for a different era and i'm very concerned about how it's applied today. he further say, "the things that you can see, the amount of data you can collect, the things you can do with postprocessing allows russia, in my opinion, to get incredible foundational intelligence on critical infrastructure, basis, ports, all of our facilities. so, from my perspective, it gives them a significant advantage." can russia use post-processing analysis to enhance their open skies collection, as general stewart has suggested? >> there have been tremendous technological advancements since open skies was first established. and therefore, i'm sure that russia and others take advantage of those technological
developments in order to advance their intelligence collection capabilities. >> do you believe that these processes and procedures on digital images and the advances in technology might allow russia to exceed the limits imposed by the open skies treaty? >> i would have to take a look into how those capabilities could be used to exceed those limits. >> my time has expired. thank you again for your appearance today. >> senator heinrich. >> thank you, mr. chair. welcome, general brennan. you outlined the real disconnect in the progress that's been made against isil in terms of kinetic progress, in terms of limiting their financial resources, and the reality of inspired terrorist attacks that have global reach, including here in the homeland, as we've seen this week. what progress is being made in
degrading isil's ability to inspire terrorist acts through the digital or even traditional media? and how have we learned how to measure that progress? >> well, what we're trying to do is go up stream and find out who was responsible for spewing this information into the internet that inspires individuals to carry out these attacks. and so, working with our military partners, we are trying to make sure that the appropriate actions are taken in syria and iraq, where a lot of this emanates from. in addition, we are trying to share information with as many of our global partners as possible so that they can be atune to individuals who may be involved in these activities, because there's not just the upstream activity, there is the downstream propagation of this. but it also gets to issues that we were talking earlier about, which is what is the government's role as far as
being able to limit this type of material, both in terms of what its legal authorities are, as well as what its technical capabilities are to prevent this type of propagation of this poison that's coming out from them. >> do you feel like you have good cooperation from our arab allies on this front? >> we have very strong cooperation from a number of arab states and partners that we are actively working with in this area, yes. >> so, director, you and the vice chair noted the inherent security challenge of surveillance and the kind of work that you do in an age of ubiquitous encryption. you know, one of the challenges is the encryption horse has left the barn. nothing we can do at this point can take access to that technology away from our enemies, away from isil, or for that matter, anyone else in the world, when you can simply go online and download telegraph on to your phone or your device
anywhere in the world. but if we're not careful about how we address these challenges, we could certainly mandate weakness into our own digital systems, potentially putting the personal and financial records of americans at risk from hostile actions both from state-level actors and from criminal actors. and i think if we mandate sort of a 19th-century solution to a 21st-century problem, we could also see a number of real economic activity, real jobs migrate overseas to avoid those perceived solutions. so, it's clear to both myself and a number of my colleagues that we need to have continued conversations around this, they need to be technologically grounded. i know senator warner wrote and i've co-sponsored a bill that seeks to set up a commission that would include perspectives
from intelligence, law enforcement and the business and technology communities. do you have a perspective on that legislation? >> first of all, let me say that i strongly support encryption as a capability that protects our way of life, our prosperity, our national security. but at the same time, i fully agree with both you, senator warner, senator wyden and others, that we need to have the opportunity to deal with this new environment of the digital domain so that the government can appropriately safeguard its interests, its citizens, its future. and that requires the experts to be able to get together, the legal, the technical, the practitioners, to find some way that is not going to be perceived as a back door, but it's going to allow the government to legitimately carry out its responsibilities while not compromising the great
benefits that accrued to encryption. i don't know as an executive branch officer that i'm allowed to endorse a piece of legislative initiative, but i have talked to other members of the congress. i think a congressional commission on this issue is something that really could do a great service, because this is not just a government-only issue. it is largely a private sector issue. and there needs to be an understanding between the private sector and the government about what our respective roles and responsibilities are going to be, to be able to find some type of solution that's able to optimize what it is that we're all trying to achieve, which is security, privacy, liberty, prosperity in a technologically rich world that is going to continue to evolve. so i encourage you to continue to tackle this issue and also to educate the american people about what it is, and so that they don't fear the government's role, which is what happens right now because they don't understand it. and then we need to make sure that they understand that that frontier is just like the physical domain and the maritime
domain. we have an obligation to protect our people. >> thank you for your perspective on that. thank you, chair. >> senate yoor lankford. >> thank you for being here again. you helped lead or did lead when president obama was president-elect obama in 2008 the intelligence transition team. it's part of your responsibility to be able to brief the future president at that time on some of the issues that were blinking red, i think the term was used, on the intelligence community. if you were helping organize for that next transition because we'll have a new president next year, what are the key things you could articulate right now are blinking red for the new president? >> cyber, certainly. that individual, whoever is elected, needs to use their all four-eight years to tackle this issue because it's going to take time in order to come up with the types of understandings that are necessary. terrorism is going to continue to plague us. and that's related to the cyber issue and how we're going to make sure that fbi and nsa and
cia and others are able to do their job to protect this country. proliferation is something that we cannot forget about, which is brought in to stark relief by the activities in north korea and kim jong-un and the continued development of his nuclear program and ballistic missile capability that is a threat not just to the region but also to us. instability in a number of countries in the middle east and africa and the lack of governance capabilities within these countries so that they are unable to tackle the political, the economic, the societal, the cultural challenges. and i am really worried about how instability is going to continue to erode and corrode some of the foundations of governance and how more and more individuals because of their feelings of being disenfranchised from their governments, are now identifying with subnational groups, whether it be with an isil or a nusra or
boca harum or others. they're not identifying themselves as somali, nigerians or yemenis. they're identifying themselves as part of a confessional group or a terrorist organization. that is a very, very disturbing trend that i believe that this country can play a role in trying to help address. we cannot solve it on our own. >> do you think that we would have less proliferation of isil and isis, whatever you want to call them, today? we would have less of the movement of terrorism worldwide if there was not a safe haven in syria and iraq? >> that is a big, big part of it. we need to take away their safe haven because it gives them the opportunity to use these lands to train and to fight, but also to gain revenue. and their control of large cities like mosul and raqqah and these population centers as well as oil fields, it generates revenue not just to keep their fighters on the battlefield, but also to try to support some of these terrorist organizations. >> are there strike possibilities that are out there that could reduce the amount of
money that is flowing to isis right now that we are not taking or that should be having a higher tempo? >> i think the u.s.-led coalition has done a good job going after some of these bulk cash sites as well as the oil infrastructure and refining capabilities. it's intermingled with a lot of the locals and civilians who are trying eke out in existence. so, i think the military has done a very good job. there's more work to be done. that's where intelligence is so important, so we can give them the insights into what we can do. >> help me understand the tempo of the pro syrian forces, including the russians and others, their air strike tempo compared to ours. >> unfortunately, they're directing a lot of their air strikes and artillery barrages against the free syrian army that is trying to unseat bashar al assad. and just looking out over the past two weeks, the amount of air strikes in the aleppo area where many of the syrian moderate opposition operate has exceeded the precessation of
host yifts totals. so yes, the russians and syrians have gone after isil as well as al nusra, but a large proportion of their strikes are directed against what we consider the legitimate syrian opposition who are trying to save their country from bashar al assad. >> you anticipate at this point that the number of strikes that are out there exceed the secession of hostilities, which seems to be a piece of paper at this point? it doesn't seem to be an actual cessation of hostilities. >> it is holding by a thread, especially in aleppo, also the damascus countryside. >> let me ask, on the intelligence agreements we have, open skies, other things we hold to so strongly to the letter and the spirit of it. do the russians also hold to the letter and spirit of those agreements? >> we'll have to get back to you in another setting on that. >> thank you. i yield back. >> senate yor hirono. >> thank you, director brennan, for being here.
you mentioned in your remarks about cia modernization and the desire to diversify the cia to be reflective of the diversity not only in our own country, but of course, all of the entities that we deal with in the world. so, can you briefly go over what you're doing to increase diversity in the cia? >> over the past three years, we've had an initiative, called the directors' advisory group, initiated by general petraeus, my predecessor, on trying to advance women in leadership within the agency. and so, we have had implementation teams that have been working over the last three years to make sure that the objectives and goals of this study are being operationalized in our promotional and assignments panels and other types of programs we have inside the agency. i asked vernon jordan, who is a member of our external advisory board, to spearhead an effort on diversity and leadership in cia that took a look at all of the different facets of the agency in terms of representation and
leadership, our recruitment efforts, our training and development of officers, and why we have fallen short of even federal standards of what our diversity composition should look like. and it was a hard-hitting report, and it came up with a number of recommendations. we have put together action teams on that as well. i have a lead officer who is involved in it. i have made mandatory training for my senior leadership team. in fact, just about three weeks ago, we had several hours of diversity and leadership training for the senior-most officers of the agency. they need to be heavily involved in it. we think we have fallen short over the past years because we have been so driven by crises that we have not paid attention to some of these strategic imperatives that we need to. that's why we need to have our leaders actively involved in these efforts from development, mentoring, sponsoring, to recruitment efforts. i go out to schools. i talk to various groups. >> that's great. so, you have a time frame for when you'd like to see some of the results of these kinds of efforts? what would that time frame be?
>> yesterday is the first one. i want to make sure that we're able to look at the milestones that we need. and it's not just the numbers. i want to make sure that we have instituted some of the programs that are going to sustain these efforts. it's putting in place the foundational elements of this. i think then the numbers that we're going to be looking at in terms of representation are going to increase over time, but i'm most interested in institutionalizing some of these changes, so it's not just a study that is forgotten about. >> yes. i think that's important. you also said in a number of ways during your responses that the question of what is the role of government as we see entities such as isil using every means to spread their propaganda and encouraging lone wolf acts, not just in our country but all throughout the world? and i did want to -- you seem to indicate that in order for us to determine what the appropriate governmental role should be, that one approach would be a commission. i think that's what senator
warner's bill is, to create a commission to enable us to figure out what government's role should be, along with, you know, with input from a lot of other folks like you. so would you say that is the best way for us? because you have said that the role of government is one that we haven't quite figured out. >> i don't know what the best way is, but i just know that it has to be an effort undertaken by the government and the private sector in a very thoughtful manner that looks at the various dimensions of the problem and is going to come forward with a number of options, recommendations, about how to optimize what we're trying to do on the national security, privacy, civil liberties front, that protects this country and not cede this environment to the terrorists and those who want to do us harm. i do believe that with the tremendous technological advances like encryption and other things, they are taking advantage of the liberties that
we have so -- fought so hard to defend. >> and i think right now, other people have talked about the need to figure out what we're going to be doing in this cyberspace. i don't think we've put in place any kind of cohesive or coherent process. let me turn to china. the hague is expected to rule about china's claims in the south china sea soon, and it's anticipated that the ruling will support the philippines' case that china has made excessive claims about its maritime sovereignty. can you just briefly discuss your assessment of what china's response might be to such a ruling? and could the expected ruling be a trigger for further escalation by china? >> well, in the recent conference, the shangri-la conference in singapore, the chinese representative, admiral sun, made it clear that they don't recognize the legitimacy of the arbitration tribunal, nor i think will cede to its findings.
so secretary carter made very clear that we certainly do recognize that there needs to be this type of arbitration, given that there are a number of claimants to some of these features in the sea, and it's not just the philippines, it's other countries as well. and so, there needs to be an agreed upon mechanism that will be able to resolve these outstanding disputes. i think the united states has made very clear the importance of protecting freedom of navigation in that part of the wor world, and we'll continue to take steps to make sure people understand the united states is committed to freedom of navigation worldwide. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you, senator. do any senators seek additional questions? senator wyden has asked for one. >> yes. >> the vice chairman also asked me, director, to ask you a couple of questions. she had to leave for an
appropriations meeting at 10:30. what's your assessment of north korea's cyber capabilities and intentions? >> i think that the north koreans have developed a cyber capability, as we've seen some recent incidents over the last year or two where it has been employed. i think it is something that we need to be concerned about. kim jong-un's pension to use whatever capabilities he might have to cause problems. so, we can get back to the vice chairman a more detailed answer about their capabilities as well as potential intentions. >> great. one last question from the vice chairman. isil's getting all the attention today. they're not the only terrorist organization out there. what are we doing and how concerned are you on aqap and
other potential organizations? >> the vice chairman's absolutely right, there are a number of terrorist organizations. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula continues to be very active inside of yemen and has several thousand adherence and fighters. there has been recent collaborative efforts between the united states along with the uae and saudi arabia and yemen to dislodge aqap from the port city. it was successful it drove them out, but there is an active effort under way to continue to dismantle and destroy that organization. but also, there is the organizations in the fpac area led by the taliban, the that kwannies that continue to engage in terrorist attacks. lesh quitabba, we work closely with the services in area h the area, including indians and others, in their carrying out attacks. so this is something we have to dedicate time to. as you know, ayman al zawahiri
is still out there putting out propaganda to his followers, so this is a continuous challenge. >> senator wyden. >> on this encryption issue, mr. senator, you have been clear that you think there is a government role here? i mean, there's no question that there are ways that government can strengthen the personal safety of americans at a dangerous time. and i, foreexamp example, think helps to hire people with extensive experience in science and technology, like in oregon's silicon forest. i can give you plenty of names. what i don't want to do, though, is go backwards on digital security, which is what's going to happen if the government, if the congress requires that back doors are built into the products of this country. so we will continue that debate, and i just want to make that clear as we wrap up. senator lankford asked an appropriate question with respect to briefing a new president or what would you say
to a new president. and i think i've heard you touch on this, but i'd like to get it formally for the record. director brennan, if the next president of the united states directs the agency, directs the cia to resume the use of coercive interrogation techniques, how would you respond? >> i have said publicly that i do not believe such aggressive coercive techniques are necessary. as you know, the cia's detention interrogation program was disbanded. and i certainly, while i am director of cia, have no intention of bringing such a program back and would not engage in eits such as waterboarding and other things ever. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator king. >> quick question about isil in libya. any chance they're going to get a hold of any of libya's oil capabilities, because that's where a lot of their revenues have come from in syria and iraq. how do you assess the security
of the oil assets in libya? >> i don't think anything in libya is overly secure. there have been attempts made and assaults upon some of those oil facilities. but to date, isil has not been able to gain control of them. i'm going to have to get back and see whether or not there are sort of pockets of areas where isil's been able to encroach, but there are some challenges there, and there are a number of security militias and firms that are in that area that have prevented isil from taking it over, but we'll get you a more thorough response. >> i know i said it was my final question, but -- >> i knew better. >> my wife says i say "finally" too much, it gets people's hopes up. >> she's a smart woman. >> afghanistan. we haven't talked about afghanistan at all. what's your assessment of the security situation in afghanistan? there's a proposed drawdown of our troops, which has to start some time -- or in the early fall, if it's going to achieve the 5,000 troop number in january.
give us an assessment of the situation. is there a -- i guess the short question is does the government have a chance or is taliban just waiting, and they're going to take back over? >> we're near the height of the fighting season. the number of casualties on both sides in terms of the ansf, afghan national security forces, and the taliban are greater this year than we've seen in a long, long time because of the number of engagements, which means i think the afghan forces are stepping up and engaging more as u.s. forces have drawn down, but also i think it reflects the intensity of the taliban efforts. they're really trying to erode the government hold in a number of areas. we have worked very closely with the afghans, we the u.s. government, to have them better consolidate their forces so they can protect the critical infrastructure in the cities and transit routes. but the taliban is determined
working with the haqqanis, a subgroup of the taliban, so there is continued concern about the taliban's ability to carry out these attacks, both in some of the outlying areas, but also as they try to go after the provincial capitals as well as kabul. so, it is still uncertain in my mind whether or not the taliban is going to continue to make incremental progress. we are providing support to our afghan intelligence partners so that they have the capabilities that they need. but there is still a long, hard fight ahead in afghanistan for the afghan government. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator king. director, thank you. the two takeaways from your testimony that i certainly heard that are relevant to today -- there will be an increase in global terrorism as more pressure is applied in the battle space. and i think that's something
that we certainly have seen up to this point. there is no reason to suspect that that doesn't increase. and isil has become a global organization. and i think sometimes we treat them in a very small geographical footprint, but they are quickly and quietly grown to be that global organization. now i'd like to get a closing statement. i'm not sure that i've done that before, but i feel compelled. and i'm not going to speak for the vice chairman, but i think she would probably associate with most of what i'll say. this feud between the tech companies and the intelligence community and law enforcement has to stop. encryption is the issue that we describe it as, but this is much more. technology is going to drive the united states economy for the next 50 years and the global economy as well. it is the secret sauce for our children and our grandchildren to have unlimited opportunities,
not success, but opportunities. when the vice chairman and i committed to at least lay on the table a solution to encryption, it was not with the belief that we were smarter than anybody else. it's we understood what was at stake and we were willing to take the heat. and as you know, director, we've taken a lot of it. and i don't regret it, because i think what we had hoped was that we would start a national debate in this country about what the appropriate role of government is. that for the american people to understand that for our agencies to prevent and protect them, that that comes with a price and that this debate is about what that cost might be and what we're willing to accept. we can't separate the world based upon whose domain domestically and who is domained in foreign countries. that's the beauty of the internet, it doesn't really matter. but if it wasn't important to
locate the united states, we'd probably have very little manufacturing because most of them's customers are overseas, but they're here. and they're here for an important reason. they're here because we have in our foundational structure things that they find important. and at the top of the list is the rule of law. and i point to what one tech leader said as the vice chair and i launched the encryption debate to the level it is today. we can't trust a judge on the bench to hear from the intelligence community or law enforcement and understand whether somebody's met the threshold that they need to reach to access communications or data. let me say today, if we've gotten to a point where we don't trust a judge on the bench, we have just gutted the rule of law in the united states. this to me is about so much more than encryption.
this is about whether the united states is going to be the innovator of the world for the next 50 years. it's about what the next generation has as opportunities, and, oh, yes, freedoms, protection of personal data and prevention of terrorist acts. if we can't prosecute criminals by a district attorney or by a u.s. attorney because they can't gather the information they need to make a case in court, then talking about orlando, we'll talk about crime in every community across this country because we're going to have individuals that commit it that walk and live next door to us every day. so, i use the platform today. i don't think i find disagreement from you or from others in law enforcement either nationally or locally, because we've heard from a lot of them, but i really believe that we
need to take it heart that what we do affects the intersection of the rule of law and technology in the future, and we're much better off to have that debate today than we are to wait until something happens and we need it. and the pendulum swings too far, a la post 9/11. and we did some things then that we thought were right. today looking back, we wouldn't do them again. we all agree. this is an opportunity to get this one right, not to go too far, but to go to the right place, the right point. so director, i want to thank you for your testimony. i want to thank you for the resolve of your workforce. i also want to highlight the professional staff of this committee. i think they are incredibly talented, incredibly dedicated. they travel to very unpopular spots where your officers are on a regular basis. they do it not to gain knowledge poin
points. they do it to live up to the mission of this committee, which is oversight of your agency and the rest of the intelligence community on behalf of 85 other members of the united states senate and, oh, by the way, for the american people. we are the ones that testify and certify that you do things within the letter of the law or a presidential directive and that we don't overstep those bounds, and when we do, it's this committee's responsibility to report it and pull it in. so they deserve credit because they don't get that credit very often. please pass to your employees our sincere gratitude for the job they do. we look forward to your next visi visit with us. it probably won't be open and there will be some disappointed souls in the audience, but we will do it in a much productive way. thank you, mr. director. hearing's adjourned.
if you missed any of this hearing on cia operations with testimony from cia director john brennan, you can see it again on our website, c-span.org. well, at this hour, president obama is leaving washington. a picture of air force one there as he heads to orlando, florida, this afternoon. the president scheduled to meet with the victims of the mass shooting at the pulse nightclub in orlando. joss lederman of the "associated press" saying the president is boarding air force one for orlando for a visit to console the families and first responders. the president will be joined by vice president joe biden and local officials.
on american history tv on c-span3, this saturday starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern, we're live from gettysburg college in gettysburg, pennsylvania, for the annual civil the annual civil war institute conference as authors and professors examine topics such as reconstruction in the north, and the post civil war career of president grant. at 10:00, with the approach of the 40th anniversary of the smithsonian's national air and space museum in july. reel america will show case a series of nasa films. we'll look at the 1966 film science reporter suited for space. >> you ought to see a couple of our earlier models. here we have a al shepherd suit, this is the mercury suit.
here is had gemimi. >> this looks very familiar. >> this was worn by white in his excursions. >> this looks quite a bit different from the gemini suit. >> tracing the development of space suits from the mercury program to the apollo moon mission, sunday evening at 6:00, we go on a tour of the national air and space museum to show one of a kind artifacts. >> this airplane in may, 1927, flew the 3,600 miles in 33 and a half hours from new york to paris. flown by charles lindbergh who was an unknown male pilot. his goal was to win a prize for $25,000 for the first non-stop flight from new york to paris. and so that was the impetus for the flight. what it represents in the history of aviation is part of
the telling of the airplane and this transformation of the airplane from what the wright brothers created and how it transitions to what we call the modern airplane. >> for the complete american history tv schedule. go to cspan.org. madam secretary. we proudly give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states.
and now to a panel discussion on access to produce and healthy foods. georgetown law center's o'neil institute for national and global health law held a summit on food and public health. this portion is about an hour. >> i know people are still trickling in from the break, but in the interest of time because we have this fabulous panel, let's get started as people come in. i want to say we just had this panel about sugar and obesity and what we should eat and we did put out cookies during the break. the cookies were made by an organization called together we bake. and it's a group that takes women who are coming out of being incarcerated who don't
have job skills. and helps train them and not only gives them skills but confidence and other necessary tools for getting their lives back on track. so they're full of sugar and butter, they're delicious but you can feel good about them. so i wanted to add that in. so we're ending the panel -- sorry the conference with a panel about access to produce and nutrition. you might say why are we ending the conversation? produce -- access to healthy food is among the most fundamentals of health. without access to healthy food all the other conversations are not quite as important. but when we started to think about what does it mean to have access to produce, we realized it was one of the most holistic all encompasses topics to talk about. access to healthy food and produce is about the issues that
are important in this election cycle. we're talking about the economy. if you don't have enough money you can't afford healthy food. by that same token, food production both the production piece, the restaurant piece are huge parts of the american economy and huge parts of our labor force. access to healthy food is about immigration. if foreign born workers make up 90% of our seasonal work force so we can't talk about having access to healthy food if we don't talk about who is going to pick the food and get it to the market. access to healthy food is about the environment. we heard a lot this morning about concerns about water usage and food production. it's estimated that as much as 80% of the nation's consumptive water use is used for agricultural. we have to think about those kinds of issues. i could go on and son about this topic, but i won't because our
speakers are about to do that. i'm also going to defer reading their bioes. they have really interesting jobs, i thought, oh, i would like to do what you do. i suggest you -- i encourage you to read their bioes. with that, we're going to go down the line here. [ applause ] >> okay. just let me get myself sorted out here. all right. good afternoon everyone. thank you for sticking with us. we are a small but mighty crowd at this point. so i appreciate that you're all still here. i'm from change lab solutions and we're a national non-profit based in oakland, california. we focus on helping communities address the drivers of chronic disease using law and policy. today i'm going to talk
specifically about how we can use law and policy to increase consumption of fruits and vegetables. and i'm going to talk about this topic in the context of a new collaborative project that i'm part of. it's the healthy people 2020 law and health policy project. this is my first technology test. let's see if i can stranchange slide. excellent. these are the partners in this project. it's cdc hhs and the cdc foundation. the law and health policy project is under the umbrella of hhs's healthy people initiative. i'm sure many are familiar with this, but it's a science based ten year national -- it's a initiative that provides science
based ten year national objectives for improving the health of all americans. the purpose of the law and health policy project is to provide in depth analysis of evidence based legal intervention and strategies to improve the health in a series of reports. so the project is hoping to issue about 10-15 reports on a wide range of topics from dental health to hospital acquired infections. one of those reports is going to be specifically on using law and policy to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. so let's dig into the fruit and veggie report. i'm going to try to use as many puns as possible throughout this 15 minutes. so the healthy people 2020 identified increased consumption of fruits and vegetables by individuals two years and older as a leading indicator for overall population health.
the report that we're developing provides a summary of laws and policies that influence the availability and offering of fruits and vegetables, particularly in settings widely accessed by the general public. it highlights examples of -- from a wide range of sectors, institutional policies, federal, state, local, tribal policies. all of which are likely to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. what we're really trying to do -- it's not possible in every case -- is tie the policy to evidence that the policy works. one of the things we've learned from the process of developing this report is that the evidence base related to how long policy influences public health generally fruit and vegetable consumption specifically needs to be strengthened. dr. angel did a good job of talking about the health disparities and so i'm not going
to dig into what the problem is that we're trying to address here, but i do want to highlight a couple things that are very specific to fruit and vegetable consh consumption. fewer than one in four american adults consumes the recommended daily servings of fruits and vegetables. and one in ten children eat no fruits and vegetables at all in a day, which is kind of amazing. the rates of consumption across the board for americans is poor. but it's lower in communities of color and underserved communities. and this is has been discussed earlier today due to the fact that these communities do not have access to healthy food generally and fruits in vegetables specifically.