tv British Defense Secretary Discusses U.S.-U.K. Relations on Global Terrorism CSPAN July 9, 2017 9:55pm-10:55pm EDT
state, and we also see economic aspects to the diplomatic effort to diverse them from this wrong path. thank you for coming. on his visit to the u.s., the defense minister sat down with heather conley for the center of strategic and international studies to talk about u.s.-u.k. collaborations in combating security threats. this is just under an hour. heather: good afternoon. welcome to the center for strategic and international studies. my name is heather conley. i'm senior vice president for europe, eurasia and the arctic region. we cannot be more delighted to welcome secretary of state of defense michael fallon here to csis. i was explaining to the
secretary that, boy, the news cycle has been so quiet and slow the last few days that we were so glad he could come here and help elevate our discussion. but he comes at an incredibly important time, certainly on the heels of several days of incredible news not only security related issues, with the north korean launch of an icbm, but also as we watch unfold the historic meeting between president trump and president putin today. secretary fallon, thankfully, is a frequent visitor to csis. he was here two years ago in march and the topic of discussion was in defense of a rules-based order and how that transatlantic relationship can be used. and i think now, in today's discussion, we will look at the defense of the rules-based order and see where we go from here. secretary fallon assumed secretary of state for defense, his position, on july 15, 2014.
two days later, a russian missile shot down mh-17. that was his first few days on the job. three years later, two elections later,one referendum later, secretary fallon, you have had an extraordinary tenure already in your three years. we are delighted you are here with us. we have so much to discuss and we look forward to your comments. colleagues, please join me and thanking secretary fallon for joining us here at csis. [applause] sec. fallon: heather, thank you. and good afternoon. it's great to be back in the united states and to be speaking at this world-renowned center. whose ideas have influenced generations of defense thinkers on both sides of the pond. this is my first opportunity to visit the united states after our recent election.
and let me reassure you that postelection, government remains strong and we have remained committed to delivering stronger defense. now there are some who have taken a look at britain in the past few months after an unpredictable election. i'm not sure there is another kind of election these days. have looked at the negotiations over brexit, have seen the series of appalling terrorist incidents in manchester and london, and have wondered whether britain is getting distracted in any way in our international role. that would not be the first time critics have been wrong. i remember that first visit as defense secretary back in 2015.
that was before, rather than after, the general election of that year. yet, some of the concerns expressed were all too familiar. they said we were not committed to the 2%. they noted parliament's refusal to endorse strikes against assad's chemical weapons. they said we would not be committed to two aircraft carriers. they said we would not act in the face of trouble. so, it is worth reminding ourselves just what happened next. first, we did invest later that year 2015, we conducted an ambitious strategic defense and security review, committing to continue to meet nato's 2% target. since then, not only have we done what we said we would do, but we also have chosen to grow our defense budget year on year by at least 9.5% ahead of inflation.
nato's figures confirmed we are spending more than 2% and we are also meeting the targets to spend 20% of that on new equipment. we're using that growing budget to purchase, to develop and to build a high-end kit from aircraft to drones to apache helicopters and armored vehicles. from fifth generaion f-35 fighters to two aircraft carriers, the most powerful ships ever built in britain. and we were delighted two weeks ago to witness queen elizabeth embarq for the first time. our carrier strike plans, thanks to your continuing support -- and we have over 120 aircrew and
pilots training here on 10 f-35 aircraft. those carrier strike plans are already becoming a reality. we are building, following a successful vote in parliament, a new generation of nuclear ballistic submarines to maintain our ultimate nuclear deterrent. and, we are adapting to an age of information warfare. investing in equipment with the sensors and receptors to handle a super abundance of information, transforming our military structures to cope with the virtual environment. bringing our signals and intelligence corps together under a shared command to collate, to analyze, disseminate cyber information more efficiently and effectively. and training up a new generation of cyber warriors to strengthen
our networks and tackle our vulnerabilities. my second point today is that we are doing more than investing. we're also acting. when i spoke here in march 2015, that was still under the shadow of the 2013 syria vote against taking military action to deal with the use of chemical weapons. yet, by the end of 2015, a new parliament had voted overwhelmingly to extend the airstrikes we were conducting in iraq to syria itself. today, we are performing a pivotal role in the 71 member coalition. attacking daesh's positions with our aircraft, training local forces. we have trained over 50,000 iraqi and peshmerga groups. using our offensive cyber capabilities to disrupt
capabilities in iraq and syria. and an overall contribution of airstrikes second only to that of the united states. it's striking to think that when i took office just three years ago, daesh were closing in on the gates to the fact that. -- gates to baghdad. today, they are close to defeat in their last city of mosul. but the counter-daesh campaign is far from the united kingdom's only operation. we've been going global. we are not just in the middle east. we continue in afghanistan where we have committed to increasing troop numbers again after the uplift we announced last summer. building counterterrorism capacity, improving the resilience of afghan forces, strengthening the afghan air force. training the next generation of afghan officers.
we're in africa too, training somalians to fight al-shabab. assisting south sudan in the midst of a humanitarian crisis. in total, this afternoon, we have more than 10,000 british servicemen and women deployed or in bases and involved in some 25 operations around the globe. so britain has delivered, britain is delivering, and we will continue to do so. but my third point is that we will do so in partnership. we are stronger, of course, when we work together. and the fact is today that our nations are facing a wave of multiple, concurrent, diverse global threats from islamist extremism, from north korea
testing missiles, and as we've seen, firing off missiles, from russia more aggressive as we have seen in ukraine and syria, from iran sponsoring terror, from the insidious spread of misinformation and cyber attacks. these are challenges that demand in international response. so as we deliver on our domestic vote to leave the political framework that is the european union, we see brexit as an opportunity not to step back from european defense, but to step up to strengthen euro atlantic security. in particular, we are strengthening our bonds within nato, the cornerstone of our defense. continuing to deter in the light of russian aggression. we are leading nato's enhanced forward presence in estonia with
800 british troops. we are working alongside the united states in poland. this year, britain leads the alliance's very high readiness joint task force. this year, i have dispatched raf typhoons to romania to police the skies over the black sea. this month, royal navy ships take over for a year, half of nato's maritime missions in the mediterranean, the black sea. we're also in nato right behind the united states in calling for all members to start paying their way. your president was absolutely correct to say that european nations need to do more to shoulder their share of the burden.
since britain and the united states stood together to demand action back at the wales summit, 24 of the 29 member nations have now raised their game, and the alliance has cumulatively increased its defense spending by around $46 billion. but money isn't the only nato issue. forged in a monochrome world of the cold war, nato was not transform itself into a far more agile organization. secretary mattis and i are working together for faster decision-making, better prioritization, and less bureaucracy in the way that nato works. we also want to see nato adopting a 360-degree approach, producing a coherent force
capable of meaningful action with a modern integrated approach to defense and to deter. playing an enhanced role in the fight against international terror. now, our global influence as a country doesn't just come from nato. it comes also from a wealth of bilateral alliances. last week, we took a significant step forward by expanding the u.k.-led joint expeditionary force to include sweden and finland. that gives us a nine nation armed force of like-minded, northern european countries able to deploy a force of up to
10,000 personnel, augmenting our ability to respond to threats in the north sea and north atlantic, but also giving us the adaptability and agility to deploy very quickly to humanitarian zones, to rescue our citizens from crisis hot spots, to conduct more minor military missions. and we've recently used our purchase of your p-8's to do more trilaterally with the united states. i signed an agreement with secretary matus and our norwegian colleague to have more cooperation in the training, logistics and support that need to address the change security advances an increase russian submarine activity in the north atlantic. now it should go without saying that when it comes to bilateral relationships, the united states remains our strongest ally. since i spoke here back in 2015,
our partnership has only strengthened further. i've already touched on the operations across the world from europe to the middle east, to africa and afghanistan. but the truth is we are now more integrated at every level. working in each other's headquarters, flying in each other's planes, training on each other's ships. collaborating on everything from nuclear capabilities, including sharing a common missile compartment, and intelligence, to autonomy. and we have the prospect now of the united states with f-35 fighters flying from the decks of our aircraft carriers and our planes in turn flying from yours. back in 2015, the united states helped support our strategic defense review. and today, if you turn to your
own national defense strategy, i would like to share just one conclusion drawn from that experience of working together on our defense review. and that is the need for a stronger, modern defense. last year saw the person of the -- saw the passing of the nobel prize economist thomas shelley, a great american who helped our current notions of deterrence. were he with us today, he would remind us deterrence is about much more than the atom bomb or hydrogen bomb. it's about ensuring that our adversaries always know that the cost of an attack will be far greater than any potential reward. in the cold war, that meant massing armies along the borders of the iron curtain whilst building up vast nuclear arsenals.
yet in an age of gray-zone conflict with proxy, nonconventional threats, sometimes anonymous, adding to the conventional and nuclear dangers and threatening to undermine the rules-based international order of which are security depends, our deterrence must necessarily evolve. agility will be critical. it will demand constant and strategic planning to prepare for a broader range of threats. it will require perpetual persistence to continually countering cyber intrusion. to rebut the malicious misinformation of our adversaries with a faster truth. it will seek new innovations and
-- in disruptive capabilities, whether big data or autonomous systems. above all, it will be about the art of persuasion. last week, i spoke at the margaret thatcher security conference in london. its theme was whether or not we are witnessing the decline and fall of the west. whether our western values were up to overcoming these new and present dangers. i argued then that not only can we rise to this challenge but that we must and we will. we are not being attacked by these adversaries because we failed, because our values are redundant. on the contrary, we are being attacked because we won. because we succeeded in spreading these values and beliefs across the world. and today, we are recovering our
confidence in them. but in an age of contested interests and confrontation, always prayed to doubt us where our adversaries seek to use cyber warfare and misinformation to rewrite the western narrative, to extend their spheres of influence, to try to limit those freedoms that we champion, we have to learn how to remake those original arguments. because in so doing, that will make our societies far more resilient, far less susceptible to our failures. now that requires political leadership and no two nations are better equipped to make the case for the west than the united states and the united kingdom. we share the same values and democracy, of justice, for freedom of tolerance.
values we fought for throughout the past century. but we didn't just fight, we also championed the causes of liberty. the free market. the innovation that technology demands. we gave people ever greater opportunities to live wealthier, healthier, happier, freer lives. so if we get this right, if we present our case strongly enough again, we will do more than simply build resilience in our countries. we can reawaken the hopes of those still living under oppressive regimes. in the 1980's, president reagan and margaret thatcher succeeded in shattering the shackles of communism. not just because they railed against the cruel and desolate creeds that lurked behind the iron curtain, but because they
presented the vision of a better life. i remember a few years back being struck by the description of what was called the beautiful moment with news of reagan's evil empire speech reached siberia. it was "the brightest, most glorious day. finally, a spade had been called a spade. president reagan" from that moment admitted impossible for anyone in the west to close their eyes to the real nature of the soviet union. so today, it's not enough just to speak out against the aggressive behavior of russia in ukraine or in syria, or to urge
our adversaries to act without accordance to international law. we must also give hope to people across the world of a better way of life. secretary mattis, marking the 70th anniversary of the marshall plan, he said we stand for freedom and we will never surrender the freedom of our people. back in 1996, the iron lady delivered a speech in fulton, missouri, where of course churchill had coined the iron curtain phrase 50 years before. she said, "there are rare moments where history is open and its course changed by means such as these. we may be at just such a moment now." i suggest to you this afternoon that we have reached such a moment. once more, we look to the united states to recapture the spirit
of fulton. the provide deterrence for a darker age. to remake the case for the west and to follow the mission statement of this very center in "sustaining american prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world." and as you do that, i want you to rest assured that a bolder, global britain as in the great war, the second world war, as in the cold war, will continue standing by your side, strengthening our transatlantic bonds, and supporting everyone in the cause for freedom. thank you. [applause] >> secretary fallon, thank you.
heather: secretary fallon, thank you. sometimes we need a dose of inspiration and we needed that. thank you very much. in some ways, i think the challenge with any think tank right now is where to begin. what subject do we jump into? i think i'm going to start with the subject of the day and that is russia. and president trump stated in his speech in warsaw on thursday about the bedrock nature of the article five commitment, something that was not accomplished at the nato leaders meeting in brussels. you just recently completed a successful nato defense. ministerial. help us understand how things are going with the deployment of the native italian. nato has had a challenge of the one in, getting forces there quickly. getting the kit there. what has your experience been and the british forces
experience in estonia in preparation for the placement of a battalion to defend estonia should that become necessary? sec. fallon: we have seen a resurgence of nato. we've seen a revival of nato. right back from the summit of wales in 2014. a number of nato members begin to increase their defense spending again after years of decline. and we have seen more commit to reach the 2% target. and your president's rhetoric has only been helpful in that. it has helped to encourage those other allies to be clearer about their defense spending. but we have also, since that same summit, seen a revival in
nato's deployment. we saw a commitment then to the very high readiness task force. that stood up last year. we commanded this year. i was there in an exercise with them in romania. and we saw several thousand troops from my country, your country, but also from spain, a series of some of the newer members of nato detachments, deploying. that is the major response force of nato ready to deploy. we greeted were solved a year ago. and within a year, we have seen all four battle groups deployed. in the three baltic states and in poland. we have seen a number of member states of nato come together in different detachments, alongside each other. we have a large company of french troops alongside our
battle troops. and indeed, we have a company in your battle group. we have seen different formations. the collective sense of purpose in nato. and it was quite emotional standing there in estonia for the stand up parade of the british-french troops, where the president of estonia said to me "this is the first time we have had foreign troops on the estonian soil as friends." that was quite a moment. it shows you just how important these deployments are for the eastern flank of nato. but i find them encouraging, for those of us who have always believed in nato, that nato has begun to revive itself. we need to carry that through with modernization of reforms that secretary mattis and i are champion which would lead to a reduced bureaucracy.
but there can be no doubting now in moscow, that nato is an organization that is ready to defend itself. heather: we are watching very closely, russia will implement a very significant military exercise. every four years, this major military exercise comes to the western district. a combination of 100,000 forces will be deployed along nato's eastern flank. any particular concerns you have? what are you watching for as we watch this exercise unfold? sec. fallon: we will be watching it extremely closely. these are much larger exercises. anything that nato can carry out. in that sense, they are more provocative than any nato deployment. we have been absolutely transparent with russia about
our deployments. the numbers involved, the armaments they carry. it is absolutely defensive. it is meant to reassure, they are defensive deployments. and that is a rather different approach than what we see with russia. but as moscow conducts that exercise with its troops, there should be no doubt nato has demonstrated an enhanced forward presence and the task force has demonstrated its willingness to back up its support. and to have the president reconfirm the united states commitment to article five yesterday was the icing on top. heather: i want to turn a little bit closer to shore. you mentioned the cooperation bilaterally and trilaterally with the maritime patrol aircraft. there is a growing concern about
russian submarine warfare activity in the atlantic. there are tabletop exercises in washington on the greenland-iceland-u.k. gap. we have not done that in a long time. i read a report recently, saying we need to beef up nato's command structure. there is much more u.k. leadership role in submarine warfare. we have actually had some back and forth with russian defense ministry officials about the aircraft carriers, theirs and the queen elizabeth. sec. fallon: we have seen a bit of carrier envy. ok.her: carrier envy, [laughter] sec. fallon: that is expected when you sail a brand-new aircraft carrier. we are building two of them. but what we have seen in recent
years is a significant increase in russian submarine activity in the north sea. what we need is an alliance as well as our ourselves, we need to protect ourselves, to protect the nuclear deterrant, to protect our carriers. but also to protect nato. the need for nato to take a 360 degree view of its security. it has been an intense focus on northeast and flank of nato where allies like estonia feel particularly vulnerable. there's been concern in the southeast quadrant too. we work more closely together. the fact that norway, britain and the united states are operating the same aircraft gives us huge potential for more collaboration in training, in logistics and support. already, our air crew are flying, training up and we look forward to the first arrival towards the end of this decade.
heather: i'm going to finish up the russia question by noting as you are doing your deployments in the black sea, u.s. vessels and aircraft have experienced very unprofessional behavior by russian pilots coming within five feet of u.s. aircraft. any special concerns you have as you increase your maritime presence in the black sea and of course, your air patrol role? anything you are concerned about with russian behavior? sec. fallon: well, we are concerned about russian long-range aviation. the air information region where russian aircraft don't respond when we send up our jets to ward them off. that is provocative. it can be dangerous. it often involves the divergence of civilian flights that may be
in the area. and there is a capacity always for a misunderstanding, miscalculation. so we continue to talk to russia about that. we use our communications with we have used our communications with russia to ensure where possible we can de-conflict and where possible we can readily de-escalate any tensions. heather: moving towards the middle east, your maritime mission in the mediterranean. the migration crisis, the report over the last several weeks has seen an uptick in migrants attempting an incredibly dangerous crossing in the mediterranean. what is the u.k. position the migration crisis and the nato role? the european union taking a leadership role. what is the maritime strategy here? a strong u.k. role in that position?
sec. fallon: it is a good example where britain remains, involved in the security of what is our continent. the security of europe matters to us as much as members of the european union. since the beginning of the european union mission, there are two missions. the european union mission in the central mediterranean and the nato issue. in the beginning of the european union mission, we have our own navy ship there helping to save lives in the mediterranean. we're seeing a huge increase on the number of migrants tackling this journey. we do need to do something about it. not simply to control migration in europe, but also to save lives. far too many in an incredibly dangerous journey and people are making a lot of money out of
this particular trade. we think it is important to start to tackle the business of people smugglers to make sure they cannot profit any longer on this trade. that means working with the libyan authorities to build up their coast guard efforts which is very slow work but necessary if they are to police their own territory to stop migrant boats getting to the edge of those waters where it becomes even more dangerous. to attempt the journey across to india. to work with libya and work on returns for those who are not clearly refugees. those who are clearly economic migrants that are attempting to cross illegally so they can be returned to where they came from. heather: turning more to syria, we are hearing early reports from the g-20 conversation that syria has potential cease-fires.
we have talked a lot about cease-fires. what is your sense on where things are going in syria? there has been some discussion about the safety zones. the military footprints. two major powers, the u.s. and russia, very close proximity to each other. give us your sense of syria right now. what does the future military picture look like? us your sensa right now. what does the military future look like? >> it's littered with cease-fires. it would be nice to one day have a cease-fire. -- none of these have turned out to be cease-fires. they haven't broken consistently by the regime and broken by russian activity itself. we welcome any cease-fire, but let's see it. let's see the results on the ground. where the safety zones are proposed, let's not have the civilian population misled.
if they can be properly enforced, they are fairly welcome. they can get united nations humanitarian aid that was promised. we have come up the coalition and the united states, we have the deconstruction machinery that enables the coalition and russian regime to avoid flying aircraft at the same time at exactly the same space and it's important we continue to work that machinery. is gettingtle space incredibly complex. the capacity for missed adulation, we have already seen attempts and we will have to work even harder at that. hypothetically, if the syrian regime would use chemical weapons, with united and him be prepared to assist militarily in an attack? towe made it clear last time
secretary mattis that your imitation was considering just prior to the last attack, i made it clear that the united kingdom would support that attack and we did support that attack publicly. the use of chemical weapons is illegal, barbaric, and innocent lives were lost. we are in no doubt the source of the original chemical weapons was the regime. it was only the regime aircraft in the air at that particular time. any effort to deal with that or forestall a chemical weapons attack will have the united gives full support. spinning might gloat and now i will move to afghanistan. 10 years from now, as you are expanding to your children what the role was up the british military forces in afghanistan and what was accomplished, what would that story be?
to fault, it was first to reduce the threat of the transnational terrorist groups from afghanistan, using it as a safe base to protect the west. it was used to eliminate that threat. it was also to try to build a better future for the people of afghanistan, like we now have. they have a democracy, a fragile democracy, a democracy nonetheless. six or 7 million people voted in the last election and girls are able to be educated in school and there has been an increase in quality of life in large parts of afghanistan. back, our objectives were noble, to reduce the terror threat and to try and build a better afghanistan for its own people. that campaign has been far longer than anybody originally forestall.
i can see that. , it's a battle against insurgency that can only be one in the end by local forces that can command the support of the local population. so i hope over the next few years, we will interview -- continue to improve the resilience of those forces. that's why we are uplifting the trading of afghan -- training of afghan forces to improve their air force, counterterrorism effort and future officer training. >> for many of us as we are watching the story unfolds in afghanistan, seeing an uptick in support to the taliban, in some ways it looks like we have lost ground. secretary mattis has called for
additional forces. do you think nato will be able to successfully increase their contribution? it's going to be a limited footprint. it's going to be an additional search. it does not feel like we want to make that commitment again. >> we are past the danger point of last summer with a previous ministration here it was considering reducing the commitment to afghan and we have seen a number of allies looking at how they, too, might uplift their commitment. i think in the west, we understand these terror groups are still there, still a threat to the west from their operations in afghanistan. i think we also understand afghanistan, if they were to collapse as a country, there would be huge publications in terms of migration further
westwards, that would eventually and with us in western europe. i hope we can persuade our nato allies to increase their commitments again on the basis of driving up reinforcing resilience in the afghan forces themselves. in the end, this is a battle they have to to it. win. but it's important they went in the end. >> the last spin and my globe and then i want to turn to the audience. let's turn to the is a specific region. you are mentioning north korea. before we came out, we were hypothetically saying the united states could ask for in article five commitment if the icbm attempted to reach u.s. soil. would nato be able to respond in any meaningful way? we have seen where six nato countries have participated in exercises.
the u.k. dissipated. but europe does not have a physical presence or capability. is there a solution set that our nato allies can support us in trying to deter north korean advances in their icbm capability? >> we are a long way away from military options. we have to recognize that this is not just a threat to the united states. nor should the united states be expected to deal with this entirely on its own. it's a threat to the international committee are. and it's up to the committee to redouble its and improve its cost to the regime of what it is doing. existingooking at the resolutions that have been passed, entering they have been enforced properly, adding new
names and organizations to the sanctionse we have being breached and working harder collectively to ensure the international community has one in dealing with this particular problem. >> it's a huge challenge. let's turn to our audience. i know they have their questions. we have colleagues with microphones if you could please raise your hand, introduced yourself, and ask your questions very briefly. we are going to collect a few questions and have secretary alan respond to them in time. desk secretary fallon responded to that. quick question on qatar, did discuss qatar and relations and embargo on qatar? >> thank you so much.
here,l move across microphone coming your way. >> i wanted to ask if you could comment further on the scope or potential scope of u.s.-u.k. defense operations in asia as the region changes? and also if you could comment -- veryu have to speak clearly into that, sorry. >> and also potentially in the indian ocean. also curious about if you could u.k.-india cooperation. >> thank you. two more questions and then i will come back for a second round. >> i'm with at&t. with the increase in cyber attacks and military presence across the world, can you
discuss at the u.k. strategy, how to increase the medication network? -- communication network? >> the british strategy on cyber? >> yes. >> is there more specific on defensive capabilities? thank you. the government behind him. -- the gentleman behind him. >> secretary tillerson says that in the meetings today between president trump and putin that comment onrump did russia's interference in last year's election and president putin consistently denied it. and reaction to that whether you have confidence in this american administration to take a tough line on potter
putin. >-- vladimir putin. betweenllenging issue qatar, cyber, india, anything else you would like to offer. >> i didn't quite get the details on some of the questions because of the microphone. qatar, yes. we want to see this dispute brought to an end. secretary tillerson is working actually hard to do that to bring that about. in closeking cooperation with our foreign secretary, forced johnson, and i hope this -- boris johnson and i hope this can bring to a resolution. we have friends in the gulf area this is a dispute in the family, if you'd like. we would like to see it brought to an end and we are using all our contacts to try and explore various ways of doing that.
but the lead is with secretary tillerson. on asia, we are committed to the south tennessee to exercising the right to freedom of navigation and to fly. we have flung typhoons to the south china sea last october, and we think it's very important we stick to that principle. we continue to work to revive the powers defense arrangement to the south to give more reassurance to members of the five hours through regular exercising. and i think he specifically mentioned india. i was in india in april just before the general election. we were working more closely with india on the number of defense for grabs. indeed, -- defense progress. have jointlype to
into markets working with india. there is growing cooperation inh average two navies particular, as well as between our armies and air force. it a vital cooperation we are investigating -- interesting and very carefully. on cyber, it's one of the three or four major threats to the country. think we werewe right to do so, we earmarked 1.9 in the sterling to spend spending. on improving ever sever defenses. defending our own defense, improving that critical national infrastructure, and also building up the offensive cyber capabilities that we have already confirmed that we are now employing with the coalition against dash, which i have
recently confirmed the would be supporting the services of nato if those capabilities were acquired. -- work required. quired.ere re on the meeting between president trump and president putin, i have drawn attention on my speech to russia to undoubted russian interference in european the netherlands referendum and the french election, the attempted coup in montenegro, i am not going to inment sadly on interference the united states election. >> i think we will have a second round here. i will move back around. >> thank you very much for speaking to us. i'm retired from the state department. my question is cyber.
has the british government made what would be the line that would trigger an article five nato response? i am not expecting you to say ,learly yes, this is the line but maybe you could give us some examples of points below that line and some point fairly a buffet so we can get a better idea of what level of several attack would trigger article five? >> thank you, sir. you in the second row? >> my question is regarding the u.k. efforts in mosul and iraq. after the push of isis out of the area, what are the uk's efforts in strengthening the iraqi government to prevent a power vacuum in the future? >> thank you. >> i'm with northup gone. -- northrup grumman.
so much going on between ever two countries, is there any issue on the subject of u.s. -u.k. said trait that has come up to the table between yourself and the u.s. cap part -- counterpart? yes i have been asked this question before. we got nato to agree now that a separate attack can be construed as an attack under article five. i think that's important that we recognize cyber as a domain alongside the other domain. don't think it's useful to start specifying specific thresholds. i think the danger is, if we did that, we would start to see several attacks just below the threshold that we have identified. i would rather our adversaries whatleft uncertain as to the qualifying level of pain is, if you like, before article five
would be triggered. -- on mosul, pushing out of iraq and the meeting -- and the remaining cities in the river valley, we want to be sure we don't have to go back in there and do this coalition all over again. 71 countries, and investment over three years, a huge investment for us, ever strike power, intelligence having, and training. is,t was really important it's not simply, we don't simply get a humanitarian aid as you go into these mosul where the services have been restored, markets are starting to open
again, but there is sufficient stabilization that the sunni populations of these cities in they have a feel stake in the future of iraq. this requires stabilization and political reconciliation and we need to strengthen the government's determination to follow through the military campaign with that political end,that should, in the prevent us from doing this all over again. relationship, there is a huge investment in american pit. we expect to see our own companies further down the supply chain getting a sufficient share of that. we signed an agreement with boeing, which has seen them invest more in the united kingdom and opening up more
opportunity for smes in particular and we want this to be two-way traffic. we are buying a lot of high and f-35's, kit at 35's -- attack helicopters, ba aircraft and so on. we expect a fair return on that. and we are also watching very closely any tendency toward protectionism that might discriminate against british companies, indeed british committees involved in the united states defense chain, as well. these are issues we discussed with the administration. >> we have a short time for two quick sections -- corrections. -- questions. then we will close out. >> you talk about military cooperation. have you had a chance, since you been here, to express u.k. governments displeasure about
the leaks of intelligence, particularly around the time of the manchester bombing and the damage that can do with trust in london? >> thank you. >> german defense in washington. mr. secretary, the former chief concernse voiced his because of those high ticket items like carriers and nuclear components, that there might be tooment, one might be forced frome the british army 80,000 two up to 65,000. >> fine, those two final questions. so far as the intelligence is concerned, these were serious leaks at the beginning of a criminal investigation. we made that very clear to the
united states. reassurance from those together agencies that this information would be properly protected in the future and we have now regarded that particular matter as close. it's important that it is close off because there is a huge amount of intelligence sharing that is necessary when you are fighting terrorism. it was unfortunate, but it has been dealt with. the former head of the army, we have no plan to reduce the size of the army down to 65,000. on the contrary, our manifesto commitment to maintain the size of the armed forces, including the ability of the army to fight at divisional level and indy in the 2015 sd sr, we are increasing the size of the royal navy and the royal air force. we are not about cutting the army. >> secretary, thank you so much.
this has been such a great discussion and it's a perfect abidingon of a deep relationship we have with the united kingdom bilaterally as well as multilaterally within nato. thank you for putting the busy,nt to a very sometimes confusing week of international affairs and cutting through it and helping as to understand what important and the british position on that. with your warm up plus, these think secretary fallon. [applause]
[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] the house and senate return this week from the july 4 recess. on the agenda, the defense authorization will -- bill. we spoke with a capitol hill reporter to learn more. >> joe gould is a congressional reporter with defense news. what is in the version, the 2018 version approved by the house armed services committee? servicesuse armed national defense authorization act for 2018, late last month. policyhe annual defense bill that gets reconciled with the senate version. in this case, they authorize about