tv CSIS U.S. and U.K. Relations CSPAN July 10, 2017 12:54am-1:54am EDT
aware. certainly our secretary of 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 the 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 that you are here with us. we have so much to discuss and we look forward to your comments. colleagues, please join me and -- in 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 post election, government remains strong and we have remain 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 wondered whether britain is getting distracted in any way in our international role. that wouldn't 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 weren't committed to the 2%. they noted parliament's refusal to endorse strikes against assad's chemical weapons. they said we wouldn't be committed to two aircraft carriers. they said we wouldn't act in the face of trouble. so, it's 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've also 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 raft 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. inr under a shared command to analyze, disseminate cyber information more effectively. and training a new direction of
-- new generation of cyber warriors to tackle our vulnerabilities. my second point today is that we are doing more than interesting. we are also acting. spoke here in march 2015, that was still under the shadow of that 2013 syria vote against taking military action to deal with the use of chemical weapons. yet by the end of 2015, a new element had voted overwhelmingly to extend the airstrikes we were conducting in iraq to syria itself. and today we are performing a pivotal role in the 71 member counter -- coalition. training local forces, we have troops over 50,000 iraqi
using our offensive cyber capabilities to disrupt activity in iraq and syria. divisionverall airstrikes -- contribution airstrikes second only to the united states. it shocking to think when i took office three is ago, they were closing in on the gates of baghdad. today, they are close to defeat mosul.r last city of but the campaign is far from the united kingdom's only operations. we have been going global. we are not just in the middle east. we continue in afghanistan, where we continue to increase in troop numbers after the uplift we announced last summer, willing counterterrorism capacity, improving the resilience of afghan forces, strengthening the afghan air force.
training the next generation of afghan officers. tradingn africa, too, somalians to fight -- training somalians to fight al-shabab. total, this afternoon, we have more than 10,000 british service and and women deployed -- men and women deployed in some 25 operations around the globe. so britain has delivered come up britain is delivering, and we will continue to do so. is, we will point do so in partnership. course, whener, of we work together. the fact is today, our nations are facing a wave of multiple concurrent, diverse, global threats from islamist it
extremism, from north korea testing missiles, as we have seen, from russia, more aggressive as we have seen in the ukraine and syria, from iraq -- from iran sponsoring terror, to misinformation and cyber attacks. these are challenges that demand an international response. so as we deliver on our domestic vote to leave the political framework that is the european union, we see grexit 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 or it we are leading -- russian
aggression. we are leading the presence in estonia with 800 was troops. we are working alongside the united states in poland. this year, written leads -- britain leads the joint task force. dispatchedi have typhoons to romania for policing, to police the skies over the black sea. month, royal navy ships take over for a year, half of nato's maritime missions in the mediterranean, the black sea, and egypt. we are 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 european nations need to do more to shoulder
their share of the burden. since written and the united states -- since britain and the united states stood together to demand action back at the royals summit, 24 of the 29th member nations have now raised their game and the alliance has cumulatively increased its 46 --e spending by around $46 billion. but money isn't the only nato issue. force in a monochrome world of the cold war, nato must 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 approach, 360 degree
producing a coherent force capable of meaningful action with a modern, integrated approach to defense and deterrence. playing an enhanced role in the fight against international terror. our global influence as a country doesn't just come from nato. it comes also from a wealth of bilateral alliances. 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 the north atlantic, but
also having as the adaptability and agility to deploy very quickly to humanitarian tasks. to rescue ever citizens from crisis hotspots, to conduct more minor military missions. and we recently use our purchase more trilateral and the united states norway. last week, i signed an agreement with secretary mattis to enable closer cooperation on the training and logistics of toport of those p8 that need address the change and increase russian right activity in the north atlantic. -- russian submarine activity in the north atlantic. it should go without saying, when it comes to bilateral relationships, the united states remains our strongest ally. 2015, spoke your back in
our partnership has only strengthened further. i have touched on the operations across the world from europe to the middle east, to africa and afghanistan. but the truth is, we are more integrated at every level. working in each other's headquarters, flying in each other's planes, turning on each other's ships. collaborating on everything from nuclear capabilities, including sharing a common missile compartment am a and intelligence to economy. and -- to autonomy. ishave the prospect of f-35 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, as 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. that is the need for a stronger modern deterrence. of thear saw the passing nobel prize-winning economist thomas schilling, a great american who helped ever current notions of deterrence. today, he would doubtless remind us that deterrence is about much more than the hydrogen bomb, it's about ensuring that our adversaries always know that the cost of an attack will be far greater than any potential report. -- essential reward. , it meantd war while adapting
ever knew there arsenals. with nonconventional threats, sometimes anonymous, often i'm office, adding to the conventional and nuclear danger and threatening to undermine the rules-based international order in which our security depends, ever deterrence must evolve. agility will be critical. it will demand constant strategic dining to prepare -- strategic planning to prepare for threats. rebut the malicious misinformation of our adversaries with a faster truth. inwill seek new innovations disruptive capabilities, whether systems or autonomous
to stay ahead of the curve. above all, it will be about the art of persuasion. , i spoke at the margaret thatcher security conference in london. the thing was whether or not we are witnessing the decline and fall of the west. values werewestern up to overcoming these new and present dangers. that not only can we rise to this challenge, but that we must and we will. attacked byeing these adversaries. because we failed. values of her veil -- 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 power confidence in them. contestedage of interest and confrontation, always pray to doubters that our adversaries seek to use social media and a cyber warfare and misinformation to rewrite the western narrative to extend their spheres of influence to try to limit the freedoms we champion. we have to learn how to remake those original arguments. because in so doing, it will far more societies resilient, far less susceptible to our fails. that requires political leadership and know to nations are better equipped to make the case for the west then the united states and the united kingdom. we share the same values of democracy, of justice, of
freedom, tolerance, values we fought for throughout the past century. but we did not just fight, we also championed the causes of liberty, the free markets. the innovation that technology demands. we gave people ever greater ,pportunity 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 understill living 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 a description of what was called a beautiful moment when news of reagan's evil empire speech reached siberia. the words he wrote, the brightest most recent day finally a spade had been called a spade, finally all worlds newspeak was dead. had come upagan from that moment, make it impossible for anyone in the west to continue closing their eyes to the real nature of the soviet union. enough just's not to speak out against the aggressive behavior of russia in ukraine or in syria. to merge our adversaries to act in accordance with international law. we must also give hope to people
across the world of a better way of life. friend saidttis, my in germany last week, marking the 17th anniversary of the marshall plan, he said we stand for freedom and we will never surrender the freedom of our people. ladyin 1996, the iron delivered a speech in fulton, missouri, where of course churchill had point the iron curtain phrase 50 years before. and she said, and i quote, there are rare moments when history is byn, and its course changed means such as these. we may be at just such a moment now. to you this afternoon that we have reached such a moment. once more, with a to the united states to recapture the spirit.
to provide determines for a darker age, to remake the case for the west. and to follow the mission intement of this very center sustaining american providence and prosperity as a force for good in america -- in the world. and as viewed do that, i want you to rest assure that a bolder, global britain will continue to stand by your side. thank you. [applause] >> secretary fallon, thank you.
sometimes we need a dose of inspiration and we needed that. thank you very, very much. now in anyge right think tank is where to begin. what subject to we jump into? i think i'm going to start with the subject of the day and that is russia. stated in hisp 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 recently completed a successful native defense ministerial. help us understand how things are going with the deployment of the nato italians. nato has had a challenge of deployment, getting there quickly, getting their equipment.
what has your experience been and the british forces experience been in ansonia in preparation for basement of a battalion to defend estonia? >> we have seen a resurgence of nato. we have seen a revival right back from the summit in wales in 2014. seeing as i said a number of nato members begin to increase their defense spending after years of decline of it we have seen more of them start to commit to a date to reach the 2% target and your presidents rhetoric has only been helpful in that. it has helped to encourage those other allies to be clearer about their defense spending. revivalave also seen a in nato's seriousness about deployments, exactly your point. we saw commitment than.
that stood up last year. we commend it this year. romania, andt and we saw several thousand troops from my country, your country, , a series of the newer members of nato detachment deploying or it that is the .ajor -- deploying are we agreed in warsaw just a year ago about a presence and within a year, this would have been unthinkable in the nato five or 10 years ago, within a year we have seen all four battle groups deployed in the three halted states and poland. -- baltic states and poland. company of french troops alongside our auto group
and indeed, we put a company into your better group in poland. we have seen these formations, all of which has added a sense of purpose in nato. it was quite an emotional moment standing there in estonia for the parade of the british and french troops when the president of estonia said to me, this is the first time we have had foreign troops on 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 always believed in nato, that nato has begun to revive itself. we need to carry that through with the reforms i mentioned that secretary mattis and i are championing, which would lead to faster decision-making and reduce bureaucracy. there can be no doubting now in moscow that nato is an
organization that is ready to defend itself. >> we are watching very closely, russia will implement a very significant military exercise every four years. this exercise comes to the western military district. some believe a commendation of over 100,000 forces will be deployed from the peninsula along nato's eastern flank. havearticular concerns you that you are watching for as we watch this exercise unfold? >> we will be watching it increasing -- extremely closely. they are much larger exercises than anything nato can carry out. we have an absolute transparent with russia about our deployments. the numbers involved, the
armaments they carry, the purpose of these employments, that is absolutely defensive, aimed to reassure they are defensive deployments and that is a different approach to what we see. conducts these exercises with their troops, there should be no doubt, nato has demonstrated through its enhanced forward process and has dems task force, strutted its willingness to back up and it support and have the the unitedeconfirm states commitment to article five today was the icing on top. >> treading a little bit closer to shore, you might have mentioned about the cooperation bilaterally and try laterally maritime patrol aircraft, there is a growing concern into
submarine warfare in the north atlantic. think tanks in washington are holding tabletop exercises on the u.k. gap. we have not done that in a very long time. we have written a report recently that said we need to beef up nato's command structure come up much more of a u.k. leadership role in antisubmarine warfare. what are your thoughts on that? you have had back and forth on that with russian officials on the state of aircraft carriers both of their and the queen elizabeth. >> we have seen a bit of carrier mv, i think. >> carrier and the, ok. okay.rier envy, in recent have seen years is a significant increase
in russian summary activity in the north sea. and we need as an alliance, as well as our foes, we need to respond to that to protect our nuclear deterrent, to protect our carriers, but also to protect nato. natoated to the need for ticket 360 degree view of its security. there has been an intense focus on the flank of nato where allies like estonia feel vulnerable there has been concern in the southeast quadrant, too. we look right around nato. we were look -- we were more closely together. the fact that we are all operating the same aircraft gives us huge potential for more collaboration in training, logistics, support, already our and we looktraining forward to the first deployment.
i'm going to finish up the rest of the question by noting as if you are doing your theoyment in the black sea, u.s. vessels and aircraft have experienced 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 your air patrol role? anything you articulate concerned about russian behavior? aboutare concerned long-range aviation. aircraft don't respond when we sent up our jets to warn them off. that is provocative. it can be dangerous. it often involves diversion of
the civilian flight that might happen to be in the area and there is a capacity for misunderstanding and miscalculation. we continue to talk to russia about that. we use our communication with russia specifically to ensure that where possible, we can de-conflict and where possible, we can readily de-escalate any tension that arises. >> moving towards the middle east, you are also maritime mission in the military -- mandatory. the migration -- mediterranean. inhave seen an uptick migrants attempting a dangerous crossing of the mediterranean. what is the uk's position on the migration crisis, your naval role? ,he navy and the european union is the european union taking a leadership role? what is the strategy here?
again, is there a strong u.k. role in that position? >> it's a good example of where britain remains and will remain involved in the security of our continent. it's the security of our continent matters to us as much as it comes to the european union union. of thehe beginning european union mission in the central mediterranean, we have a royal navy ship there today hoping to save lives in the mediterranean. we are seeing a huge increase in the number of migrants who are tackling this journey and we do need to do something about this, not simply to control migration into europe, but also to save lives, far too many sitting out on what is an incredibly ages -- dangerous journey and there are
people making a lot of money out of this particular trait. -- trade. we start to tackle the business model of the people to make sure they cannot drop it any longer from this trade area that means working -- trade. working with the libyan authorities, which is very slow work, but necessary work. the police failed to police their own territory to stop migrant boats heading to the edge of those waters, where it becomes more dangerous to attempt the journey into india, to work with olivia and to work with a policy on returns for this clearly not refugees, who are clearly economic migrants attempting to cross illegally so they can be returned properly to where they came from. >> turning more to syria, we are hearing early reports from the g 20 stations that syria looking
at potential cease-fires. we talked a lot about cease-fires. what is your sense of where things are going in syria?there has been some discussion about safety zones, military footprints are daunting. unitedor powers, the dates and russia, are in very those proximately to each other. give us your sense of syria 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] [indiscernible conversation]
announcer: the house and the senate return this week. on the agenda is the house authority station bill. we spoke with a capitol hill reporter to learn more. >> joe gould is congressional reporter with defense news. version, the the 2018 version approved by the health and services committee. >> sure. the house armed services past the defense act for 2018 late last month and what it is is the bill, the annual defense policy bill that gets reconciled with the senate version.