to conflict zones, syria most notably, and the concern that they became or already were radicalized with the intent of returning to the united states to do us harm. that, of course, remains a concern of ours, but increasingly we are concerned about the home-grown radicalized violent extremist. and we had an effort that was under the rubric of countering violent extremism, but we rebranded that effort very importantly and created the office for community partnerships because ultimately -- ultimately the owners of that effort must be the local communities themselves to be able to identify individuals who are on the path to radicalization and to intervene in that path. we, in the federal government, can facilitate and equip them to address this phenomenon. the -- director james comey has spoken on a number of occasions publicly about the fact that there are approximately 1,000 individuals under investigation in the united states now. there are individuals in every single state of our union who are under investigation. and they may very well not have travelled to an area of conflict, bu

syria is not saying well, russia can be no part of it. probably engaging russia on a solution to syria. >> they have to be part of it and so does iran. the idea that we could come to accommodation or agreement without having those players is ridiculous. tom, you would probably agree with that. they have to be at the table. that's what secretary kerry is trying to bring about. an agreement or negotiation that would tend to improve the situation. you're quite right in your comment about selective engagement. that's why i like the paradigm. you look at each one of these discrete, specific foreign policy problems through the prism of the national interests and our principles and values and say to yourself, okay, if we take this action what's it going to lead to? that's the way a president should approach these things. look at where the vital national interests of the country are at stake. you might decide to go as far as the military. if you don't get to that point you still have the tools of our political economic and diplomatic engagement. >> i like the idea of the guiding principle bein

syria we know that the assad regime cannot have the credibility and doesn't represent the people as a result. not only civil conflict, but breeding grounds for isil. that's not through much of the world's ills as a crisis in governance and willing to ignore the rule of law and i look forward to the conversation we are having with two of the real champions in the history of america on foreign policy. >> well, as we all are very thrilled to have you, secretary baker is to me a model of public service, someone that i looked up to for a long time and i appreciate him taking his time to be with us today. i know he served off and on pult pell times with great distinction. i got to know him over the course of the first few years of the obama administration and although i don't know him as well, he is highly disdain and we could not be more fortunate than to have him here today. if you would summarize your commends in about five minutes. if you can summarize and we look forward to asking questions. if you would start secretary baker, i would appreciate it. >> it's a pleasure to be here for

, the concern is, of course, with what's happening in syria. and with the growth of the islamic state or daesh or whatever you want to call them with the meltdown in libya, where you're seeing a pathway of foreign fighters now making their way into europe where, of course, they don't need a passport to travel among various members states of the european union and many of those countries have visa waiver programs with the united states whether people can gain access to the united states or whether they can just, as in the case of san bernardino, radicalize people in place. although obviously the two individuals involved there had traveled to the middle east as well. so, i think it's really important that we understand what the process is. obviously a lot oversight by the fisa court which many of my colleagues say is very important to them, by the director of national intelligence, odni, and the department of justice, there's a lot of oversight here and a lot of of the to try to minimize the impact on american citizens. although the fact of the matter is, as i understand, under 702, tha

stood side by side in two world wars, in korea, in kuwait, in iraq, in afghanistan, and now syria, as we work to tackle the threat of daesh and try to bring peace to the war torn country. we forged the nato alliance in the aftermath of war. we stood firm with our allies to ensure that peace reigns in europe and that the expansionist efforts of the european unions were resisted. today the work we do together continues as strongly as it ever has. our intelligence professionals work side by side in a seamless battle against the threat of terrorism. perhaps more than any two countries on earth, we share fruits of those labors in a way that strengthens our mutual security and that of our allies around the world. but our relationship is about so much more than security. the united states is britain's biggest trading partner. the united kingdom is one of the biggest international markets for u.s. goods and services. we share cultural roots, year and year, after oscar ceremony, british actors, actresses, production teams, feature high on the nomination lists. u.s. tv is challenging the be

will be critical for survival. in syria, we know that the assad regime cannot have the credibility. it doesn't represent the people. as a result we have not only civil conflict but breeding grounds for isil. to me, a common thread is woven through much of the world's ills as a crisis in governance. and a willingness to ignore the rule of law. i look forward to the conversation we are having today with two of the real champions in the history of america on foreign policy. >> well, as we all are thrilled to have you, secretary baker is, to me, a model of public service. someone that i have looked up to for a long time. i appreciate him taking his time to be with us today. i know he served in the public arena off and on multiple times with great distinction. tom donalin is someone i have gotten to know over the course of the first few years of the obama administration. while i don't know him as well, i know he's highly esteemed. we could not be more fortunate than to have the two of you here today. if you could, if you would summarize your comments in about five minutes, we are certai

the region. >> we didn't invade the gaza strip, we didn't invade syria and yet we see iran on the warpath all over and what this agreement did was take -- was take the budget of islamic revolutionary guard corps the hard currency available to it and increase it by an order of magnitude. >> doing that before that's why we went into iraq is what you're saying. yes? no? it seems like revisionist history. >> we are trying to blame -- according to the u.s. department of state since 1984 and to try to somehow distract from that and distract from a false mod -- a narrative of false moderation is counterproductive i would argue. >> i have to tell you i feel like a replay of dr. strangelove here. and it would be nice to have a balanced discussion. >> i agree. that's why we invited mr. rhodes and we invited the participation of senator cotton who is the other end of the spectrum, but when the white house refuses to make them available and democrats call no witnesses, we can't have that discussion. that's what's a shame about today's hearing. now recognize the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. ru

east. sanctuary in syria and iraq provided recruit, retrain and execute external attacks in paris and brussels. it also has theable to incite others around the world as we've seen in san bernardino. veteran al qaeda fighters have traveled to pakistan to take advantage of the per missive environment there. they are seeking to carry out attacks again the west. al shabab maintains safe haven in the area, threatens security in the area, boca haram, ally of isis continue to maintain their base in west africa. continues to support attacking the west vying with isis to be the leader of a global jihad. al qaeda wields substantial influence over affiliated groups, particularly al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. indeed on the three occasions, they have sought to bring down an airliner headed for the united states. there's every reason to believe it still has the intent and substantial capability to carry out such an attack. against this backdrop of a dynamic and lethal terrorist threat the ability of the united states to conduct surveillance under section 702 is vital to security. as direct

efforts with respect to the challenges in syria and in iraq, so i think it's important to underscore the fact and i think we've also taken very important steps with respect to deepening our relationship in our own hemisphere. that gets way too many attention. no great pawer or important nation has the kind of strategic base that we do in terms of the americas and the potential. i think it's important to underscore the fact with specifics. i think it is important to fin to accelerate our efforts to address those problems. >> can i say, without this being interpreted as a political statement, which it isn't, because i agree with 99% of what tom has said here today, we need to make the world understand we're going to lead from in front, and not from behind. i think that's an oxymoron. >> senator flake. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i apologize if i'm plowing old ground here. i couldn't be here earlier. we can't deny that it's really changed the order in the middle east. and other activity, and now it's -- it's gained status at least, you know, as a responsible nation state, i guess, i'm g

coming from iraq and syria and terrorists trying to exploit that refugee flow to get to western europe? >> yes, thank you very much. actually, you point out there are two questions. the first one on the tool that you have, are they adequate, do they need to be modernized and changed. and the second one, more european focus. and it's -- it's a fact that this toxic link that the terrorists are trying to put between immigration and terrorism needs and requires a very strong answer from us, from our european communities. it's not by chance that we found syrian passport in the stadium near paris after the attacks. there was maybe a will to underline this immigration as a threat. so but to answer your first question very, very directly, actually france is trying to enforce most of the measures and europe, too, most of the measures in terms of -- of combatting and controlling international travelers. actually, we have -- we've had the pcs agreement that has been ratified just this year. we are sharing information a lot. and diversity of agreements on even without agreements. so this and for e

talked about the humanitarian situation in syria and the transition to living in the u.s. we'll also hear from state department officials who oversee the refugee process. >> now i'm very pleased to introduce actually dr. michelle gavudan listed here as mister, but he's also a medical doctor, who is going to be the event moderator from here on. he became president of refugees international in september 2010, leading our eye forward in its mission to bring attention and action to refugees and displaced people worldwide. prior to his role with our eye, he served as the united nations high commission on refugees regional representative for the united states in the caribbean. his career with unhcr has spanned more than 25 years including international service in africa, asia, latin america, and the pacific. as i mentioned, he is trained as a medical doctor in addition to holding a master's degree in tropical public health. michel spent a decade working in guyana, zambia, brazil, london and yemen before joining unhcr as a field officer in thailand in 1978. his u.n. career took him to field

the main effort in particular against isil. against its presence in iraq and syria. and in many ways when we look at the spread of isil, preventing that will depend on defeating the group in its core homeland. and so, therefore, the focus in that regard on that core area is appropriate. >> any other comments? >> i would just say that much of the terrorism that we saw in the past on the continent of africa tended to be focused on africa, so there was not the comparable threat to the homeland from terrorists in africa as we see in the middle east. but i think we've all come to the conclusion that terrorism anywhere affects us everywhere, and we have to address it not just in the middle east but in africa as well. >> so, the core central beginnings, if you will, of this threat emanated from the middle east. and so, you know, hitting areas where especially they're establishing a caliphate has been important. and then secondly the groups in africa have not been seen as a threat to western entities. would that be a fair assessment of the focus? >> i would say initially. but i think we're s

all understand, and we have to look at each country separately. syria and iraq, that's a pretty -- >> you think that's your job -- >> -- to return those immigrants to those countries. >> you really think syria and iraq is your job and your responsibility to make that determination? here's what the law says, and i'm quoting. on being notified by the attorney general that the government of a foreign country denies or unreasonably delays accepting an alien who is a citizen subject national resident of the country after the attorney general asks whether the government will accept the alien under the section, the secretary shall, and so if you go to the first part -- >> shall what? >> order consular officers in the country to discontinue granted immigrant visas or nonimmigrant visas or both until the attorney general notifies the secretary the country has accepted the aliens. what is incumbent upon you personally in your duty and responsibility is to make that notification. if you're trying to take even just one alien and deport them back to a country, these are criminal aliens. reme

afghanistan in the presidential election. we all talk -- everybody talks about iraq, syria. we have twice as many troops in afghanistan as we have in syria. it's where we were attacked from and we don't say anything. if you can explain that to me i'd be happy. let's get the next question. >> my name is dominic cardoa. you made a statement that's troublesome to me. you made reference to the fact that afghanistan has the most islamic of constitutions. how do you interpret that? does that mean sharia law? how dos you interpret that? >> we have sharia law. our constitution is based on sharia. it may be the version of sharia that perhaps some -- it's not the strictest of interpretation that extremists want in afghanistan but our constitution is based on sharia. it has been for the past 15 years. >> but you've also signed a whole variety of international human rights agreements, laws. >> absolutely. it's not to say that sharia is not compliant with human rights. sharia is compliant with that. that has been our constitution since it was formed 15 years ago. >> but also the constitution, if

/syria phenomenon that's being transplanted into syria welcomed in by some extremist elements. some of whom then said we don't want them. they didn't like being told what to do and kicked them out. so the libyans are difficult. she's very sensible and dynamic and easy to work with. we love working with her. but libyans can be quite fractious. so carving that channel in a way that they're going to say this is good is what we're trying to do even if we can't predict where individual droplets are going to go. if -- and even though it's going to take time which it is and it will. thank you. >> thank you. i'm going to be willing to take some questions from the audience. oh, yes. i'll be willing to take some questions from the audience. raise your hands. i've already seen a few of you with your hands up. i suspect there will be more questioners than i'm able to get to. when i call on somebody would you, number one, introduce yourself as to your name and affiliation. number two, ask a question, don't make a statement. keep it short. end with a question mark. all right, let me start in the mid

strong grasp on the theory and practice of terrorism as illustrated by his book on syria. there full biographies on the sheet you received. he brings that particular perspective to this panel and the others have other perspectives which will be useful in performing the view of the problem. fred wary has expectancies in military affairs and knows military well with the embassy in libya and based on numerous trips to the country. he coulds the complexities of libyan-armed groups and the foreign military establishments that might be involved at some point in interacting with the libyan government. she has shown herself to be an articulate voice for both the libyan government of national accord and for the libyan people more broadly. she is a for vent libyan patriot and involved in libyan civil society efforts against the gadhafi regime and responded to her country's call by accepting senior positions in the libyan ministries of education and foreign affairs prior to her current assignment. jonathan wiper is the secretary of state for libya. he was a key member of kerry's staff when john

unfinish tasked left you to. vladimir putin has been learning from bloody experience in ukraine and syria that military adventurism pays. that diplomacy can be manipulated to serve his strategic ambitions and that worst refugee crisis since world war ii can be weaponized to divide the west and weaken its resolve. the only deterence we seem to be establishing is over ourselves. they don't have the legal assistance they need to defend themselves and which the congress authorized for fear of provoking russia. this fear of escalation only encourages the dangerous bee hafror we saw last week when russian fighter jets conducted simulated attacks within 30 feet of a u.s. navy destroy eastern performed dangerous maneuvers within 50 feet of a u.s. surveillance aircraft in international airspace. this is a positive first step to re-estabilsh deterence in europe but it's just that, a first step. russia is building an advanced anti-access area denial network russian submarine activity is the highest level since the cold war. the modernization and expanding operations demand a comprehensive review of

activities in the sinai, the fragmentation of iraq and syria, disarray in libya and the adverse impact of these developments on egypt's internal security and egyptians recognize that none of these threats can be satisfactorily addressed by the possession of nuclear weapons. in addition, while egypt plans to build its first nuclear power reactor with russia's help, it has ambition nuclear energy plans in the past, which never materialized. given the secure economic challenges currently facing the egyptian government, cairo's nuclear energy plants are unlikely to fair much better this time around. finally turkey, turkey is also on everyone's short list of potential nuclear armed states. but turkey has maintained reasonable good relation with iran, even during the height of the sanctions campaign against iran, although the two countries take opposing sides in the syrian silver war, turkey like egypt does not regard iran as a direct military threat. indeed, sees instability and terrorism emanating from the syrian conflict as its main security concerns and nuclear weapons are not viewed as rel

that have actually been inspired to travel or to attempt to travel to syria and iraq are much lower than for other parts of the world, whether it be north africa, the maghreb countries, even european states, the caucusis and even into southeast asia, the numbers are higher. but that said, there is evidence of some african -- recruitment among africans into isil. and their propaganda is very shred in identifying and using recruits that will come from those groups and appealing to those individuals to join the caliphate or come to iraq and syria. of course, isil has been attempting to infiltrate into other areas of the continent, in particular in somalia, and there is evidence of a struggle and, basically, a conflict internally between al shabaab and elements that had sought to adhere or to affiliate with isil. they haven't seemed to have the success there, but it does identify that this is an ongoing concern we have to watch very closely. >> and is the cost of getting to syria, to iraq part of the challenge with recruitment, or is it other -- is it the messaging that's the issue? >>

allegiance and addressing issues in syria and that kind of thing. >> thank you very much. that was great. and thank you to each of you. it's no small toosk take countries and do it in is a minutes. we do appreciate it. the juxtaposition laid out in the front sort of you said something was the failure to inoculate. no country we talked about has not been in this period before, though there's a lot of color around why this time is different and complicated for each of those countries. i'm going to open it up for questions. i would ask you to please state your name and your question. i'm going to take a few of them together to try to address them. we did start a little late so i'm going to let this go about ten minutes on. but my question just throw into the mix for all of you is what a lot of people wonder is so prices go up. does any of this stick? how does that change what we have seen under way and does it change the chances of it succeeding or failing? wait for the microphone. >> thank you, my question is open to the panel. nobody mentioned specifics about the organization of pet

syria refugees, no country has raised more money and only the united states has spent more money. i want us to proceed with as much support across the house as we can. i think it's right to stick to the principle we shouldn't be encouraging people to make this dangerous journey. i think it's right to stick to the idea we keep investing in the refugee camps and the neighboring countries. i also think it's right not to take part in the eu relocation and resettlement schemes which have been a failure. we're already taking child migrants in europe with a direct family connection to the uk. we'll speed that up. and also talking to save the children to see what we can do more. particularly with children who came here before the eu turkey deal was signed. because as i say again, what i don't want us to do is to take steps that will encourage people to make this dangerous journey, because otherwise our actions, however well-meaning they will be could result in more people dying rather than more people getting a good life. >> robertson. >> thank you mr. speaker. last week i accused the prime

president obama's point man on syria from 2009 to 2012. he's somebody who understands, you know -- there's nobody who's been closer to the obama administration's policies on syria than fred hoff. and he has now come around to the view that president obama has in effect recognized syria as an iranian sphere of interest and did so in order to reach the agreement. >> well, i appreciate it. i think the upshot of all this, the nuclear more significant, but beyond that, iran is really emerging as the dominant power in the region. how you can see that's good for our security is beyond me, and i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. now recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. cartwright, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, at this time, i'd like to associate myself with the words of representative lynch of massachusetts and also representative maloney of new york. i don't think it's possible to overstate the amount of study that went into the iran deal on both sides of the aisle, and it is with great regret that i see it has turned into a political football

syria, take ing over lebanon and threatening israel and europe and everybody else. so i got to tell you, i am if i'm u so fortunate enough to be the nominee, i am looking forward to debating donald trump come the fall. finally, we have to unify america. a house divided against itself cannot stand. we can't be scapegoating and finger pointing and blaming and demeaning and degrating and insulting. our fellow americans, do we have disagreements, yeah, that's healthy. there are lots of different ways to achieve our goals. we set our goals and then we have a good back and forth about how we achieve them. you don't do that by denigrating people. demeaning people, that is not what we are. and it's time that we said enough. we're willing to have good political debates. enough with the hate rhetoric and the insults and let's look for ways to work together. let's recognize what made our country great. i think we are great. but i think we can be greater if we do what we must do and so many of the targets that trump aims at and other republicans aims at are part of how we became great. this eff

mattered in syria. you drew a red line against assad. you did not follow up when gadhafi was taken down by his people. please don't repeat these mistakes by reducing or forces in afghanistan because you will get the same result, probably worse. that's just my editorial comment. in terms of budgets, if we go back into sequestration mode, what would it mean to our presence in europe. >> it would have an immediate impact on the forces that we have there today and i believe that it would potentially put at risk the forces that we plan to rotate today to reinforce our posture. and certainly it would impact the readiness of our remaining forces to come to europe if deterrence should fail. >> would it be an encouraging sign to russia that we're less committed to europe? >> it would, sir. >> general robinson, what would sequestration do to your ability? >> it would affect the readiness of the force and our ability to invest in capabilities to defend the homeland. >> can you give me some examples of what we would lose in terms of capabilities? >> depending where we are with sensor development or

. times. >> question about syria. as you know, the president announce d today that he has approved the deployment of special operations troops on the ground in syria. this comes after several years in which the assessment of most of the intelligence community for opposition forces really have very little capability in terms of organization, military impact, staying power, anything you wanted. has that assessment changed? and is it possible yet to set out any plausible timelines if their capability increases if pressure on isis continues for the fall of raqqah. >> the answer to the last question is no. i certainly can't project realistically a timeline. i do think that the deployment of the announced the special forces fortroops, is a manife manifestation of the need to and the effectiveness of advising, assisting, and being on the ground with not just the arabs but the others who are there, principally, various factions of the kurds. and so the complexity of the situation in syria is unbelievable. and to the extent that we can promote proxies who have, you know, interest in their own v

we're in that city building that we have seen replicated elsewhere in equgypt in syria, iraq and elsewhere. >> fred, let me ask you to pick up on that. how successful do you think dash can be in turkey and syria. after all, there has to be a lot of competition not only from the libya factions but from the new government of national accord. i just question how much in the way of financial reserves daesh can bring in bare in try to go affect libyans and other fighters. i realize there's a reservoir of potential fighters elsewhere in africa and so on. what are the practical constrants on daesh and how you is it possible for the combination of the libyan government of national accord and international partners to compete with them? >> well, there's a lot there. i think that you have -- sorry you have answered it. they're not able to really replicate the sort of state building functions that they have elsewhere because they lack, you know, revenue streams. they're not able to tap into vast sectarians and there's a pocket that they have planted themselves. they have been pushed out and

and the islamic state of iraq and syria isis. the international community's right in supporting counterterrorism efforts that seek to defeat this extremist groups militarily and must at the same time assist the affected countries to address the root causes and triggers of the rise in extremism and violence. the principal motivation of today's terrorists in sub-saharan africa is deeply rooted in a pattern of religious beliefs. however, it is noteworthy that governance failures have exacerbated the impact of this phenomenon and created an enabling environment in which extremism thrives. when a state collapses as was the case with somalia prior to the emergence of al shabaab, allows for huge swaths of ungovernable fa ablable spaces mali or fails to fulfill its basic purpose of providing citizens with access to a meaningful life and liberty and property as in northeastern nigeria. the social contract between the state and the citizenry is broken. discontent with governments that are viewed as illegitimate or ineffective is a fertile ground for recruitment as disaffected individuals

in effect recognized syria as an iranian sphere of influence, and one of the goals of the deception of mr. rhodes is to -- is to prevent people from connecting the dots between the syria policy and the iranian nuclear policy. and the fifth part of the deception is blaming allies. the white house on background and in public is very -- is very willing to criticize our sunni allies as creating sectarian extremism in the region. it's willing to criticize in very -- in very derogatory terms prime minister netanyahu of israel. it never criticizes the iranians. you never hear a word from the white house about what the iranians are doing in syria in pursuit of the -- in pursuit of -- in support of -- in support of assad's murder machine. i'll just sum up now by what i think we need to do were this and i would say two points. number one, i agree with you, chairman chaffetz, that we do not actually know what is in the iran deal. we still do this day don't know. and i completely agree with your assessment about the activities of secretary of state kerry in euro europe. last week he was in euro

like syria and iraq and afghanistan, we're having tremendous difficulties with, so she has listened. she has promised to follow up. she sent a cable out to all of our ambassadors across the world, last march, to say please, be mindful of this. help ice and other agencies that are seeking to get cooperation from the jurisdiction and assist them in their efforts to remove people. >> but what levers, i mean, we have levers. members have mentioned the visas that we grant to citizens from these nations coming into the u.s., foreign aid. >> sanctions. there are sanctions imposed. >> where have they done to meet to discuss this. >> where the department of state has? i'm not familiar with the specifics of what they've done. >> i guess, mr. chairman, that is sort of the crux of the frustration that myself and murphy bloomenthal, it just screams out for the fact that, you know, the agencies in the u.s. ice and the state department are not getting this done and that is why we have requested inspector general's report. that process is under way right now. we're going to be receiving the results