Skip to main content

tv   Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner Discusses Chinas Use...  CSPAN  June 25, 2019 10:29pm-11:35pm EDT

10:29 pm
"in depth" next month with author lee edward. watch book tv every weekend on c-span 2. senator mark warner, vice chair of the senate intelligence committee, recently sat down with "pbs newshour's" judy woodruff to talk about china's 5g technological advances, artificial intelligence and global security. this hour long event was hosted by the council on foreign relations in washington, d.c. good afternoon, everyone. what a cheerful looking group. i am judy woodruff with the "pbs newshour" and i'm delighted to be here with all of you at this council and foreign relations meeting with senator mark warner
10:30 pm
who truly needs to introduction. as you know he's vice chairman of the senate select committee on intelligence. i'm going to be presiding over this discussion. the meeting is the annual kenneth a. moscow lecture on homeland security and counterterrorism. this is an annual lectureship that honors the memory of kenneth a. moscow who was a long time member of the council with a distinguished career in the intelligence community. further details on his life and his many professional accomplishments can be found in the booklet that you have at your seat. i do want to extend a special welcome to the members and guests of the moscow family who are here with us today seated at the center table. welcome to you. so without further ado, i'll just say i will invite senator warner, he will speak for about ten minutes and then i'll have the opportunity to ask him questions for about 20 minutes and then at 1:00 we will open it
10:31 pm
up for questions from members. so without further ado, senator mark warner. >> thank you for that int introduction. looking forward to our discussion. that's about ten minutes for senate time. about ten minutes, right? it is a -- look forward to our conversation. i also it's a great honor to be here council on foreign relations with the moscow family and got a chance to meet the kids this is a great tribute to mr. moscow and his service to the council and his service to our country. what i want to talk about today in this obviously deals with
10:32 pm
cyber, deals with homeland security, i want to take a slightly different vent though and talk about china. this is a subject of which, for, you know, probably 2008 going forward i guess for a long time i had what i would view as pretty traditional, conventional views about china from both -- that i think was shared by a lot of members in our policy committee, a lot of folks from the business community, as a former venture capitalist i looked as china as a rapidly modern sizing country with 1.3 billion people with rising incomes and expectations and mostly saw opportunity. i think i saw what a lot of folks thought, that a rising china, a china that had been brought into the wto, a china that was part of the world order wub good for the overall world
10:33 pm
order sigh eye there would be places where we wub competitors, but mostly partners, typically the last three years or four years, and many, many classified briefings later i have fundamentally vifted my viewpoint. i believe that president xi, starting with major consolidation of power in 2015 and 2016 reasserted the communist party's dominance in china across all field of business, society, the military, and he has now using that consolidated power to bring about both state and civil society, actually propose a role and view of china that would dominate the world and that domination would lead to a diminishment of u.s. power and influence. the chinese government uses all the traditional tools of the
10:34 pm
state to exert influence and expanded military presence and we've seen that, and i'm sure we'll talk about in the south china seas, an aggressive deployment of espionage to steal secrets and we saw some of that decline after his meeting with president obama back in that 2015 time frame. we've unfortunately seen a dramatic increase since that. but what we've also seen come out of china is more creative mechanisms that take advantage of the authoritarian model to force chinese companies, researchers and others to act on behalf of the communist party. all this has set the stage for the chinese government to aggressively display every lever of power to service the state and at the same time exploit the openness of our society to take advantage and to take economic advantage. i believe this is, in many ways, the challenge of our time. let me also put a caveat here
10:35 pm
that's extraordinarily important, my challenge, and i believe our beef is with the communist party of china and the president xi regime, china is a great nation, and a great people. as we see right now, the pushback in china, forces of beijing, when we see the concerns raised by many chinese about the incarceration, imprisonment of at least a million if not 2 to 3 million leaders, concerns about the chinese government are felt all across the region. the rest of the presentation are questions we continue to reaffirm the concern i have is with the communist party and the government and i am deeply concerned that we don't allow this to turn into, in our
10:36 pm
country, a diminishment of the contributions made by chinese americans and chinese nationals and others. we do not need in any form. we repeat the chen case that took place in the early '80s in detroit. with that caveat i'd like to think about, again, where we go from here. first again with the focus on technology. we've lived in a world and many of us in this room have lived in a world that still can remember sputnik, the last moment when america's technological supremacy was really questioned and sputnik jolted america into action, president kennedy charged us to put a man on the moon and we changed our academic institutions and we changed our research areas, changed our military industrial complex and we were successful in that
10:37 pm
contest over space and i would argue since that moment in time virtually every technological advancement, computing, whether it was in telecommunications, my field in wireless, around the internet, social media, all of these innovations have either been american or western led. even if they weren't american we ended up setting the standards. and by setting the standards, by having the world's largest economic power that ability for us to set the standards while the rest of the world sometimes would complain about us setting the standards by us setting the standards that meant the rest of the world had a default position. we were the largest economy so we had a single governance rule around this technology. i don't think in many ways we as a nation have fully appreciated all of the economic, political and candidly social benefits our country enjoyed by being the
10:38 pm
technology center and the standards setter. in many ways that is all up for grabs right now. i see this firsthand in the competition for 5g and for those of you who are not technology nerds in the room 5g is the equivalence of in the wireless nex generation of moving from radio to television, enormous opportunity and china is basically employing tactics we used to employ. equipment vendors with 120% and more financing, they are flooding the zone with engineers in terms of standard setting bodies and in many ways what is happening with 5g could very well happen with artificial intelligence if america doesn't try to reassert its both investments in technology and its willingness to set the standards. i also believe that what we're
10:39 pm
seeing as well is not only china make these moves but they're can you believing that with an ability to actually manipulate and use western companies in ways that are frankly fairly confounding. we've seen western companies in an effort to try to get access to the chinese market make sacrifices on intellectual property, make sacrifices on business practices that they would make to get into no other market in the world. and we're seeing countries make that entrance into china two decades ago pop up next to their facilities, forcing of sharing of intellectual property. obviously people's republic of china is trying to use this new enhanced power as a way to build economic dominance, i believe not only in china but around the
10:40 pm
region we've also seen china in the technology field to do something that quite honestly i don't think most of us in the west thought was possible, to use and eregulate the internet. bill clinton in the late 90s saying any government that would try to regulate the internet would be like nailing jell-o to the wall. using the powers of internet and facial recognition, collaboration between chinese tech companies and government to build a surveillance state that would make george or well blanch. we are still trying to grapple with that. what we have right now is a chinese government basically trying to now take their successes and exploit and basically offer them the other regimes around the world.
10:41 pm
a three-part plan, one, they offer an authoritarian form of government to oppressive regimes, and a belt and road initiative that offers economic financing for countries who are open and three increasingly they are offering this technology driven, repressive state model to actually regimes like in pakistan, ethiopia, venezuela and elsewhere. and quite honestly, one of the things that is of great concern to me as we go through this recognition of what china's been able to do, it bothers me a great deal when we sometimes see american technology companies who have no problem working with china on development of their social credit system or surveillance state tactics in some of those same companies than having challenges working with establishment. that's something we need to examine and frankly have some honest, heart to heart
10:42 pm
conversations with some of those companies. so where do we go from here? three areas that i would leave you with before we get into our conversation. first, we need to sound the alarm and over the last year, because i've had so many of these briefs and the evidence has become so overwhelming, i've gone to the intelligence community and said, you know, simply terrifying or scaring, you know, members of the intelligence committee to give us this information in classified briefings, you are not -- we are not doing our job if we don't find ways to declassify more of this information and get it out to american business, american policymakers, american academia. so i've started a series of road shows. we've done now 11 of them where i always take a republican senator partner, usually senator rubio or senator burr and along with either the director or deputy director of national intelligence, senior levels from dhs, fbi, and our
10:43 pm
counterintelligence center and bring in groups of business leaders, venture capitalists, academics to really kind of share in a one day classified read-in some of the challenges that china presents and some of the tactics they use to try to advance their government's interests. we need to set warnings in a better way. we need a short-term strategy. here i think we need a lot of work and frankly i have seen very little articulate development from the administration on that short-term strategy. i would acknowledge that the trump administration has done the right thing, vis-a-vis china in saying the status quo is not working. but if the status quo is not working he's got to offer an alternative. i would argue the challenges of an emerging china have not been only counter to the united states but all of the west, the
10:44 pm
countries that first raised the challenges around china before they were fully recognized in this country were japan, korea and australia. there was a moment in time where we could have built a grand national coalition and gone to china, china, you're a great nation, one of the most powerful countries in the 21st century but you've got to play by the rules. and instead of building that grand coalition, the administration has called canada a national security threat, not the kind of plan that we ought to have. so the third thing i think we need is the need to make sure that as particularly as the administration moves forward that we don't confuse trade issues with national security issues. the president, i think, has launched this trade war without building national alliances needed, without articulating clearly what his goals are. but what particularly concerns me is recent comments where he's indicated that the administration's appropriate
10:45 pm
actions, i would argue, around huawei might be a trading ship in our trade dispute with china. that would be a disaster. we're finally starting to make progress with allies in terms of raising the very legitimate concerns about huawei and other chinese provide ers in the 5g area. if that were to be traded away as a trading ship the ability for our intelligence community, the ability for our technology community to have any credibility on a going forward basis would be extraordinarily diminished. we have to be concerned about that. to the areas on legislative front, short-term, that i think we need to continue to explore, one, i've been a strong supporter of the reform called firma. we may need to take a broader look there because there are certain tactics that the chinese entities are now using in erm thes of venture capital
10:46 pm
investment, noncontrol sectors that disproportionately are falling into areas of great technological advancement. that needs to be re-examined and i've also recently put forward legislation around both aml and beneficial ownership, beneficial ownership legislation would be geared around true ownership companies. this has an opportunity beyond frankly the china threat but it does involve a tactic that china constantly uses, the use of shell companies. finally in terms of everall strategy, a lot of work needs to be done. we haven't articulated the steps we need to take and finally we need the long-term strategy and that goes back to what kind of investment we're prepared to make in this country in research
10:47 pm
and development. i often like to point out that america has a defense budget last year at $716 billion. china's defense budget is roughly $250 billion. that $500 billion delta, china is investing in 5g, artificial intelligence, quantum computing in a host of other areas where, again, under president xi's vision china will not only lead but will dominate. i worry at times our defense budget, we may be buying the world's best 21st century intelligence when most of conflict will be in the cybersecuri cybersecurity do main, and increasingly in space and those are areas where we are not doing as much as we need to do. we need to make those research investments. we've seen, if you go back from the historical basis at the end of world war ii, the united states accounted for 69% of
10:48 pm
annual global r&d, we're now down to 29%. china's on a dramatic upward trend, china will pass the united states in all expectations by 2020 in the number of patents issued and, again, in a world where this is all worked on on a collaborative basis i think we can get this right, in a world where the chinese government under president xi is looking for economic and strategic dominance, that ought to be a concern for us and what i hope we can go through in our discussion here, judy, is how we get this right, how we set policies on a going forward basis. we do not want the default into the old bipolar world we lived in post world war ii. we do not want to have these concerns about the chinese government actions, again wipe off on the greatness of the chinese nation, the chinese-americans but we do need to come to an understanding that
10:49 pm
the kind of best notion business case of five or six years ago is not coming to pass and how we get our act together on a going forward basis i again will argue will be the question of our time so with that judy let me bring you forward and let's go forward into our conversation, thank you. >> thank you, senator warner. thank you. you went over just a few minutes so i'm going to go over into the members time just a few minutes. what is the main worry that you have about china? i mean, what is the worst case scenario? do you think -- i hear you saying you don't think china's going to come across the ocean with weapons, but what are you worried about? >> i would say there are two things i worry the most about. one is, you know, there's been no economic success story
10:50 pm
greater than china's in the last 25 to 30 years. and if we go back to a pre-89 world where the america and the west versus america the west versus soviet, i think, it falls into a pure etiologic conflict with china but for china is on the move, on the go and they are offering a case and to a lot of people it looks really good. if you could somehow obtain china's growth rates and saying here don't look to democracy, look at our authoritarian form of government, that gives you the kind of control you need to move the country forward. second, they are completely not with the same tools that really in the past were economic incentives and then third, i'm very troubled with what china has been able to do in terms of
10:51 pm
its creation of a surveillance state which i think would make george in 1984 pale in comparison when china is literally creating this social credit system, on a financial credit basis and on a social credit basis, how loyal each of the citizens are to the regime, based upon the daily movements and because of the presence of facial recognition and the willingness of chinese tech companies to share the information with the government, that authoritarian monitoring surveillance concerns me greatly. so, that vision they are offering around the world, number one and number two what concerns me is, i think we sometimes have underestimated the economic and other benefits that have occurred in our country from being the technological leader of the last 60 years, being the leader in setting the standards and the host of each of these
10:52 pm
technological innovations, it is really brought us along. i think it will be a very different world, if in these areas like ai, facial recognition, 5g, if china is a leader in china ends up setting the standards . >> we know this very well, some european governments are affecting -- question in this band, have british diplomat saying they could allow what way into the commercial network without threatening their intelligence and their military network, how do you see that? >> you will hear british politicians say that but you don't hear the british politicians services say that. let's be clear. we have away equipment and in many of the rural and smaller fighter systems around the country. this is pretty good equipment and it's about 30 to 40% cheaper
10:53 pm
, where we made a mistake, and we should've raised this issue much earlier, it's not in the intelligence community needs to be more forthcoming, it's not the fact that the wall way equipment has a backdoor right now but when you buy a whole full kit from wall way and the notion of the 5g network which is a much more distributed system, all of the upgrades that are sent on and you cannot prevent the chinese law they've put laws in place that put every corporation the first obligation is to become this party. this is an important point to finish. you cannot prevent the government from telling wall
10:54 pm
way to sell malware . >> there are couple areas, in terms of rural carriers, this would at least take the first step towards creating a fund that would help potentially change out some of the equipment. i don't want to go off on the tech deep side but there are some issues on earlier versions of the network that won't be is compromised, but we are putting forward legislation that would have about $700 million funding without being replaced. and on the foreign governments you see some countries reconsider though not only
10:55 pm
publicly but one of the challenges we have is that because there's not an american based or >> late to the party but in the past we would've had a whole government effort around setting standards that should've started under obama but it didn't. it's been very rudimentary until recently. in a normal white house you would've had somebody in charge of this. but we are not operating within normal white house . >> in general is the administration on the right track? >> yes. the administration has gotten
10:56 pm
folks within the appropriate agencies, the sec, ntia and dod and the state department has an important role and others have come together. we've convened the group to make sure they are working on a regular basis but i wish they would've been contained two years ago . >> were asking you to look at the crystal ball but what's going on in hong kong? how does that affect your thinking and what your assessment is? >> i think what it says to me is that the concerns that i and others are raising about the model of governing god don't take my word, you should be concerned about it . >> i don't think i could ever
10:57 pm
think of any time in modern history with that great of a percentage of a population that should've been a protest. i think there are huge concerns about president she's style of governing . >> two of the things i want to raise with you and then i do want to turn it over to the members but one is a story in the new york times over the weekend about u.s. newly revealed capabilities to get inside the grid, the power grid in russia. and, within the story, there was interesting information about whether or not the president was told about this and so forth, but overall, is it a good thing, first of all, is the u.s. doing this, the president came out and says it's not true, is the u.s. doing this and if the u.s. is, is it a good thing or not? >> i'm not going to comment on
10:58 pm
what our government is doing or not doing and i would say when we add to other things, i do think the overall willingness of the trump administration to allow us to use is appropriate i think for a long period of time, russia and china could frankly steal from us or hit us with impunity because i think there was a reluctance on our government side and a concern of us fiber escalation the notion being in the extreme they shut down moscow no power
10:59 pm
for 24 hours, is a new york for 24 hours and you have a crisis, so we were concerned about cyber escalations . >> but the second side of the story which i think is worthy of commenting, but if it is accurate, it's a pretty stunning statement and that statement being if intelligence officials were rated to brief the president because he might tell someone and generally that coming on top of the president's other the outrageous comments last week that coming out of the white house to a national media correspondent that in a sense he would welcome assistance
11:00 pm
from russia or china in election interference it didn't have enough of a moral compass is another's a moral and legal obligation to abort that, you could take the comment and if you're not concerned you should be . >> you took steps, he jumped over to the next thing but quick be on the cyber capabilities, a sense of cyber, capacity. it's fair to say those of increased in recent years on the part of the united states? >> the trump administration put out an executive order that i think appropriately took some of the constraints on the process off for us you cyber.
11:01 pm
11:02 pm
to me that's outrageous. i've put forward three pieces of legislation that i would hope card was in a bipartisan way would pass if they were serious about protecting the integrity of our election process is any ambiguity about taking foreign assist in center residential campaign by legislation, it would make it clear that if you have an offer of a prohibited item already defined in law elsewhere, the obligation is not to say thank you, it's a reported to the fbi. i don't know how anyone could be against that and secondly we need to pass bipartisan legislation on this, and to make sure there's a paper ballot after all of the voting machines and the ability to
11:03 pm
have an audit to make sure there is appropriate security provisions in place and third i have a series of legislation on basic rules of the road around social media so we don't have the kind of manipulation that the russians use last time that increasingly the chinese are using on a variety of other countries in asia right now and that's a hold different subject area but i think all the three areas if we really care about making sure that the election in 2020 is fair we need the provisions . >> one more minute, and brief where they being held up . >>, republicans have the majority . >> the good news is, if the election security legislation back to the floor would get 85 votes. have a series of bills in social media and everyone of them i have a republican partner. in terms of the reporting a number of reported the best
11:04 pm
republican colleagues that indicated he thought that would make common sense to make that if the foreign government intervenes, make sure you have two tell the fbi. what is stopping this is the white house . >> cannot be turned around? >> it can only be turned around if americans of both political parties say our democracy and the integrity of the democracy is more important than the sensibilities of the current office in the white house . >> there's a lot more to ask you, you are the vice chairman of the committee that oversaw a lot of work, running parallel with the molar investigation but, it is the turn of the members to ask questions. i do want to invite you to raise your hand. i am reminding you again that everything is on the record, they will bring you a microphone and we ask you to
11:05 pm
stand, state your name and affiliation and limit yourself to one question lots of hands are right here in front. >> >> hello i'm ricardo from california from san diego. i run a technology policy company there. you mentioned a front in the bill right now to support the transition of rural operators in america from walway to other suppliers. so we are in a major changing of wireless switches from hardware to software and interestingly, american companies now have an advantage in the area of software so china has had a long one benefiting from this side and i think the shift to software
11:06 pm
should help us but who can compete with the hundred 20% financing? i would like to see if you could offer a little more detail about the bill they mentioned . >> the irony is that, the 120% financing model, was started by the american providers back in the 80s as they built out the first generation of wireless networks as i'm sure you're aware. you know, it is, it's a challenge there is not a short answer. i believe, the legislation with forward is a good first step in hasn't had enough funding if you're gonna look to replace across all the domestic carriers that have walway. it begs the bigger question, which is, what china has defined, the chinese government
11:07 pm
has defined and they spelled it out in china 2025, specific areas with a hope to be dominant . they have modern industrial policy where they bring the power of this date and the bank and its financing tools and equipment bending and research to bear we have not done that in america or the west. but, if we are thinking about areas, particularly where he who has the most data, he who has the most information may win, we need to rethink some of that before going to able to stay competitive . >> let's see, someone in the back, the gentleman with her hand up right there. >> jamie rubin of ballard partners, thank you for your comment, senator, could you address the south china sea and whether you think the chinese government has violated its promises to not militarize the
11:08 pm
areas and further, if we stay on the path we are on, do you see a time when china will be a greater military power in asia than the united states? >> >> china is very aggressive and we have chosen to bear the responsibility for the whole world. china is more focused on its neighborhood although i would point out that china always has a military base in djibouti, it's not just asia. i do believe that china efforts with the south china sea, go beyond what they promised they were going to do in terms of constraints. i think, this is where the countries who are most affected are vietnam and the philippines. i wish that we
11:09 pm
had a foreign policy that would leverage the ties so again, in china's benefit, the chinese government can make this a china u.s. potential conflict or adversarial relationship you've got of by the rules and you can't continue to flaunt international agreements whether it's the islands in the south china sea are around technology transfer or surveillance states in your own country. and, we don't have that kind of foreign-policy coming out of this administration. so, i do know this, there are grave concerns from our military about china's rise and whether they will surpass us, i'm not going to comment but, it's
11:10 pm
clearly got the attention of the american military establishment . >> all right, this gentleman over here . >> you've called for greater regulation of social media firms and i am wondering if you could speak on how the regulation could be enhanced with regard to content. i'm not talking about violence or hate but content that could have it disruptive effect even if it's removed quickly once posted . >> let me try to do this i had a long spiel on this and i will try to give you the short version, this is one more example of what i would say that where america has been giving up its leadership role. . our company started with social media and we should've set the, we would've been fined if we would've set the ground rules for social media. our failure to act has set the
11:11 pm
rules on privacy and, you know, you have the uk and australia moving on content, this is one more example, not unlike the full standards on 5g were up until recently we would've been setting all the standards and even though other countries might've complained i asked having one standard, generally in the right direction, countries could default to our standards and overall worked all around. on social media there are four areas that need examination. the first is privacy but there is already well thought out ideas on privacy as i mentioned from other member states and bipartisan efforts going on with privacy legislation on the hill. second, the questions around identity domination. one of the areas around hate speeches would diminish hate
11:12 pm
speech if you had to validate your identity, i'm also concerned about the female in egypt who needs to be anonymous but there are number of people who think, we will either move to identity validation or default into an effort and a dark web where the internet- based commerce will be with identity validation. you have countries like estonia have so much outside interference that they have gone to identity validation i'm not sure where i fully come out on that but we've got to know whether be but there are odds in legislation but now the validation content is interrelated and the content restrictions are what is called section 230 and when you made the rules for the companies you consider themselves and common
11:13 pm
carriers with no responsibility in 2019 you think of them is not as common carriers that we have already taken some bites around content and we taken prohibition on sex trafficking and child pornography and we've taken bomb making but we ought to have a debate in this area around content, i'm not sure what i will come out but i do think because the technology that has as much as slowing a video of nancy pelosi. 10 x more challenging and some of us are working on legislation and by the final area i think privacy, identity, content, more transparency. this is where we may move first.
11:14 pm
we give up information about ourselves that you don't know why clicking i agree and never being able to find and subscribe, dark patterns in the technology business. we are to have more transparency there and i think we are to have data affordability. one of the things that drove competition in the market is when they made it very easy for you to move your phone number from one company to another. we need the same kind of portability and interoperability with data so
11:15 pm
if i'm tired of harm treated on facebook i could pick up and move all my data with the videos easily to a new site. so, there will be a series of ways that i think that we can get at some of these issues that will indirectly deal with content and directly deal with content, short of maybe breaking up content. becky said the u.s. give up leadership role in this, why, how did this happen? >> i think it's happened because i think congress is not willing to legislate, some of these are legislative actions and some of these are actions that could have been done administratively. i think our failure to think about an articulated cyber strategy that set on an
11:16 pm
international basis what kind of cyber attack pics will not be allowed on an international order would've been enormously powerful so we wouldn't have had some of the ransomeware and other activities and set the other standards but this has been a process. it's gotten worse because congress has become more inefficient and the ability of the administration to build international coalitions >> this one right here . >> beverly lindsay, university of california. in many of our major research universities we have large numbers of internationals students particularly china involved in in some of the cutting-edge research what you think will be the perspective or how should we think about this continued interaction at our best research universities
11:17 pm
as students go back home? >> this is an extraordinarily important question. there are 360,000 chinese students studying in america it's almost double . >> one of every three are chinese . >> and foreign students here and in all those students they are paying 100 cents on the dollar for tuition. for many of these universities this is a source for the university become addicted to two things that the intelligence community was willing to do has declassified recently. we are currently using $400- $500 billion off the property each year. that's going to china.
11:18 pm
that's an enormous loss. i don't want to give the specifics because -- but it's the overwhelming majority of the counterintelligence cases in our country right now involving chinese nationals. so how we think about this in a way that does it interfere with the integrity of all the chinese students that recognize the factual basis of what is happening real-time on college campuses right now is a hard issue. things have changed in the last five years around chinese students. one, i would argue that five years ago eight years ago, 10 years ago most chinese students in with indians, brazilians and
11:19 pm
ethiopian students, they wanted to come here and study and the vast majority wanted to they. three things have changed since then, one i would argue that america and 2019 under this administration is not is immigrant friendly. you may contest that but i think that is a feeling that most people have. second, the chinese economy is roaring and it's a lot more attractive to go back but, the third factor that is taken place that is different is that the chinese spy services are literally threatening chinese families to say, if your son or daughter does not come back and come back with intellectual property, your family will be put in jeopardy. so, how we sort this through and one of the most things that colleges and universities have started to do his dave started to remove some of these confucius institutes that are agents of chinese servants is to spy on chinese students and
11:20 pm
hold them accountable. but, i think this is something i will have to keep working on because if we don't, what i'm afraid of is that you may have an cross the board, that may not be good for the universities or the state of our research and we don't want our squabbles with the communist party of china and that the chinese . >> are you saying that universities are now aware of this and they are acting on it? >> they are, we have had, we have met with presidents and chancellors of virtually every major university in america and this is much more on the radar screens today than it was 18 months ago. >> there are universities . >> if you simply look . >> again, we are changing the
11:21 pm
rules of the game midstream. i went to governor -- to china's governor and celebrated a partnership so, i'm not being -- but, if the facts have changed but the policies haven't changed. and, figuring that out is some in that i think we are all trying to sort through. >> yes . >> this woman right here >> >> professor of charter school of public policy at george mason and director of the transnational corruption center. one of the issues on china that you didn't mention is the enormous role in what might be called environmental devastation around the world. there's been a lot of visibility but the low-end depleting fish stock off the west coast of africa and how
11:22 pm
they are feeling conflict and migration and d4 station that contributes to the clock will damage. is there a way we can do with some of these problems that are undermining the sustainability of all of that? >> great question. >> i know the challenges and one is that the countries that are sometimes being excluded are saying well, we, you, america of the west, you did that for hundreds of years in terms of exploitation and now we want a piece of the pie and we can do what western companies did 80 years ago and they may have some valid trees in those comments but your point is exactly right and these affect us all and i don't think i have seen there's not in
11:23 pm
articulated strategy on how we push on into a more responsible and economical role. we didn't help matters we got out of the paris accord . >> yes. . >> thank you nelson cutting him . you mentioned the counterintelligence aspect of the mueller report and people remembered that it began as a counterintelligence investigation. i think many of us were surprised when we finally read the mueller report when he said that no, no, he'd staved off the counterintelligence investigation and simply provided information to the f pi for them to do their own investigation. now, on the intelligence committees, you are entitled by statute to receive briefings from the administration on
11:24 pm
major intelligence and counterintelligence operations, have you received briefings on the counterintelligence side of what moeller had been investigating what do you anticipate getting such briefings? >> we've made very public and we hope and intend to get the underlying evidence that mueller looked at are considered in terms of our counterintelligence response and i'm very proud of the fact that we are the last remaining bipartisan investigation and may be the last remaining bipartisan committee in the senate. but, we are still doing our job and we are very conscious of what moeller said and didn't say. >> is it clear there can be a bipartisan agreement? >> our investigation has five
11:25 pm
components. and the assessment of january 17, was it as accurate, they did it to help trump and her clinton. we confirm that unanimously. we came out with our report on election security that you've got it written as far as declassification and that was unanimous in bipartisan. we are drafting the component parts on social media again and we've had no disagreements to date. we will point out some of the heirs with the obama administration got it right in some areas with a candidly got it wrong. we've had notice on the issue of conspiracy, collusion was a day we shouldn't have used from day one but we are still or it's been reported that we saw witnesses last week . >> it had been reported, hadn't? >> let's see, this gentleman
11:26 pm
right here . >> hello. from our discussion it were that china is challenging the united states everywhere, all the time around the world. it seems like our response is too little too late as things like the bill that , the development finance corporation and minimum budget, what will allow us to put their money where their mouth is and stand up? >> so, great question. this is an important tool and he would be the first to acknowledge it's not near enough when we are looking at the goal that. i would argue that, and this is kind of my map but point that
11:27 pm
you need to make this not u.s. versus china but it needs to be more democracies calling on china to engage and i think we could do a better job of leveraging on the economic development standpoint and is the current administration and when we have to put people in those . >> . >> stage three which is, which
11:28 pm
technologies we need to invest in and that is what the race to the moon was industrial policy by simply a different name but the short term interim, what we do over the next couple years, i gave out ideas but i think was still pretty thin . >> one last question we have time for, let's see, someone way in the back all the way in the back. >> so many american firms and other companies have cut off their supply to walway but still, we know that some makers in the united states -- by the
11:29 pm
export control so they want the government to lose the control on that so that they can still continue the supply of some sensitive parts or regular parts to walway. i'm wondering what is your point of view? >> you raise a very important question. and, this is where i think, even though the designation letter was a long time coming i think the fact that it had not been fully thought through and it shows that this was an issue that should've received tire attention early because your point, when you are thinking about the net worth versus the handset do we really want to restrict american and other chip manufacturers from selling into the handset, i think there
11:30 pm
does need to be exemptions granted of the designation letter and i think we should have thought through that on the front end but i would be supportive of recognizing that there is a difference between selling component parts to walway versus purchasing walway and there is a difference between the network and the handset so my point is i agree with your question . >> thank you for senator mark warner, vice chairman of the committee on intelligence and thank you to all of you. the meeting is concluded. [ applause ] >> thank you . >> thank you.
11:31 pm
11:32 pm
here's a look at life coverage on wednesday on c-span the house is back at 10 am eastern for generals reaches with legislative business at 12 a.m. members will continue work on a 20/20 spending package that covers the treasury department and judiciary and executive branches. on cspan-2, the senate returns at 10 am eastern to resume debate on a bill that sets 2020 defense policy and programs. then that 6:45 pm eastern time the coverage of the annual congressional baseball game begins with first pitch set for 7:05 p.m. and on cspan-3, there is a house oversight hearing regarding the office of special counsel's recommendation that president trump fire white house counsel kellyanne conway
11:33 pm
for alleged hatch act violations. that is at 10 am eastern time. and it 2:30 p.m. that the senate budget committee holds a hearing on federal government spending with testimony from the u.s. comptroller general. the reviews are in for c-span the president's book that recently topped the new york times new and noteworthy column. the reviews: a milepost in the ever-changing reputation of our president. the new york journal of books the president makes a fast engrossing read. read about how noted presidential historians ranked the best and worst chief executives from george washington to barack obama. explore life events that shape our leaders, challenges they face in the legacies they left behind at
11:34 pm
president or wherever books are sold. back we are back with the president and we will talk about this year's congressional pig. first, tell us what this is ? >> citizens against government waste was founded in 1984 with president reagan so we've been around a long time. since then we have of course been investigating, researching, exposing and exposing government fraud and abuse and the rest around since 1991 and we have identified hundred 11,000, 114 earmarks with 314 billion dollars so when people say just a little here are a few thousand there but adds up and they are corrupting, costly and equitable


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on