Counterterrorism in 2020: Future prospects and challenges panel

TODAY'S EVENT IS PART OF THE 

FORD SCHOOL'S TOWSLEY 

POLICYMAKER PROGRAM.

IT DEVELOPED INTO THOUSAND ONE, 

THE TOWSLEY PROGRAM HAS ALLOWED 

US TO BRINGS PROFESSIONALS TO 

JOIN A PROGRAM FOR SEMESTER AND 

SOMETIMES LONGER.

WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE TOWSLEY 

FOUNDATION WITH US THIS 

EVENING.

I AM HERE TO RECOGNIZE AND ON 

BEHALF OF THE FORD SCHOOL OFFER 

OF MY THINGS TO GLENN WHITE AND 

DALE DUNBAR FOR THE INCREDIBLE 

SUPPORT OF THE FORD SCHOOL.

[APPLAUSE] 

>> OUR TOWSLEY POLICYMAKER 

RESIDENTS TEACH AND WORK WITH 

THE FACULTY AND BECOME A PART 

OF THE LIFE OF THE SCHOOL 

BRINGING REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE 

IN ALL OF ITS COMPLEXITIES AND 

POTENTIAL RIGHT HERE TO THE 

FORD SCHOOL AND THE UNIVERSITY 

OF MICHIGAN.

THE TOWSLEY GIFT HAS HAD A VERY 

POSITIVE AND POWERFUL IMPACT ON 

OUR SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS, AND 

WE ARE DEEPLY GRATEFUL.

THIS SEMESTER, THEY ARE GLAD TO 

HAVE JAVED ALI AS A 2018 

TOWSLEY POLICYMAKER AND 

RESIDENT.

HE IS CURRENTLY TEACHING A FORD 

SCHOOL GRADUATE LEVEL COURSE OF 

DECISION-MAKING.

JAVED HAS OVER 20 YEARS OF 

NATIONAL SECURITY AND 

INTELLIGENCE IN WASHINGTON D.C. 

AND HE MOST RECENTLY SERVED ON 

ASSIGNMENT FROM THE FBI A 

SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR 

COUNTERTERRORISM AT THE 

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL.

HE BEGAN HIS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 

CAREER IN TO THOUSAND TO IT IS 

WORKED AT THE DEFENSE 

INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, THE 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY, AND THE FBI.

AND IN ADDITION TO HIS ROLE AT 

THE NSC, HE WAS ALSO ON 

ASSIGNMENT AT THE NATIONAL 

INTELLIGENCE COUNCIL AND 

TERRORISM CENTER.

HE HAS A BA IN POLITICAL 

SCIENCE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF 

MICHIGAN, AND DA, AND AN MA IN 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS FROM 

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY.

JAVED IS GOING TO INTRODUCE HER 

DISTINGUISHED PANELIST MORE 

FULLY IN A MOMENT SO FOR NOW, 

PLEASE SIMPLY JOIN ME IN 

OFFERING A VERY WARM WELCOME TO 

OUR GUESTS.

WE HAVE PETER BERGEN, A 

JOURNALIST FOR FELLOWS OF THE 

NEW AMERICA.

BARBARA McQUADE, MY COLLEAGUE 

AND PROFESSOR FROM MICHIGAN 

LAW, AND THE FORMER DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN 

DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.

AND CHRIS COSTA, A 30 YEAR 

VETERAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 

DEFENSE AND NOW THE EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR OF THE SPY MUSEUM IN 

WASHINGTON, D.C.. LET ME JUST 

PAUSE THERE AND ASK YOU TO JOIN 

ME IN WELCOMING THEM.

[APPLAUSE] 

>> LET ME JUST SAY A BIT ABOUT 

THE PROCESS, WE WILL FOLLOW OUR 

USUAL FORD SCHOOL RULES.

IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR 

JAVED OR ONE OF THE PANELISTS, 

PLEASE RIGHTED AND WE WILL 

COLLECT CARS AROUND 4:30.

OUR PROFESSOR JOEY RHODY, I AM 

LOOKING AND SEEING YOU, AND 

THREE OF JAVED STUDENTS WILL 

SORT THROUGH AND READ THE 

QUESTION.

MICHAEL BECKMAN, AND ELLIOTT 

VAN WHITE.

IF YOU ARE WATCHING ONLINE, 

PLEASE SEND YOUR QUESTION VIA 

TWITTER USING #POLICYTALKS.

WITH THAT, JAVED, I WILL TURN 

THINGS OVER TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU, DEAN BARR.

FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO 

SAY THANK YOU, DEAN BARR, FOR 

GIVING ME A CHANCE TO BE HERE.

IT IS A LOOK TO WIND OF THIS 

CLASS IT HAS BEEN A SPECIAL 

PRIVILEGE AND HONOR FOR ME TO 

BE HERE CERTAINLY IS A MICHIGAN 

GRAD MANY YEARS AGO.

AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE 

WHO WAS TURNED OUT TODAY TO 

WATCH IN PERSON, A GREAT 

AUDIENCE TO HEAR THE REMARKABLE 

INSIGHTS THAT YOU WILL GET FROM 

THIS VERY DISTINGUISHED PANEL, 

AND HOPEFULLY FOR THOSE WHO ARE 

WATCHING ONLINE ARE FOLLOWING 

ONLINE AS WELL, AND IT IS A 

NEAT CAPABILITY THAT DID NOT 

EXIST WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL 30 

YEARS AGO.

BUT AS DEAN BARR MENTIONED, 

UNDER THE TOWSLEY PROGRAM, I 

TRIED TO GET ALL OF THE 

OBJECTIVES THAT YOU TALKED 

ABOUT IN TERMS OF MY PRESENCE 

HERE OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS 

AND CERTAINLY TO THIS MONTH, 

CERTAINLY LEADING A NEW CLASS 

THAT WILL GO WELL.

THE STUDENTS CAN GIVE YOU 

FEEDBACK ON INTERACTING WITH A 

BROADER RANGE OF STUDENTS 

ACROSS THE CAMPUS.

I TRY TO DO THAT AS WELL AND A 

PULL TOGETHER A UNIQUE PANEL 

DISCUSSION, AND I THINK THAT WE 

WILL DELIVER THAT TODAY.

NOW DEAN BARR, WHEN YOU HAD 

ASKED ME TO START TO THINK 

ABOUT AN EVENT UNDER THE 

TOWSLEY PROGRAM, WHAT IT WOULD 

LOOK LIKE IN TRUE NATIONAL 

SECURITY COUNCIL PRACTICE, AND 

CHRIS COSTA GNOSIS, I LOOKED AT 

MULTIPLE OPTIONS, LOOKED AT THE 

PROS AND CONS OF EACH OPTION 

AND ULTIMATELY CAME UP WITH MY 

OWN RECOMMENDATION AND DID NOT 

HAVE TO CONSULT WITH ANYBODY 

ELSE.

BUT WHEN I SORTED THROUGH THE 

COMPLEXITY, I DECIDED TO BUILD 

THE PANEL AROUND SOMETHING THAT 

MEANS ÃSOMETHING VERY PROFOUND 

TO ME, COUNTERTERRORISM.

THIS IS THE ISSUE WHERE I WORK 

THE ENTIRETY OF MY CAREER IN 

GOVERNMENT AND SEVERAL YEARS 

BEFORE 9/11 IN WASHINGTON SO 

HOPEFULLY THIS IS THE 

PERSPECTIVE THAT WE CAN TALK 

ABOUT OVER THE NEXT HOUR, HOUR 

AND-A-HALF YEAR.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THIS 

ISSUE ALIGNS WITH SOME OF THE 

TOPICS WE HAVE EXPLORED IN THE 

CLASS ON NATIONAL SECURITY 

DECISION-MAKING, SO THIS IS A 

TWO FOR ONE.

NOW, WHAT I ALSO WANTED TO DO 

WAS TO LOOK INTO THE FUTURE.

SO THE WE LITERALLY JUST 

PASSING 17TH ANNIVERSARY OF 

REMEMBER THAT DAY, AND I 

CERTAINLY DO FOR MY TIME IN 

WASHINGTON, THE THREAT OF 

TERRORISM IS NOT GOING AWAY 

ANYTIME SOON IN THE UNITED 

STATES.

TWO YEARS FROM NOW WE WILL BE 

IN 2020 AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT 

THE WORLD WILL LOOK LIKE THEM.

SO THIS IS WHAT I WANTED TO 

PANEL DISCUSSION TO FOCUS ON, 

THE FORWARD-LOOKING APPROACH OF 

WHAT THE WORLD OF TERRORISM AND 

COUNTERTERRORISM WILL LOOK LIKE 

IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND WE ARE 

REALLY LUCKY TO HAVE THESE 

THREE EXPERT VIEWS BRINGING 

THEIR OWN DISTINGUISHED 

BACKGROUNDS THROUGH A VARIETY 

OF DISCIPLINES, AS DEAN BARR 

DESCRIBED.

EACH OF THEM WHO I KNOW, SOME 

FOR LONGER THAN OTHERS, AND 

BOWEL HAVE BUILD POSITIVE 

RELATIONSHIPS WITH.

SO, LET'S FIRST TURN TO PETER 

BERGEN.

AS WE HEARD FROM DEAN BARR, I 

WOULD CONSIDER PETER THE 

WORLD'S LEADING POLICY EXPERT 

ON COUNTERTERRORISM.

YOU HAVE BEEN IN THIS FOR 

ALMOST 30 YEARS IF NOT MORE.

YOU HAVE WRITTEN SEVEN BOOKS Ã

AND CORRECT ME IF I GET THIS 

WRONG.

MOST OF THEM ARE AWARD-WINNING.

YOU'VE AUTHORED MULTIPLE 

REPORTS OF MONOGRAPHS, AND WHAT 

OF YOUR HOMEWORK ACHIEVEMENTS 

IS YOUR INTERVIEW WITH OSAMA 

BIN LADEN IN 1998.IF YOU GET 

THAT RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR, 97.

>> THERE WE GO.

BUT PETER, AGAIN, I THINK IS 

REALLY THE WORLD'S LIVING VOICE 

OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT, AND EVEN 

IN MY DIFFERENT POSITIONS WITH 

GOVERNMENT.

AND CHRIS COSTA CAN ATTEST TO 

THIS.

WE WERE THINKING OF SORTING 

THROUGH SOME TOUGH 

COUNTERTERRORISM ISSUES INSIDE 

THE NSC.

THE FIRST PERSON WE SPOKE TO 

WAS PETER BERGEN SO PETER, 

THANK YOU FOR SPENDING TIME 

WITH US.

MY CONNECTION WITH YOU GOES 

BACK ALMOST 20 YEARS BUT NOW 

CHRIS I HAVE NOT KNOWN AS LONG.

CHRIS HIRED ME AS A DEPUTY AT 

THE NSC.

WE HAD NEVER MET EACH OTHER 

WHICH IS UNUSUAL.

USUALLY IN WASHINGTON THE 

SENIOR POSITIONS, THE PERSONAL 

CONNECTIONS TO DO WORK OUT THAT 

WAY BUT I NEVER MET CHRIS.

I'M STILL NOT SURE WHY HE 

PICKED ME AS A DEPUTY.

[LAUGHTER] 

>> BUT AS YOU CAN TELL, YOU 

WANT UP TO ME ON THE MICHIGAN 

TIE EVEN THOUGH YOU DID NOT GO 

TO SCHOOL HERE BUT THERE IS 

GOLD OF MY TIE, JUST FOR THE 

RECORD.

BUT CHRIS AND I HIT IT OFF FROM 

THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WE 

SPENT TOGETHER WAS ALMOST LIKE 

A 20 YEAR SORT OF BOND, BECAUSE 

WE REALLY WENT THROUGH SORT OF 

THE CRUCIBLE, FROM THE TIME 

THAT WE BOTH SPENT IN THE NSC 

FROM EARLY 2017 TO EARLY 2018.

SO CHRIS CANNOT SAY ENOUGH 

ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PICKING ME AS 

YOUR DEPUTY BUT YOUR OWN 

CAREER, 34 YEARS OF GOVERNMENT 

SERVICE, 25 YEARS IN THE 

MILITARY AND RETIRED AS A 

COLONEL.

A LOT OF THAT TIME IN THE 

MILITARY INTELLIGENCE WORLD, 

ALSO IN THE SPECIAL OPERATIONS 

WORLD, THE COMMANDO HALL OF 

FAME.

BUT YOU DID NOT KNOW THIS ABOUT 

CHRIS.

YOU'VE SEEN THE PICTURES AND 

YOU WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE HIM 

WHEN HE WAS IN HIS COMMANDO 

ROLL!

AND THEN, ANOTHER NINE YEARS OF 

SERVICE IN GOVERNMENT TO 

INCLUDE THE LAST YEAR IS A 

SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE 

PRESIDENT FOR COUNTERTERRORISM 

AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

AGAIN, CHRIS, I WAS HONORED TO 

WORK WITH CHRIS AS HIS DEPUTY.

THEN BARBARA WHO I ALSO HAVE 

NOT KNOWN AS LONG BUT WHEN I 

WAS AT THE FBI ÃAND I HAVE 

LEFT THE GOVERNMENT, JUST TO BE 

CLEAR.

WHEN I WAS AT THE FBI, 

BARBARA'S REPUTATION WAS 

WELL-VERSED INSIDE THE HALLS OF 

THE FBI.

HER CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, 

HAS SPENT A LOT OF TIME AS A 

PROSECUTOR ON THE FRONT LINES 

ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES TO 

INCLUDE COUNTERTERRORISM.

BUT THEN, THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR 

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF 

MICHIGAN IN 2010, YOUR 

PROMINENCE BECAME EVEN HIGHER.

AND I THOUGHT WHAT WAS REALLY 

UNIQUE ABOUT YOUR ROLE AS A 

U.S. ATTORNEY EVEN THOUGH YOU 

WERE, AGAIN, THESE ARE REALLY 

TOUGH NATIONAL SECURITY CASES 

TO INCLUDE COUNTERTERRORISM 

CASES, BUT I ALWAYS THOUGHT 

THAT YOU WERE ONE OF THE FEW 

U.S. ATTORNEYS GOING BACK 

ALMOST 1 DECADE TO TRY TO 

BALANCE THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH 

ROLE IN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, 

AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT 

YOU HAD A FOOT EQUALLY IN BOTH 

CAMPS AS THEY WERE SORTING 

THROUGH THE TOUGH ISSUES AFTER 

TO THOUSAND ONE, SO THANK YOU, 

BARBARA, AS WELL, FOR BEING 

HERE WITH US.

SO THAT IS SORT OF AN 

INTRODUCTION TO THE PANEL.

LET ME JUST FRAME THE 

CONVERSATION WE WILL HAVE TODAY 

AND THE FORMAT.

SO WE HAVE AN HOUR AND 20 

MINUTES OR AN HOUR AND 10 

MINUTES AND WE CAN GET THROUGH 

THIS SMARTLY.

I HAVE FOUR QUESTIONS, THE 

PANELISTS KNOW WHAT THIS IS.

UNLIKE SOME OF MY IMMEDIATE 

APPEARANCES IN TELEVISION AS 

PETER AND BARBARA CAN ATTEST 

TO.

BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS 

CYCLED THROUGH THE PANEL WITH 

THE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS THAT I 

HAVE THEM GET YOU ALL INVOLVED 

IN THE AUDIENCE, EITHER HERE IN 

THE ROOM OR THOSE WATCHING 

REMOTELY OR ONLINE.

WE HAVE STUDENTS FROM THE CLASS 

WILL HELP TO FACILITATE THAT 

ASPECT.

BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS 

FROM THE AUDIENCE.

IF WE DON'T THEN I WILL MOVE ON 

TO THE NEXT TWO QUESTIONS AND 

WE WILL SWING BACK TO THE 

AUDIENCE QUESTIONS AT THE END 

BUT WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL GET A 

CHANCE TO INTERACT WITH THE 

PANELISTS.

SO THAT IS ENOUGH TALKING FOR 

ME, SORT OF A FRAME UP FOR WHAT 

WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO 

ACCOMPLISH, SO LET'S JUST DIVE 

INTO THE QUESTIONS.

WE WILL START WITH PETER AND 

THEN REVERSE HER FOR THE SECOND 

ONE.

SO I MENTIONED BRIEFLY THAT WE 

WANT THIS PANEL TO ADD LEAST 

START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT 

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE AND WHAT 

THE POTENTIAL TERROR THREAT 

WILL LOOK LIKE IN 2020.

SO THAT IS SORT OF A JUMPING 

OFF POINT, PETER.

SO JUST LOOKED AT THE TERRORISM 

PHENOMENON FROM 30 YEARS, 

LOOKING AT 2020, WHAT DO YOU 

THINK THE BIGGEST TERRORIST 

THREATS WILL BE FOR THE UNITED 

STATES IN THAT TWO YEAR 

TIMEFRAME, AND WHY DO YOU 

BELIEVE SO?

>> WELL THANK YOU, JAVED, FOR 

THE INVITATION AND TO THE FORD 

SCHOOL.

YOGI BERRA SAID IT IS HARD TO 

MAKE PREDICTIONS, ESPECIALLY 

ABOUT THE FUTURE.

SO I WOULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING 

OBSERVATION THAT ISIS WAS NOT A 

PROBLEM.

ISIS WAS A SYMPTOM OF THE 

PROBLEMS THAT DOES NOT AFFECT 

THE UNITED STATES BUT AFFECTS 

THE MIDDLE EAST AND EUROPE.

A BIG PROBLEM IS A REGIONAL 

CIVIL WAR BETWEEN THE SUNNI AND 

THE GULF STATES.

NOW, THE COLLAPSE OF OUR 

GOVERNORS FROM LIBYA TO YEMEN 

ARE A SECOND ISSUE.

THE COLLAPSE OF OUR ECONOMIES, 

AT 30 PERCENT IN THE REGION 

RIGHT NOW.

THE POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHIC 

EXPLOSION, THE SECOND MOST 

OTHER THAN THE THE SUB-SAHARAN 

AFRICAN, NORTH AFRICA, POLICE, 

THE FASTEST GROWING POPULATION 

IN THE WORLD.

I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THE 

ARGUMENT THAT THE POOREST 

PEOPLE BECOME TERRORIST BUT I 

WANT TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT 

PEOPLE LOOKING FOR JOBS, ISIS 

AND THE TALIBAN, THESE GROUPS 

HAVE ÃTHEY PROVIDE JOBS FOR 

THAN AS A RESULT OF THE FIRST 

FOUR PROBLEMS, ALTERED BY 

CLIMATE CHANGES THAT ARE MADE 

NORTH AFRICA AND THE 

SUB-SAHARAN A VERY DIFFICULT 

PLACE TO LIVE.

SO WE HAVE THIS NEXT PROBLEM 

WHICH IS AN UNPRECEDENTED WAVE 

OF IMMIGRATION INTO YOUR.

I GREW UP IN ENGLAND.

EUROPEANS DON'T HAVE THE 

IDEOLOGICAL APPARATUS TO ACCEPT 

LARGE-SCALE IMMIGRATION.THERE 

ARE OF COURSE EXCEPTIONS.

THE MAYOR OF LONDON IS A MUSLIM 

IN THE HOMELAND SECRETARY IS A 

MUSLIM BUT THE FACT IS IF YOU 

ARE A MUSLIM LIVING IN EUROPE, 

IT IS NOT AN ACCOMMODATING 

PLACE.

AND THEN, YOU HAVE THE RIGHTS 

OF THE ULTRANATIONALIST 

PARTIES, EVEN THE PRO-FASCIST 

PARTIES WHICH WERE ONCE VERY 

MARGINAL, AND THEN, ALL OF 

THESE TRENDS ARE AMPLIFIED BY 

SOCIAL MEDIA.

SO, ISIS WAS A SORT OF MIDDLE 

EASTERN PHENOMENON WITH A 

MIDDLE EASTERN DIMENSION BUT 

THE UNITED STATES WAS NOT 

REALLY EFFECTIVE BY IT.

WE ARE PROTECTED BY IDEOLOGY, 

THE AMERICAN DREAM WHICH IS 

WORKED VERY WELL FOR EVERY 

IMMIGRATION THE LAST GENERATION 

OF IMMIGRANTS.

YOU CAN DRIVE ÃCANNOT DRIVE 

FROM DETROIT TO |

>>> NOW, IT MIGHT NOT BE AS 

EFFECTIVE AS BARBARA, CHRIS, 

THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE NOT 

FLOURISHED IN THIS COUNTRY AND 

WE HAVE TAKEN THE FIGHT TO 

THEM.BUT, WITH THAT SAID, 

FIVE YEARS AGO AFTER THE DEATH 

OF BIN LADEN IN THE ARAB 

SPRING, I WOULD'VE HAD A RATHER 

OPTIMISTIC ANSWER BUT TODAY I 

DON'T BECAUSE I THINK THAT 

THERE ARE UNDERLYING ISSUES 

THAT CONTINUE TO EXIST.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU, PETER.

CHRIS?

>> SO FIRST OF ALL IT IS A 

PRIVILEGE TO BE HERE TONIGHT SO 

THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND 

ESPECIALLY TO PARTICIPATE IN A 

PANEL WITH JAVED AND PETER AND 

BARBARA.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME 

CONTEXT FIRST, THEN I WILL DIG 

INTO THE QUESTIONS.

CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY?

NO?

OKAY.

WELL, NORTH AND SOUTH BEREZO ON 

DAY ONE, JUST TO SET THE 

CONTEXT, WE HAD THREE ISSUES 

THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH IN 

THE COUNTERTERRORISM SPHERE.

FIRST OF ALL, WE HAD A 

DECISION TO MAKE ON AN 

INTELLIGENCE RAID THAT WOULD 

HAPPEN IN THE FIRST WEEK OF THE 

ADMINISTRATION.

THE RATE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY 

DIRECTED AGAINST AL QAEDA AND 

THE PENINSULA.

I SUBSEQUENTLY DISCOVERED THAT 

IT WAS AN OPERATOR THAT I KNEW, 

BUT THAT IS THE PRICE OF 

DECISION-MAKING, NATIONAL 

DECISION-MAKING.

WE PUT PRESSURE ON AL QAEDA IN 

THE ARABIAN PENINSULA.

THE SECOND ISSUE THAT WE HAD TO 

WORK WAS A CONSTANT UNDERLYING 

THREAT DIRECTED AT COMMERCIAL 

AVIATION THAT WAS PERSISTENT 

AND SEVERE, AND WE WERE VERY 

MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

THERE WAS A STAY IN CONTINUITY 

BETWEEN BOTH ADMINISTRATIONS 

THAT YOU SHOULD BE REASSURED 

ABOUT.

AS WE WENT FROM ONE 

ADMINISTRATION TO THE NEXT, 

GETTING TO THE PROBLEM.

THE THIRD ISSUE WAS, WE HAD TO 

ACCELERATE OUR ISIS CAMPAIGN.

THOSE WERE THREE ISSUES IN THE 

FIRST WEEK THAT WE WOULD TACKLE 

ALMOST IMMEDIATELY.

SO I WANT TO PROVIDE THE 

CONTEXT.

NOW, TO ANSWER, THE BIGGEST 

THREATS ÃI WANT TO REINFORCE 

THAT REMNANTS OF ISIS IN THE 

NEXT 25 YEARS OR SOMETHING LIKE 

ISIS IS GOING TO PERSIST.

THE ENEMY HAS GONE UNDERGROUND.

ISIS HAS GONE UNDERGROUND 

CERTAINLY, BUT SOME OF THE 

WONDERING GROUPS WILL BE BETTER 

TRAINED AND MORE LETHAL AND 

STILL INSISTENT ON CAUSING 

HAVOC IN THE WEST AND SOME WILL 

GET AWAY FROM SYRIA AND IRAQ, 

SO I AM WORRIED ABOUT A 

REBRANDED ISIS HERE 

IDEOLOGICALLY SOMEBODY ELSE, 

WHETHER THAT IS A BIGGER AL 

QAEDA, THAT IS AN OPEN QUESTION 

BUT WE WILL HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT 

ISIS.

SECONDLY, I AM WORRIED ABOUT AL 

QAEDA.

THEY LAY THEIR HEAD LOW AND LET 

ISIS STICK IT UP AND TAKE THE 

SHOTS, BUT AL QAEDA HAS NOT 

GONE AWAY.

THEY HAVE BEEN QUIETLY 

REBUILDING AND USE DOCTOR BRUCE 

HOFFMAN'S WORDS, THEY HAVE BEEN 

QUIETLY REBRANDED THEMSELVES.

THIRD, THE OTHER CONCERN, BASED 

ON 2020 WITH THE QUESTION THAT 

WE RECEIVED, I AM WORRIED ABOUT 

HEZBOLLAH.

THEY HAVE A CLANDESTINE 

INFRASTRUCTURE.

THEY HAVE NOT GOT AWAY.

AND THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO 

TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A GRAY ZONE 

CONFLICT THAT IS PLAYING OUT IN 

SYRIA TO THIS DAY.

SO I AM VERY MUCH WORRIED ABOUT 

HEZBOLLAH.

AND I SHOULD ARGUE THAT SOME 

WOULD SAY THAT THE 

ADMINISTRATION HAS CURRENTLY 

RESUSCITATED THE HEZBOLLAH 

PROBLEM, SO THAT WE COULD 

JUSTIFY A MORE AGGRESSIVE 

IRANIAN PROBLEM.

FROM A PURELY CT LINENS, I AM 

STILL WORRIED ABOUT HEZBOLLAH.

THEY HAVE A VERY, VERY CAPABLE 

AND LETHAL CAPABILITY.

THE SECOND PART THAT I WILL 

WRAP UP VERY QUICKLY, I JUST 

WANT TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT 

MORE OF A SCENE SETTER, THAT IN 

THE POST BIN LADEN WORLD, THERE 

WAS A GREATER OPTIMISM, RIGHT?

BIN LADEN WAS KILLED.

THERE WAS A CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM 

THAT BEGAN TO BREAK OUT.

BUT THEN AGAIN, A LOT OF OTHER 

THINGS HAPPENED, BUT AN 

APOCALYPTIC GROUP CAME ALONG 

WHICH WAS ISIS, TAKING 

ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THE CHAOS.

AND WITH THAT SAID, I THINK 

THAT I WILL CLOSE MY INITIAL 

COMMENTS WITH THE FIRST ANSWER 

BY SAYING RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE 

CURRENTLY HAVE PLAYING OUT IN 

SYRIA AND IRAQ AS A METAPHOR 

FOR WHAT WE WILL BE DEALING 

WITH IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, 

WHICH IS THIS GRAY ZONE 

CONFLICT PLAYING OUT.

WHEN YOU CONSIDER SYRIA, WHAT 

IS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW?

WHAT YOU HAVE IS HEZBOLLAH 

OPERATING IN THAT SPACE.

PROXIES.

YOU HAVE A GENOCIDAL REGIME OF 

SYRIA WITH RUSSIANS IN THE 

PLAYGROUND, ACTING AND TAKING 

ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THE CHAOS 

ON THE GROUND IN SYRIA.

YOU HAVE ISIS REMNANTS STILL 

OPERATING IN U.S. PROXY FORCES, 

AND U.S. FORCES STILL GOING 

AFTER THE LAST VESTIGES OF 

ISIS, AND A NATO ALLEY OF THE 

TURKS PLAYING IN THE SAME SPACE 

SO I THINK THAT THAT IS VERY 

MUCH A METAPHOR FOR WHAT WE 

WILL BE DEALING WITH IN THE 

NEXT FEW YEARS.

>> Barbara McQuade: WILL THANK 

YOU VERY MUCH PRODUCE THE 

MICROPHONE GOOD?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR 

INVITING ME, JAVED AND MICHAEL.

WE ARE SO GLAD TO BE HERE AT 

THE FORD SCHOOL, OUR NEIGHBOR 

FROM ACROSS THE PARKING LOT 

PART OF ONLY THOUGHT OF YOU AS 

A GOOD TARGET FOR THE WATER 

BALLOON FIGHT IN THE PAST BUT 

IT IS GREAT TO BE HERE.

[LAUGHTER] 

>> OUT ANSWER THE QUESTION, I 

CERTAINLY AGREE WITH WHAT CHRIS 

AND PETER HAVE TO SAY AND I'LL 

ADD A FEW MORE THOUGHTS OF WHAT 

I THINK IS A PROSECUTOR, LESS 

OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE 

BUT MORE OF THE PROSECUTION 

TEAM, WITH MY PRIOR JOB.

NOW IT DOES APPEAR TO ME THAT 

THE THREAT IS THAT WE MIGHT SEE 

IN THE FUTURE MIGHT ALSO COME 

FROM HOMEGROWN VIOLENT 

EXTREMISM.

AS WELL AS NATION STATES.

RUSSIA AND KOREA, KORAN, AND 

CHINA IN PARTICULAR.

BUT DURING THE TIME THAT I 

WORKED ON THESE THREATS IN THE 

U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE STARTING 

INTO THOUSAND TO AND UNTIL LAST 

YEAR, WE REALLY SAW THE THREAD 

EVOLVE VERY QUICKLY.

FIRST, OF COURSE AFTER 9/11, IT 

WAS ALL ABOUT AL QAEDA.

SHORTLY THEREAFTER IT BECAME AL 

QAEDA IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA, 

AND THEN IT DID EVOLVE TO ISIS, 

AND EVEN THAT WE HAVE SEEN HAS 

EVOLVED SINCE THAT TIME.

SO I DO SEE ÃEVEN THE ISIS 

THREAT HAS EVOLVED FROM TRAVEL 

TO SYRIA AND SIGN UP TO BE A 

FIGHTER FOR ISIS.

OR DON'T COME TO US, STAY WHERE 

YOU ARE AND FIGHT WHERE YOU 

ARE.

THEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE DRIVING A 

CAR INTO A CROWD, COMMITTING 

TERRORIST ACTS WHERE YOU LIVE.

SO THE THREAT IS SO CONSTANTLY 

EVOLVING, I THINK AS PETER 

MENTIONED, I SEE CLIMATE CHANGE 

WHICH IS DRIVING CARE ACTIVITY.

MIGRATION OF REFUGEES, PEOPLE 

WITH NO PLACE TO LIVE, I THINK 

THAT THAT IS GOING TO SPARK THE 

MILITANT GROUPS, FIGHTING FOR 

THEIR LIVES, FIGHTING FOR THEIR 

LAND.

SO I THINK THAT THOSE CAN SPARK 

THE THREAD AS WELL.

THEN JUST TO TALK ABOUT THE TWO 

THREATS OF HOMEGROWN VIOLENCE 

AND EXTREMISM, THREATS FROM 

NATIONSTATES, WITH REGARD 

HOMEGROWN VIOLENCE AND 

EXTREMISM, THIS IS SO 

OVERSTATED AND UNDER LOOKED.

SINCE 9/11, 71 PERCENT OF 

TERROR ATTACKS IN THE UNITED 

STATES HAVE BEEN PERPETRATED BY 

HOMEGROWN VIOLENT EXTREMISTS, 

RIGHT WING GROUPS.

WE FOCUS ON THE BIG AND 

DRAMATIC ATTACKS LIKE 9/11, BUT 

WE TEND NOT TO PAY AS MUCH 

ATTENTION TO THE OTHER GROUPS 

BY HOMEGROWN VIOLENT EXTREMIST 

WHICH I THINK IT'S A MISTAKE.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE 

COUNTERTERRORISM OF THE OBAMA 

ADMINISTRATION THE WE AT THE 

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STARTED TO 

PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE 

THREAD AND RESUSCITATED A GROUP 

CALLED THE DOMESTIC TERRORISM 

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.

I WAS A COCHAIR OF THE GROUP, 

AND THE GROUP HAD LAST MET ON 

SEPTEMBER 10 TO THOUSAND ONE.

HIS WORK HAS BEEN GREATLY 

OVERSHADOWED BY THIS VERY 

HORRIBLE AND SERIOUS AND 

SIGNIFICANT EVENT OF 9/11, BUT 

BECAUSE SO MUCH EMPHASIS WAS 

PLACED ON INTERNATIONAL 

TERRORISM, I THINK THAT THERE 

IS LESS ATTENTION THAN 

APPROPRIATE, PAINTED THE 

DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

SO IT IS STILL ALIVE AND WELL 

AND MY COCHAIR WITH THE U.S. 

ATTORNEY FROM THE DISTRICT OF 

UTAH IS STILL THE ATTORNEY IN 

THIS ADMINISTRATION AND I KNOW 

THAT HE IS CARING ON THAT 

IMPORTANT WORK SO I AM GLAD TO 

SEE HE HAS HIS EYE ON THE BALL.

SOMETIMES I WORRY ABOUT THE 

RHETORIC THAT FOCUSES ON THE 

INTERNATIONAL THREAT THAT 

UNDERSTATES WHAT THIS THREAD IS 

OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM, BUT I 

MEAN IT IS JUST AS SIGNIFICANT.

WHEN SOMEBODY DIES, NOBODY 

CARES IF IT WAS MOTIVATED BY 

INTERNATIONAL OR DOMESTIC 

TERRORISM.

THIS IS A THREAT THAT WE NEED 

TO PAY ATTENTION TO.

AND THEN, WITH REGARD TO THE 

FOREIGN THREAT FROM 

NATIONSTATES, THE CIA HAS 

RECENTLY SAID THAT THIS WILL BE 

HIS RENEWED FOCUS, SINCE 9/11, 

THE TOP PRIORITY HAVE BEEN 

COUNTERTERRORISM.

AND THOUGH IT IS CERTAINLY PART 

OF WHAT THEY FOCUS ON, THEY HAD 

MADE A TOP PRIORITY 

NATIONSTATES FROM HUMAN 

INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION, AND I 

THINK THAT THAT MAKES A LOT OF 

SENSE WITH WHAT WE HAVE SEEN 

WITH RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE AND 

THE ELECTION WHICH IS A 

CONCLUSION OF THE 17 

INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WHO HAVE 

LOOKED AT THAT AND THE FEAR OF 

THE WAY THAT CYBER TECHNOLOGY 

CAN BE USED TO ATTACK THE 

COUNTRY.

WE HAVE SEEN ELECTION 

INTERFERENCE AND IT CAN BE USED 

FOR ATTACKING OUR ELECTRICAL 

GRID, AS WE MOVE TOWARDS THE 

INTERNET, BEING ABLE TO 

INTERFERE WITH AUTONOMOUS 

VEHICLES AND HOSPITAL SYSTEMS, 

PRIVATE RECORDS AND DATA, 

FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, CREATING 

CHAOS IN ALL OF THOSE THINGS 

BUT USING SOCIAL MEDIA AS A 

WEAPON AGAINST US FOR THE 

INFORMATION WARS AS A 

PROPAGANDA TOOL AND AS A WAY TO 

COLLECT INFORMATION ABOUT 

AMERICANS WHO SHARE LOTS OF 

PRIVATE DATA ON SOCIAL MEDIA 

PLATFORMS.

NO USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO CROWD 

SOURCE TERRORISM, WE HAVE SEEN 

ISIS DO THAT BY RADICALIZING 

PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD THROUGH 

SOCIAL MEDIA LIKE TWITTER AND 

OTHER PLATFORMS, SO I AM SORRY 

TO PRESENT SUCH A DIRE OUTLOOK 

ON THE FUTURE BUT IT WILL BE 

SUNNY AND WARM.

>> THANK YOU, BARBARA, FOR THE 

COMMENTS.

I JUST READ ABOUT THE THREE 

DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, WE 

HEARD THAT YES THIS IS NOT A 

ROSY PICTURE WE ARE STARING AT 

LOOKING AT THE FUTURE BUT IT IS 

A REALISTIC ONE.

AND AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN 

STUDYING THE TERRORISM ISSUE 

FOR A LONG TIME AS WELL, I WAS 

SAY THAT WE HAD ALL THE ONES 

THAT I WOULD'VE EXPECTED 

EVERYONE TO SORT OF COMMENT ON, 

BUT THAT JUST GOES BACK TO ONE 

OF MY EARLIER POINTS, THE 

PHENOMENON OF TERRORISM NO 

MATTER HOW YOU DESCRIBE IT IS 

GOING TO MANIFEST ITSELF FOR 

THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AGAINST 

THE UNITED STATES WHETHER IT IS 

A THREAT TO THE HOMELAND OR A 

THREAT TO THE INTEREST OVERSEAS 

AND IT WILL NOT RECEDE AT ANY 

TIME IN THE FUTURE.

NOW, BARBARA, I WAS STRUCK BY 

YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE 

NATION'S STATE AND THREAT, EVEN 

FROM THE CONTEXT OF TERRORISM, 

THOUGH I THINK THAT YOU ARE 

GOING BROADER THAN THAT.

BUT FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DO 

REMEMBER, BEFORE 9/11, THE U.S. 

GOVERNMENT ÃAND THEY STILL DO, 

BUT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT USED TO 

COMPILE A LIST OF THE FOREIGN 

GOVERNMENTS THAT WE BELIEVED 

WERE ACTIVELY USING TERRORISM 

AS A TOOL, AN OFFICIAL STATE 

POLICY, TO AFFECT HER INTEREST.

AND IF YOU HAD WATCHED THE WAY 

THAT THAT LIST HAS GROWN OVER 

TIME, CERTAINLY AFTER 9/11, THE 

LIST IS MUCH SMALLER NOW THAT 

WAS BEFORE 9/11.

BUT WHO IS TO SAY THAT IT COULD 

NOT COME BACK AROUND IN THE 

FUTURE?

THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK 

ABOUT.

SO THAT IS SORT OF THE NOT TO 

ROSY PERSPECTIVE OF THE FUTURE 

BUT WHAT IT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE 

SO LET ME START WITH BARBARA 

AND WORK HER WAY BACKWARDS WITH 

HIS NEXT ROUND OF QUESTIONS.

WITHOUT, DOES THE UNITED STATES 

NEED NEW AUTHORITY, 

CAPABILITIES, OR RESOURCES TO 

COMBAT WHAT LOOKS LIKE A VERY 

BROAD THREAT ON THE TERRORISM 

LEVEL?

>> Barbara McQuade: AS A FORMER 

PROSECUTOR WHEN I THINK OF THE 

TOOLS THAT ARE NEEDED, IT IS 

TWO THINGS.

ONE IS INVESTIGATIVE TOOLS TO 

BE USED AS A PROCESS TO DISRUPT 

AND PROSECUTE TERRORIST 

ACTIVITY.

DID THE OTHER THING IS 

SUBSTANTIVE LAWS, CRIMES THAT 

CAN BE CHARGED AGAINST PEOPLE 

WHO COMMIT THESE ACTS, AND BOTH 

PRESENT SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT 

CHALLENGES.

ONE, GETTING CONGRESS TO PASS 

ANYTHING COULD BE A CHALLENGE.

ANYTHING WHATSOEVER.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE, IT 

IS DIFFICULT TO KEEP UP WITH 

THE EVOLVING THREAT.

SO FIRST WITH REGARD TO 

INVESTIGATIVE TOOLS THAT ARE 

AVAILABLE, WHAT A PROSECUTOR 

WANTS MOST TO CERTAINTY AND 

CLARITY.

TELL ME WHAT THE RULES ARE, I 

WILL FOLLOW THEM.BUT AS 

TECHNOLOGY IS EVOLVING SO 

QUICKLY, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT 

FOR THE LAW TO KEEP UP WITH 

TECHNOLOGY.NOW I WILL GIVE 

YOU AN EXAMPLE OF A CASE THAT 

CAME OUT OF THE EASTERN 

DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.

BUT I WAS THERE WE HAD A CASE 

CALLED UNITED STATES VERSUS 

CARPENTER WHICH WAS A CASE 

INVOLVING AN ARMED ROBBERY CREW 

THAT WAS OPERATING AROUND 

DETROIT COULD NOW ONE OF THE 

PIECES OF EVIDENCE THAT WAS 

USED IN THAT CASE IN MANY OTHER 

CASES IS CELL SITE LOCATION 

DATA.

YOU PROBABLY ALL KNOW THAT YOUR 

CELL PHONE IS A TRACKING DEVICE 

AND YOU CAN BE IDENTIFIED BY 

YOUR LOCATION 24/7 BACK FOR 

YEARS.

IF THAT INFORMATION WAS 

OBTAINED, WE CAN FIND OUT WHERE 

YOUR PHONE WAS AT ANY TIME OF 

THE DAY OR NIGHT.

NOW IN MR. CARPENTER'S RECORDS, 

THEY WERE OBTAINED WITH WHAT AT 

THE TIME WAS BELIEVED TO BE THE 

PROPER LEGAL PROCESS, A COURT 

ORDER UNDER WHAT IS CALLED THE 

STORED COMMUNICATION 

INFORMATION ACT, AND WITH THE 

COURT ORDER THAT WE OBTAINED, 

WE WENT TO THE PHONE COMPANY 

AND FOUND OUT THAT MR. 

CARPENTER WAS AT THE SCENE OF 

THE ROBBERIES AT THE DATE AND 

TIME THAT THEY OCCURRED.

SO IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER 

EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO 

CONVICT HIM, THE CASE WENT ALL 

THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT 

AND IN DECEMBER THEY HELD THAT 

THIS DATA IS SO INVASIVE THAT 

WE THINK THAT INSTEAD OF 

JUSTICE COURT ORDER, YOU SHOULD 

BE REQUIRED TO GET THIS HIGHER 

LEGAL STANDARD OF A SEARCH 

WARRANT IN ORDER TO GET THAT 

GOING FORWARD.

WILL THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE 

EVIDENCE WAS SUPPRESSED IN A 

CASE LIKE CARPENTER.

SO GOING FORWARD AND JUST 

FIGURING OUT WHAT THE RULES OF 

THE ROAD ARE CAN BE SO 

CHALLENGING THE CONGRESS CANNOT 

EVEN KEEP UP WITH THE EVOLVING 

TECHNOLOGY TO GET PROSECUTORS 

THE TOOLS THAT THEY NEED.

SO BEING NIMBLE, THINKING 

THROUGH HOW THESE ISSUES 

PARALLEL THE TOOLS WERE 

OBTAINED IN THE PAST.

ANOTHER CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE 

NOW IS ENCRYPTION ON APPLE 

TELEVISIONS IN THE SAN 

BERNARDINO TERRORISM CASE WHERE 

THERE WAS A SHOOTING, YOU MIGHT 

KNOW THAT THE FBI WANTED TO 

RETRIEVE THE CONTENT OF HIS 

CELL PHONE.

HE WORKED FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN 

BERNARDINO, AND THEY GAVE 

CONSENT TO USE THE PHONE, BUT 

IT WAS PASSWORD PROTECTED AND 

THE FBI CANNOT OPEN IT WITHOUT 

KNOWING WHAT THE PASSWORD WAS.

THEN TIM FAILED PASSWORD 

ATTEMPTS WOULD ERASE THE 

CONTENT OF THE PHONE WITHOUT 

KNOWING IF IT HAD BEEN SYNCED 

TO THE CLOUD OR IF HE HAD 

COMMUNICATED WITH OTHER 

ASSOCIATES, THAT WAS ÃTHEY 

COULD NOT ÃTHEY WANTED TO LOOK 

AT IT BUT LACKED THE ABILITY TO 

DO IT.

THEY TRY TO GET APPLE TO HELP 

WHICH RESISTED AND THEY DID NOT 

HAVE THE TOOLS TO GET INTO THAT 

CELL PHONE.

SO THAT IS A PROCESS PART THAT 

IS CHALLENGING FOR PROSECUTORS.

NOW I THINK THAT WE NEED TO 

MAKE CLEARER WALLS.

WHAT DOES THE LAW REQUIRED TO 

GET THESE THINGS?

AND SUBSTANTIVELY AND ALSO 

DIFFICULT, WHAT TOOLS ARE 

AVAILABLE TO PROSECUTE THESE 

HOMEGROWN EXTREMIST GROUPS WHEN 

IT COMES TO INTERNATIONAL 

TERRORISM, THERE'S A LOT OF THE 

STATUTES ON THE BOOKS WHICH IS 

WHY LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES 

OFTEN QUICKLY SAY THIS IS A 

TERRORISM INVESTIGATION AND WE 

CAN INVESTIGATE FOR MATERIAL 

SUPPORT TO A FORD TERRORIST 

ORGANIZATION OR TERRORISM 

TRANSCENDING NATIONAL 

BOUNDARIES.

THE SAME TOOLS ARE NOT 

AVAILABLE WHEN IT COMES TO 

DOMESTIC TERRORIST GROUPS 

BECAUSE THAT IS A HARDER NUT TO 

CRACK.

WE KNOW FROM FBI ABUSES IN THE 

GO AND TELL PRO, OPERATION 

CHAOS, THAT SOMETIMES THE FBI 

INFILTRATED ORGANIZATIONS FOR 

POLITICAL PURPOSES SO AS A 

RESULT THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT 

RELUCTANCE TO ALLOW LAW 

ENFORCEMENT OF SOME OF THE SAME 

KIND OF TOOLS FOR DOMESTIC 

GROUPS AS INTERNATIONAL GROUPS, 

BUT THAT LEAVES US WITHOUT THE 

LAWS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO 

CHARGE AGAINST DOMESTIC GROUPS.

SO THERE DOES REMAIN THE 

QUESTION OF HOW DO YOU 

EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTE THESE 

GROUPS WITHOUT VIOLATING THEIR 

CIVIL LIBERTIES?

AND THAT REMAINS A CHALLENGE.

>> THANK YOU, CHRIS?

>> SO, AUTHORITIES, 

CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES.

THE SIMPLE ANSWER AND A WORD IS 

NO.

FROM MY STANDPOINT.

NOW, I WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT THE 

COUNTERTERRORISM ENTERPRISE HAS 

BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE.

PRE-9/11 THROUGH 9/11, POST 

INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF LEARNING.

RICHARD CLARK SET UP THE 

ENTERPRISE PRE-9/11.

NOW, WE HAD A HORRIFIC ATTACK 

AGAINST OUR NATION.

THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF 

LEARNING SINCE THE HORRIFIC 

ATTACK HIM THERE HAS BEEN NO 

ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE 

RIGHT UP FRONT THAT I WANT TO 

REINFORCE IS THE IDEA OF AN 

OVERCORRECTION.

SO, WE IN THE COUNTERTERRORISM 

DOMAIN, WE ABSOLUTELY 

UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY TO 

FOCUS ON NORTH KOREA.WE 

UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY TO 

FOCUS ON OTHER STATE THREATS 

AND CERTAINLY THE RUSSIANS, AND 

WE DO WORRY ABOUT IRAN, THE 

STATE THREAT AND SPONSOR 

TERRORISM.

WITH THAT SAID, WHAT I WOULD 

UNDERSCORE IS WE HAVE AN 

EXCELLENT COUNTERTERRORISM 

ENTERPRISE THAT HAS BEEN 

REFINED OVER YEARS, AND SOME 

HAVE CALLED A TRAP.

WE KEEP SAYING THAT WE WILL 

HAVE ANOTHER 9/11 IF YOU TAKE 

AWAY THE RESOURCES.

BUT I JUST SAY THAT WE CAN WE 

APPORTION THE RESOURCES, BUT I 

WOULD RECOMMEND DOING SO VERY 

CAREFULLY AS I AM VERY, VERY 

CONFIDENT THAT WE HAVE AN 

ENTERPRISE THAT IS VERY MUCH 

FOCUSED ON KEEPING THE NATION 

SAFE DAY IN AND DAY OUT.

THE REAL LIFE 24 PLAYS OUT 

EVERY DAY.

THE ENTERPRISE I AM TALKING 

ABOUT IS THE INTELLIGENCE 

COMMUNITY THAT PLUGS IN VERY 

SURGICALLY AND FOCUSES ON 

COUNTERTERRORISM AND THE 

CONVENING AUTHORITY WAS THE 

OFFICE THAT JAVED AND I WORKED 

IN AT THE NSC.

WE BROUGHT THE AGENCY TOGETHER, 

NOT JUST TO HEAR THE 

INTELLIGENCE BUT TO FOCUS ON 

MITIGATION MEASURES.

OKAY, YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE A 

THREAT STREAM DIRECTED AT 

COMMERCIAL AVIATION, WHAT ARE 

WE DOING ABOUT IT?

WE HAD THE BULLY PULPIT OF THE 

WHITE HOUSE TO ENSURE WE WERE 

APPLYING THE RIGHT RESOURCES SO 

I AM VERY PLEASED WITH THE 

ENTERPRISE BUT ALSO WANT TO 

STATE ÃNOW THIS IS A FRANK 

ADMISSION, WE DID NOT DO ENOUGH 

LAST YEAR ON COUNTERING VIOLENT 

EXTREMISM OR WHATEVER THE TERM 

IS TODAY, WE DID NOT FOCUS ON 

THAT ENOUGH.

I TRIED.

AND I THINK THAT OUR NEW 

COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY, I 

HOPE AM HOPING, WILL FOCUS ON 

THAT BUT THAT WAS NOT THE 

PRIORITY LAST YEAR.

CONTEXTUALLY, UNDERSTAND THAT 

THAT IS WHAT I DELIBERATELY 

TOLD YOU THE THREEFOLD FOCUS ON 

DAY ONE.

NOW THIS REALLY WAS A LARGE 

PART ON ISIS, SO I DO THINK 

THAT AS THINGS EVEN NOW, WE 

WILL BE ABLE TO FOCUS GOING 

FORWARD ON THE HPE THREAT.

THE FBI AND THE DEPARTMENT OF 

HOMELAND SECURITY DOES SOME 

EXCELLENT WORK.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THE DS FOR 

PROBLEMS THAT OUR EUROPEAN 

FRIENDS AND ALLIES HAVE.

WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SOCIAL 

STRUCTURE HERE IN THE UNITED 

STATES.

WITH THAT SAID, I DO WORRY 

ABOUT HPE'S, AND I DO AGREE 

WITH EVERYTHING THAT BARBARA 

SAID AND WILL TELL YOU THAT I 

JUST SPOKE TO ÃI HAD AN 

OPPORTUNITY TO DO A BROADCAST 

WITH BRIAN PENAS, AMERICA'S 

VERY FIRST 9/11.

HE HAS BEEN A COOPERATOR WITH 

THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SINCE 

HE WAS RELEASED FROM PRISON.

GETTING PEOPLE LIKE BRIAN TO 

TELL THEIR STORY IN A POSITIVE 

WAY, TO SHARE THEIR 

OBSERVATIONS AND TO KIND OF 

BOUNCE BACK FROM A COLOSSAL 

MISTAKE, THAT IS WHAT THE JUDGE 

HAS ALLOWED HIM TO DO.

I WANT MORE BRIANS TO TELL 

THEIR STORY TO DETER PEOPLE 

FROM GOING DOWN THE PATH.

AND OF COURSE, THE MAJOR ATTACK 

THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR WAS HVE 

ON HALLOWEEN LAST YEAR.

NO SLEEP THAT NIGHT WHILE WE 

WORKED THROUGH THAT TO MAKE 

SURE THERE WEREN'T ANY FOREIGN 

TIES, BUT HOW DO WE PREVENT 

THAT?

WE HAVE TO PREVENTED BY A 

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP 

CONTINUING TO GIVE RESOURCES 

THAT THE FBI VIEWS, THE DOJ 

NEEDS, AND HOMELAND SECURITY.

I HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT OUR 

NEED TO FOCUS SOME OF THE 

RESOURCES ON THE GRAY ZONE.

SO I WON'T THAT BUT I REALLY 

THINK THAT THE ENTERPRISE IS IN 

A GOOD PLACE.

I JUST WORRY ABOUT AN 

OVERCORRECTION, THE FURTHER AND 

FURTHER WE GET AWAY FROM 9/11, 

THERE WILL BE A TENDENCY ÃTHE 

GOVERNMENT DOES THIS.

WE HAVE A HISTORY OF DO THIS, 

TO REAPPORTIONED RESOURCES TO 

DECLARE SOME KIND OF VICTORY 

PRECIPITOUSLY AND TAKE YOUR EYE 

OFF OF A MOVEMENT THAT HAS NOT 

GONE AWAY.

IT IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS A 

CONCERN, THAT IS THE 

IDEOLOGICAL PIECE OF THIS 

FIGHT.

CHRIS GREAT, CHRIS, THANK YOU.

>> WELL, WHY HAVE FOREIGN 

TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS NOT 

SUCCESSFULLY ATTACKED THE U.S. 

SINCE 9/11?

THREE BIG REASONS ARE OFFENSIVE 

AND DEFENSIVE CAPABILITIES, 

THREE, PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.

ON 9/11, WE WERE AN OPEN DOOR 

WITH 18 PEOPLE ON THE NO-FLY 

LIST, AND ONE OF THEM WAS THE 

OPERATIONAL COMMANDER OF 9/11.

BUT NOW, 81,000 PEOPLE ARE ON 

THE NO-FLY LIST WITH ONE AND 

HALF BILLION PEOPLE ON THE 

TITLE LIST WHICH MEANS THAT YOU 

GET ON AN AMERICAN BOUND FLIGHT 

OR CARRIER.

FOR 9/11 WE DID NOT HAVE THE 

NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM SET 

UP WITH DHS OR TSA.

WE HAD ABOUT 30 JOINT TERRORISM 

TASK FORCES BUT NOW THERE'S 

MORE THAN 100.

THE INTELLIGENCE BUDGET TEST 

TRIPLED WHICH IS OUR DEFENSIVE 

CAPABILITIES.

FOR OUR OFFENSE OF 

CAPABILITIES, THE DRONE PROGRAM 

PUT A HUGE CRIMP ON AL QAEDA 

CENTRAL.

THE BEST WITNESS HAS BEEN BIN 

LADEN HIMSELF WAS SAID THAT HIS 

ENTIRE ORGANIZATION WAS BEING 

OBLITERATED.

NOW YOU HAVE THE CASE IT WAS AN 

UNDERWEAR BOMBER.

WHEN A GUY HAS SMOKE POURING 

OUT OF HIS CROTCH ON A 

TRANSATLANTIC FLIGHT 

APPROACHING DETROIT IT WAS THE 

PASSENGERS AND CREW THE 

BASICALLY DISABLED HIM.

SO THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION 

IS NO, WE DON'T NEED MORE 

AUTHORITIES.

NOW I HEAR BARBARA ON THE BACK 

DOOR, BUT LIKE HIS DILEMMA FOR 

AMERICANS, THE BACK DOOR WOULD 

GIVE PEOPLE ACCESS TO A 

POTENTIAL CRIMINAL, BUT THE 

MOST SUCCESSFUL ENTERPRISE IN 

THE UNITED STATES IS SILICON 

VALLEY.

WE WOULD BE UNDERCUTTING THIS 

AMAZING BUSINESS BY SAYING YES, 

THERE IS A WAY INTO EVERY 

PRODUCT CALLED A BACKDOOR.

IF THERE IS A MY INCOME IS NOT 

JUST THE GOVERNMENT.

SO THERE'S NO SIMPLE ANSWER TO 

THAT.

AND ON THE SECOND POINT, WHICH 

I JUST WANT TO ÃI TOTALLY 

AGREE WITH BARBARA ON THIS 

DOMESTIC TERRORISM QUESTION.

BUT THIS IS THE DILEMMA, NOT 

EVEN THE DILEMMA.

WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT AND 

IT IS NOT A CRIME TO BE A 

MEMBER OF A NEO-NAZI GROUP IN 

THIS COUNTRY.

IT IS A CRIME TO CONDUCT A 

VIOLENT ACT ON THEIR BEHALF, 

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS A 

CRIME TO BE A MEMBER OF ISIS IN 

THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE YOU ARE A 

PART OF AN INTERNATIONAL 

TERRORISM ORGANIZATION.

YOU CAN NEVER CRIMINALIZE NAZI 

GROUPS WHICH HAVE A PERFECT 

RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT 

AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT 

ACTUALLY BREAKING THE LAW.

SO THIS IS WHAT MAKES IT SUCH A 

DIFFICULT |

>> PEOPLE OFTEN SAY WHEN THERE 

IS A DOMESTIC TERRORISM ATTACK, 

WHY IS IT NOT TREATED AS 

TERRORISM.

WHILE THE ANSWER IS FOR A 

PROSECUTOR LIKE BARBARA, IT'S 

VERY EASY TO JUST GET THEM ON 

MURDER, AND IF YOU INTRODUCE 

TERRORISM INTO THE EQUATION, IT 

RAISES A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER 

ISSUES MOST OF WHICH ARE 

CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES, WHICH 

YOU WOULD NOT GO DOWN, I THINK 

IT'S A GREAT ROUND OF QUESTIONS 

THAT I DID NOT HEAR A CONSENSUS 

WHICH IS INTERESTING, BUT YOU 

HEARD TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT 

VIEWS, SOME OVERLAPPING IN 

RESPECTS BUT OTHERS, THE LINES 

WERE CLEARLY DRAWN BUT THANK 

YOU TO THE PANELISTS FOR THEIR 

THOUGHTS.

SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH TWO 

QUESTIONS.

I'M LOOKING AT RYAN, ELLIOTT 

AND MICHAEL.

IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE AUDIENCE 

QUESTIONS, SEVERAL PEERS RATHER 

THAN RECYCLE THROUGH THE NEXT 

ROUND OF MY OWN QUESTIONS THAT 

EVERYONE HAS SEEN, LET'S GET TO 

THE AUDIENCE QUESTIONS AND I 

WILL LEAVE IT TO YOU THREE TO 

LEAD US THROUGH THE.

>> YES, THANK YOU, ABSOLUTELY.

MY NAME IS ELLIOT BYRD.

IN MY FIRST YEAR STUDENT HERE 

AT THE FORD SCHOOL AND THIS IS 

YOUR FIRST QUESTION.

HOW CAN WE AVOID AND/OR REMEDY 

ANTI-WESTERN SENTIMENT OFTEN 

PERPETUATED BY CONTINUES THAT 

MY PRESENCE IN THE REGION TO 

PREVENT THE REGROUPING OF 

PROMINENT EXTREMIST GROUPS IN 

THE NATION?

AND IF YOU NEED ME TO REPEAT 

THAT, JUST LET ME KNOW.

>> LET ME SAY, THE UNITED 

STATES, I'M A CATHOLIC SO I CAN 

SAY THIS.

THERE ARE SINS OF OMISSION AND 

SINS OF COMMISSION.

SO I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL 

HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT 

HIS SYRIA POLICY HELPED 

CONTRIBUTE TO WHERE WE ARE 

TODAY PRETTY OBVIOUSLY DID NOT 

CREATE THE SITUATION INDEED AND 

NOT AMELIORATED.

AND THE ORIGINAL SIN GOES BACK 

TO THE WALLS.

AS IF YOU OVERTHROW SOMEBODY, 

ANARCHY IS WORSE IN 

DICTATORSHIP THAN OBAMA DID THE 

SAME THING IN LIBYA JUST EIGHT 

YEARS LATER, AND THAT IS ONE OF 

HIS WORST MISTAKES.

I THINK THE QUESTION ABOUT 

ANTI-WESTERN SENTIMENT ÃWE ARE 

THE WORLD'S SUPERPOWER, YOU 

KNOW?

BUT IT IS VERY HARD TO KNOW 

WHAT THE SECOND DAY AFTER LOOKS 

LIKE OR THE THIRD DAY.

BUT IF YOU DON'T PLAN FOR IT IS 

OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE WORSE 

THAN IF YOU DO PLAN FOR IT.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS 

A SIMPLE ANSWER TO THAT 

QUESTION.

OBVIOUSLY, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE 

MORE.

BUT THAT IS IT.

I THINK THE PRESIDENT TRUMP 

MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE IN 

AFGHANISTAN, BY THE WAY, AFTER 

A LOT OF DELIBERATION.

THE FIRST TIME HE IS PUBLICLY 

SAID LOOK, I'VE CHANGED MY MIND 

ABOUT SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT.

THE ONLY THING WORSE THAN BEING 

IN AFGHANISTAN IS LEAVING IT.

WE HAVE RUN THIS BEFORE IN IRAQ 

IN TO THOUSAND 11.

NO, THERE'S NO SIMPLE ANSWER 

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE WE PAY 

THE PRESIDENT AND THE PEOPLE ON 

THE NSC TO TRY TO FIGURE THESE 

THINGS OUT AND THERE WILL BE NO 

GOOD ANSWER.

THAT IS THE NATURE PRESIDENTIAL 

DECISION-MAKING, I THINK.

>> I WOULD JUST ADD THAT NO 

ADMINISTRATION HAS FIGURED OUT 

HOW TO GET AT THE GRIEVANCE 

PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THE UNITED 

STATES.

WE ARE JUST NOT FIGURED THAT 

OUT.

I REMEMBER PETER LOOKING AT A 

DRAFT OF RCT STRATEGY, AND HE 

IDENTIFIED THAT AS A 

SIGNIFICANT CONCERN.

IT WAS A CONCERN THAT I SHARED 

WITH HIM.

BUT WE HAVE TO RELY ALSO WITH 

OUR BROADER POLICIES TO HELP 

AMELIORATE SOME OF THE ANXIETY 

IN THE MIDDLE EAST, FOR 

EXAMPLE.

I DO THINK THAT IN SOME WAYS WE 

ARE DOING THAT.

REMEMBER THAT THERE IS A PUBLIC 

AND A PRIVATE VIEW OF THE 

UNITED STATES AND THE MIDDLE 

EAST IN PARTICULAR WHICH MEANS 

THAT PUBLICLY THEY MIGHT HAVE 

TO SAY, WE DON'T LIKE AMERICA 

BUT PRIVATELY THEY SAY, WE NEED 

YOUR HELP.

AND THE BEST WORK THAT WE ARE 

DOING IS SMALL FOOTPRINTS, NOT 

TO VIOLATE THE SENSIBILITIES OF 

NATIONS, NOT HAVE A LARGE 

MILITARY PRESENCE, AND I DON'T 

THINK THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION 

HAS ANY INTEREST IN ALL IN A 

LARGE SCALE PRESENCE.

SO SMALL GROUPS OF SPECIAL 

OPERATIONS WORKING WITH FOREIGN 

PARTNERS, I THINK THAT THAT IS 

THE RIGHT BLENDING.

BUT WE DO NEED THE OVERARCHING 

POLICY WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT 

OUT OF MY PAY GRADE.I HAD A 

COUNTERTERRORISM FOCUS I HAVE 

TO ENSURE THAT MY REGIONAL 

COUNTERPARTS ARE KIND OF 

BUILDING THIS SUPERSTRUCTURE.

THEN WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO CT 

APPROPRIATELY, 

COUNTERTERRORISM, USING OUR 

EXQUISITE CAPABILITIES BUT THIS 

IS A TOUGH PROBLEM AND I WISH I 

HAD THE ANSWER.

>> I GUESS THE ONLY THING I 

WOULD ADD THIS TO THE EXTENT 

THAT WE CAN CONTROL THE 

PERCEPTIONS OF THE UNITED 

STATES THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO 

SOME HELP, ONE OF THE 

PROPAGANDA TOOLS THAT GETS USED 

FOR ALL OF THESE TERROR GROUPS 

IS THAT THE UNITED STATES IS AN 

OCCUPYING FORCE AND AN 

OPPRESSOR.

SO DOES NOT HELP THAT WE HAVE A 

PRISON IN GUANTCNAMO FOR 

EXAMPLE.

THAT IS USED AS PROPAGANDA 

AGAINST US AND IT DOES NOT HELP 

WHEN THERE ARE IMAGES OF THINGS 

ROLLING THROUGH THE MIDDLE 

EAST.

SO THOSE KIND OF THINGS MAY BE 

TOO SOME EXTENT ARE INEVITABLE, 

BUT I DO THINK THAT ALL OF 

THOSE THINGS FEED THE 

NARRATIVE.

THE OTHER THING THAT FEEDS THE 

NARRATIVE IS WHEN PRESIDENT 

TRUMP AND OTHERS CONTRIBUTE TO 

THE FALSE NARRATIVE THAT 

AMERICA IS AT WAR WITH ISLAM 

AND, YOU KNOW, MUSLIMS ARE THE 

PROBLEMS AND AN IMMIGRATION 

BAN, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

I THINK THAT THAT COULD BE USED 

AGAINST THE UNITED STATES IN 

THE LONG RUN.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.

MICHAEL?>> I AM MICHAEL 

BACHMAN, A FIRST-YEAR CANDIDATE 

FOR THE MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY 

AND MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE 

THE COUNTERTERRORISM 

IMPLICATIONS OF THE U.S. 

MILITARY LEAVES AFGHANISTAN.

>> DID YOU LIKE WHAT HAPPENED 

IN IRAQ IN 2014?

SO, I WOULD JUST ADD NOT A 

WHOLE LOT MORE BEYOND THAT, BUT 

I WILL SAY THAT THE KEYWORDS TO 

FOCUS ON OUR COUNTERTERRORISM 

PLATFORM WAS GETS INTO THE 

CYCLE OF I CAN BE ACCUSED 

READILY OF BEING CAUGHT IN A 

COUNTERTERRORISM TRAP.

IF WE PULL OUT WITHOUT A 

PLATFORM TO PROSECUTE 

COUNTERTERRORISM, I CAN SAY I 

TOLD YOU SO IF THERE IS ANOTHER 

THAT.BUT FRANKLY IF YOU LOOK 

AT THE LINES OF COMMUNICATION, 

WHICH REALLY MEANS, THE TYRANNY 

OF DISTANCE, WE HAVE TO HAVE 

THE ABILITY TO PUT PRESSURE ON 

OUR ADVERSARIES WHILE THEY ARE 

CONDUCTING PLANNING WHICH IS 

ANOTHER TRAP, RIGHT?

YOU CAN IDENTIFY POCKETS 

THROUGHOUT THE WORLD THAT COULD 

BE USED AS A SANCTUARY FOR 

TERRORISTS TO CONDUCT PLANNING 

SO WE DO HAVE TO PRIORITIZE.

BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE A 

BURGEONING, DEVELOPING ISIS 

FOOTPRINT THAT WAS NOT THERE A 

FEW YEARS AGO IN AFGHANISTAN 

AND YOU HAVE STILL, REMNANTS OF 

AL QAEDA STRADDLING THE BORDER, 

ABLE TO OPERATE.

THOUGH WE HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB 

AS PETER SAID, PUTTING PRESSURE 

ON AL QAEDA, THE CORE OF AL 

QAEDA.

BUT THE OVERARCHING ARGUMENT 

IS, WE NEED A PLATFORM TO 

CONDUCT COUNTERTERRORISM.

I WAS NOT FOCUSED ON THE 

COUNTER TALIBAN FIGHT.

THAT IS AN INSURGENCY AND A 

VIBRANT INSURGENCY, AND I DO 

HOPE THAT EVENTUALLY WE CAN END 

THE INSURGENCY AND THERE COULD 

BE SOME KIND OF A 

RECONCILIATION, AND I HOPE THAT 

THE INSURGENCY DIES IN TIME.

THERE IS GOOD HISTORY TO 

UNDERSTAND THAT EVENTUALLY, 

INSURGENCIES DIE OUT BASED ON 

AN EXHAUSTION OF THE 

POPULATION, BUT AFGHANS ARE A 

HEARTY PEOPLE.

SO I CAN'T BE TOO OPTIMISTIC.

WITH THAT SAID, I AM ADAMANT 

THOUGH THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THE 

ABILITY TO GO AFTER THESE CORE 

ORGANIZATIONS LIKE AL QAEDA AND 

ISIS WHEN THEY ARE IN A 

POSITION TO CONTINUE THEIR 

PLANNING AGENCY WESTERN 

TARGETS, AND THAT IS THE 

OVERARCHING REASON THAT WE NEED 

TO CONTINUE U.S. FOOTPRINTS IN 

SUPPORT OF THE AFGHAN 

GOVERNMENT.

PLUS, THEY HAVE ASKED US TO 

STAY.

>> NOW, I WILL CHEAT A LITTLE 

BIT.

THOUGH I AM THE MODERATOR AND I 

AM SUPPOSED TO BE NEUTRAL BUT 

ON THAT QUESTION AS WELL, WITH 

MY OWN CAREER AS AN 

INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL 

SUPPORTING A LOT OF POLICY 

DECISIONS ON THE ISSUE, I WAS 

ALWAYS VERY COMFORTABLE GIVING 

POLICYMAKERS SORT OF AN 

INTELLIGENCE PERSPECTIVE AND 

LEAVING IT UP TO SOMEBODY ELSE 

TO MAKE THE ULTIMATE DECISION 

BUT THAT TOOK ON A WHOLE NEW 

CONTEXT WHEN I MYSELF, CHRIS 

AND I, WERE AT THE NSC ON THE 

FRONT LINE WHERE THE ROLES ARE 

REVERSED.

MY COLLEAGUES FROM THE 

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY WERE 

GIVING US FORMS AND CHOICES OR 

OPTIONS, BUT WE HAD TO MAKE OUR 

DECISIONS.

AS CHRIS AND PETER SAID, THERE 

ARE RISKS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE 

ISSUE.

IF YOU SAY THERE ARE RISKS.

BUT IF YOU LEAVE, HISTORY HAS 

SHOWN FROM POST-9/11, THE RISK 

OF WHEN THE UNITED STATES 

LEAVES THE CONFLICT ZONE, THE 

RISKS THAT CAN HAPPEN.

SO THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO SAY.

NOW, RYAN, DO YOU HAVE A 

QUESTION?

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, 

RYAN, A FIRST-YEAR CANDIDATE AS 

WELL.

NOW A QUESTION THAT KINDA FALLS 

OFF OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, 

CAPABILITIES TO TARGET THE 

CAPABILITIES, GIVEN HOW THE WAR 

HAS EXPANDED, HAS THE 

AUTHORIZATION OF THE MILITARY 

FORCE WAS GRANTED INTO THOUSAND 

ONE NEED TO BE UPDATED 17 YEARS 

LATER TO KIND OF ACCOUNT FOR 

NEW REALITIES ON THE GROUND?

>> I HAD A FEELING THAT 

SOMEBODY WOULD ASK ME THAT 

QUESTION SO LAST NIGHT I 

THOUGHT THROUGH THAT BECAUSE TO 

BE CANDID, LAST YEAR, NOT THAT 

I WAS TACTICAL AT ALL.

WE HAD A WORK AT A STRATEGIC 

LEVEL BUT THAT WAS A DECISION 

THAT LEGISLATORS HAD A SWORD 

OUT.

NOW THIS IS A QUESTION OF 

LEGISLATIVE VERSUS EXECUTIVE 

POWERS, RIGHT?WITH THAT SAID, 

AS I SAID EARLIER, I BELIEVE WE 

HAVE THE RIGHT RESOURCES AND 

AUTHORITIES TO PROSECUTE THE 

COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY 

AGAINST OUR ADVERSARIES, 

REALLY, THEY COME FROM THE SAME 

ROOTS OF THE MOVEMENT THAT 

ATTACKED US ON 9/11.

SO I AM VERY COMFORTABLE WITH 

THAT AND I WILL LET THOSE 

DEBATES PLAY OUT AND I THINK IT 

IS IMPORTANT IN A DEMOCRACY FOR 

US TO HAVE THOSE DEBATES.

BUT OTHERS WILL HAVE THAT 

DEBATE.

IT IS HEALTHY THOUGH TO ASK THE 

QUESTIONS, BUT AS I SAID AND 

MAKE CLEAR, I WAS VERY 

COMFORTABLE WITH THE 

AUTHORITIES THAT WE HAD, AND I 

WOULD RESTATE THAT WE ARE 

DEALING WITH THE MOVEMENT AND 

THE ROOTS OF THAT MOVEMENT GO 

BACK TO OUR ADVERSARIES THAT 

ATTACKED US ON 9/11.

>> Woman: I WILL ADD TO THIS.

FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT 

THE AUFM.

THIS WAS THE AUTHORIZATION TO 

USE MILITARY FORCE.

IT WAS LIKE ALL FORCES 

NECESSARY AGAINST THOSE 

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACKS OF 

>> THAT IS RIGHT.

>> SO LEGALLY, WHAT IS THAT 

MEAN?

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THAT?

IT CERTAINLY DOES MEAN THAT 

CORE AL QAEDA, THE 19 

HIJACKERS, THOUGH STARTED BUT 

THE OTHERS WERE AFFILIATED WITH 

THEM THAT PLANNED THE ATTACK 

AND SUPPORTED THEM, BUT HOW 

BROADLY CAN YOU INTERPRET WHAT 

WAS MEANT BY THOSE RESPONSIBLE 

FOR THE ATTACKS OF 9/11?

IT HAS BEEN USED FOR ISIS FOR 

EXAMPLE, AN ORGANIZATION THAT 

DID NOT EXIST ON 9/11.

SO IS THAT A REASONABLE LEGAL 

ARGUMENT IS THAT IT CAN BE USED 

AGAINST ISIS?

SOME ARE IN FAVOR OF IT THAT 

THAT IS THE SUCCESSOR 

ORGANIZATION SO THOSE ARE 

PEOPLE, BUT IF YOU TAKE A VERY 

NARROW LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF 

THE STATUTE THERE WAS A NO, 

ISIS DID NOT EXIST.

SO THE QUESTION IS A GOOD ONE 

WHICH IS, SHOULD THE LANGUAGE 

BE AMENDED, MODIFIED OR 

EXPANDED IN SOME WAY TO ADDRESS 

THE CURRENT THREAD AS IT 

EXISTED TODAY TO REFLECT THE 

LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE.>> 

YES, THE LIKELIHOOD OF IT BEING 

REVISED IS CLOSE TO ZERO 

BECAUSE CONGRESS ÃEVERYBODY 

REMEMBERS HILLARY CLINTON'S 

VOTE AND WHAT THAT DID FOR HER, 

SO NO ONE WAS TO VOTE ON 

ANYTHING THAT IS CONTROVERSIAL.

JEFF FLAKE AND TIM KAINE HAVE 

ISSUES, BUT IS NEVER GONNA MAKE 

IT TO THE FLOOR LET ALONE PASS.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE WHERE 

WE ARE BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF 

ÃCONGRESS IS AN ADVOCATE OF 

ALL POWERS THAT IS ALLOWED TO 

HAVE A ROLE IN IT.

AND OF COURSE, WE THE PEOPLE 

ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THE 

DECISION, WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF 

THE WAR AND THE LENGTH OF THE 

WAR AND HOW MUCH WILL WE HEAR?

SO THIS IS NOT TO BE AS.>> 

AND I WILL CHIME IN AS A 

MODERATOR.

THE ONE TIME I USED MY LAW 

SCHOOL BACK INTO MY GOVERNMENT 

CAREER ÃIT WAS NOT A SUCCESS 

BEFORE THAT IS WHEN I GOT TO 

THE NSC AND WHEN CHRIS AND I 

WERE HAVING TO WRAP OUR HEADS 

AROUND THESE TOUGH LEGAL 

ISSUES, THAT IS WHERE THE LAW 

SCHOOL ÃTHE VAGUE MEMORIES OF 

LAW SCHOOL, THAT IS WHEN THAT 

WAS IMPORTANT FOR WHICH YOU 

REFERENCED, SO FROM A LITERAL 

READING OF THE AUFM, COULD WE 

USE AMF TO STICK TO THE 

STRAIGHT CON STRAINS?

SO THAT WAS A ONE TIME WERE MY 

LEGAL BACKGROUND ACTUALLY KEEP 

HIM FROM A COUNTERTERRORISM 

PERSPECTIVE.

SO I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE MORE 

QUESTIONS AS WELL, MICHAEL?

>> WHAT ARE THE FUTURE THREATS 

TO OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES FROM 

COUNTERTERRORISM POLICIES AND 

OPERATIONS IN THE FUTURE?

>> YEAH, I GUESS THAT I CAN 

TAKE THAT ONE.

I THINK THE BIG ONE IS HER 

PRIVACY RIGHTS UNDER ALL OF THE 

SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS WE HAVE 

TODAY.

YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO INTERCEPT 

THREATS COMING INTO THE UNITED 

STATES.

WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS 

ABOUT THAT.

AND ONE OF THE OPEN QUESTIONS 

IS THE EXTENT OF PRESIDENTIAL 

POWER TO INTERCEPT THOSE KINDS 

OF COMMUNICATIONS, BECAUSE OF 

THE ABUSES OF WATERGATE AND 

MARTIN LUTHER KING, WAR 

PROTESTERS AND OTHERS, IN THE 

CALLED THE FOREIGN SURVEILLANCE 

ACT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A 

COMPROMISE BETWEEN ALLOWING THE 

EXECUTIVE TO HAVE UNFETTERED 

POWER TO CONDUCT SURVEILLANCE 

IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL 

SECURITY VERSUS THE VERY 

CAREFUL OVERSIGHT THAT IS GIVEN 

IN CRIMINAL CASES WITH COURTS.

SO THE COMPROMISE WAS CREATED 

FOR A SECRET COURT, THE FOREIGN 

SURVEILLANCE COURT, WITHIN 

OVERSIGHT, AND A NONPUBLIC WAY 

THAT THEY CAN KEEP INTELLIGENCE 

CONTROVERSIAL.

BUT THERE IS SOME OVERSIGHT.

WE DO KNOW THAT OVER THE 

YEARS, THE PRESIDENT HAS 

SOMETIMES GO AROUND THE 

STATUTE, WITH A PRONE CARE 

PROGRAM THAT WAS REVEALED BY 

THE "NEW YORK TIMES" INTO 

THOUSAND FIVE.

WE KNOW THAT JIM COMEY REFUSED 

TO SIGN OFF ON THE PROGRAM 

BECAUSE HE BELIEVED IT TO BE 

ILLEGAL BUT SCHOLARS WILL SAY 

THAT IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT IT IS 

ILLEGAL BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW 

THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT THE 

PRESIDENT IS PERMITTED TO DO SO 

THE IT IS LIKELY THAT THERE ARE 

PROGRAMS GOING ON THAT WE DON'T 

KNOW ABOUT.

THE SNOWDEN CLIQUES FOR EXAMPLE 

SHARED WITH US THAT THERE WERE 

PROGRAMS GOING ON WE DID NOT 

KNOW ABOUT LIKE THE COLLECTION 

OF EVERY PHONE CALL THAT EXISTS 

IN AMERICA EVERY DAY BY ALL 

USERS, JUST IN CASE THAT MIGHT 

NEED TO BE CLEARED.

SO WHAT OTHER PROGRAMS ARE 

GOING ON OUT THERE?

YOU KNOW, GENEALOGY WEBSITES, 

IS THE DATA BEING COLLECTED FOR 

OTHER PURPOSES?

YOUR CELL SITE LOCATION DATA?

WHAT INFORMATION IS BEING 

COLLECTED TO BE USED?

AND THOUGH IT DOES SEEM 

INNOCUOUS ENOUGH ÃPEOPLE THAT 

DON'T DO ANYTHING WRONG SO 

DON'T CARE IF THE GOVERNMENT 

HAS MY INFORMATION.

WE KNOW THAT IN NAZI GERMANY, 

CENSUS DATA IDENTIFYING PEOPLE 

IS JEWISH WAS USED TO RHONDA 

POSEN INTO CONCENTRATION CAMPS 

SPIRITS WE MIGHT TRUST THE 

GOVERNMENT NOW BUT WE DON'T 

KNOW FOR WHAT NEFARIOUS PURPOSE 

ALL OF THE DATA MIGHT BE USED 

IN THE FUTURE SO I THINK THAT 

SURVEILLANCE COLLECTION IS 

IMPORTANT BUT SHOULD CONCERN US 

FROM A CIVIL LIBERTIES 

PERSPECTIVE.

>> AND I WOULD ADD TO WHAT 

BARBARA SAID.

SO GETTING EVERY CELL PHONE 

CALL IN THE UNITED STATES AND 

STORING IT, SECTION TO 05, 

THESE REVELATIONS HAVE COME OUT 

AND IT TURNED OUT THAT 

ACTUALLY, GIANT FISHING 

EXPEDITIONS PRODUCED VERY 

LITTLE.

THERE WAS JUST ONE CASE AS FAR 

AS I COULD TELL THAT WAS VERY 

CLEARLY BASED ON THIS EVIDENCE 

OF SOMEBODY SENDING MONEY TO A 

PEER GROUP FROM SAN DIEGO.

THE THING THAT FINDS 

TERRORIST'S TRADITIONAL LAW 

ENFORCEMENT TECHNIQUES, 

INFORMANTS AND SUSPICIOUS 

ACTIVITY REPORTS, FAMILY, 

AND/OR COMMUNITY MEMBER, TIPS.

OLD-FASHIONED POLICE WORK.

SO THESE VERY SOPHISTICATED 

KIND OF APPROACHES, A, THEY ARE 

UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT TURNS 

OUT AND BY THE WAY IT WAS OBAMA 

WHO CONTINUED THIS PROGRAM, 

RIGHT?

SO IT WAS BOTH BUSH AND OBAMA, 

BUT ALSO, THEY DON'T REALLY 

ANSWER THE MAIL IN TERMS OF 

ACTUALLY FINDING TERRORIST, 

THESE KIND OF UNIVERSAL 

SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS THAT ARE 

UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

>> SO, I JUST ÃWE DID COVER 

THIS A LITTLE BIT AND ACTUALLY, 

BARBARA DID A GREAT JOB OF 

TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT WING IN 

THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND I THINK 

THAT PETER DID AS WELL.

SO AGAIN, THE CONCERN IS THE 

ABUSE.

DO WE GO TOO FAR?

I WAS IN THE SEAT WITH THE 

GENRE DURING CHARLOTTESVILLE SO 

I'M NOT A LAWYER BUT I FOUND 

MYSELF THAT WE CAN PLAN THE 

PART OF A LAWYER AS WE WALK 

THROUGH WHILE WE DON'T HAVE 

TERRORISM LEGISLATION 

NECESSARILY, AND I KNOW THAT I 

AM NOT SAYING THAT EXACTLY 

RIGHT FOR DOMESTICALLY.

THERE IS A NUANCE THERE.

BUT WE DO NOT USE INTELLIGENCE 

TOOLS ARE REFERRED TO EARLIER 

IN A BIG WAY, INTRUSIVELY.

WE DO NOT APPLY THAT 

DOMESTICALLY TO FOLKS IN THEIR 

FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

SO DO WORRY ABOUT THAT, HAVING 

GROWN UP FIRST AS A 

COUNTERTERRORISM AGENT KNOWING 

THAT THE ARMY HAD ABUSES, WE 

HAD A PROBE WITH THE FBI AND 

THE ARMY THAT WENT BEYOND THE 

PALE, MANY YEARS AGO.

NOW WE DID LIVE THROUGH THAT 

AND WE WERE SCHOOLED IN 

UNDERSTANDING THE LEFT AND 

RIGHT LIMITS OF OUR LAWS.

SO I DO WORRY ABOUT THAT.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT EVEN 

AT THE INTERNATIONAL SPY 

MUSEUM, WE DO EXPLORE THAT AND 

IT IS FASCINATING, THE PALMER 

RAIDS AGAINST ANARCHISTS IN THE 

SO I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE 

REMINDED OF OUR HISTORY, AND I 

LIKE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

WE DON'T NEED TO GO FURTHER 

INTO THE DOMESTIC FRONT.

NOW, THE HV EASE THAT ARE 

FOCUSED ON OVERSEAS AND HAVING 

COMMUNICATIONS WITH FOREIGN 

INTELLIGENCE OR TERROR 

ORGANIZATIONS OR INTELLIGENCE 

ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE 

SUPPORTING THEM, THAT IS A 

WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY.

>> AND I THINK THAT WE DO HAVE 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AS WELL, 

RIGHT?

>> OH, FOLLOWING ON THE CT LIKE 

POLICY THAT THE UNITED STATES 

HAS IMPLEMENTED ABROAD TO DEAL 

WITH THE THREAT OF TERRORISM, 

THIS IS ADDRESSED TO THE PANEL.

ARE YOU CONCERNED WITH THE OVER 

EMPLOYMENT AND RELIANCE ON 

SPECIAL FORCES TO SOLVE THE 

PROBLEM OF TERRORISM, AND IS 

THAT SHORT-TERM USE OF SPECIAL 

FORCES AND DECISIVE ACTION 

TARGETING MISSIONS, DOES THAT 

CREATE A GREATER RISK IN THE 

LONG TERM?

>> SO, I HAVE ARGUED ELSEWHERE 

AND AGAIN I DO SAY THIS VERY 

CAREFULLY AND WITH SOME 

THOUGHT.

I DO WORRY ABOUT ÃI CANNOT 

SPEAK FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS 

COMMAND, BUT I CAN TELL YOU 

THAT THEY DO WORRY ABOUT THE 

BURNING OUT OF SPECIAL 

OPERATIONS BECAUSE OF THE 

AMOUNT OF DEPLOYMENTS, THE 

FOOTPRINT, WHERE THEY ARE IN 

THE GLOBE, THINGS LIKE NIGER 

HAPPENING WHERE WE LOSE SPECIAL 

OPERATORS AND SUPPORT TO 

SPECIAL OPERATORS.

WE LOSE AMERICAN SERVICE 

MEMBERS.

I TOLD YOU ABOUT THE FIRST WEEK 

WHERE WE LOST A NAVY SEAL AS A 

RESULT OF THE RAID AGAINST AL 

QAEDA IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA.

WITH THAT SAID, I DO BELIEVE 

THAT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CT 

PRESSURE REQUIRES, SMALL 

FOOTPRINTS OF SPECIAL 

OPERATORS, A HIGH PRICE TO PAY, 

BUT IT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE 

TO DO TO CONTINUE THE PRESSURE 

AND WORK WITH FOREIGN PARTNERS 

AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE 

WORKING WITH PARTNERS AND 

PROVIDING THE INTELLIGENCE THAT 

THEY NEED.

IN OTHER WORDS, INTELLIGENCE 

SHARING HAS TO HAPPEN ROBUSTLY 

AND WE HAVE TO HAVE DISCRETE 

RELATIONSHIPS WITH NONSTATE 

ACTORS IS WELL-MEANING SOME 

TRIBES IN PLACES WHICH COMES 

WITH A PRICE AS WELL.

OUTSIDE OF THE STATE TO STATE 

ENGAGEMENTS, IN SOME WAYS, WE 

DO GO BACKWARDS WHEN WE WORK 

WITH NONSTATE ACTORS AS 

PARTNERS, BUT I THINK THAT THE 

THREAT NECESSITATES THAT AND IT 

HAS TO BE DONE THOUGHTFULLY AND 

IT HAS TO BE DONE SURGICALLY, 

AND SPECIAL OPERATIONS IN OUR 

INTELLIGENCE SERVICES ARE 

POSTURED TO DO THAT, BUT THEY 

DO HAVE TO BALANCE THAT OUT 

WITH THE STATE THREATS LIKE WE 

TALKED ABOUT.

>> I MEAN, CHRIS, I BELIEVE 

THAT HE SAID THAT PERFECTLY.

>> AND I SHOULD JUST ADD THAT I 

DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS SO I THINK 

THAT THE TRACK RECORD SPEAKS 

VOLUMES THAT ISIS HAS BEEN 

ALMOST EFFECTIVELY DISMANTLED 

THROUGH SPECIAL OPERATIONS, 

DRONE STRIKES, AND OTHER 

MILITARY LEVELS.

BUT ANOTHER PART OF THE 

EQUATION IS WINNING HEARTS AND 

MINDS.

YOU CAN CONTINUE TO BEAT THEM 

BACK BUT IT IS THE PREVENTION, 

THE CHANGING OF MINDS, WHAT 

THAT WILL STOP THE NEXT THREAT.

WE DO HAVE INCREDIBLE TOOLS 

AVAILABLE TO US.

IN THE SAME WITH THE TERROR 

ORGANIZATIONS ARE 

CROWDSOURCING, WE COULD USE 

THAT AS WELL.

WE OFTEN ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT 

TO BE THIS VOICE AND I THINK 

THAT THAT WAS PROBABLY A WRONG 

MODEL.

I DON'T THINK THE GOVERNMENT 

HAS A CREDIBILITY TO BE THAT 

VOICE.

IT LOOKS LIKE PROPAGANDA BUT 

FINDING WAYS TO EMPOWER 

REFUGEES TO TELL THE REAL STORY 

OF WHAT LOOKS LIKE, PEOPLE WHO 

ARE ISIS DEFECTORS TO TELL THE 

REAL STORY OF WHAT IT LOOKS 

LIKE, THAT COULD BE A POWERFUL 

COUNTER NARRATIVE, SO FINDING 

WAYS TO GET PLATFORMS TO THOSE 

WHO TELL A DIFFERENT STORY 

COULD BE EFFECTIVE.

>> NO ELLIOT, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU 

HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL.

>> WHAT ROLES SHOULD ARTIFICIAL 

INTELLIGENCE PLAY IN 

COUNTERTERRORISM, IF ANY?

>> IF WE DID NOT HAVE A FIRST 

FOR THIRD AMENDMENT WE CAN STOP 

EVERY TERROR ATTACK IN THE 

COUNTRY BECAUSE ÃI AM NOT A 

TECH GUY BUT WE ARE AT THE 

POINT WHERE WE COULD MAKE SOME 

PRETTY GOOD ASSUMPTIONS.

LOOK, SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES DO 

THIS ALL THE TIME.

THEY KNOW YOUR SEXUAL 

ORIENTATION, IF YOU'RE MARRIED 

OR WHERE YOU LIVE OR THE 

HOBBIES THEY HAVE AND THEY CAN 

PUT TOGETHER A BIG PICTURE VIEW 

WHICH IS WHY THERE ARE 

MICRO-TARGETING OF ADS.

SO SIMILARLY, JUST REVERSING 

THE PICTURE IF SOMEBODY IS 

EXHIBITING CERTAIN BEHAVIORS 

ONLINE AND BY THE WAY, 

EVERYBODY IS GETTING 

RADICALIZED ONLINE.

FOR INSTANCE.

THERE IS NO IN PERSON MEETINGS 

OR RADICAL MOSQUE.

IT WAS ALL ONLINE.

BUT IF THERE'S NO FIRST OR 

THIRD AMENDMENT YOU COULD VERY 

EASILY DETECT PEOPLE USING 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WHO 

COULD BE THREATENING.

IT IS A MINORITY REPORT THAT 

HAS COME TO LIFE.

LOOK AT WHAT THE CHINESE ARE 

DOING GOOD YOU CAN CREATE THE 

PERFECT TOTALITARIAN STATE NOW 

WITH FACIAL RECOGNITION 

TECHNOLOGY AND AI.

AND LUCKILY, WE ARE NOT GONNA 

DO THAT.

>> AND I WOULD JUST ADD THAT 

LAST YEAR, SOMEBODY ASKED ME 

RECENTLY ABOUT ARTIFICIAL 

INTELLIGENCE AND I'M TRYING TO 

GET MY HEAD AROUND THAT NOW, 

BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT AS I 

REFLECTED ON THAT, THERE WAS 

NOT ONE TIME IN A YEAR AT THE 

WHITE HOUSE WITH ALL OF THE 

INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS THAT 

JAVED AND I RECEIVED 

INCESSANTLY, NO ONE BRIEFED ME 

ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

I DID KNOW THAT IT WAS OUT 

THERE BUT THAT WAS NOT WHAT WE 

WERE FOCUSED ON DAY-TO-DAY.

HOWEVER, NOW THAT I'VE HAD A 

CHANCE TO BREATHE A LITTLE BIT 

AND GET SLEEP AND REFLECT ON 

WHAT WE DID NOT DO LAST YEAR 

ALONG WITH CV, WE DID NOT GIVEN 

A FOCUS TO HOW OUR ADVERSARIES 

WILL USE ARTIFICIAL 

INTELLIGENCE.

SO I DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU, THEY ARE 

USING DRONES IN THE BATTLE 

SPACE, ISIS IS.

THEY ARE VERY SAVVY LOOKING FOR 

INDIVIDUALS WHO UNDERSTAND 

TECHNOLOGY, SO THEY CAN REVERSE 

THE TECHNOLOGY TO USE IT FOR 

ALLIANT PURPOSES.SO WE DO 

HAVE TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BECAUSE 

OUR ADVERSARIES ARE LEARNING.

BUT AGAIN, A FRANK ADMISSION 

LAST YEAR, WE DID NOT FOCUS A 

LOT ON THAT.

BUT IN FACILITATING A 

DISCUSSION ON AI IN OCTOBER SO 

I WILL GET A LOT MORE ON THAT.

[LAUGHTER] 

>> ANYTIME YOU RELY ON MORE 

TECHNOLOGY IT IS WONDERFUL AND 

MAKES OUR LIVES EASIER, BUT 

JUST IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE 

HAVE ALL PROBABLY ENCOUNTERED 

PROBLEMS WITH YOU KNOW, CREDIT 

CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN 

COMPROMISED, IN THE SAME WAY, 

ANYTIME WE RELY ON TECHNOLOGY 

THERE IS A RISK FOR AN 

ADVERSARY TO USE IT AGAINST US.

THERE IS THIS BIG DISRUPTION OF 

DATA BY OVERLOADING THE 

CIRCUITS THAT HAPPENED A YEAR 

OR A YEAR AND-A-HALF AGO.

YOU KNOW, AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES.

IF WE RELY ON AUTONOMOUS 

VEHICLES, A FOREIGN ADVERSARIES 

USED THAT AGAINST US.

IT IS LIKE ÃWHAT WAS IT?

DO THOUSAND ONE, A SPACE 

ODYSSEY WHEN THEY TAKE OVER.

WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE 

BUILT THESE SYSTEMS THAT WE ARE 

THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHAT CAN 

HAPPEN IF AN ADVERSARY CAN 

CONTROL THIS?

IS THERE A WAY TO SHUT IT DOWN 

WITH A BACKUP PLAN IN PLACE WE 

ARE NOT SO RELIANT ON THE 

SYSTEMS THAT WE ARE COMPLETELY 

DISABLED WHEN THEY GO DOWN.

>> YOU KNOW, I WILL WEIGH IN 

QUICKLY WITH MY OWN KIND OF 

OBSERVATION NOT NECESSARILY ON 

THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 

POINT BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE 

AS AN ANALYST BEFORE HE GOT TO 

THE WHITE HOUSE, WHAT I THOUGHT 

MAYBE ISIS RIGHT SO DIFFERENT 

AND UNIQUE AND PROBABLY THE 

MOST PERNICIOUS THING THAT WE 

HAVE SEEN AFTER 9/11 WAS THE 

FACT THAT ISIS, THERE IS SOME 

ASPECT THAT ISIS MANAGED TO 

CRACK THIS TECHNOLOGY 

PHENOMENON IN A WAY THAT WE IN 

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT ARE CLEARLY 

FALLING BEHIND AS CHRIS HAS 

DESCRIBED.

WITH ISIS, SOME OF THE INITIAL 

SUCCESSES WERE USED, ALL OF 

THESE ADVANCES WERE HAPPENING 

IN THE EARLY TO THOUSAND TENS 

ON ENCRYPTION AND INSTANT 

MESSAGING AND MOBILE 

COMMUNICATIONS.

WE, OURSELVES AND THE 

GOVERNMENT, WERE NOT DOING AS 

GOOD OF A JOB AS ISIS WAS AS A 

GROUP IN TERMS OF ORGANIZING 

THEMSELVES AND COMMUNICATING AS 

AN ENTERPRISE AND ACTUALLY 

INSPIRING PEOPLE TO CONDUCT 

ATTACKS OR ORGANIZING ATTACKS.

ISIS WAS ANIMUS FOR A WHILE AND 

THAT, AND ARTIFICIAL 

INTELLIGENCE IS PROBABLY IN 

ASPECT OF THAT.

>> WHAT ROLE SHOULD THEY PLAY 

IN COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMIST 

EFFORTS?

>> THE ACTS THAT ÃA VERY FEW 

PEOPLE ARE ENGAGED IN THESE 

ACTS.

SO WITH ANY KIND OF 

HUMANITARIAN DEVELOPMENT, YES, 

IT IS GREAT.

I'M ALWAYS VERY SKEPTICAL, THE 

SON OF A BILLIONAIRE.

THERE'S AN ASSERTION FROM AN 

UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS EGYPTIAN 

FAMILY SO THIS IS A LITTLE 

DIFFERENT WHERE WE HAVE TO TALK 

ABOUT TERROR GROUPS MADE UP OF 

VOLUNTEERS AND INSURGENTS WERE 

ON A PAYROLL.

SO IF YOU WORK FOR ISIS YOU'RE 

GETTING SO IF YOU WORK FOR ISIS 

YOU'RE GETTING PAID $100 A 

MONTH.

THE TALIBAN, $150 A MONTH.

SO IN AN INTELLIGENT SITUATION 

THIS COULD BE USEFUL IF YOU 

COULD CREATE OTHER LIVELIHOODS.

FORCE THAT IS NOT ALWAYS EASY 

IN OTHER COUNTRIES BUT IN THE 

TERRORISM ISSUE, IT MAKES NO 

DIFFERENCE AT ALL BECAUSE 

TERRORISTS ARE VOLUNTEERS WERE 

WILLING TO DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE.

YOU CANNOT PAY PEOPLE SEE HOW 

TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN, 

THIS CAN BE USEFUL FOR 

INSURGENCIES THAT OFTEN 

PRACTICE TERRORISM, BUT 

TERRORISM ÃKIND OF A CLASSIC 

PEER GROUP LIKE AL QAEDA, I 

DON'T THINK IT WOULD MAKE MUCH 

DIFFERENCE IN EFFECT, HE CAME 

OUT OF SAUDI ARABIA WHICH IS 

NOT A POOR COUNTRY WHERE MANY 

OF THESE IDEAS WERE INCUBATED.

>> AND I THINK THAT PETER 

COVERED THAT VERY WELL.

>> OKAY.

I THINK THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 15 

MINUTES LEFT OR LESS THAN THAT 

BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE STILL HAVE 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE 

AUDIENCE, SO LET'S JUST KEEP 

GOING WITH THAT RUN.

>> FOR THE ISSUE OF THE ONGOING 

INSURGENCY AND TERROR THREAT IN 

AFGHANISTAN, CAN WE SOLVE THE 

ISSUES WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE 

SAFE HAVEN IN PAKISTAN AND WHAT 

ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE BEST 

WAY TO GO ABOUT THAT?

>> THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO.

[LAUGHTER] 

>> YOU WANT TO EXPOUND ON THAT 

A LITTLE BIT PETER?

[LAUGHTER] 

>> WELL, COUNTRIES HAVE 

INTEREST AND ÃWE HAVE AN 

ALLIANCE OF SOME SORT WITH 

PAKISTAN BUT THEY ARE NOT Ã

WE'RE NOT FRIENDS BECAUSE WE 

LIKE THEM OR THEY LIKE US.

THEIR INTERESTS ARE VERY 

STABLE.

THERE'S A WONDERFUL SCENE WHERE 

THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT CARROTS 

AND STICKS AND THEY SAID WHAT 

IF THEY'RE NOT QUITE CURIOUS?

NOW THE POINT IS, WE HAVE TRIED 

CARROTS WITH THE PAKISTANIS AND 

STICKS.

THIS IS 17 YEARS ON AN AVERAGE 

HEATEDLY RELEASE THIS.

THIS COUNTRY AFGHANISTAN WILL 

BE ATTACHED TO THEM FOREVER SO 

THEIR INTERESTS ARE MAKING SURE 

THAT THEY HAVE A NON- ENEMY 

LINED COUNTRY ON THE BORDER 

BECAUSE THEY ARE THREATENED ON 

THEIR OTHER BORDER, AND THE ARE 

GOING TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE 

TO MAKE SURE THERE IS NOT AN 

INDIAN ALIGNED GOVERNMENT IN 

KABUL WHICH MEANS THAT THERE 

ARE GROUPS IN THE TALIBAN THAT 

THEY WILL DO FOREVER.

PRESIDENT TRUMP CORRECTLY SAID 

WE WILL GET TOUGH ON 

PAKISTANIS.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET TOUGH 

ON THEM.

AS LONG AS WE HAVE TROOPS IN 

AFGHANISTAN, WE NEED THEM.

LOOK AT THE GEOGRAPHY.

YOU HAVE IRAN AND THE RUSSIAN 

PRO-RUSSIAN STATES.

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET 

SUPPLIES OUR TROOPS IN 

AFGHANISTAN IS ON GROUND 

THROUGH PAKISTAN OR THROUGH AIR 

AND THEY HAVE NOT THREATENED 

THAT PERSON WE ARE IN THIS FORM 

OF INSTABILITY WHERE THEY WILL 

CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE 

INSURGENT GROUPS TO SOME DEGREE 

AND WE WILL BE ANNOYED BY IT 

BUT WERE NOT GOING TO TRY TO 

MAKE THEM A STATE SPONSOR OF 

TERRORISM OR SANCTION THE 

INDIVIDUALS OF THE PAKISTANI 

STATE BECAUSE WE DO NEED THEM 

SO THAT IS A VERY UNCOMFORTABLE 

ANSWER TO THE QUESTION BECAUSE 

THERE'S REALLY NO GOOD ANSWER 

HERE OR MAGIC BULLET.

BUT ALSO FOR ALL THE REASONS 

THAT CHRIS OUTLINED EARLIER WE 

WILL BE IN AFGHANISTAN FOR 

QUITE SOME PERIOD OF TIME 

BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ÃBY THE 

WAY, CAN YOU IMAGINE ANY 

PRESIDENT IN OUT OF AFGHANISTAN 

WHEN HILLARY CLINTON OR DONALD 

TRUMP, A TERROR ATTACK WAS 

SOMEHOW, YOU KNOW, EMANATE FROM 

THE AREA SEVERAL YEARS LATER, 

IT WOULD BE THE BENGHAZI 

EPISODE TO THE POWER OF ÃSO 

NO.

WE WILL NOT LEAVE FOR GOOD 

REASONS BECAUSE OUR NATIONAL 

SECURITY IS THERE BUT WE ALSO 

CANNOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THE 

PAKISTANI KIND OF FUTURE.

>> JUST A NUANCED POINT, IT IS 

NOT JUST AN AFGHANISTAN 

STRATEGY BUT IT IS 

DISTINCTIVELY A SOUTH ASIAN 

STRATEGY TO GET AT THE PROBLEM 

OF MORE PRESSURE ON PAKISTAN, 

WITH ALL OF THE THINGS THAT 

PETER SAID ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.

WE HAVE PLAYED THIS BEFORE WITH 

THE PAKISTANIS.

THE JURY IS OUT BUT THIS IS A 

SOUTH ASIAN STRATEGY THAT IS 

BROADER THAN JUST AFGHANISTAN.

WE HAVE TO EMBRACE INDIAN 

ISSUES AS WELL IS PAKISTANI 

ISSUES.

THE PAKISTANIS DO NOT LIKE 

THAT.

SO WE WILL SEE.

THE JURY IS OUT.

I'VE HEARD ALL OF THE SAME 

ARGUMENTS, AND I HAVE LISTENED 

TO SOME OF THE ENGAGEMENTS, 

WITH PAKISTANIS.

I WAS PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT.

WE TOLD THEM THE SAME THING 

THAT I HEARD A GENERAL TILL THE 

PAKISTANIS INTO THOUSAND FIVE, 

EVEN AT THE ISI HEADQUARTERS, I 

HAD MY FOOT SLAMMED THE DOOR AT 

THE ISI HEADQUARTERS WHEN THE 

GENERAL SAID CHRIS, STAY REALLY 

CLOSE TO ME BECAUSE YOU'RE 

GOING TO THE MEETING NO MATTER 

WHAT.

I HAD TO STAY REALLY CLOSE BUT 

THEY STILL SLAMMED THE DOOR IN 

MY FOOT BUT I MANAGED TO GET 

IN.

THEY GLARED AT ME THROUGHOUT 

THE MEETING BUT I TOOK NOTES 

AND SMIRKED WHICH IS NOT MY 

NORMAL STYLE BUT MY FOOT WAS 

HURTING.

THE POINT IS, I LISTENED TO THE 

MESSAGING, THE SAME THAT I 

HEARD LAST YEAR SO IT IS A 

CYCLE.

>> YES.

>> NOW, ON WE HAVE MORE 

AUDIENCE QUESTIONS?

>> AND I THINK THAT THIS WILL 

BE THE LAST QUESTION.

TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD THE 

UNITED STATES PRIORITIZE 

COUNTERTERRORISM OVER OTHER 

THREATS LIKE EMPOWER CHINA AND 

A REAL EMERGING CHINA?

>> THAT IS A QUESTION AND I'M 

GLAD THAT SOMEONE THOUGHT OF 

THIS.

>> I THINK THAT CHRIS HAS 

STRONG VIEWS ON THIS.

>> Chris Costa: I DO.

SO I HAVE ACTUALLY PREPARED 

SOME REMARKS AND I WILL JUST 

READ A COUPLE OF REMARKS THAT I 

THINK ARE IMPORTANT.

THIS IS MY CENTRAL THESIS AND I 

HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO GET SOME 

SLEEP AND REFLECT ON THIS VERY 

THOUGHTFUL QUESTION AND 

COMMENTARY FROM THE PANEL AND 

AM BETTER FOR HAVING HEARD IT.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT I WORRY 

ABOUT HASTE TO PIVOT FROM 

TERRORISM TO OTHER SECURITY 

CHALLENGES AND I WORRY ABOUT 

THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE 

STAND TO LOSE ON SETBACKS OF 

THE COUNTERTERRORISM FRONT.

WE CAN DO MORE THAN ONE THING 

AT ONE TIME.

NOW PEOPLE HAVE ARGUED THAT WE 

HAVE DISPROPORTIONATELY FOCUS 

ON COUNTERTERRORISM BUT I WILL 

TELL YOU IN MY TIME, IN JAVED'S 

TIME IN THE WHITE HOUSE, WE DID 

NOT DISPROPORTIONATELY FOCUS ON 

COUNTERTERRORISM.

I HAD TO FIGHT TO ENSURE THAT 

OUR EQUITIES ÃI HAD TO ARGUE 

OUR ISSUES IN AFGHANISTAN.

OF COURSE HE ARGUES BROKE OUT 

IN THE DEBATE LEADING UP TO THE 

FINAL DECISION FOR THE SOUTH 

ASIAN STRATEGY, BUT I DO WORRY 

THAT THE PENDULUM WILL SWING 

GET THE OTHER END OF THE 

SPECTRUM AND WE WILL FORGET 

WHAT HAPPENED ON 9/11.

I DO WORRY ABOUT THAT.

I AM NOT ALARMIST.

I JUST BELIEVE THAT THAT IS A 

PRAGMATIC VIEW OF THE WORLD SO 

I THINK THE STEADY PRESSURE, IS 

IF I DID IT ARREST?

IS IT SHOULD WE READ PORTIONS 

OF RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN 

FOCUSED ON CT?

YES, I THINK THAT WE CAN DO 

THAT APPROPRIATELY AND THAT THE 

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY CAN 

FIGURE IT OUT.

I THINK A SOUND, OVERARCHING 

COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY ÃDO 

NOT DECREMENT THE RESOURCES.

DO NOT DETRACT FROM THE GAINS 

THAT WE HAVE HAD.

SO I DO FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT 

THAT.

I WANTED TO TEST THAT OUT ON 

THIS AUDIENCE AND MAY BE WE CAN 

TALK WHEN WE BREAK AT THE ÃAT 

THE SOCIAL, I THINK, THAT SOME 

OF US ARE GOING TO.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> Barbara McQuade: I AM IN NO 

POSITION TO DISAGREE WITH THIS.

CERTAINLY, COUNTERTERRORISM 

REMAINS A TOP PRIORITY.

WE WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE 

CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE 

SAME TIME BUT IF YOU HAVE EVER 

MANAGED RESOURCES, YOU KNOW THE 

CHAPTER PRIORITIZE ONE THING 

OVER THE OTHER.

NOW I WAS STRUCK WHEN GINA SAID 

THAT THEY WOULD MAKE THAT A 

PRIORITY.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT THREAT 

FROM NATIONSTATES, ELECTION 

INTERFERENCE, AND ALSO A REALLY 

SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM RELATING TO 

INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE FROM OUR 

FOREIGN ADVERSARIES.

A HUGE PROBLEM WITH ÃI 

CONTINUED IN DETROIT, STEALING 

TRADE SECRETS FROM THE AUTO 

INDUSTRY, OFTEN THROUGH CYBER 

MEANS.

SOMETIMES IT IS JUST FROM PAIN 

ENOUGH TO AN EMPLOYEE TO LEAVE 

AND COLLECT DATA ON A THUMB 

DRIVE OR AN EXTERNAL HARD DRIVE 

AND TAKE IT TO A COMPANY, A 

START UP IN CHINA.

BUT THE ABILITY TO SNEAK IN AND 

OUT THROUGH THE DOOR BUT 

THROUGH YOUR COMPUTER TO STEAL 

TRADE SECRETS, I THINK THAT 

THAT COULD HARM THE GREATEST 

ADVANTAGE THAT THE UNITED 

STATES HAS WHICH IS OUR 

INDUSTRY AND ECONOMY.

AND WE DO KNOW THAT THERE WAS A 

BIG INDICTMENT AGAINST CHINESE 

NATIONALS, CHINESE 

INTELLIGENCE, STEALING FROM THE 

STEEL INDUSTRY IN PITTSBURGH.

NOW A LOT OF THOSE WERE NOT 

CHARGED BECAUSE YOU CANNOT 

EXTRADITE PEOPLE FROM THE 

COUNTRIES WHERE THE THREATS ARE 

COMING FROM SO RATHER THAN 

CHARGE THEM AND GO PUBLIC IS 

USUALLY THE INTELLIGENCE 

COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO WASH TO 

TRY TO GAIN VALUABLE 

INTELLIGENCE FROM THAT KIND OF 

ATTACK.

BUT IN THAT INSTANCE IT WAS 

DECIDED WHAT IS CALLED NAME AND 

SHAME.

TO SAY WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE UP 

TO AND WOULD COST YOU TO LET 

THE WORLD KNOW ABOUT THAT BUT 

IT IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT THREAT 

THAT IS GOING ON AND THREATENS 

ONE OF THE GREAT ADVANTAGES 

THAT THE U.S. HAS OVERCOME 

OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD.

SO THOUGH COUNTERTERRORISM IS 

AN IMPORTANT PRIORITY, I DO NOT 

WANT THAT TO DIMINISH THE 

PRIORITY OF THE THREAT POSED BY 

NATIONSTATES.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> NOW, IT WON'T SURPRISE US IN 

THIS DISCUSSION THAT IS ALL 

TRUE, IT WILL PROBABLY BE 

IRRELEVANT FOR THE NEXT THING 

HAPPENS WHICH WILL BE KIND OF A 

SWINE FLU VIRUS THAT KILLS 2 

MILLION AMERICANS OR SOMETHING 

UNPREDICTABLE, A BIO ATTACK.

AND WE WILL LOOK BASICALLY ÃIS 

ALWAYS A PROBLEM WHERE YOU'RE 

FIGHTING THE LAST WALL BECAUSE 

THAT'S ALL THAT YOU KNOW.

BUT I DO THINK THAT IT IS 

FAIRLY OBVIOUS THAT IT WILL 

SURPRISE US.

THEY SURPRISE US ON PEARL 

HARBOR AND 9/11.

OF COURSE THERE WERE 

INDICATIONS BUT WE DO TEND TO 

BE SURPRISED.

UNFORTUNATELY, SOMETHING ELSE 

WILL HAPPEN.

HISTORY HAS NOT STOPPED.>> 

ALL RIGHT.

I AM MINDFUL OF THE TIME.

WE ARE THREE MINUTES AHEAD OF 

SCHEDULE, BUT AS CHRIS KNOWS 

HIS PEOPLE WHO USED TO RUN 

MEETINGS IS SAVING A LITTLE BIT 

OF TIME IS GOOD FOR EVERYBODY.

WE HAD A GOOD COMPETITION OF 

WHO COULD IN THE MEETING THE 

EARLY SO I THINK THAT ONE IN 

THAT REGARD, EVEN AT THE NSC.

BUT THANK YOU FIRST OF ALL TO A 

LOT OF PEOPLE.

FIRST, THANK YOU TO YOU ALL WHO 

DECIDED TO TAKE TIME OUT OF 

YOUR BUSY SCHEDULES AND 

AFTERNOONS.

THANK YOU FOR THAT INTO THE 

PANEL AS WELL, COMING IN FROM 

WASHINGTON.

THANK YOU FOR BARBARA FOR 

TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR 

SCHEDULE.

>> ALWAYS.

>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING TIME 

WITH US.

THANK YOU TO THE STUDENTS FROM 

THE CLASS, RYAN AND MICHAEL, 

ELLIOTT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR 

HELPING TO FACILITATE THE 

QUESTIONS AND A SPECIAL THANKS 

TO LAURA LEE.

I KNOW THAT I SAW LAURA HERE 

SOMEWHERE BEFORE.

LAURA, I HAVE PROBABLY BUGGED 

THE MOST OF MY TIME COMING TO 

THE FORD SCHOOL ASKING HER 

LITERALLY MILLIONS OF QUESTIONS 

ABOUT HOW DO I PUT AN EVENT 

LIKE THIS TOGETHER?

WHAT ARE THE DOS AND DON'TS?

SO THANK YOU.

AND LAST, THANK YOU TO AARON 

FLOREZ.

I KNOW THAT YOU ARE THERE IN 

THE BACK.

YOU REALLY WHERE THE PERSON WHO 

DID ALL THE HARD WORK YOU PUT 

THIS TOGETHER SO A SPECIAL 

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR 

EVERYONE!

[APPLAUSE] 

DEAN BARR, THANK YOU.

LET ME SAY THANK YOU AGAIN 

TO JAVED FOR PUTTING TOGETHER A 

WONDERFUL GROUP OF PANELISTS.

EVERYBODY, PLEASE JOIN US 

OUTSIDE FOR A RECEPTION.

THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.