tv CSIS U.S. and U.K. Relations CSPAN July 8, 2017 3:02am-4:05am EDT
there are united nations efforts underway as you're aware. certainly our secretary of state, and we also seeeconomic aspects to the diplomatic effort to u.s., thevisit to the defense minister sat down with heather conley for the center of strategic and international studies to talk about u.s.-u.k. collaborations in combating security threats. heather: good afternoon. welcome to the center for strategic and international studies. my name is heather conley. i'm senior vice president for europe, eurasia at the arctic region. we cannot be more delighted to welcome secretary of state of defense michael fallon here to csis. i was explaining to the
secretary that the news cycle has been so quiet and slow the last few days that we were so glad he could come here and help elevate our discussion. he comes at an incredibly important time, certainly on the heels of several days of incredible news not only security related issues, with the north korean launch of an icbm, but also as we watch unfold the historic meeting between president trump and president putin today. frequent fallon is a visitor to csis. he was here two years ago in march and the topic of discussion was in defense of a rules-based order and how that transatlantic relationship can be used. in today's discussion, we will the defense of the rules-based order and see where
we go from here. secretary fallon assumed secretary of state for defense, his position, on july 15, 2014. two days later, a russian missile shot down mh-17. that was his first few days on the job. secretaryndum later, fallon, you have had an extraordinary tenure already in your three years. we are delighted you are here with us. we have so much to discuss and we look forward to your comments. and thankinge secretary fallon for joining us here at csis. [applause] heather, thank you. it's great to be back in the united states and to be speaking at thi world-renowneds center. whose ideas have influenced generations of defense thinkers on both sides of the pond.
this is my first opportunity to visit the united states after our recent election. let me reassure you that postelection, government remains strong and we have remained committed to delivering stronger defense. now there are some who have taken a look at britain in the past few months after an unpredictable election. i'm not sure there is another kind of election these days. have looked at the negotiations over brexit, have seen the series of appalling terrorist incidents in manchester and wonderednd have britain is getting distracted in any way in our international role. that would not be the first time critics have been wrong. britain is getting i remember the first visit as defense secretary back in 2015.
that was before rather than after the general election of that year. yet, some of the concerns expressed were all too familiar. they said we were not committed to the 2%. they noted parliament's refusal toi endorse strikes against assad's chemical weapons. they said we would not be committed to two aircraft carriers. they said we would not act in the face of trouble. so, it is worth reminding ourselves just what happened next. first, we did invest later that year 2015, we conducted an ambitious strategic defense and security review, committing to continue to meet nato's 2% target. since then, not only have we done what we said we would do, but we also have chosen to grow our defense budget year on year
ofat least 9.5% ahead inflation. we arefigures confirmed spending more than 2% and we are also meeting the targets to stand 20% of that on new equipment. we're using that growing budget to purchase, to develop and to build high-end kit from aircraft to drones to apache helicopters and armored vehicles. f-35 fighters to two aircraft carriers, the most powerful ships ever built in britain. we were delighted two weeks ago to witness queen elizabeth embarq for the first time.
thanksrier strike plans, to your continuing support -- and we have over 120 aircrew and pilots training here on 10 f-35 35 aircraft. those carrier strike plans are already becoming a reality. we are building following a successful vote in parliament a new generation of nuclear ballistic submarines to maintain our ultimate nuclear deterrent. and, we are adapting to an age of information warfare. investing in equipment with the sensors and receptors to handle a super abundance of information, transforming our military structures to cope with the virtual environment. bringing our signals and intelligence corps together under a shared command to analyze, disseminate cyber information more efficiently and effectively.
and training up a new generation of cyber warriors to strengthen our networks and tackle our vulnerabilities. my second point today is that we are doing more than investing. we're also acting. in march 2015,re that was still under the shadow the 2013 syria vote against taking military action to deal with the use of chemical weapons. yet, by the end of 2015, a new parliament had voted overwhelmingly to extend the airstrikes we were convicting in -- conducting in iraq and syria. today, we are performing a pivotal role in the 71 member coalition. attacking daesh's positions with our aircraft, training local forces. we have trained over 50,000
iraqi and peshmerga groups. cyber cyberfensive capabilities to disrupt capabilities in iraq and syria. an overall contribution of airstrikes second only to that of the united states. it's striking to think that when i took office just three years ago, daesh were closing in on the gates to the fact that. today, they are close to defeat in their last city of mosul. aeshthe counter-d campaign is far from the united kingdom's only operation. we are not just in the middle east. we continue in afghanistan where we have committed to increasing troop numbers again after the uplift we announced last summer. building counterterrorism capacity, improving the resilience of afghan forces,
strengthening the afghan air force. training the next generation of afghan officers. we're in africa too, training somalians to fight al-shabab. assisting sudan in the midst of a humanitarian crisis. in total this afternoon, we have moreassisting than 10,000 britih servicemen and women deployed or in bases and involved in some 25 operations around the globe. britain has delivered, britain is delivering, and we will continue to do so. is that we will do so in partnership. we are stronger, of course, when we work together. the fact is today that our nations are facing a wave of diverse, concurrent,
global threats from islamist extremism, from north korea testing missiles, firing off moreles, from russia aggressive as we have seen in ukraine and syria, from iran sponsoring terror, from the insidious spread of misinformation and cyber attacks. these are challenges that demand in international response. so as we deliver on our domestic vote to leave the political framework that is the european union, we see brexit as an opportunity not to step back from european defense, but to step up to strengthen euro atlantic security. we are strengthening our bonds within nato, the cornerstone of our defense. in the light deter
of russian aggression. we are leading nato's enhanced forward presence in estonia with 800 british troops. we are working alongside the united states in poland. this year, britain leads the in the light of russianalliance's very high s joint task force. this year, i have dispatched typhoons to romania to police the skies over the black sea. shipsonth, royal navy take over for a year half of nato's maritime missions in the mediterranean, the black sea. behindlso in nato right the united states in calling for all members to start paying their way. your president was absolutely correct to say that european
nations need to do more to shoulder their share of the burden. since britain and the united states stood together to demand action back at the wales summit, 24 of the 29 member nations have now raised and the alliance has cumulatively increased its defense spending by around $46 billion. but money is not the only nato issue. world of the cold war, nato was not transform itself into a far more agile organization. secretary mattis and i are working together for faster decision-making, better
prioritization, and less prioritization, and less bureaucracy in the way that nato works. we also want to see nato adopting a 360-degree approach, producing a coherent force capable of meaningful action with a modern integrated approach to defense and to the deter. an enhanced role in the fight against international terror. our global influence as a country doesn't just come from nato. it comes also from a wealth of bilateral alliances. last week, we took a significant step forward by expanding the u.k.-led joint expeditionary force to include sweden and flyn finland. that gives us a nine nation armed force of like-minded, northern european countries able to deploy a force of up to 10,000. augmenting our ability to respond to threats in the north
sea and north atlantic, but also adaptability and agility to deploy very quickly to humanitarian zones, to rescue our citizens from adaptability d crisis, to conduct more minor military missions. and we've recently used our purchase of your p-8's to do more try laterally with the united states. i signed an agreement with secretary matus and our moregian colleague to have cooperation in the training, logistics and support that need to address the change security advances an increase russian submarine activity in the north atlantic. it should go without saying that when it comes to bilateral relationships, the united states remains our strongest ally.
oure i spoke here in 2015, partnership has only strengthened further. i've already touched on the operations across the world from europe to the middle east, africa and afghanistan. but the truth is we are now more integrated at every level. working in each other's headquarters, flying in each other's planes, training on each other's ships. collaborating on everything from nuclear capabilities, including sharing a common missile toartment, and intelligence, autonomy. and we have the prospect now of the united states with 35 fighters flying from the decks of our aircraft carriers and our planes in turn flying from yours. states 2015, the united support our strategic
defense review. today, if you turn to your own national defense strategy, i would like to share just one thatusion drawn from experience of working together that experience of working together on our defense review. and that is the need for a stronger, modern defense. last modern defense. last year saw the person of the nobel prize economist thomas shelley, a great american who helped our current notions of deterrence. were you with us today, he would remind us deterrence is about much more than the atom bomb or hydrogen bomb. it is not ensuring that our adversaries always know that the cost of an attack will be far greater than any potential reward. in the cold war, that meant
massing armies along the borders of the iron curtain whilst building up vast nuclear arsenals. gray-zoneage of conflict with proxy, nonconventional threats, sometimes anonymous, adding to the conventional and nuclear dangers that are threatening to undermine the rules-based international order of which are security depends, our deterrence must necessarily evolve. agility will be critical. it will demand constant and strategic planning to prepare for a broader range of threats. it will require perpetual persistence to continually countering cyber intrusion. malicioushe misinformation of our adversaries with a faster truth. it will seek new innovations and disruptive capabilities, whether
utonomousor a taunus systems systems. it will be about the art of persuasion. last week, i spoke at the margaret thatcher security conference in london. its theme was whether or not we are witnessing the decline and fall of the west. whether our western values were enough to overcome these new and present dangers. i argued then that not only can we rise to this challenge but that we must and we will. we are not being attacked by these adversaries because we failed, because our values are redundant. on the contrary, we are being attacked because we won. because we succeeded against spreading these values and
beliefs across the world. ourtoday, we are recovering confidence. at an age of contested interests always prayedion, to doubt us where our adversaries seek to use cyber warfare and misinformation to rewrite the western narrative, to extend their spheres of influence, to try to limit those freedoms we champion, we have to learn how to remake those original arguments. because in so doing, that will make our societies far more resilient, far less failures.e to our that requires political leadership and no two nations equipped to make the equipped to make the case for the west then the
united states and the united kingdom. we share the same values and democracy, of justice, for freedom of tolerance. values we fought for throughout the past century. but, we didn't just fight, we also championed the causes of liberty. the free market. the innovation that technology demands. ever greater opportunities to live wealthier, healthier, happier, freer lives. demands. if we get this right, if we present our case strongly enough again, we will do more than simply build resilience in our countries. we can reawaken the hopes of those still living under oppressive regimes. reaganet thisin the 1980's, prt and margaret thatcher succeeded in shattering the shackles of communism. not just because they railed against the cruel and desolate
creeds that lurked behind the iron curtain, but because they presented the vision of a better life. i remember a few years back being struck by the description of what was called the beautiful moment with news of reagan's evil empire speech reached siberia. it was "the brightest, most glorious day. finally, a spad had been callede an spade. president reagan" from that moment admitted impossible for anyone in the west to close their eyes to the real nature of the soviet union. enough just to speak out against the aggressive behavior of russia anin ukraine or syria, or to urge our adversaries to act.
we must also give hope to people across the world of a better way of life. mattis, marking the 70th anniversary of the marshall plan, he said we stand for freedom and we will never surrender the freedom of our people. ladyin 1996, the iron delivered a speech in missouri where churchill had coined the iron curtain phrase 50 years before. she said, "there are rare moments where history is open and its course changed by means such as these. way maybe juse may be at just sa moment now." we have reached such a moment. once more, we look to the
united states to recapture the spirit of fulton. the provide deterrence for a darker age. to remake the case for the west and to follow the mission center center in very sustaining american prominence as you doas you do that, i wanto rest assured that a bolder, global britain as in the great war, the second world war, as in as a force for good in the world. the cold war, will continue standing by your side, strengthening our transatlantic bond and supporting everyone in the cause for freedom. thank you. [applause] strengthening our transatlantic
heather: secretary fallon, thank you. ofetimes we need a dose inspiration and we needed that. thank you very much. in some ways, i think the challenge right now is where to begin. what subject do we jump into? start with going to the subject of the day and that is russia. stated inent trump his speech in warsaw on thursday about the bedrock nature of the article five commitment, something that was not accomplished at the nato leaders meeting in brussels. you just recently completed a successful nato defense. help us understand how things are going with the deployment of the native italian. nato has had a challenge of the one in, getting forces there quickly. getting the kit there.
what has your experience been and the british forces experience in estonia in preparation for the placement of a battalion to defend estonia should that become necessary? sec. fallon: we have seen a resurgence of nato. a revival of nato. right back in 2014. a number of nato members begin to increase their defense spending again. after years of decline. we have seen more commit to reach the 2% target. your president's rhetoric has been helpful in that. it has helped to encourage those other allies to be clearer about the defense spending. we have also since that same summit seen a revival in nato's deployment.
we saw a commitment then to the very high readiness task force. that stood up last year. we commanded this year. i was there in annexes eyes with them in romania -- in an exercise with that in romania. we saw several thousand troops from my country, your country, but also from spain, a series of some of the newer members of deploying. that is the major response force of nato ready to deploy. greeted were solved a year ago on an. within a year, we have seen all four battle groups deployed. we have seen a number of member states of nato come together in detachments, alongside
each other. we have a large company of french troops alongside our battle troops. we have a company in your battle deploying. thatgroup. we have seen different formations. the collective sense of purpose in nato. it was quite emotional standing there in estonia for the stand up parade of the british-french troops, where the president of estonia said to me this is the first time we have had foreign troops on the estonian soil as friends. that was quite a moment. it shows you just how important these deployments are for the eastern flank of nato. i find this encouraging for those of us who have always believed in nato that nato has begun to revive itself. we need to carry that through with modernization of reforms are secretary mattis an id i champion which would lead to a
reduced bureaucracy. in moscow, nato is an organization that is ready to defend itself. heather: we are watching very closely, russia will implement a very significant military exercise. this majoryears, military exercise comes to the western district. a combination of 100,000 forces nato's deployed along eastern flank. nato's eastern flank. any particular concerns you have? what are you watching for as we watch this unfold? watchingon: we will be it extremely closely. these are much larger exercises. anything that nato can carry out. in that sense, they are more provocative than any nato deployment. we have been absolutely
transparent with russia about our requirements. the numbers involved, the the numbers involved, the armaments they carry. it is absolutely defensive. it is meant to reassure, they are defensive deployments. that is a rather different approach than what we see with russia. moscow conducts thatn carryas exercise, there should be no noubt nato has demonstrated a enhanced forward presence and the task force has demonstrated its willingness to back up its support. reconfirme president the united states commitment to article five yesterday was the icing on top. heather: i want to go closer to shore. you mentioned the cooperation bilaterally and trilaterally
with the maritime patrol aircraft. there is a growing concern about russian some bereaved warfare activity in the atlantic. there are tabletop exercises in washington on the greenland-iceland-u.k. gap. we have not done that in a long time. a report beefing up nato's command structure. there is much more u.k. leadership role in submarine warfare. we have actually had some back and forth with russian defense ministry officials about the aircraft carriers, theirswe havk andforth the queen elizabeth. sec. fallon: we have seen a bit of carrier anenvy. [laughter] sec. fallon: that is expected when you sail a brand-new aircraft carrier. we are and the queen elizabeth. building two of them.
but what we have seen in recent years is a significant increase in russian submarine activity in the north sea. what we need is an alliance as well as our seen in recent years is a significant ourselved to protect ourselves, to protect our carriers. but also to protect nato. take a 360r nato to degree view of its security. it has been an intense focus on northeast and flank of nato where allies like estonia feel particularly vulnerable. there is concern in the southeast quadrant too. we work more closely together. the fact that norway, britain and the united states are operating the same aircraft gives us huge potential for more collaboration in training, logistics and support. our air crew are training up and we look forward to the first
arrival towards the end of this decade. heather: i will finish up the noting as youn by are doing your deployments in the black sea, noting u.s. vessd aircraft have experienced very unprofessional behavior by russian pilots coming within five feet of u.s. aircraft. any special concerns you have as you increase your maritime presence in the black sea and your air patrol role? anything you are concerned about with russian behavior? sec. fallon: we are concerned about russian long-range aviation. the air information region where russian aircraft don't respond and we send up our jets to ward them off. that is provocative.
it can be dangerous. it often involves the divergence of civilian flights that may be in the area. there is a capacity always for a misunderstanding, miscalculation. we continue to talk to russia about that. we have used our communications with russia to ensure where possible we can de-conflict and where possible we can readily de-escalate any tensions. heather: moving towards the r maritimet, you mission in the mediterranean. the migration crisis, the report over the last several weeks has seen an uptick in migrants attempting an incredibly dangerous crossing in the mediterranean. what is the u.k. position the migration crisis and the nato role. ? the european union taking a leadership role.
what is the maritime strategy here? a strong u.k. role in that position? sec. fallon: it is a good example where britain remains, involved in the security of what is our continent. europe matters to us as much as members of the european union. there are two missions. the european union mission in the central mediterranean and the nato issue. in the beginning of the european union mission, we have our own navy ship there helping to save lives in the mediterranean. increase on a huge the number of migrants tackling this journey. we do need to do something about it. increase on the number ofnot simply to contn in europe, but also to save lives. many many in an incredibly
dangerous journey and people of making a lot of money out of this particular. travel. we think it is important to start to tackle the business of people smugglers to make sure they cannot profit any longer on this trade. that means working with the libyan authorities to build up their coast guard efforts which is very slow work but necessary if they are to police their own territory to stop migrant boats getting to the edge of those waters where it becomes even more dangerous. india.rney across to work with libya and work on returns for those who are not clearly refugees. clearly economic migrants that are attempting to cross so they can be returned to where they came from. heather: by turning more to syria, we are hearing early
reports from the g-20 conversation that syria has potential cease-fires. we have talked a lot about cease-fires. what is your sense on where things are going in syria? there has been some discussion about the safety zones. the military footprints tha. two major powers, the u.s. and russia, very close proximity to each other. give us your sense of syria right now. what does the future military picture look like? sec. fallon: the recent history of the syrian civil war is littered with cease-fires. none of these have turned out to be cease-fires. they have been broken persistently. broken by the regime and broken by russian activity. they have beenwe welcome any cet let's see the results on the ground.
where these safety zones are proposed, let's not have the civilian population misled. where these safety zones are if they can be enforced, they are very welcome. getting the united nations military aid that was promised. so far, yes, we have the coalition, through the u.s. we have the de-conflicting mission that enables both the coalition and russia and the regime to avoid buying aircraft at the same time at the same space. it is important to work that mission. but the battle space in north syria and to the southwest is getting incredibly conflicted. the capacity for miscalculation -- we have already seen sadly on that front. we are going to have to work even harder. heather: hypothetically, if the syrian regime were to use
chemical weapons, but the united kingdom be ready to assist militarily in an attack? sec. fallon: we reviewed the various options. your administration was considering. prior to the last attack, i made it clear the united kingdom would support that attack. the use of chemical weapons is a illegal, barbaric and innocent lives were lost. we are in no doubt the source of the original chemical weapons attack was the regime. it was only regime aircraft in the air at that particular time. or effort to deal with that stall a further chemical weapons attack will have the united kingdom's full support. heather: i will keep spinning my globe and go to afghanistan. 10 years from now, if you are explaining to your children and grandchildren what the role of
british military forces were in afghanistan and what it accomplished, what that story would be? sec. fallon: it was supposed to reduce the threat of this transnational terror group operating from afghanistan, using it as a safe base to attack the west. to reduce and eliminate that particular threat. mostly, to build a better future for the people of afghanistan which we now have a democracy, a fragile democracy, but a democracy nonetheless. six or 7 million people voted in the last election. still able to be educated in school. there has been an increase in the quality of life in large parts of afghanistan. objectivesk, our were konwnown to reduce the terr threat and build a better afghanistan for its own people.
that effort has taken far longer than anyone has originally foretold. i can see that. it is a battle against insurgency w that can only beon can onlysurgency that be won by the local population. in the next few years, we can continue to improve the resilience of those forces. that is why we're uplifting our commitment, having it done previously last year, to strengthen the training of afghan forces, improve the air force, improve their counterterrorism efforts, and future officer training. ,eather: i think for many of us watching the story unfold in afghanistan, seeing the uptake of russian support to the taliban, additional regional
control.king it seems like we have lost ground. secretary mattis and general nicholson has called for additional courses. will there be increased forces or a limited footprint? surge, but it doesn't feel like we want to make that commitment again. sec. fallon: the potential point of last summer where the previous administration was considering reducing the commitment to afghan. we have seen a number of allies and they too might uplift the commitment. in the west, we understand the terror groups are still a threat to the west from their operation in afghanistan. i think we also understand if afghanistan were to start to collapse as a country, there would be huge implications in
west of migrations for the which would eventually end up in western europe. i have continued to try to persuade our nato allies to again. thei in the end, this is a battle they have to win. they have been up against it for the last two to three fighting seasons and we withdrew from combat operations. spin of mye last globe and then i will turn to the audience. let's turn to the asia-pacific region. i was mentioning north korea. saying hypothetically the united states could ask for in article five commitment if icbmorth korean attempted to reach u.s. oil. would nato be able to respond in any meaningful way?
six nato countries have participated and exercises. participated, but europe does not have a physical presence and a capability. is there a solution cents that our nato allies support us in trying to deter north korean advances in their icbm capabilities? well awayn: we are from looking at military options. i think we have to options. i think we have to recognize first of all this is not just a threat to the united states, nor should the united states be expected to deal with it entirely on its own. it is a threat to the international community as a whole. it is up to the international community to get to improve the cost to the regime of what it is doing. that means looking at the existing diplomatic efforts, the
resolutions in the united nations, ensuring it can be enforced necessary. adding new names, organizations to the list that we had evidence sections are being breached. and working harder collectively to ensure the international community is dealing with this particular problem. heather: it is a huge challenge. let's now turn to our audience. i know they have their questions. we have colleagues with microphones. if you could please raise your hand, introduce yourself and ask your question very briefly. we will collect a few questions and have secretary response of them in the remaining time. we will start this way. >> hi, i'm with the navy league. quick question on qatar. can you discuss how that influences u.s.-u.k. relations with the other arab countries
having an embargo on qatar? heather: thank you so much. we will keep moving across. >> thank you, secretary. i wanted to ask if you could comment further on the scope or potential scope of the u.s.-u.k. defense cooperation in asia, as the whole region trad changes. heather: in asia. you have to talk very clearly, sorry. >> and also potentially in the indian ocean. also curious if you could comment on u.k.-india defense cooperation and the potential for that going forward. heather: thank you. let's take two more questions and then i will come back for a second round. thank you. >> hi, i'm with at&t. with the increase in cyber
attacks from adversaries and military presence around the world, can you talk about the u.k. strategy to increase defense in the security network? the u.k. strategy -- heather: the british strategy on cyber? >> yes. heather: a more specific? >> defensive. heather: thank you. one more. sorry. the gentleman behind. thank you. >> hi, i'm david smith of the guardian. secretary tillerson says today between president trump and putin that president trump did press putin on the issue of russia's interference and last year's election. president putin denied it. i want to know your reaction to that and whether you have confidence in this american
administration to take a tough line on vladimir putin. heather: i will stop there for the moment. betweenlenging issue qatar, india, cyber and anything else you would like to cover on the meeting. sec. fallon: i think it is the way the microphone was. yes, we want to see this dispute come to an end. secretary tillerson is working very hard to do that, bring that about. he's working in close cooperation with our foreign secretary boris johnson. i hope this dispute, as all disputes, we can bring it to a resolution. we have friends. this is a dispute in the family in the gulf. we want to see it brought to an end and using all of our
contacts to try to explore various ways of doing that. the lead is with secretary tillerson. committed in the south china sea for example to exercising the right to freedom of navigation and to fly. we have flown through the south china sea last october. we think it is very important that we stick to that principle. we continue to work to revive that five powers defense arrangement to the south to give more reassurance to members of the five powers through regular exercising. i think you specifically mentioned india. april justdia in before the general election. we were working more closely with india on a number of defense programs. indeed on a number of projects
where we hope to go jointly into third markets. closely.e are working there are growing cooperation with the two navies as well as our armies. it's a bilateral cooperation we are investing in very heavily. identifying cyber is one of the three or four major threats to our country. sdsr, we earmarked 1.9 billion sterling to spend over the spending period on improving our cyber defenses, defending our own defense through the resilience of our critical infrastructure. the offensive up cyber capabilities that we have already confirmed on employing with the coalition against daesh
and which i very recently confirmed we would be willing to put in the service of nato if those capabilities were required. on the meeting between putin and the president, i have not seen the readout but you have seen two of already gotten it from secretary tillerson. i have drawn attention in my undoubtedrussia to russian interference in european elections, in the referendum, in the french election, the attempted coup in montenegro. i will not comment on interference in the united states election. heather: we have a second round here. we will take the cluster of three questions and then loop back around. >> thank you very much for speaking to us. i'm retired from the state
department.my question is cyber . has the british government made the decision on what would be the line that would trigger in article five nato response? i'm not expecting you to say clearly yes, this is the line, but maybe you can give us some examples of below that line and some points above it so we can get a better idea of what level of cyber attack would trigger article five. heather: thank you. pass the microphone to the second row. >> hi. theuestion is regarding u.k. efforts in mosul and iraq. of isis out of the area, what are the uk's efforts in strengthening the iraqi government to prevent another power vacuum in the future? yes, i'm with northrop
grumman. there is so much going on between our two countries and in the world. onthere any issue between the subject of u.s.-u.k. defense trade that has come up to the table between yourself and your u.s. counterpart? heather: thank you. we will stop there. sec. fallon: on cyber, yes, i have been asked this question before. we have nato to agree on those. a cyber attack can be construed as an attack on article five. i think that is important that we understand under the domain. however, i don't think it is useful to start specifying specific thresholds. i think the danger is we did that, we would start to see cyber attacks just below the threshold that we have identified. leave itather
uncertain to exactly what would qualify the level of pain is before article five would be triggered. on mosul, yes, we want to be suresure the end of pushing daeh iraq, the remaining cities in the river valley, we can get them completely iraq, oe want to be very sure we don't have to go back and do this coalition all over again. 71 countries, an investment over three years. us, thenvestment for intelligence gathering and training 50,000 iraqi troops. what is really us, important ist is not simply getting the humanitarian aid in as has gone into east mosul where central
services are being restored, schools are being reopened, markets are starting to open again, but that there is sufficient stabilization of the sunni populations, the cities and provinces really feel they have a stake in the future of iraq. this requires stabilization and political reconciliation. we need to strengthen the body of government's determination to follow through a military campaign with political work that should prevent us from having to do this all over again. -- there relationships is huge investment in american kit, to put it as crudely as that. we also expect to see our own companies down the supply chain getting a sufficient share of that. we signed an agreement with
boeing. we are seeing them invest more in the united kingdom. opening up more opportunity for our sme's in particular. we want this to be two way traffic. buying a lot of high-end american kit. f-35's from you. attack helicopters and so on. we expect that their return from that. we are also watching very closely any tendency towards and discriminating against british companies in particular. british companies involved in the united states defense as well. these are issues we discussed with the administrative. heather: fantastic. we have a short time for two quick questions. two right here and then we will close out. sir? >> you talked a lot about military to military cooperation. the kit, as you put it.
have you had a chance to express the u.k. government's displeasure about the leaks of intelligence, particularly around the manchester bombing, and the damage that can do with the community here and in london? heather: thank you. mr. secretary, very recently, a former chief of defense voiced his concern because of those high ticket items like carriers and nuclear components that there might be a moment to reduce of the british army from 80,000 two up to city 5000. do you share this term? sec. fallon: those two final questions. r as the intelligence
leaks, seriously's in the beginning of a criminal investigation. we have made that very clear to the united states. reassuranceelligencewe have red from the particular agency concerned that this information where it is shared will be properly protected in the future. we now regard that particular matter as closed. it is important that it is closed off because it is a huge amount from the particular agency concerned that this information of intelligence sharing that is necessary when fighting terrorism. it was unfortunate but it has been dealt with. as far as the former head of the army is concerned, i can reassure you we have no plan to reduce the size of the army down to 65,000. our manifesto commitment is to maintain the size of the armed forces, including the ability of of intelligence sharing that is army to fight at the
divisional level. in the 2015 sdsr, we are increasing the size of the royal navy and royal air force. armywe are not about cutting te army. heather: secretary, thank you so relationship we have with the united kingdom within nato. in q4 putting the end -- thank you for putting the endpoint to the week of international affairs and helping us expand what is important and the british position on that. with your applause, thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [inaudible conversations]
>> this weekend on booktv on c-span2, saturday at 11:00 p.m. eastern, pat buchanan talks asut his book on his time the former speechwriter and senior advisor to president richard nixon. >> there were going to break richard nixon as they broke lyndon johnson. but the -- but at the end of 68%, richard nixon was at approval in the gallup poll. astonishing. he had beenbefore, written off as the biggest loser in politics. roxanne discusses her life,
body, and its impact on her life in her memoir. >> is the woman on the cover of a book standing in her fat pants , and i thought, i can't write that book get. i want to write that book. why don't i tell the story of my body today without apology and just explanation of, this is my fat body, and this is what it is like to be in this world in this body? schedule, gon the to booktv.org. this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, university of washington professor william compares the 1950's beatniks to the hippies of the 1960's. >> they were veterans of the great depression, world war ii, and the atomic age. the hippies were the optimistic
children of the baby boom generation and the rising affluence of the postwar consumer boom. >> at 10 a quarter eastern, 30 years ago oliver north appeared before committees investigating iran. >> american people are not to be way you ask the question. you intentionally deceive the american people or have been intent to begin with. the effort to conduct these operations was made in such a way that our adversaries would .ot have knowledge of them that is not wrong. new, ron paul explores the consequences of what they call america's post-world war ii security state. >> the people who like authoritarianism, tell people what to do, they know it is
illegal for an individual to go into your house and take what they want. fortunately, that moral standard still exists. you can't take from people and hurt people. it happens, but most people recognize you can't do it. it is not illegal for the government to do it. >> for a complete schedule, go to c-span.org. congress returns the next week from their fourth of july recess. many senators have heard from their constituents on efforts to replace the health-care law. that was one of several issues discussed at a town hall held by texas senator ted cruz this week. the entire thing runs about an hour. [applause]