former u.s. senator mike pompeo and former defense secretary leon panetta testified on china's relations with iran and russia. before the house select committee on the chinese communist party. we also discussed how global threats and u.s. relations with china can impact every day americans and the importance of strengthening global partnerships and building energy and supply chain security. this is just over two hours. >> live coverage here on c-span. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] will the clerk will play video. >> hamas launches surprise attacks within israel borders overnight. >> $100 $100 million a year . >> xi jinping's says that one will be reunified with china during his new year's address. >> so 2024 must mark an

inflection point. >> we stand at this so 2024 must mark an inflection point. we stand at this crossroads. whether it's a surrender to a sea of troubles, we will do every thing we can to deter. the growing number of world conflicts and threats have strengthened ties between moscow and beijing. she told when they are driving changes not seen in a century. i will provide an alternative to western influence. [ inaudible ] >> u.s. national security with a power to reshape the international order to they say they are opposed to in world order led by the united states and its allies. the china is by far the most serious challenge to u.s.

national security with a power to reshape the international order to beijing's liking. >>the people's republic of china and russia have the means to threaten our interests and way of life. >>we're the last real super power and now china is a near peer-to-peer adversary to us now and of course, their goal is to build up the empire. they're putting up outposts buying up land in the country and ccp coming up and opening shop on main street. >> and age of idealism by purity of hardheaded realism. old enemies, new foes are taking shape battle lines are being redrawn. it's gathering forces that attempts to break ukrainian defenses across the eastern domestic region. rusk is also receiving support from iran. ukrainian officials in moscow has used hundreds of or any drone to hit civilian and military targets and then

there's china, the record show tiny state owned companies provided russian government owned defense firms with navigation equipment, jamming technology, and jet parts. ran his turning sites toward china. china is the biggest training partner in the on the customer's heavily sanctioned oil exports. plans on doing 25 year agreement signed in 2021. according to the new york times it calls for joint training and exercises, joint research weapons development intelligence sharing. actively deepened cooperation with new member iran. iran across, and connects and the alliance with iran called the axis of resistance. >> russia, chinese virions making the way to the foundation of the world the hands of order is being shaken to their hamas.core. >>to guarantee our freedoms, we must be prepared to serve.

>> as we work to meet the authentic problems of our time, we will generate a vision and an energy, which would demonstrate a new to the world. a superior vitality and the strength of the free society. >>well, thank you, first a point of order, we have a hard stop at 11:00, so i'm going to be ruthless in enforcing time limits, beginning with my own. i had a fancy prepared speechbut would like to ,tell a story secretary panetta has heard before. when i was with his son and listening to his wisdom, i piped up, mr. secretary, what's the best job you had in washington d.c.? in response that would simultaneously inspire and depress me, he said the best job i ever had was being a member of congress. he was a man who had every great job in washington d.c. and he said best job was member of congress because, and i quote him, there was a feeling

you could get stuff done. and i'd like to think that at a time when congress is struggling to get much done, this committee has been an oasis of bipartisanship and at least an attempt to reinvigorate that feeling and spirit that secretary panetta was talking about. we have two incredible public servants with us today, secretary pompeo as well, to provide their perspective how we restore deterrents and meet the moment. and we are in a decisive moment for u.s. national security for global security more broadly. famouslychurchill called the period of german re-armament and alliance building the gathering storm. today the storm gathers once more and as we watch china undertake the largest peace time military buildup since world war ii, and in moscow and pyongyang, and problems do not age well. we ignore them at our peril.

appeasement or overreliance on polite diplomacy will not save us. we must have our military strength, support our allies and deter in authoritarian alliance and only strength will withstand the storm. i recognize for the opening statement. thank you for coming the distinguished secretaries who are with us today. until the last few years, a lot of americans thought that freedom and democracy were finally spreading around the world. after the cold war democracy spread from eastern europe to east asia to sub saharan africa. in the 1990's some pundits theorized in an addition to the spread of democracy, growing economic ties between countries would also make war less likely. in fact, there was even a theory that it would be impossible for two countries that both had mcdonald's to go to war with each other. this was called, and i'm not

kidding, this is called, quote, the golden arches theory of conflict prevention and it was- - (inaudible) to plow shares, instead of sorts being beaten into plowshares tangs are traded in for, yes, happy meals. i like this theory a lot. one reason is that mcdonald's is based in my home state of illinois and the other reason is that mcdonald's was my first real job in life flipping burgers, so i have a sentimental attachment to this theory, but there's only one thing wrong with this theory, that is that it's falst. it doesn't work. while the chinese communist party invited mcdonald's intochina the ccp did not trade in tanks for happy meals. instead in 1989, they sent those tanks into tiananmen

square just a few blocks from what would be the largest mcdonald's in the world.vladimir putin didn't trade in his tanks either and sent them into ukraine two years ago, when mcdonald's stopped operating in russia in protest, putin forced the sale of mcdonald's property and renamed their brand. you can't go to mcdonald's in moscow anymore, but you can go to this place. it's russian for tasty and that's it. economic ties with the ccp and russia did not lead them to become democracies or to become more peaceful. in fact, the opposite happened. after coming to power, xi jinping issued document number nine which tells the ccp to stamp out false ideological trends like democracy, universal values, media independence, and civil society. the ccp now jails, disappears and murders journalists and dissidents and is carrying out an ongoing genocide, a genocide

against the uyghur people in the province. beyond bits border, the south china sea and militarizing taiwan. and no limits partnership with vladimir putin and stands by the putin regime during its brutal invasion in ukraine. last october, president biden sent congress a request for additional funding to support ukraine and others who are defending freedom and democracy against those who wish to tear down those ideals. in november, every single democrat on this committee signed a letter to congressional leadership urging this body to take action to pass that supplemental funding request. it's now january. the time to pass president biden's supplemental funding request is now. it's now. the spread of freedom and democracy around the world has been one of recent history's most extraordinary

developments. the power of these ideals has been proven by how fiercely those who enjoy them will fight to protect them. rather than turning their swords into plow shares as they've integrated with the world economy, the ccp and putin's russia have bought more swords. consequently, we must acquire more shields, and we must help our friends shield their democracies from attack as well. our mutual security depends on it. thank you and i yield back. >> ithank you, ranking member. i note for the record that your chart and prop game gets better every time we do a hearing. very impressive. again, we're privileged have two former secretaries. secretary pompeo was secretary of state and 4th district in kansas from 2011 to 2017. secretary pompeo was director of the cia as well as secretary of defense under president

barack obama, and previously served aschief of staff for former president bill clinton and best job, apparently, as a member of congress from california from 1977 to 1993. we thank both of you for making time out of our busy schedules to be here. if you could please stand and raise your right hand, i will now swear you in. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief so help you god? let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative, you may be seated. thank you, secretary pompeo, you're recognized for your opening remarks. great. thank you, mr. chairman and thank you ranking member, it's great to be here. i started my career canon 107 so feels like home very much. it's a real remarkable, bipartisan work and privilege to be in front of this particular committee. all are doing important, remarkable, bipartisan work and

i want to personally, on behalf of the pompeo family, thank you, each of you, for doing that. it matters to my family, it matters to each american and bless you for that. and you all have in front of you, much as my time in congress, important decisions, we have wars in the europe, the middle east, and risk at home, and the topic we're here to talk about today, challenges in the pacific and decisions right. you know, to start i always get to the facts. i'm going to try to do this in just three minutes. asia, i know you'll endeavor to get these decisions right. you know, to start i always get to the facts. i'm going to try to do this in just three minutes. we have got deterrents loss of europe, deterrents lost in the middle east. we're in the cusp of losing that deterrent model in asia as well, and one could argue those have already been lost. chairman kim who i spent way too much time with, chairman kim has now talked about the absence of any desire for peaceful reunification with the

republic of korea. that's a change that is important within guyana two weeks ago, they are frightened by maduro and his efforts to retake, his words, much as xi jinping talks about reunifying, retake what is rightfully theirs. this is a challenge that's linked. not just about one of these theaters, one of these zones, one of these regions, but these are all deeply linked whether america will have the resolve, capacity to deter and maintain the order that we have benefitted, that americans have benefitted from since the post cold war order was established. we know that this conflict largely begins with economics. chinese communist party has been at war with the united states economy for at least 20 years. unist party back in 197 it might have made sense in 1982. it made no sense by 2002, 2012

and certainly today makes no sense. it's dangerous for the united states to allow the chinese communist party to engaged in way that for our republic. i'll be asked about that. we think not only about taiwan, not only the south pacific and the los angeles chains, but los angeles, denver, washington d.c., chicago and my home state of kansas. the chinese party is working diligently inside the gates to undermine what we stand for. chain but about los angeles, denver, washington, d.c., chicago. o the chinese communist party is working diligently inside the gates to undermine everything that we stand for. when he talks about american when he talks about american it passively. he is working to achieve very american decline here at home. the last thought.

secretary panetta, i think it is important for americans to see this is not about politics or remotely partisan. it is so much more fundamental than that. i have been critical of many of the biden for inaction policies at the work that they continue to do to confront the challenge of china, i have approved and appreciated and i always knew that we could do more and they could do more as well. am counting on this committee to help us get to that place. we can't immediately turn around and create loopholes when we put together orders on how america should proceed. we cannot allow our allies to escape sanctions and we need tot make sure that our friends comply with them as well. this will require temerity from each of us.

the chinese communist party is not about to give and because of some great speech someone gives. or beijing or washington, d.c. they are determined and they will push back against the actions and we need to make sure that we hold chinese communist party at risk in the same way that they seek to put america at risk each day. if we get that right, the operational pieces will get those. with the strong united states military and a robust american economy we can deliver those outcomes in a way that will give us a chance that 250 years from now the 76 the or 79th secretary of state consider with his democrat counterpart from previous administration and still have the opportunity to defend what we hold most sacred. thank you for giving me the chance to be here today. spectacle for those remarks. secretary panetta. >> thank you.

distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify. on the increasing threat posed by the people's republic of china and its ongoing efforts to undermine the united states. thank you for having me join with my good friend mike pompeo. we worked together when he was in my job as director of the cia and continues to be in touch to the time he was secretary of state. mike and i are good friends and i am glad that we are here to be able to present our views. i also want to think this committee and the fact that youe are a bipartisan committee working on this issue is incredibly important to foreign

policy. i want to commend you for the work that you have done and in particular your work on --. we live in a dangerous world ins which tyrants and autocrats and terrorists are challenging and attacking democracies. they are threatening our values. our interests in our national security. vladimir putin brutally invaded ukraine and it was for no other reason than he did not believe that the people of ukraine had the right to decide how to govern themselves. ukraine is not just fighting to protect democracy but to protect the concept of democracy in the 21st century. when hamas attacked and brutally killed innocent men, women, and children in israel, they, like al qaeda, they cleared that they had no regard

for the dignity of life and the hamas leadership does need to be destroyed just as we targeted and destroyed al qaeda leadership. we are facing an aligned group of dictators and autocrats from around the world. united in determination to undermine democracy buechler china is looking to advance its own narrative of western decline. she explicitly said the east is rising and the west is declining and that china will replace the united states as a world power. i have met with xi jinping multiple times. he is smart and can be very diplomatic and is committed to an aggressive china but it is important that we never underestimate xi jinping because, he will use every

opportunity to undermine the stability of the united states in the west. he will steal our intellectual property and duck espionage. i believe they planted mall where within our own computer networks. he will use disinformation campaigns and he will militarize the south china sea. the people's army has the largest navy. there producing manned and unmanned aircraft and they are expanding their nuclear arsenal. as a result, they are not simply developing what could be called a general-purpose military. they are developing a military that can employ the threat and the use of force.

xi jinping recently said the reunification of the motherland is a historical necessary -- necessity. there is no question they threatened taiwan. the president was correct to say that we will defend taiwan militarily if it comes to that and i have always believed strongly that when the u.s. gives its word, it must stand by its word. that's the essence of deterrents. the bottom line is we are facing an increasingly aligned group of autocrats around the world and the fact is that they're now having dual use technologies spread with russia, iran, china and north korea. while this alignment of autocrats is troubling, the good news is that it does not even come close to approaching the strength and depth and breadth of the united states global network of allies and partners. look, some have suggested that our relationship with china is

improving and there's no question, we've had increased military and economic dialog, but make no mistake, the only way to try to avoid war with china, the only way to deal with china is from strength, from strength. both china and russia became more aggressive when they sensed weakness on the part of the u.s. and for that reason we must take strong action to arm and train taiwan to defend itself. to strengthen our force posture, to invest in the next generation of military technology, to bolster our alliances and to maintain strong export controls on critical technologies. and, i must say, we must demonstrate that our democracy is strong and that we can govern. ta

for that reason, it is incredibly important that this congress pass the supplemental request and provide necessary military aid to ukraine, israel, and taiwan. to fail would send a terrible message of weakness. to adversaries and allies alike, make it clear those who believe that the united states can back away from our commitment in ukraine, you cannot be weak on ukraine and be tough on china. in conclusion, let me just say, i tell the students at the panetta institute that in our democracy we govern either by ha leadership or by crisis. if we fail to provide leadership, then we will govern by crisis. and the price of that is the loss of the trust of the american people in our

democracy. this committee provides hope that we can govern and work together in a real sense. our democracy and our national security depend on each of you for your leadership necessary to govern and protect our country. thank you. >> thank you, mr. secretary. we've released three major policy reports that were the culmination of a year's worth of work and membership hearings and input and we're now trying to turn those into legislative reality, but i think perhaps the most important function of the committee is to try to explain to our colleagues and the american people, why, why any of this matters and for those who are in the d.c. beltway and think tanks, it may seem obvious why the defense of taiwan or the genocide matters, but i'm not sure it's as obvious to americans who are just trying to live their lives. for example, i had 600 people come to a town hall in my district to talk about the lake sturgeon being listed as endangered species, a huge issue for northeast wisconsin. i'm not sure i could get 20 people to come to a discussion about china.

i'd like both of you the opportunity to answer the everyday american who you've represented in your past job, why does this matter? why should they care about the threat posed by the ccp. i'll start with you, secretary pompeo. >> chairman gallagher, it does not surprise me that -- i don't think these are two separate things. they are so deeply interconnected. what happens in kyiv doesn't stay there. what happens in gaza doesn't stay there. these threats are real. you can see it on our southern e border as well. right there are bad actors trying to infiltrate our nation across that border as well. and for the folks back in kansas, so many american jobs depend on the fact that we will confront the chinese communist party's efforts to destroy our manufacturing base and intellectual property there are jut comes for ordinary families prepared on a united states that is prepared to defend its

own economy, create the rule of law, trade lanes open, all of these things that somehow seem distant. they're right on top of us. last piece, talked about china inside the gates. you know what? we closed in the trump administration the chinese consulate in houston, texas. we didn't close it because we disliked them, we closed it because they were conducting what i believe is one of the largest espionage operations ever against the american people from that very facility a they are in our universities today, operating to steal our finest high end research. these things matter to american economic growth for years in front of us. if we get it wrong then our children and grandchildren will live in an america that looks fundamentally different. we can't permit that to happen. it's not something about 6,000 miles away. it's about something just down the street from you, your

family and your neighbors. >> thank you, sir. secretary panetta, why does it matter in monterey? >>it matters because it really is about the fundamental security of our country. and i think one of the things that marks the american people is not just their common sense and their spirit and their resilience, but it's also their willingness to secure not just their family, but their country. as secretary of defense i had the opportunity to look into the eyes of our men and women in uniform sat going both to iraq and afghanistan. and what i saw was a

willingness on the part of these young men and women to put their lives on the line in order to fight and die for this country. to fight and die for this country. and so there are men and women from across this country who have assumed the responsibility of providing security and putting their lives on the line in order to defend this country. so it is incredibly important to what i call the american dream. i'm the son of italian immigrants. i used to ask my parents why did you come to this country? they came in the early 30's they came from a poor area in italy and i never forgot my father's response. he said, your mother and i

believe we could give our children a better life in this country. i think that's the american dream. giving our children a better life. and that's what this is all about. if we don't provide security for this country, if we don't deal with the threats that we're facing abroad, then we are not providing security. we are not providing the american dream for our children. >> thank you, sir. i yield my one second, ranking member is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. secretary panetta, you el quently stated your strong support for the white house's supplemental request for ukraine assistance. secretary pompeo, you're an eloquent and strong supporter for aid to ukraine and in your op-ed part of the reason, putin winning in ukraine would em bolden the ccp and make a war over taiwan more likely, isn't that right?

>> yes, that's correct. and secretary panetta spoke to that as well. >> let's just be very clear. w if we do not further fund ukraine now, war is more likely over taiwan, which none of us, none of us want war over taiwan or with china and that's certainly what the american people do not want. let me turn to my next topic, this is a picture of the cia memorial wall honoring those who died in the line of duty. last year the ccp's secret police launched a recruitment campaign. they posted this picture with an article about the first cia officer killed in the line of duty whom the ccp claims they killed in tibet in 1950. now, here is the rub. if you look at this article, the headline reads, quote, the first black star the cia hung

on the stone wall is related to china exclamation point. now, secretary panetta, i find this very disturbing. nobody should glorify the killing of an american, do you agree? >> absolutely. >>and xi, chairman xi came to san francisco recently and told us he wants to quote, make friends with us. secretary panetta, this might be obvious, friends don't glorify or laud the killing of other's people. >> absolutely. >>i think this is another example of the need to always judge the ccp by their actions not necessarily just their words. let me turn to this other very interesting picture and secretary panetta, you might recognize this. secretary panetta, this is you in the prc in 2012 and it looks like you're receiving a very memorable gift from china's then minister of defense. do you remember this.

>> i remember very well. >> is this hung in your dining room, by the way? >> i don't know if i've ever brought that photograph with me. >>now, interestingly, not only is that plate very memorable, but this gentleman here, general was the last defense minister in china to not be prosecuted for corruption. the next three individuals to hold this position as minister of defense were all prosecuted for corruption and/or purged and many others in the people's liberation army have also been purged. secretary panetta, there have been numerous reports of xi jinping purging some leaders not because of corruption, but because they disagree with xi's leadership. so here is my question, can you rule out that xi jinping is purging people from the pla because they disagree with his leadership? >>you know, that defense

minister that i met with, i actually -- we established a pretty good relationship in our ability to talk to one another and as a matter of fact, we began to do military exercises together and continued to have a dialog. t and i was hopeful at that time that we could continue that relationship. unfortunately, that hasn't been the case and you've just indicated the amount of corruption and those that are being dismissed because xi doesn't particularly like the way they conduct business. with that does is, is undermines stability in china. and it undermines stability in the military. the fact that we broke down our communication with china here is of concern because we need to be able to stay in touch with china when we have differences of one kind or another.

another. question is that xi, by virtue of the way he's dealing with his military leadership, i think is undermining their think is undermining their to what they need to do. >> let me turn to my last topic. this is a cture of joshua wong, secretary pompeo, joshua wong is a prisoner because he led pro democracy protests in hong kong. he came to the consulate in hong kong and requested refuge in 2020 when you were secretary. t were you personally in favor of him receiving refuge? >> look, i don't want to talk about the discussions we had inside. i think the united states can always do more, whether as for him, nathan law, jimmy who has been prosecuted, the united states can do more and better to protect these people in their capacity to just do the base things that every human being to speak their mind peacefully. f

>> i call upon the ccp to release joshua wong and wish we had provided him refuge at the time. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you, recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank both secretary panetta and pompeo for your service to our country. we appreciate it. secretary pompeo in your written testimony today you talk about a couple of different things that deal with the difficulties that the chinese economy's having right now. demographically they're struggling. you talk about their stock market is a disaster, stealing money off shore accounts, and, but it says make no mistake a weakened china is an ever growing danger to the united states and the world. so are you saying there, or just elaborate a little on this, the weaker their economy is, the more volatile their government could be and the more danger they are to the rest of the world?

>> it's good to see you again. >> to see you, too, sir. s >> it's not a direct line, that's not a one for one as they weaken they present more risk. i think they present more risk, the decision making apparatus and secretary panetta spoke to this, as there's more turmoil, as their economy struggles more and see the demographic writing on the wall, the decision making inside the chinese leadership becomes more fractured and as xi jinping sees the end of his time in leadership approaching as each day goes on, more likely to achieve the end-game that he's described. he's unambiguous about it, that he's determined to do it, and as the challenges present themselves there's always a risk that xi jinping has seen the clock has run and if america is not prepared to deter him, more likely to take action that is adverse to u.s. economic and u.s. military interests in the region.

>> thank you, secretary panetta, you talked a while ago about dealing from strength. i'm assuming that also means economic strength because as indicated here, you know, even if they're weakened, they're still dangerous and in some of the testimony we've had before, from some of our witnesses, who have been refugees from china, they talk about the fact that they spent about 300 billion a year to surveil, detain and building detention camps on their own people and in doing that, they have a tremendous fear of their own people, the government does of their own people. if you stress them, if you stress their economy, there's some difficulties and we ourselves to be able to offset o have to have a strong economy. do you agree with that, would you like to speak, elaborate on that a little bit more? >> look, i think there's-- the whole thrust of our efforts with china is deterrents. and that deterrence has to be

both military and economic. and i think the reality is that right now because china has a very unpredictable economy, you just read today where their real estate industry is being challenged, they're being-- they're in trouble because of loans that were issued and the real estate area is a huge investment area for china. so they're going to suffer another hit because of that. and add to that the other unpredictability of the chinese economy right now and low growth that's taking place, i

think what that -- what that's doing in some ways is, it's drawing xi's attention to what he was primarily concerned about, which was developing about, which was developing the future. so in some ways, their problems represent good news for the united states. >> thank you. secretary pompeo, there were decoupling ourselves from china and all the trade we've had has always been discussed on this committee. should we do it at all? should we do some, should we do none? how do we approach that. i think we've had discussions and i've been in the committee along with mr. barr and i chair the subcommittee on national security and national finance and so, the trade and international financing, these things all fits together here so decoupling, only about half a minute left here. decoupling ourselves from china,

what is your opinion on there, do it halfway, what would you suggest? >> difficult to do in 15 seconds let me give it a run. we should never think for a moment we're going to get the us decision on this. it could be the chinese party doing it as well decoupling. and xi jinping on what terms. makes sure high end dual materials, we should focus intensely in the reterm and shut not part of it down, but all of it down. as for the, you know, the beach balls and blankets and the likes and more complicated problem sets and it's a continuum, but the effort today has to be protect the crown jewels of the american economy and make sure that we have the resources that we need to continue to deliver american manufacturing across the world. >> thank you, i'll yield back. >> thank you. secretary castor. >> good morning.

secretary panetta, in 2022, after vladimir putin and russia invaded ukraine, the united states, president biden and our n.a.t.o. allies helped rally freedom loving people across the globe to support ukraine. what do you surmise xi jinping and the prc took from that? what lesson did they take from the swiftness of that coalition? st >>as i mentioned in my testimony, i really do think that russia and china grew more aggressive because they sensed a weakness on the part of the united states. that the united states was withdrawing from leadership in the world, was withdrawing from our alliances and wasn't drawing the line on aggression and i'm thankful that president biden and our n.a.t.o. allies drew a line on putin. i don't think putin expected that, really frankly. so it was really important for the united states and our allies to be able to say, if you cross that line, we will

take steps to go after russia, we'll undermine your economy, we'll provide military aid, and we will strengthen n.a.t.o. that was a clear message and most importantly, the message was if the ukrainians, because they're brave fighters, stopped the russian invasion. t that got the attention of xi jinping and the fact that that invasion was stopped, the fact that the united states and our allies came together to help ukraine has been a major signal, i think, to xi to think twice about taiwan. >> around that time, putin and xi said that there are no limits to this deepening relationship. they wanted to convey that publicly to send that message to the rest of the world and i think that that's correct, that the swiftness of the coalition, the robustness of it sent a message to china and xi. but now, it seems like they're waiting for the americans the next election this year, that they're kind of hedging that e

they are waiting for the next election this year, that they are kind of hedging thatthere's going to be a change in policy and they see that the congress has not been able to pass a supplemental to bolster the ukrainian people. what signal, what is xi jinping and the prc taking from the fact that the congress has not united in continuing to repel this foreign aggression from putin? >> look, i believe that it's mike mullen that said dysfunction in washington is a threat to our national security because our ability to govern, our ability to work together, our ability to deal with the problems in this country, that's what democracy is all about. that's the strength of democracy, is the ability of republicans and democrats to sit down and to get things done. to provide the supplemental

requests, to deal with defense issues, to deal with foreign policy issues, and when for whatever reason that breaks down and it doesn't work, what it does is, it sends a signal to the world that the united states is not strong in our democracy and that because of the dysfunction that we see in washington, it is undermining our credibility in the world. so i can't tell you how important it is for the united states, for republicans and democrats, to work together as this committee is, to basically send a signal that we are unified when it comes to defending our interests. >> for xi jinping in particular, would do you surmise that they are considering right now if the u.s. does not follow through with the help to democracies and the ukrainian

people in particular? >> xi is very aware of what is happening just as putin is. when they see dysfunction and they see that we cannot get our act together to be able to do what is right they sense that his weakness and the lives them the incentive to think that given the opportunity they can take advantage. what we're doing by failing to pass the supplemental, as i said, we are playing the xi jinping game and we are playing the vladimir putin game. that is that our strength is being undermined not from abroad but from within. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you ms. barr. >> thank you for your extraordinary public service.

secretary pompeo, i enjoyed visiting with you in monterey with your son jimmy. thank you for tolerating my bad golf. secretary pompeo, thank you four, as secretary of state elevating this threat from china and establishing the deterrent that we need to continue to be vigilant about. i want to ask you about recent opec summit and that the biden administration removed the chinese public institute of forensic science from the commerce entity list in exchange for greater cooperation. last year i questioned assistant secretary of state crittenden brink on the delay of implementation and export controls. secretary pompeo, what kind of

message does it send to our adversaries that the state department intervenes to prevent the listing of prc entities who should be subject to sanction. >> i think that is an enormous policy mistake. i think the likelihood of xi jinping to stop fentanyl moving into the country is precisely 0 and as a result of that he has been determined to poison our children here at home and i don't think any action taken by the department of state to relieve them of any penalties, restrictions, prohibitions is likely to change his direction on that. >> and just for context, this ministry that was removed from the commerce entity list, this is an instrumentality of the ccp that has engaged in horrendous genetic testing of uighurs and human rights violations. secretary panetta, you noted in your testimony that our

adversaries routinely weaponize economic tools of market access and trade dependencies, such as fossil fuels from russia and critical minerals from china. last week, it was announced in an effort to combat climate change, the biden administration would be halting lng exports. this administration, however, has extended eight times a treasury general license allowing for transactions involving russian energy exports, including oil, to be exempt from u.s. sanctions. do either of these actions, the action to block lng exports to our allies in eastern europe or the action to provide a general license to our sanctioned regime against putin, to either of those actions help us cut off funds from moscow? >> i don't know whether -- and i hope they haven't, the administration has made a final

decision with regards to lng, i know the president has postponed that issue and is looking at some of the issues related to regulations, but i think it is very important to be able to provide that kind of fuel to our allies for goodness sakes. because they've joined with the united states, they have lost the ability to have to rely on russian energy. that's a good thing. and we ought to be providing the support necessary in order to give them the ability to be independent of that source of energy. so i hope that the administration moves forward with the lng and allows that

fuel from the united states to be able to go to our allies. >> i agree with that. i think that exporting producing energy is a geopolitical tool and a grave mistake to not recognize that. s but in addition, i want to talk a little about, as a member of the financial services committee with oversight over treasury, that the treasury department's inexplicable ig decision to provide a license to russian banks to allow them to process energy transactions, ap i've spoken with secretary yellen about this. i've spoken to wally, these are great public servants who are trying to do right with this oil price cap regime, but the problem is, the oil price cap is not working. it's russian crude is trading above the cap and it's not enforceable. to me, what would make more sense is to sanction dirty polluting russian energy and produce more american energy to help our allies. can either of you speak to that?

>>i think you've made a very good orpoint and that's what we should be doing. >>well, i thank the gentlemen for etheir testimony and their service and once again, secretary pompeo, new, especially-- or secretary panetta, thank you especially for your incredible work with the intelligence community in lead up to the abadabad, and thank you. >> at some point somebody will play you in a movie, secretary pompeo, i fear that's true. recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you to the two of you for coming on out and talking to us here. secretary panetta, i'd like to start with you. i've been listening to your responses to some of these questions. you've had great points and i'd like to flesh out and talk about some more you talked about deterrents and critical nature of components there in

terms of our economic strength and also in response to one of my colleagues talked about the importance of sending a signal to the world that we're strong and that credibility that's there, and so i want to try to merge these together because you know, when i had the conversation once with a leader from the indo-pacific region, they're talking about, look, the american military strength is here, they're asking-- you know, the united states is asking us to join that component. we're talking about economic strength and yes, that's part of it, but what they pointed out is one thing, the number one question that they talk about amongst themselves, about what to do with the united states and china, and that other countries are talking about, is the singular question, is america a reliable partner and they said it to me

in a way, we know the answer to that right now. all the challenges we see, domestic turmoil and things like that. i guess i wanted to ask you, when you talk about deterrents with military and economic strength as these two pillars, would you be amenable adding political strength, too, of showing that if you have the strong military, the strong economy, without that component of having a government that can make decisions decisively, quickly, that it weakens the components of the other elements of deterrents. is that something that makes sense to you? >> oh, it makes a great deal of sense. look, what represents the power of the united states, obviously our military capabilities, our diplomatic capability, our economic strength. those are the strengths of the united states. i but most important, is the word of the united states and whether we stand by our word. whether we are credible, and

so, when it appears that we are- - that we are weak in the sense of delivering what we promised we would do, it hurts our credibility. i mean, i've been abroad, just like you have. and i've talked to foreign c leaders. and the question that they inevitably ask is, what's happening in the united states? can we trust the president? can we trust the congress, can we trust an ally? those are the questions i get and i'm sure others have gotten the same question. >> thank you. >>and the important thing is that we have to show that what we say we will do, we do and if we back away from that, it the wrong message to the t world. >> thank you, secretary. secretary pompeo, i'd love to kind of bring you into this,

you know, the challenges that you see before us, the fact that the two of you served here in congress and you're seeing what we're up to, the challenges we're facing this constant threat of a government shutdown that we keep struggling with, the issues with the supplemental. i guess i wanted to ask your thought of what secretary panetta just stayed said. to fix our own system and show that the bipartisanship here is something that can extend to 435 in the who us and 100 in the senate. i'd be interested in your thoughts. >> yes, i lived the dream as well and pass add handful of continuing resolutions on my watch, too, much to the department of defense's consternation, we couldn't redirect our resources. o the same was true during my time in the executive branch. i watched congress unable to actually move resources to the current day challenges as time moves on, one needs to be able to do that. continuing resolutions do that and i was an advocate for working through that.

and there are serious matters and judgments and opinions, i don't mind the to and fro, the angst that people somehow describe. i'm unbothered by a rambunctious american democracy. in the end. we have to deliver the policy prescriptions that get it right. and i heard secretary panetta talked about xi jinping and vladimir putin invasion of ukraine, he is not suggesting that we should not pat ourselves on the back of america. one free bite at the apple killing tens of thousands of ukrainians is not something we should pat ourselves on the back. we should remember we did not conduct american foreign policy with the excellency to actually convince putin not to invade ukraine. we need to win these things. it's insufficient to catch incoming missiles, you have to hold your adversary at risk. when we think about the ccp

you have to hold your adversary at risk and as we think about the ccp, this is my theory as to what congressman barr said. if we simply play defense, we allow -- and then hold a press d conference announcing how brilliant it was to shoot it down over south carolina. xi jinping gets that he is on offense and we are on defense and that is not a good place for the united states to be. >> mr. newhouse. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretaries, welcome this morning, an honor to have you both here and mr. panetta, just so you know, your son an honorably carrying on the tradition of public service. >> i guess the jury is out on that.

>> and i appreciate that. we take a family affair. >> so, peace through strength, that's something that we've lived with and have tried to exercise for several -- many decades and i think, i agree with both of your comments in that regard. you know, we as a committee went through a table top exercise as some people call it, a war game to see what scenarios and outcomes would look like in the event of china moving on taiwan. i heard someone say that it was a prevent war games because at the conclusion of that, no outcome was anything that anybody would like to see on either side. the costs would be very high. one of the goals, i think, of many people is to have president xi wake up every morning and think, today is not the day, that there are so many deterrents staring him in the face that he would come to that conclusion. and i think i've heard from secretary gates, robert gates

that no one in the chinese military has experience on any kind of major war. no general has any war experience and so there's a lot of reasons why maybe an invasion would not be their first course of action which leads me to maybe a more probable course of action. i just returned from the-- from japan recently and the number of incursions in taiwanese and japanese air space by aircraft from china is in the hundreds every year. the naval ships that, the presence of the chinese navy on the eastern coast of taiwan is constant. so, if invasion, all-out invasion cost is too high and l too difficult, what's to-- what can we do as a country to g prevent or stop or deter china from taking an easier route,

perhaps, of a blockade and simply just strangling taiwan from outside any travel or anything coming into the country? >> there is no question that the most important thing we can do with regards to taiwan is to strengthen their deterrents and to not only provide the arms, d but provide the training necessary for them to be able to defend themselves and to show that the united states will maintain a presence in that area with our navy and with our other capabilities. it's important to make clear to china that they aren't going to have a free ride if they decide to make trouble for taiwan. but it is very important that

if we say we will defend them militarily that we defend them militarily and that means providing whatever support they need if they are, in fact, a victim of aggression by china. this, the thing that xi is going to be looking at is whether or not we are taking actions. it this is not about words. this is about actions and what we do to support taiwan and to maintain a strong presence in the south china sea. those are the kinds of actions that xi will watch closely. >> thank you. mr. pompeo. >> two thoughts.

i agree with secretary panetta. a blockade gets ugly quickly. once a product ceases to flow out of taiwan into the rest of the world, this is a country upon which the entire world is dependent for deliveries across the world and it gets difficult quickly. it gets difficult for the japanese, the philippines. more quickly than for us in the united states. so we should not, i guess my c urging is not to think about the blockade as as a more peaceful a more genteel solution to xi jinping's desire to bring taiwan under his f political control but an act of war very much in the same way then an invasion would be. >>thank you, mr. chair, and thank you to both of our witnesses. it's quite significant to have

both of you here testifying before our committee, and we thank you for your time. mr. pompeo, in your testimony you talk about the economic war and the war within an and maybe sometimes pretending we are not in. do you see economics is the primary motivation for the ccp to align itself with american adversaries, and in many respects taunt us on the global stage? or are there other motivations? >> thank you for the question. you get one % of the former italian-american directors cia's here today. >> thank you for that. we appreciate it. no, i think the primary motivation is ideological. it is xi jinping is driven by a

marxist leninist ideology, a. understand of china as the middle kingdom of the central act on the world stage and he feels there is, that their history has been wronged by the western order. economics is a tool by which he seeks to achieve a global hegemony that he so seeks i think the motivation is much deeper and much darker than just ranking member krishnamoorthi how to make a few more minute before his people. this not an effort to improve life for the chinese people. this is an effort for aggregation of power for the chinese communist party. >> as we look towards maintaining when i was in asia i would remind them, you think bangladesh would be first, you're running the country. with some of the changing dynamics that have hit the west, particularly with the brexit as an example. as well as the west reliance on ccp investment in your economy.

how do we bring along our european allies to this deterrent strategy, given that the former secretary of state. >> in the end, the central thesis is -- one is respecting national 17. and nations actingt in their own interest. when i was in asia i would remind people, you would think englander should be first. sovereign nations acting in their own interest and then second the united states has a deep interest in protecting basic freedoms andproperty rights and contractual capacity to deliver against increasing efforts to undermine market- based economies. this is one of the central theories of xi jinping is show up in africa with some stole intellectual property from the united states that you built with cheap labor inside of china and then dump it on the world than ever to aggregate political power.

we have a model that is deeply different from that. we should not head down that route but we need to make sure an increasing number of nations benefit from the central ideas rights,, rom the central ideas contact, capacity to engage in relationships in a way to protect human dignity as well. >> and so that they see it is not to be exploited by those who do not necessarily share our goals for market success. there's a lot to be set around this idea of how we maintain the post-world war ii order and redefine it for the time period we're in today. looking not only back to a great history that defined so much economic success for individuals, but also for the world. we needed to thank for

strategic about how we're working with our allies, particularly on supply chains and access to minerals. mr. mr. panetta, with a slight remaining time, would love to get any thoughts you have with iran and what the ccp's motivations are taken as we're facing another pressure with democracy being under attack with our friend israel as well as some of the impeding terrorists demands that are coming down. >>i think, i think you get it and you understand where we really have to go in order to develop the strength of the united states and our allies in economic competition with china. china engages with belt and road initiatives. they engage in spreading a lot of money around. they engage in building ports

and doing all kinds of things that pretend to help countries but, let me tell you, it doesn't work because countries feel like they are not the ones that are really benefiting for this. and that's why the united states needs to continue to show how we should promote economic justice. >> thank you. dr. dunn. >>i was a little farther down the line. thank you, mr. chairman. i have several articles elected in it. first i would like to enter this information, then they can read the names. >> without objection. >> so what, afghanistan, ukraine, iran, the biden administration's categorically failed to come they failed to deter war the very first nation of diplomacy, from the

disastrous withdrawal of afghanistan to lack of guidance in ukraine and delayed support for israel. and now delayed responses on this drone attack on american servicemen. it's all failure of deterrence. how much easier is it to fail when a u.s. president turns over $6 billion to iran. the iranian government is constantly worried, they pose a danger to allies in the region. they are a known funder of terrorism at the pose a direct threat to national security. we can't economically support them. let me say, mr. secretaries, i've never said that, mr. secretaries, never before have we had more auguste paris experts on international policy before us. so thank you very much for being here. secretary panetta, i wanted to thank you for all your comments

about the willingness of our young men and women to defend america and the free world. one of my son served under you in the middle east and its office in determination that you described, and i will add everybody is telling you how well jimmy is behaving. he's been outstanding. nobody has ever come he's never had a day with people said something nice to him. secretary pompeo, thank you very much for being here today and for your continued public service on foreign affairs and diplomatic policy, even in the face of irenic death threats and bounties on your life. with all the separate attacks we are seeing across the world, can sort of look like a growing number are acting independently, but i think we know that's not the case. there's this sort of global alliance against democracy and

the rules-based order of nations. and our nato allies actually have risen to the stack and declared their concerns in these of the theater such as the indo-pacific. i wonder if you clarify for us this threat to the free world for our folks back home, because it doesn't always, they don't always think about that on a larger sense. >> so, it is the case as you described. these are all linked. these are not independent strategies. they may be an independent theater separately but make the mistake about it, the our there are russian drones going to russia to kill ukrainian kids. there's russian energy flowing to china. these actors are working to undermine the things that matter most to us here at home. it is hard sometimes when i represented ifsouth-central kansas. it's hard to appreciate when

you go about your life and you find it hard to appreciate there's evil in the world that is a staggering competition to our way of life. i spent time with secretary pineda and these folks want bad things for us. they want to undermine freedom here at home and we have a responsibility to get it right economically, dramatically, and we need to make sure that we have a strong military to defend those. >> i appreciate you and i agree with you greatly. i appreciate both of you. i think we all agreed that we have a serious problem and it is our job to rally or friends t around this and colleagues to support these things in the world. thank you so much for coming here and showing a

determination. with that, i yield back. >>ia thank you. mr. auchincloss. >> mr. chairman, this is the opportunity -- you cite a lack of decency and respect for the institution of culture. t a nation and society intent on despising and destroying itself will not prevail. it is a worthy message undercut by the record of its messenger. the message recited that the insurrection that occurred on january 6 was an example of a quote peaceful transition of power. january 6, 2021 when it xi best day in office, when the united states degrades its own democracy on the world stage

for people all over it as it undermines her ability to lead and the power of our example. kind of example are we setting for -- when former administrations take the side of the dictators? mr. pompeo, you describe putin is very capable and said he had you had enormous respect for him. also missing from your remarks, these regimes have an ally in donald trump. just this month donald trump praised kim jong-un and called him a tough, smart

il it is not just as you sa a strong military and a strong economy. it is also a strong democracy. secretary, you made this clear in your remarks. the greatest threat to national security is if we fail to govern our democracy. i agree with you. this cannot happen if you defy reality. snow on behalf of your call on the respect for vital institutions, will you attest under oath that joe biden was duly elected to a free and fair election? >> so much for bipartisanship with this committee. well done, sir. you have destroyed that. >> will you attest under oath that joe biden was duly elected in a free and fair election, out of respect for the vital institutions of our democracy as he write? >> yes, sir. i spent my entire life, time and service in the unit states

army as a lieutenant. >> will you attest that joe biden won a free and fair election? >> of course president biden is the duly elected president of the united states. but if you allow me to respond. it would permit that, that would be most decent and a partisan an institution respecting. >> in a free and fair election? >> may i respond to the tirade you engaged in? >> can you answer a yes or no question? >> you would call witnesses and permit them to respond. you make assertions that are fundamentally unfounded and indecent. >> with the witness unwilling to respond to the question, we are going to assert that his answer was no. mr. panetta, if republican were to win in november, would you recognize that that individual is the duly elected president of the united states? >> of course would be the right answer mr. pompeo. i yield back. >> i wish secretary clinton would be so clear about the election as well. >> we have one minute and 10 seconds for secretary to answer

the question. >> just this. we did have a peaceful transition of power from the trumpet minister to the biden administration. i saw my state department work diligently to deliver the information that the secretary desperately needed to get started on the right foot. >> gentlemen has yielded to me and i have given that time to secretary pompeo. i would like to see a show of hands of who thinks it is peaceful. >> what are you doing? >> by the way, i was happy that we enter that with such excellence. we will have bipartisan disagreements on many things. i think it is a factual matter. you account a number of foreign policies and it is a factual matter that the world was and less conflict three years ago then it is today. secretary antony blinken yesterday said that not since 1973 has there been -- so

dangerous. i agree with him on that. it was safer three years ago because we established a deterrence model that was successful at preventing the invasion of europe, the debacle in afghanistan, the good work that we did. you will recall the trump administration was the first administration to provide defensive weapon systems to ukraine with the obama administration concluded it would not or did -- would not do so. this is what kept people safe. it was not partisan or political but good policy. >> mr. johnson. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. secretaries, thank you for being articulate and logical voices about the power of a deterrence and the importance of american leadership and about the very real risk posed by this authoritarian alignment between china, russia, north korea, iran and others. we have talked a lot about that authoritarian alignment of

external actors. i'm curious to what extent that alignment extends within our own borders? to what extent has the chinese communist party identified and invested in partners that seek to undermine our country within. secretary pompeo does go ahead, mr. panetta. >> that was one of the great concerns that we saw when i was director of the cia. it was obvious that china had an extensive intelligence network play. and that through their technology, they were deliberately planning methods of gathering intelligence. whether it was other sales that they were using that for intelligence. they are very aggressive.

within the united states now on disinformation. we know that vladimir putin had a disinformation campaign as well and china is doing executive same thing, using artificial intelligence very effectively to spread disinformation and misinformation in this country. so that, i think, remains a significant concern that, at a time when, you know, they talk about dialogue and when they talk about trying to improve relations, we cannot underestimate their efforts to basically undermine the democracy. >> two quick thoughts. i agree with secretary panetta that we should never forget this information space and social media and how the chinese, his party has communist directed entities on

all of our cell phones, passing information that is deeply filtered and designed for our young people here to undermine their ideas and understanding of american foundational ideas. we have to take serious action there. second thought, it seems like a long time ago but don't forget that this is the very president xi that unleashed a virus upon the world and killed over a million people in united states. it gets seldom referenced. it is hard to imagine the staggering impact covid has held on the world and nobody has held him responsible including the week from his lap. which happen. and when he was aware that he had a relatively lethal and contagious virus leaked from the lab, he made a decision to hide the data and off the researchers and to put thousands of people on airplanes and transit them across the world with the death, destruction and economic harm that followed from that. this is the very same xi jinping working here in the united states against us. >> it is pretty well on the record of this committee that

the algorithms of tiktok in america are designed to deliver trash to american youth. the algorithms and china deliver a more virtuous content. because of that, another reason, i have a tendency to describe tiktok as nothing more than ccp malware. is that hyperbolic or is that accurate? >> i think it is accurate. >> it has to be fixed. and i would add that it is not just tiktok. it is more pervasive in the way that secretary panetta described it. so this information warfare is something for democracies to defend because we have wide open societies. and i get that and i'm happy about that but we have to do it. and we have the tools to do it as well. >> go ahead, secretary panetta. >> i think it also raises the importance of our ability to have intelligence on china. we

need good intelligence on our adversaries. we have intelligence on our allies. but intelligence is critical to our ability to make the right decisions. i have to tell you that china is a very tough target. and it is not easy to be able to penetrate and get the kind of intelligence that we absolutely need if we are going to deal with china. >> thank you, gentlemen. i fear that much of america is still sleepwalking through the very real threat that every single day china, russia and others have thousands of people and millions of dollars at work undermining our country in the way you describe. thank you for calling attention to that threat. with that, i yield. >> thank you mr. chairman and secretaries pompeo and panetta for joining us today. the united states faces an array of threats around the world, the likes of which we have not seen in decades. it is clear u.s. global leadership is critical at a time when our competitors, like the chinese communist party,

are manufacturing strategic alliances to challenge us. however, there must be other ways to avoid a spiral of competition in which the ccp increasingly supports and presses states like russia, north korea and iran, forcing us to respond. and as we know, conflict on the international stage can have an impact seen at the local level including higher prices at the gas pump and grocery stores and longer shipping times for u.s. consumers to get the goods they need. this is a cycle of ever greater conflict which we must break if we are to work together in the global community to solve our biggest challenges like climate change, migration and nuclear proliferation. secretary panetta, since we cannot draw any of these hostile nations into our orbit, where can we disrupt the cycle and the formation of ccp led strategic alliances before they submit? >> i think we have to stand back and look at the dangerous world out there.

and look at the flashpoints that are part of that world and the threats coming from china and russia and north korea and iran and from terrorists. it is a troublesome world. i often think, how does the united states confront that many challenges? the only way we can confront those challenges is building alliances. that is the only way to deal with it. it has to be not only the united states but our allies. and by the way, the one thing about these autocrats as they are not very good at alliances. they are not very good at building their own alliances. that is our advantage. so we need to strengthen nato. we need to strengthen our relationship with both israel and modern arab nations in the middle east. we need to strengthen our relationship in the pacific between japan, south korea,

australia, india, the quad. we need to build those relationships. we need to do it in latin and central america and we need to do it in africa. that, i think is going to be the most fundamental task, how we effectively build those alliances so that we can confront these adversaries with our allies. >> and while we aim for a more productive global community, we must continue to operate in the reality of these times. i am clear that i know the need for the u.s. to remain a steady, solid and sound defender of the rules-based international order. with democracies and you are being threatened, japan, south korea or taiwan, it is our moral duty to step up and lend a helping hand. president biden has led the world in support for democracies under threat like ukraine and israel but congress needs to do more to provide the resources that the president requested and his national security emergency

supplemental. without these essential resources, our allies would be left in the cold. secretary panetta, what would you say are the most critical pieces of president biden's national security supplemental request, particularly in regards to taiwan? >> i think that supplemental is a very important request that will benefit our foreign policy in the world. our ability to provide military aid to ukraine, we have delayed this for too long. and ukraine has suffered as a result of that. the last thing we want is to give vladimir putin the advantage of ukraine. that is extremely important. aid to israel, we know how important that is in order to give then the capability we need in order to defend themselves. and taiwan, obviously is another democracy under threat.

so every one of those pieces that are critical to the supplemental, i think the president has obviously made that request but very frankly, i think the bipartisan support in the congress is there to pass that package. we just need to get there. and i understand that we need a deal and i understand we need to protect our borders well. all of that is critical though to being able to show the world that the united states stands by our word. >> thank you. with that, i yield back. >> thank you. 11:00 a.m. is a hard stop. the map does not currently work out if everybody stays here but we are going to power through and get as many done come up to 11. ms. henson. >> thank you mr. chair. and warning gentlemen. thank you for being here and for your our -- your service

to our country enter your insight so that our committee can do this very important work. it is hugely challenging hearing about the links that the prc will go to to continue to undermine us. they are aligned against us for their agenda which is to spread their authoritarian regime, not just through china and suppress the chinese people but continue to do this around the world. obviously, very concerning while they care deeply about their surveillance state globally, they care about spreading the influence through the debt trap diplomacy which i have heard you both reference. the initiatives they have tried to use to undermine and overpower. these partnerships and relationships really as we know, are nothing more than an attempt to spread their authoritarian regime around the world and to undermine us in that process. i want to focus on bricks and the relationship there. obviously they opened up bricks to opec countries. when we talk about energy and

the vulnerabilities that exist there, with iran, saudi arabia, how concerning is it that the block will really control the lion's share of oil production in the world and what do you think that means for the united states and what our next steps need to be? it directed at either of you. >> thank you for that question. the united states is the swing producer for energy in the world if we permit it to be so. secretary panetta said i think it is an enormous mistake to even pause the production or the export of lng because that would cause downstream and the capital markets. and we will have a gap. the united states should remain, if we continue to produce, we will be the producer of choice and we will be the swing producer on price. second, we are an enormous consumer of energy as well. those countries that think they can form markets to the exclusion of u.s. consumers and

u.s. industrial consumers and retail consumers, i think they are making a state. we drive price from the demand end as well. they are going to do what they are going to do. the last thing i will say about that is, remember that those alliances form more strongly when our allies don't have confidence that the united states stands with them. when he told the leader of the kingdom of saudi arabia that he is a pariah, he is more likely to choose to align himself with our adversaries then he is with the united states. those are fundamental errors in understanding how these nations operate and we should never take for granted what secretary panetta said which is that we have the capacity to build alliances out that will deliver good things for the american people and if we get that piece right, america will be in a stronger position. >> do you have anything to add, secretary panetta? >> i agree with what mike said. it is -- we have, in dealing

with this challenge from autocracy and the world, we have several areas that represent the strength of the united states, our military power, diplomatic power, economic power and energy power. all are critical to our ability to be able to deal with these challenges we are facing in the world. so one energy, it seems to me extremely important that the alliances we build, in order to make sure we are developing an independent source of energy and working toward the it to undermine russia pack visibility and iran's ability to control that, imagine if we could get our act together on energy and how effective that would be an undermining these

countries. >> we say in iowa, all the above. energy, strategy. we are trying to do a little bit of everything. i think when you look at the strategy for brics and you combine that with the strategy for elton road, you look at the death trap diplomacy and what they've been able to do in south america. you talked about the instability there and potentially the work closer to home, mr. secretary as well as what we have seen with these unfulfilled loans and investments in china's ability to cool and the capital. what do you think the united state patients rule needs to be encountering that? i just met with dj norquist this morning to talk about the world bank and the financial situation and how china is trying to grow and influence and pull these lovers everywhere they are operating. what you think our next step needs to be? >> i don't have much time. but you mentioned the world bank and our role. we should never mistake our desire for the global system to

work for reliance on these international organizations. my expense as secretary of state was the u.n. was a wreck and the world bank was largely chinese influenced. these historic -- the world health organization during the time of covid. i could go on and on. sometimes we think international so therefore existing structures and frameworks. we should revisit each of those. if they are not functioning in a way that delivers for america, we should evaluate america's continued evaluation in those institutions. >> thank you. good to see you. given the prc economic interest in global motivations, what should we be doing in terms of watching china's expansion and footprint in africa? >> look, having visited africa and seen it up

close, there is no question in my mind that wherever you go, china is present. they are investing in africa. they are built road initiative is being and limited in africa. they are developing ports and infrastructure. and the end result -- and make no mistake about it, everything they are providing is not to try to help those countries develop independence and develop their own economic strength. it is to basically undermine it and do it in order for china to benefit from that. if there are minerals there, they will take advantage of those minerals. if there are other assets they are, they will take advantage of those assets. they are in it for their own gain. and that is where i think the united states and our allies have to play a much more critical rule to show african countries that we are there to help their people and not to

help us. >> it is good to see you again. i would add this. in this sense, i think time is on our side a bit. my observation and that of my team when i was secretary of state, was that many of these countries are beginning to see the volley of having taken so much resource and money from the chinese communist party. it felt good in the moment but they are now coming to appreciate what secretary panetta said, that they have lost political power and political capacity and that has constrained them and it hurts them in terms of being able to represent the people and get a good outcome. it means we need to be more active. i tried to get the state department to do better so that the west could compete in those places. i think we made a little bit of progress. there is a lot more work to do. as time marches on, if we continue our efforts in the way secretary panetta described, then ultimately, the norms we have come to believe and in the

west will be ones that africa will largely adopt as well. i felt i hope i'm right about that. >> i want to thank both of you for your tremendous service to our country and your commitment and dedication to what you have done to help make us a better country and a safer country. i think it sends a strong message in a bipartisan way that both of you are here today and in the message you are sending. so grateful for that. this committee has focused on a number of different things over the last year. one is exposing the malign activities of the ccp. i think we have done a good job doing that. the second thing is figuring out how to win the strategic competition against china. in my view, winning that on the economic front is key to the future of how we do that. going back over 20 years ago when we allowed china into the world trade organization, that seems to be a pivotal moment in this country. the argument at the time, none of us i think were in congress

than but the argument was, bring china into the world trade organization. they will modernize and liberalize in the economy will become more like us and they will be part of the world global order. clearly that did not work out the way many of us thought it would. they play by a different set of rules in a different set of standards. they are deceitful in many ways and they steal intellectual property. so here we are today having to deal with that. we also have the reality that we have the two largest economic powers in the world. i think about my own district. probably similar to yours, secretary pompeo, corn and soybeans. 40% goes to china every year. my farmers need to rely on that market to do it. take your fortune 200 companies that are heavily invested in china. and they are embedded in many ways with the ccp in terms of their business there. i have the largest concentration of caterpillar workers anywhere in the world. cat has 29 manufacturing plants in china. four r&d facilities there. you could take any company and look at that. will need think how to win the

strategic competition against china, it is tough because it is our people in the country willing to take the economic hit required. and many of us in congress want to go to a cold war mentality with china on an economic front. we hear constantly from the business roundtable and the chamber of commerce, companies in china saying, maybe you guys should hold off and pump the brakes. be careful about what you are doing. i'm curious. as we think about how we win this strategic competition economically, your advice on that. >> i will give you two thoughts. first, -- all those businesses, further activities, as a historic matter, we encourage them. this in fact was the model you described. go there, be there. they will become more like us. it just epically failed. it might have been reasonable at the time. what does that mean for kansas farmers and manufacturers across america who depend on it? and two things. don't count on the fact that it

will be a u.s. policy decision that drives them out of the country. we can see this already today. did to -- executives being detained and products not being permitted to move. the chinese communist party will have a say in the level of disconnection between the two economies and i think xi jinping is wanting to make his country more self-reliant. i would urge the leaders of those businesses to think about alternative markets and how you do you risk your balance sheet from the presence of china today and do so immediately. the second piece is, and this is the policy role, we need to be clear about those things that are illegal and legal. it is difficult for business leaders only tell them, you ought not do that but it is lawful. i promise you the chinese communist party is telling them what is illegal inside of their country and it is becoming more difficult the more punitive and harder for them to operate in both of those environments. you, policymakers, have a responsibility to say, if you really want this disconnection, if you really want certain elements of supply chain moved or you want them done, we need to put a legal regime and place

and i promise you that the american economy will prosper. we will prevail. the chinese communist party is far more dependent on america then we are on them and we ought to use that to our advantage. >> thank you. secretary panetta. >> look, i agree with what mike said. there are two important areas here. one is the competition and the economy. and there is nobody better at competition than the united states. our farmers, manufacturers and businessmen. we know how to get it done. innovation, creativity. that goes to the strength of our economy. i think it is very important for the united states to be able to unleash that kind of creativity and capability and too often, we try to restricted because of various rules, et cetera. we ought to be enhancing the

freedom of our economy in order to allow people to compete and develop the kind of products that sell in the world. secondly, dealing with china -- i'm a believer in free trade but i'm also a believer in fair trade. the problem with china is come we have engaged in trade but they don't believe in fair trade in the way they operate. what we have to do is we have got to be able to put -- and you did it with your recommendations on the economy. i think they are great recommendations. 152 recommendations. right on point. one of those is making sure that we take the wto and make certain that the wto is strong enough to be able to say to china would and engages in unfair trade, that that is what you are doing and you will be penalized for that. >> time is expired. >> secretary panetta, you and i share a belief in american leadership. we share a belief that america

perfections are on balance for a force for good in the world and america plays an indispensable role as leader of the free world and enforcer of the rules-based international and the alternative, a world shaped in the totalitarian image of the ccp is too terrifying to imagine. but the basic belief in the necessity of america's global leadership, which is the risk on the china committee has been eroding not only abroad but at home. where we are witnessing the rise of isolationism on both the left and the right. so america is a democracy constrained as it should be by the consent of the governed. is american global leadership politically sustainable in the long run if american sentiment here at home takes a decidedly isolationist turn as it did in the aftermath of world war i? >> look. we made that mistake before. before world war ii.

this country decided that somehow it could be isolationists and not have to get involved in dealing with the challenges and the threats abroad. we learned our lesson. i hope we learned our lesson, which is that you can't put your head in the sand. in a global world, it is even more so. united states has to be out there. has to be dealing with our allies. has to be developing relationships with those that agree with the goals that we seek. we have to be engaged with the world. we cannot just simply pull back and pretend that somehow, we can escape our responsibilities in the world and somehow focus on issues in the united states. yes, we have to be concerned about the united states and yes

we have to be concerned about the economy. we also have to be concerned about our role in the world. the united states has to be a world leader. if there is any lesson we learned from world war ii, it is at the united states is a world leader and let me tell you something. if united states is not a world leader, nobody else will play that role. >> in your testimony secretary panetta, you said america needs to send a message that stands by allies. congress itself has said nothing but mixed messages. even though there is overwhelming bipartisan support for israel and taiwan. there has been an indefinite delay in delivering aid to both countries. congress fails to act not only when democrats and republicans disagree but we fail to act when we agree. and if there were standalone bills on israel and taiwan with no poison pills, both bills would pass overwhelmingly in both chambers of commerce

congress. so given the risk that negotiations around ukraine and immigration could languish indefinitely, do you believe that it might be necessary at some point to decouple israel and taiwan from the larger negotiations in order to pass the immediate standalone bills? >> look, as a former member of congress, i said, in my over 50 years of public life, that i have seen washington at its best and i have seen washington at its worst. the good news is i have seen washington work. the reason i said i had the best job in the world as a member of congress is because republicans and democrats, when i was here, worked together. we worked together and we got things done. we had good relationships. and when an issue like aid to a foreign country came around, we worked together. i understand that politics is involved. i understand there is the give and take. that is what democracy is all

about. and i understand the dynamic. but in the end, it isn't about scoring political points. it is about governing. you guys aren't elected to come back here and pound your shoe on the table. you are elected to come back here and govern. that is what people elect you for. and for that reason, ultimately, people of goodwill need to sit down and develop whatever deal they can develop and get it past. and if they can't get a deal, then there is no question they need to move ukraine aid, israel aid and taiwan aid on its own. >> i have 10 seconds left. do you feel president biden is determined by the isolationism?

>> time has expired. we are trying to hit the 11:00 deadline. mr. banks is recognized. >> secretary panetta -- i'm not sure the world has ever experienced the american foreign-policy whiplash from peace through strength and the swagger of the trump pompeo approach to the weakness and appeasement week see coming from the current administration. why did pompeo did wait for you and president trump to leave office before he invaded ukraine? >> it is good to see you again. i tried to take a fact based approach to these things. i often get asked, with these things happen if you were still there? i avoid answering those. i can only articulate that they did not. i can only articulate that putin decided that it was not a wise time to invade ukraine while we were there and shortly thereafter, began to continue his effort to take more of ukraine. he took a fifth of ukraine under president obama and 0%

during our time and went at it again. in the end, putin didn't change. putin has been the same guy since he was a young kgb officer. his desire for greater russia is deep and embedded in his dna. the only things that stop these bad actors from roaming free around the world is in america prepared to respond in a way that puts more costs on them than the benefits of action. >> so fast forward come last week and, three of our american heroes were killed by a drone operated by the houthis. what would have been the swift and appropriate reaction to hold those accountable for killing our american heroes? >> it is hard to know, congressman, exactly the response at the operational level we would have taken. deterrence has always been temporary. it is one of the things i reminded everyone in the administration. when you have deterrence for a moment, you can squander it so quickly. and frankly, that is what has

happened. we lost that moment. and we had risk too. there were rounds fired at the u.s. embassy in baghdad when i was the secretary of state. we armed it to the teeth to protect our young men and women that were there, military and diplomatic women in the facility. and when we were beginning to have deterrence slip, we took a move on the general that deter that for a time. i think the trump administration would have recognized long ago that this would have been before october 7th come that you can't negotiate and you cannot release sanctions and allow them to grow their foreign exchange reserves from 4 billion, to over 50-$60 billion. the money will be used for terror and that is the risk we have an escalation taking place as a result of the united states and allies and partners having lost that deterrent capability and will. >> secretary pompeo, you notably warned our nation's governors about not getting too entwined and tangled with the

chinese communist party, as many of them did. washington becomes more aware of the china threat and the ccp is targeting many of the state's governors. this morning, the washington post published a story about the ccp's united front efforts and bring up engagement with our nation patients mayors, including the mayor of carmel, indiana, in my state. the former mayor. he just left office. you in a lavish trips to china and engaged at a high level with chinese officials in their country. wife of the -- why should our nation's mayors stray away from these types of entanglements with the sister cities projects and other ccp united front efforts? >> and some ways, it is parallel to what we were talking about in africa. the chinese communist party will always show up at people patients doors with things that feel good. the remarks i made to the national governors association, i had to run through the state department roadblock to make those remarks. it was hard for even the state

department to see this threat, not just at the federal level but a series of governors and i now remind people that the chinese communist party is showing up at school board meetings and at city council meetings and county commission ina. in your state chairman gallagher, in wisconsin, they made a hard play for your state legislative body. they are determined to propagate their efforts. they want to make friends so that when they are confronted, they can turn to their friends and say, we are not such bad guys after all. the chinese communist party is truly evil. they will work in any level of government and they will work against the private sector. they will show up at pta meetings if that is what it takes. this is an effort at every level for the chinese communist party to influence our government. >> the sister cities program is so dangerous? >> when the chinese communist party shows up at your school and offers a free swingset, is not because they care about the health of your children. that might be the simplest way to articulate sister city programs and the confucius institute on all of these

united front efforts inside of our country. they may show up and give you some temporary lift but in the end, it is about them and not about us. >> thank you mr. chair. thank you secretary panetta and secretary pompeo for your service to our country. as you know, we hollowed out a lot of our manufacturing in this country and a lot of it went to china. china has a massive trade deficit. we still have a massive trade deficit with china and china has surpluses with japan, south korea and india and engaged in unfair economic competition. do you think it is reasonable for the united states to explicitly have a goal to try to reduce the trade deficit with china by 10% every year quick some metrics so we can rebalance a relationship? >> i think it is very important for the united states to be able to develop industry,

manufacturing and develop those products that are important particularly to our national security. and you are right. we hollowed out that capability over the last few years. we need to be able to make clear that we are going to develop the kind of security that we need and yeah, i think limits make sense as part of that package of development being our own capability is in manufacturing and industry. >> secretary pompeo. >> it seems largely right. i would add only this. we should begin the focus on things that really matter as opposed to trade more generally. i'm happy to think our way through that. the initial problems that is, at the dual use technologies, ai and all the places where the

next generation of american manufacturing will actually evolve from -- i ran a machine shop in wichita, kansas. probably the only secretary of state with that in the background even for the next 250 years. and the end, we ran machines. we were good. in the end, it was technology and innovation and the intellectual property which we were building those goods which were most important to the workforce in my capacity to grow my business and i think that is true today. we should make sure we protect those things and we can get that right and as a policy man, i'm pretty straightforward. i have watched as you have tried to tackle that and i hope you all can make even more progress there. >> one of the things i'm working on on a bipartisan basis is seeing how we can have steel and clean steel in particular returned to the united states. in johnstown, pennsylvania, ohio, michigan. secretary pompeo, one of the originators work for you who was with the chips and science act. i give him credit even as he

worked with todd young and chairman gallagher was in an early part of the frontiers. we did that for chips. can we do that for steel, which is to say the next generation of steel, which will be direct reduction impact in toledo or hydrogen, why can't we lead and something like that and have the government partner with the cleveland cliffs on initial issues like that, like we did for chips. we went from the largest exporter of steel, now nine out of the 15 biggest steel companies are in china. so would you support a chips like approach to new modern steel plants in the united states and second, if you could just add, and then i will give you the rest of the time, i don't understand how we are even thinking of this with u.s. steel. japan would never let us buy one of their steel plants. why is this even a question? >> i will start with the second one in the first one. i actually encourage foreign

direct investment in the united states. i think it is incredibly important and it has created thousands and thousands of jobs in my hometown of wichita, kansas. foreign countries is a japanese or european countries that want to invest in america, great job. south korea investing enormous amounts of money in taxes to build semi conductor. i think we should be supportive of anybody that wants to come here on american terms and these are our friends and allies. second, i did support the chips and science act. it was with a touch of reluctance in my heart. between secretary ross and myself and our two teams. by the way, secretary romano has been fantastic. i credit the biden administration. this was a set of technologies that mattered and we had none of it at home. i think that is the quintessential model for when someone needs to use american taxpayer dollars as a form of industrial policy. i think we need to be very careful about how and when we do that and i prefer competition. when the competition is unfair and capital markets won't support an important technology for our soldiers, [ silence ] ,

airmen and marines, then i think we could do that. if somebody could make the case of steel, i would support it. i wonder if those industrial metals -- if you put a tariff or tax on them, if it doesn't end up costing the american industry more then it gains. >> time has expired. we have four minutes. we can do it. >> gentlemen, thank you. and i will be very quick. i appreciate your service. there is a chinese company building an electric vehicle, battery plant in my district. as part of the project, they plan to bring 20-50 chinese nationals to michigan. what do you feel are the odds of those nationals engaging in espionage for the ccp while they are in the united states. and i have both been involved looking at these kinds of

things. secretary pompeo, you were issuing work visas to chinese nationals as part of the state department. i wondered if you could both comment on that. >> look, i don't think there is any question that they will take advantage of that situation. and i think we have to be very vigilant about what the hell is going on. that is just the way they operate. they will establish a manufacturing unit. they will establish whatever they can and then they will use that for their own intelligence purposes. they will use that for their own economic purposes. they will use it to be able to gain the kind of advantages that they want that are counter frankly to the interest of the united states. i think it is very important in those situations to make sure that we -- the united states and that our intelligence

capabilities, are being used to make sure that we know what they are doing that could hurt the united states. >> i think it is worse than the fact that they will engage in espionage. i think that is just top of the list. they will use this in ways that will leverage chinese advantage. these plans are deeply dangerous to our national security and ought not be built. >> thank you. and one last question. one of the concerns. you talked about the belt and road initiatives and china spreading money around. like the inflation and reduction act, we provide green energy tax credits. this company would actually likely be applying for a green energy tax credit so we could be supplying american taxpayer dollars to fund the project. do you have any thoughts on that? >> yes. i'm against it. i'm trying to be quick.

>> you cited a good example, a marquee example and one that has been very public. there are dozens of these taking place. i promise you that the chinese communist party is not subsidizing american companies acting in america's interest inside of china that benefit the united states of america. >> thank you. secretary panetta. >> look, i think we have to obviously be innovative in the way we use economic assistance. we also have to be careful in the way we do it. and i think that if we are going to provide funds, we better make sure they are not being used for purposes that undermine our national security. >> thank you both very much. i yield back. >> thank you mr. chairman. secretary panetta and secretary pompeo, thank you for your service to our nation. you have had extensive experience as cabinet members dealing with the ccp. they have had that direct experience and you see where

things are today. tell us, what is the most significant change you have seen with the ccp? and you think that today that xi jinping and the ccp are more likely or less likely to take decisive action to reunify taiwan? >> briefly please. >> as i mentioned in my testimony, i visited with xi jinping a number of times when i was director as well as secretary of defense. at the time, i remember one conversation that he was being critical that we were rebalancing our force to the pacific. i said, we are a pacific power and we have every right to have a presence in the pacific. what you want to be interested in is what you can do to work with us and deal with north korea and the problems of trade and deal with the problems of a

free sea approach to trafficking and to our navy. and he said something like, if we can work together, we can develop peace and prosperity. that was the xi jinping i saw. but he has changed. there is no question about it. and we can talk about the reasons. there are a lot of reasons why it has happened. but there is no question in my mind that xi has been cornered in a number of ways. both in the way he dealt with covid in the way he is dealing with this economy. there is one fundamental focus that xi jinping has and it is on china. it is on china and his problem right now is that china is eroding from under him. and i think that makes him more dangerous and not less. >> i would concur. secretary panetta dealt with a very different xi jinping then we dealt with over a time. he changed his objective and it

created more power and gave him more freedom to move and i think it is more likely that he will continue his, if not militarily but political efforts to bring political control to taiwan. >> both secretaries came from california and a secretary pompeo, you came from my district. thank you for coming out today. i wish i had more time. since i'm a junior member. and you know what, i don't have time but i want to say thank you. >> great. we appreciate that. thank you to both of our witnesses in what was almost a perfect hearing. grading under the curve of congress, we are doing well. and for the record, one week from today. with that, the committee is adjourned. no selfies with the witnesses. they got ago.

today, white house budget director young and treasury secretary danielle and testify on president biden's 2025 budget request and economic outlook. watch the house appropriations

subcommittee hearing live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span three. c-span now, the free mobile app or online on c-span.org. >> do solemnly swear that in the testimony you are about to give, will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> saturdays, watch american y tv's 10 part series, congress investigates, as we explore major investigions by the u.s. house and senate in our country's history. each week, historians will tell the stories and we will see historic footage from those periods and examine the impact and legacy of key congressional hearings. this week, the 1871 investigation during the reconstruction period looking at the violence toward free black slaves by the kkk. watch congress investigates saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. >> now we head to the midwes