And secondarily, the future is made of swarms of small things. How do we get the pentagon to realize you want to buy 1000 toyotas instead of one lexus . They keep missing the boat on that and creating giant aircraft carriers. One torpedo takes out a huge amount of our capability. Thats crazy. Mac thornberry well, both good questions. Ive already forgot the first one. Oh, the two im sorry. This years defense bill will abolish the qdr. Too much time, effort for nothing. And part of our frustration is, that it becomes, became a budget justification document, not really a strategy document. And so, that really gets to what you are talking about. We have adjusted the two mc kind of approach just based on the budgets, rather than the other way around, rather than looking at the world, trying to see what, ok, what sizing construct makes sense for the world were facing, and then develop the budgets to support them. So we have provided a different system of kind of thinking about the world with an outside group at the beginning and, you know, not trying to recreate the qdr but trying to do this differently. Because that has definitely not been successful. I think there are people in the pentagon who are very interested in this swarming idea. And i certainly am. I have had a number of folks that have provided me with some material to read and help think about this, whether we are talking satellites or whether we are talking other sorts of capability. But you get to the heart of an issue, you can think about and say, ok, that makes sense, but still you have cultural bias in a certain direction within the institution. And i think part of our job in congress is to break through some of this cultural bias that prevents us from looking at these different options. I dont mean many small is always the answer to everything. But we have to look in that direction, just the cost benefit ratio for a host of reasons. So i think that concept as well as others is maturing. It is involved in some of the third offset stuff. And again, part of our job is to nurture that even when the institutional interests are to squish it. Jim talent thats a great answer. If i can just add one thing on that, i think you are so correct. It is a balance that you need. We were talking before about the perceptions of congress as an institution, you know, the larger body of people outside of the committees, who you know, have a role to play in this decisionmaking. This is what i think the building needs to understand is that those people like to see tangible things for the dollars that they spend. Right . They are not all that up necessarily on all the gradiations and differences. But when you spend a lot of money on planes, you like to see planes. I think if the pentagon understood that thats the way to make everybody feel as if we are getting value for dollars, then there is going to be a little bit less pressure on some of the bigger programs to produce quickly. There is a perception issue involved here too as well as one with poor structures. Lets take one more, which ill let the chairman answer rather than sticking my nose in. I said ill come back over here. Well get this gentlemen right here. Congressman, thank you. I have a question about technological superiority. When it comes to russians capabilities, we havent seen it in a while. Given the dubious nature of the t14 armada tank and the new fighter jet, is it possible we are overestimating russian capabilities with regard to a military scenario with a usa. If we reorient ourselves, will we lose out on the capability to wage the wars we usually do with technologically inferior enemies . Thank you. Mac thornberry i do think the point is we have to be prepared for the range of contingencies. So there are folks who say ok, Counter Terrorism and Counter Insurgency is behind us. We need to just focus on the highend threats. We dont have that luxury. We have this huge array from sophisticated to less sophisticated threats around the world, and we have to be ready for them all and maintain competency for them all. But it is true that the 15 years of where we have focused on counterterrorism have meant that we have neglected training and other things for the highend sorts of threats. I think were pretty cleareyed about the threat that russia presents. I dont think anybody says their military has as much capability as ours. But you need we have to be realistic about where they are putting their time, effort, and money. So for example, they continue to crank out new Nuclear Weapons every year. We dont. We havent built a new Nuclear Weapon since about 1990. And we are trying to keep these old machines, you know, safe and reliable. But russia is putting a fair amount of effort into that. And you have read what they say about the tactical use of nukes to make up for conventional inferiority. We, we know what they are capable or at least their level of sophistication in cyber. We, you know, they have had some demonstrations, i believe, for our benefit, in syria. So they cant match us, but they dont have to. And if you see some of the recent press reporting about deployments they have made in clinnengrad, it is concerning. Part of it is to effect a political purpose, especially in Eastern Europe. And we have to deal with that. Jim talent well, i want to keep the chairman sensitive to your time and they want to be sensitive to your schedule. Thank you, chairman thornberry, you have been a fine fellow today, and i am sure you are ready for the new administration. [applause] announcer 1 now a look at Foreign Policy and the incoming changes under the Trump Administration. We hear from ben cardin. His remarks are under 40 minutes. Christopher griffin good morning again. Chris griffin with the Foreign Policy initiative. It is a pleasure to welcome senator ben cardin, who is the Ranking Member on the Senate ForeignRelations Committee for our next discussion on the role of congress and Foreign Policy in the Trump Administration. He will be moderated by ambassador Kristen Silverberg, who is the director for this system of finance. Kristen is wellknown and wellrespected among all of us in washington. In particular for her service during a number of senior capacities during the bush administration, United States ambassador to the european union, assistant secretary of state for International Organizations also in the white house and in baghdad. It is great to have a speaker and a moderator who share what for us is an organizational interest in the promotion of human rights and democracy and strong American Leadership in the world. I ask you to please join me in welcoming senator cardin. And the ambassador, thank you very much. [applause] Kristen Silverberg senator, it is always an honor to hear from you. You know, i have dozens of topics i would love to talk about. I thought i would just hop right into it and hopefully save about 10 minutes at the end for audience q and a. When we first schedule this panel on Foreign Policy and the next administration, i was confident we would be talking about the Clinton Administration. So much for that. So, how are you . You have spent a few weeks kind of getting your mind around how you are going to approach Foreign Policy under the Trump Administration . Can you say a word about that . Ben cardin kristin, thank you for your public service. It was really wonderful to be here. You are right. It was a little bit of a surprise. When we accepted this invitation, we had outlined our comments about how the Clinton Administration would carry on from the Obama Administration. And now we are talking about the incoming Trump Administration. It is going to be different. There is no question. It is going to be different. Foreign policy institute, one of your goals, your goal is to rope us support for Democratic Institutions and human rights. Thats under attack today. Thats under attack. And the principle opponent is russia and what they are doing. I think there is going to be a great deal of concentration on russia. Russia is using its influence to affect the geographical boundaries of democratic, independent states, as well as Democratic Institutions within these democratic states. And their target, quite frankly, has been their neighborhood, the former republics of the soviet union, but also the former communist bloc, and then beyond, including the United States of america. So we all see whats happened in ukraine. And we know that russia has invaded the territorial integrity of ukraine. We know they are continuing to disrupt the development of ukraine as an independent democratic state. But we also see their activity is well beyond ukraine. Of course in moldova and georgia, there is physical presence of russias aggression. But recently, we saw an attack here in the United States, a cyber attack where they compromised our cyberinformation, and then used it to try to discredit the American Democratic election system. It was not, in my view, or i think the view of experts, an effort to elect any one specific as president. But it was an attempt to discredit democratic elections. That that is not the best way for countries to survive. So when you look at the Foreign Policy institute and your objective to robust support for democratic allies, and human rights, it is under attack. And we need to do something about that. Whether were attacked by a mig or we are attacked by a mouse, we need to respond. And currently, the Obama Administration is looking at a response. I have encouraged them to take a pretty robust response. I am developing legislation that will develop, give us additional tools that we can use against russia. Its going to be a bipartisan effort. Senator mccain, senator graham has already talked about efforts in this regard. Senator shaheen is also actively engaged. There are many of us who are working on how we are going to respond to the russia aggression. But this aggression is, again, not just limited to the United States, not just limited to their neighbors. We have seen what russia is doing in the middle east and syria and the impact it is having on supporting the assad regime. They are, what they are doing there affects what iran is doing. Iran of course affects the entire region. There are a lot of issues that we could talk about. Let me just try to tie this first to the Trump Administration. I know we talked a little bit before i walked up here. The Trump Administration has a significant problem. In that donald trump has holdings globally including in russia. His statements about russia have me greatly concerned, have many members of congress greatly concerned because russia is not our ally or friend. They are a bully. They need to be treated that way. You have got to stand up to a bully, and you have got to make sure that they understand that the leader of the free world will be there with our democratic allies. And first and foremost, mr. Trump needs to insulate himself from his business interests. And i introduced the clause yesterday to make a resolution that the only way the incoming president can do this and adhere to the constitution of the United States, which is the oath he will take on january the 20th, is to make sure that his Business Holdings are removed from his control. There are two ways to do that, a blind trust or to divest. And i am hopeful that he will take those steps. Now i am mindful of the statement he made just today or last night that he will set up a way that he will isolate himself from his business dealings. Well take a look at that. I think it is in response to many of us saying, you cant do both. But thats going to be very important to have the leader of the free world, the president of the United States, having credibility in dealing with our democratic allies as we stand up to russias aggression, whether it be in europe, whether it be their support in the middle east, or whether it be attacks here in the United States. Kristen silverberg thank you. Your comments on american support for human rights and democracy overseas i think are very important. You, of course, have been a leader on the anticorruption and human rights side. What seems to me as one of the challenges is Domestic Support here at home. I was disappointed by how little those issues played in the current elections. Im wondering if you have thoughts about what we can do to actually secure the bipartisan consensus that America Needs to be at the forefront of those issues . Ben cardin well first of all, im not surprised those issues dont play out well on election day. Election day is going to be about basically economic issues. We know that. That which controls most of the undecided voters. They are going to be concerned with how the next president and the next congressman or senator, what they are going to do to help their life. They are going to be interested in jobs. They are going to be interested in Higher Education. They are going to be interested in health care. Americas Global Leadership is not going to be first and foremost on their minds. Make no mistake about it, americas Global Leadership is critically important. We are the only country in the world that can advance good governance, human rights, anticorruption. If america doesnt lead, there will be no efforts globally to make these priorities. Recently, i was at a National Security council meeting. And it was called because of the concern of the growing corruption problems globally and the impact it has on americas National Security. If you are looking at the cancerous cause that is affecting stability globally, it is corruption. And America Needs to be at the forefront to fight corruption. Of course, the human rights agenda is all part of that. Good governance, human rights, anticorruption, empowering people, all and America Needs to be in the forefront in those efforts. I am proud of the role that we have played in the congress of the United States and the pitssky law that was passed as having an impact not just in russia but in europe. As they have passed mcnitssky laws, we are hopeful we will see the expansion of the law to a global application so that human rights violators anywhere in the world that are protected by their local governments will be subject to sanctions here in the United States. And we hope globally in using our Banking System or being able to get visas to visit america. That hurts greatly. Those corrupt officials do not want their money in local currency. They want their money in dollars. We can block that, we can make major advancements. Kristen silverberg we are obviously still waiting on some key National Security nominations, and i wouldnt ask you to get into any particular preferences, but i am wondering if you can say a word about how said it democrats are going to approach these nominations generally. I will go way out on a limb and say there will be some controversies. Ben cardin there will be some controversies. Kristen silverberg where are some of the democrats going to want to draw some lines . Ben cardin first of all, im looking forward to talking to senator corker and see how his conversations went. First and foremost, i think i speak for my all my colleagues, we want this transition to go smoothly. I think president obama is going to extremes to make sure this is as smooth a transition that can possibly be done. We respect the votes, the election results, and we want to make sure that mr. Trump comes into power as president of the United States with his team and with all the tools he needs in order to be a successful president on behalf of our nation. And were going to do everything we can to make that a reality. But when he deviates from constitutional requirements, such as the annulments clause of the constitution, we are going to speak out and take action. And when he nominates people that have records that are inconsistent with the values of our country, we are going to do everything in our power to highlight those concerns, to use the confirmation process of the United States senate to explore the backgrounds and their commitments and how they are going to respond to the portfolio under their direction and then ultimately, make a decision to either vote for confirmation or against confirmation. So, we will do that. On those advisers that are not subject to senate confirmation, we have i have already spoken out on some of those appointments, because we are not going to have other opportunities to do that. We have a constitutional responsibility. We are going to carry out that constitutional responsibility. But at the end of the day, we want donald trump to be a successful president. And we are going to do everything we can to try to help make that a reality. Kristen silverberg from the nsc app