Untouched by our counterterrorism effort. So in the future just recognize that in order to restore deterrence, were going to have to show capability, capacity, and resolve. Recognize this is an International Arms control agreement and not a very good one although there are some advantages, recognize the advantages as well. But its not a Friendship Treaty, and some people have tried to make it into a Friendship Treaty say its worthless. As a Friendship Treaty it would be worthless but its an arms control agreement that fell short of a lot of hopes but its not completely without some merit. We have allies out there. We have allies who want to rally to our side. I dont forget sitting with the king of jordan one day. We were working on his syrian refugee problem and i have seen refugees all around the world from the Southeast Asia to africa to the dalmatian coast. I have never seen i have been up in the refugee camps. I have never seen refugees as traumatized as those coming out of syria. I was told by our ambassador to work with the king on what we could do to help in those camps to reduce the chance of cholera and that sort of stuff. I had known him for a long time. We were talking just the two of us, we got done and i asked him whats it like to be a king. I have never been a king. Kind of interested in it and dont draw anything from that, by the way, and he said, well, you know, working on this, working on that and he said, by the way, i hear the french and british had to pull out of afghanistan. I said, yes, your majesty, i said domestic political concerns, they couldnt sustain the campaign. He said rest assured, general, there will be a jordanian soldier in afghanistan until the last american soldier comes home. Ladies and gentlemen, you cannot buy allies like that. You cannot buy them. And if were going to want allies to stand by us in our time of trouble, then were going to have to stand by them when they face trouble as well. And when iran says jordan, youre next, we should take them at their word. Dont patronize iran and say they dont really mean that. Yes, in fact, they do mean what they say. My next stop, by the way, that trip was the country that we in Central Command call Little Sparta because they stand by us through thick and thin, desert shield, somalia, dalmatian coast, bosnia, they have always been there. The united arab emirates. I was talking to the crown prince and he said i understand the french and british are pulling out. What are you going to do . I said im going to have to go back to the americans and ask for people to backfill. Were deep in the fight right now. And he said, well, he said, to reduce your demand on the american forces, ill send six more fighters in. Ill send another reinforced special forces company of 150 special forces, well trained, fully kitted out, ready to go, to fight under your command. Again, ladies and gentlemen, you cant find allies like that if you dont stand by them in their difficulties. So they may not be perfect. If were waiting for perfect allies, were going to be awfully alone in this world and from what i have seen in our own country, were not perfect ourselves. Lets figure a way to Work Together. Let at the stop there and open time for questions here. Thank you. [ applause ] thank you very much for that presentation. Im jon alterman, the Senior Vice President in Global Security and the director of the middle east program. I have a few questions before we go to the audience which is already champing at the bit. One question, you talked about irans asymmetric threats in the region, its activities supporting terrorism, supporting hostile states. Was it a mistake to make a Nuclear Agreement and seem to take the focus off the other activities in the region because as you know, many of our gulf allies say the Nuclear Issue isnt our issue. As a former foreign minister in the gulf told me, if somebody already has a gun pointed at your head, it doesnt matter if they have a cannon pointed at your back. Was the whole approach to put so much effort on the Nuclear Program and nonproliferation a mistake for u. S. Interests in the middle east . The short answer is, no, it was not a mistake. In this town we seem to have forgotten the tremendous effort that went into Nuclear Nonproliferation in decades past, and to our im sure its going to be to our regret and especially to our childrens regret we did not maintain that focus. So i think in the case of iran it was not a mistake to engage on the Nuclear Issue even if we were to give it primacy. That i think is debatable, but even there i wouldnt say its a mistake. The mistake would be to implement it in such a way that we appear to take our eye off the other ball. Thats the mistake. And thats a choice. And thats a choice we did not have to make, and so theres a way to balance this in terms of creating more stability in the region. Unfortunately, we probably have not executed in that manner yet. I mean, its still subject to choice every day by our government. About eight years ago a president ial candidate named Hillary Clinton suggested extending a Nuclear Umbrella to gcc allies against iran. Do you think thats something we should consider and if so under what circumstances should we pursue it . You know, its interesting, i work with a gentleman by the name of George Schultz out at hoover, and he calls he walks in every morning that were out there and he calls us younger officers in and only at hoover would i be one of the younger officers. And he talks about what it was like coming home from world war ii as a marine in the pacific and that generation looking around and 50, 60, 70 million dead, economic privation around the world and the greatest generation is called that for a reason. They say were part of this world whether we like it or not, no more going back pulling ballot on the league of nations. They create the United Nations so we can talk. They create Bretton Woods so we dont have Economic Conditions that are going to drive us into depression and war again. Three years after that terrible war against the nazis and the fanatic pacific war, the Marshall Plan is passed, and were actually helping our former foes recover. I mean, could you do that today . I dont know. But most importantly the United States makes what the australian ambassador to washington told me one time here a couple years ago the single most self sacrificial act in the history of the world. And im trying to think what is that . You have to look at it through a nonamericans eyes. He said you could have turned your back on europe after two world wars and said were going with the middle east and asia. Were going with south america. Were done with you guys. Instead, the american president s truman, eisenhower, democrat and republican, and the Congress Working together in a nonpartisan way, say were going to commit 100 million dead americans in a nuclear war to keep western europe safe. Today could we do that again over the middle east . I dont know that we have the political unity in our own country to stand up for Something Like that in the same way. So ill leave the answer to the questions to the audience. Along those lines, the Number One Oil producer in the world now is the United States. Oil producer. There are a number of people who say that allows us to change the way we look at the world, the way we look at the middle east. Do you think theres anything about the way the u. S. Looks to the world, the way the u. S. Thinks about Global Security, is there anything thats changed because our Oil Production has made us into a global oil super power . I would just give three imperatives for us to stay engaged in the middle east. The first one is oil. We may not be tied to middle east oil so much but believe me from washington to new york, San Francisco to miami, our economy is tied to the world. And if the worlds economy was to see the oil coming out of the gulf disrupted, 40 of the globally traded oil of this globally traded commodity we would get a terrible impact, not only on the World Economy but it would immediately impact here at home. So, theres an economic reason to stay engaged out there. Theres also a diplomatic reason and if we want the nations with us on so many other issues we cant ignore them when theyve got serious issues. A third would be security. Are we really so long from 9 11 that weve forgotten what it was like to look over at the pentagon with smoke pouring out of it . Id suggest were not that far removed from it. No nation on its own provides security in this world. No nation in a globalized world, actually ever, but certainly not today can do this on its own. So, if were going to have them stand by us then we are going to try to stop maniacs from attacks us again like on 9 11, then wed better be working with the folks in the region and look out for our own interests, beyond the moral to the strategic again. One last question before i go to the audience. Well get your questions ready. As you know, everybody in washingtons talking about budget constraints. Yeah. Is there anything were doing in the middle east now in the security field that you think we can afford not to do anymore . Youve talked a lot about plussing up. Building relationships. Is there anything we can stop doing that were doing now . You know, worth more than ten battleships or five armored divisions is sense of american political resolve and i think the more resolution we sew, the more unity we show with our allies certainly we have to do some ourselves. Even farm boy or farm girl knows if you want pump water out of a water pump you have to put some priming water in to get an air lock to bring it up. The idea that we can tell others, here, you do all the fighting and we are going to sit back and be up above and give you intelligence, well fly overhead with restrictive rules of engagement and all and you do all the dirty work, probably isnt going to work. So i think that we could probably get more from our allies instead of grudgingly or belatedly doing things that need to be done and being more forthcoming on it and holding constant high level discussions, remember. Any coalition against the kind of enemy we are up against takes two pieces. Its got a political piece and a military. The political is dominant. The military piece is subordinate and hopefully acting in accordance with the political agreement. And right now, i think lacking that kind of political coherence at the top, were having to do some things we probably wouldnt have to do if we could show more firmness and more conviction in what were doing. All the troops on the ground are just a front for what stands behind them. And without a unified congress, a unified american position with our allies that is a much weaker front than it would be with that sort of support. Is there a syria i mean, a way to apply that to the strategy in syria right now . Yes. I think get the Political Coalition put together up front and make clear where we stand on it. Okay. That doesnt mean 100,000 troops for 10 years or doing nothing. It means using strategy and figuring out how to go forward. Thank you. Sir, you, on the right. Thank you very much. And thank you, general, for your remarks. Im john gizzi of news max and news max television. Ill i guess ill point to the elephant in the room. General, you have been mentioned so often very much like your fellow scholar soldier james gavin was a generation ago to run for president either as a republican or as an independent. Have you given any thought to it . And how serious are the rumors about it . No. I havent given any thought to it. How serious are the rumors . Thats i think people like you know that better than i do. Sir . Over here. Just on the in the blue shirt, yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, general mattis. Its second time im listening to you. First time that you were at heritage. Im a doctor. Theres a lot of criticism inside usa as well as theres criticism about this nuclear deal, even inside iraq. Inside iran. And could you tell us, what was the compulsion on the parties which would negotiating that they had to come up with a comprehensive deal with so many loopholes and if the deal collapses what happens next . If the deal collapses, what happens next . I think if the deal were to collapse today it would depend on whether or not the economic sanctions could be reinstituted in a compelling manner. The amount of effort that the state department put into those many years ago was extraordinary. Were now at a point where people are clamoring to get into the iranian market. If you were unable to reimpose the economic sanctions, then i think you would be basically on a road to perdition because the lines of effort inside tehran are so contrary to the best interests of israel and the arab states around it that would lead to a collision. And how you would define a collision, whether it would be open war or a much higher level of terrorism, whether it would be economic blockades, as you know, saudi arabia recently said no ship thats made a port of call in the last three ports in iran can carry any saudi oil. So there are a number of things going on right now that might give us a little hint of what would be coming but i think we would be in unchartered territory at that point with probably only bad things to happen. All the way in the back next to the light stand. Mohammed. Would you please tell us something about the military to military relationship with egypt . And do you recommend the resumption of the bright star military exercise . What was the last relations with egypt and would you recommend resumption of the bright star exercise. Yeah. Egypt is a very, very interesting case. One third of the arab peoples live there. It has been an ally. It broke with the soviet union. Its been an ally since. Its fought alongside us in desert storm. Its maintained the security, the suez canal. A vital waterway. You put all this together and israels gone through very tough times and they did have a democratically elected president , morsi. Egypt. Excuse me. Egypt had a democratically elected president morsi. He was basically thrown out i believe by a public impeachment that the military then shouldered him aside. And then president al sisi came in. Obviously, were concerned about any political system has to have a counter weight and whether or not theres a sufficient all allowance for legitimate political dissent. But that said, right now, the only way to support egypts maturation as a country with civil society, with the support the president , we should have bright star reinstituted, perhaps not with tank battles but with counterterrorism type training, that sort of thing. But i think that when a president comes out two years in a row at alazar university calling for revolution in rhetoric in order to reduce the amount of negatives about the muslim religion, i think its time for us to support him and take our own side in this. Im a strong believer that egypt is a critical nation in terms of the future for stability in the middle east. Thank you. Right here on the aisle. Theres an echo up here, you know. General mattis, im colonel moragi. I had the pleasure to serve under you as a command sergeant. And i want to ask you a question, sir. Given what you mentioned about iran and influence and four capitals and given our engagement in iraq, how do you see us walking the rope between supporting the Iraqi Government with the significant iranian influence in lieu of more fighting against isis, sir . Yeah. Its a tough its a very tough situation. When i was once complaining about my job as i did routinely in the last job, as a matter of fact, i once was asked by the Vice President jokingly, you know why you got the job, jim . I said no, mr. Vice president , i wondered. He said because we couldnt find anyone else dumb enough to take it. I was complaining about it one time and a former Prime Minister in europe said, hey, jim, if you cant ride two horses in the circus get out of the middle east circus. Welcome to reality. One of my last visits to iraq i heard the same message from a number of people in the government in the shialed government and it was help us avoid the suffocating embrace of iran. So i think there is a way to work with iraq where we do not decide to just cast iraq off because weve all read about it enough, heard about it enough. Its got enough complexity. Just be done with it. Be done w. In this case what we are doing right now in iraq while it may not be sufficient is on the right path. All the way on the aisle at the end. Yes, maam. Thank you. Sputnik international news. Question about u. S. Presence in the region. You seem to indicate that more of a naval presence would be the way to go to reassure allies. I would just like you to elaborate on that and when you look at increasing a u. S. Presence, whether at sea or on the ground, combined with more u. S. Weapons going to allies in the region, where do you see that heading . Whats the worst possible out come . Let me also address the best possible out come and i can do it with an example. Several years ago, i was reading again all the reports coming out of tehran and calling for mining the gulf. Remember those days . You all remember all that word about the cruz missiles and we can board the ships. They are mostly about mining. I pick up the phone and i called my fleet commander and i said i want you to put together an international antimine exercise. Not an antiiran exercise. Heres where i want to point out why a Maritime Strategy is a way to stabilize an area and not bring it closer to crisis. If you dont have those and you have to send them in, that can be destabilizing. If you have the fifth out there, i thought we would get the usual suspects. France, britain, saudi arabia, bahrain, kuwa