Janet Napolitano, former US Secretary of Homeland Security

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:00.-- what it calls "combined operations".

:00:00. > :00:16.Welcome to HARDtalk, with me, Zeinab Badawi.

:00:17. > :00:19.World leaders are all grappling with similar problems these days -

:00:20. > :00:21.how to counter terrorism, enhance security and manage

:00:22. > :00:24.national borders, while at the same time remaining open to the benefits

:00:25. > :00:44.My guest is someone whose job that was, Janet Napolitano.

:00:45. > :00:46.She was homeland security chief for five years under

:00:47. > :00:50.She's also a former governor of Arizona, a US border state.

:00:51. > :00:53.How does she think we can make the world a safer place and respect

:00:54. > :01:26.Janet Napolitano, welcomed the HARDtalk. When you look around the

:01:27. > :01:30.world today you see almost daily acts of terror, insecure borders and

:01:31. > :01:35.the rest of it. You can't really, you are fighting a losing battle,

:01:36. > :01:38.are due? The world is a very troubled place. Everyone would agree

:01:39. > :01:44.with that and it is a very troubled place. Everyone would agree with

:01:45. > :01:49.that and the rise of jihad and the huge migration patterns that are

:01:50. > :01:53.under way. If you look at what your successor has said, he says he is

:01:54. > :01:59.very worried about the soft targets, the public places. For instance, in

:02:00. > :02:02.December last year we saw the San Bernardino killings, 14 people

:02:03. > :02:08.killed by a couple, a Pakistani wife and her husband say it for rook.

:02:09. > :02:14.That kind of attack is practically impossible to do anything about. --

:02:15. > :02:19.Syed Farook. You had a few, the Times Square bomber. Yes, the Boston

:02:20. > :02:23.Marathon, among others. When you think about something like San

:02:24. > :02:29.Bernardino, they call it leaderless jihad, in other words, people who

:02:30. > :02:33.had become converted to that theory of violence and they aren't part of

:02:34. > :02:38.an organised group and there's nothing to intercept and there's no

:02:39. > :02:41.travel to stop and they just go and commit an unspeakable act of

:02:42. > :02:50.violence. It is also the kind that is directed abroad. We saw that with

:02:51. > :02:56.the so-called Underwear Bomber in Christmas of 2009. That, from a

:02:57. > :03:02.security interception possibility gives you greater odds. You famously

:03:03. > :03:05.said at the time that the system worked but it was actually his

:03:06. > :03:09.fellow passengers who overpowered him and they realised that the bomb

:03:10. > :03:16.failed to detonate. -- when they realised. It was a lucky escape,

:03:17. > :03:21.however I was talking about how immediately upon that episode we

:03:22. > :03:24.were able to get control over all US bound international air travel and

:03:25. > :03:31.confirm every single passenger that was on the way to the United States.

:03:32. > :03:35.That was part of a system that... He got on a plane with underwear that

:03:36. > :03:39.had explosives in it and it failed to detonate properly. It is

:03:40. > :03:44.interesting, Janet Napolitano, that you are citing the attacks by

:03:45. > :03:47.jihadists because when you look at the figures it is quite striking

:03:48. > :03:51.that since the September the 11th attacks in the United States 400,000

:03:52. > :03:57.people in the US have died from gunfire, violence, and the 45, very

:03:58. > :04:01.tragic obviously, from jihadist of violence. So the numbers don't stack

:04:02. > :04:08.up. 12% of attacks in the US are jihadist inspired. So why the focus

:04:09. > :04:16.from you, when the figures don't justify that perhaps? I think that

:04:17. > :04:22.focus on jihad really drives from September the 11th, when we had over

:04:23. > :04:30.3000 Americans killed in the towers in New York, with flight 93 and so

:04:31. > :04:34.forth. For Americans to have that kind of an attack that comes from

:04:35. > :04:41.abroad and attacks iconic sites it was a real game changer for the

:04:42. > :04:44.United States. But the implication of what you are saying is that fear

:04:45. > :04:49.is driving security policy in the United States. I think in the United

:04:50. > :04:54.States, and it is sad to say and I don't agree with it as a matter of

:04:55. > :05:02.policy, but in general there is a greater acceptance of risk of dying

:05:03. > :05:06.in some way with gunfire. But not an acceptance of risk with dying by

:05:07. > :05:11.terrorism. So security policy focuses on the counter-terrorism

:05:12. > :05:18.aspect. So when Barack Obama said after the San Bernardino attacked in

:05:19. > :05:24.this -- in December, as we become better at dealing with complex

:05:25. > :05:29.attacks like September said -- September 11, that is the benchmark

:05:30. > :05:33.of security, we are successful if we avoid a massive jihadist attack.

:05:34. > :05:41.Whatever else happens. I don't think so. You want to avoid other kind of

:05:42. > :05:45.attacks as well. But in the United States most street crimes, violent

:05:46. > :05:48.crimes, are not handled at the federal level but at the local

:05:49. > :05:53.police departments or State Department of police. It is

:05:54. > :05:59.prosecuted under different laws. I think it is evaluated as a different

:06:00. > :06:02.type of risk. Can I just say that it is interesting because when you were

:06:03. > :06:05.a homeland security chief there was a report published that had been

:06:06. > :06:11.commissioned by George Bush and it was released when you were in the

:06:12. > :06:14.position. It said lone wolves and small terrorist cells in bracing

:06:15. > :06:19.right-wing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic

:06:20. > :06:22.terrorism threat to the United States. So it's not just regular

:06:23. > :06:29.gunfire that poses the biggest threat, is it? No. It is the right

:06:30. > :06:34.wing extremists. We have violent extremists of all types in the US.

:06:35. > :06:39.Unfortunately. What you have to do from a security perspective is,

:06:40. > :06:43.using the best kind of information you can glean, consistent with civil

:06:44. > :06:47.liberties, with information sharing, data collection and all that, do

:06:48. > :06:51.everything you can to prevent and then be in a position to immediately

:06:52. > :06:56.respond. The fact is, it is because of that, as you say, in the US the

:06:57. > :07:01.perception is the jihadist threat after 9/11 is what really should

:07:02. > :07:08.people up. Look at the Oklahoma bombing in 1995... I worked on that

:07:09. > :07:12.case too. Right. So because of the attention on the jihadist threat,

:07:13. > :07:16.arguably there aren't enough resources being spent on the

:07:17. > :07:22.threat, the internal threat, from right-wing extremists. They cite

:07:23. > :07:32.people who say they should be much more done to try to put resources

:07:33. > :07:35.into right-wing extremists. I do think when we are planning security

:07:36. > :07:38.in the United States we sit down and say, that the jihadist, that's a

:07:39. > :07:43.right-winger, we are going to put money here or there. No, the notion

:07:44. > :07:49.is, where can you invest resources to be the most effective for public

:07:50. > :07:58.safety? When you look at the links between American jihadist --

:07:59. > :08:01.jihadists, like the one killed in 2011 in Yemen by a US drone attack,

:08:02. > :08:08.it was an American citizen living in the US. Why does somebody like that

:08:09. > :08:14.escape surveillance and is not stopped before they go on to commit

:08:15. > :08:18.greater acts of violence? Well, he was an interesting case. He was a

:08:19. > :08:24.cleric at a mosque outside of Washington, DC. After the attack of

:08:25. > :08:31.9/11, he was on TV as a kind of moderate Muslim condemning the

:08:32. > :08:41.attack. Boaties preachings got more radical. He went to England, went to

:08:42. > :08:45.Yemen and he became the voice of AQAT and then he became their

:08:46. > :08:48.operational head. That was a turning point in a sense of the president

:08:49. > :08:54.was a willingness to authorise a drone attack on an American citizen.

:08:55. > :08:59.How do you identify and catch people like that? Also the Boston bombers,

:09:00. > :09:08.which happened on your watch, the two Brothers, another who left the

:09:09. > :09:09.US and the FBI closed the investigation before he came back.

:09:10. > :09:15.You clearly need better surveillance. I think you have to

:09:16. > :09:23.think about what kind of surveillance. Al-Awlaki was in

:09:24. > :09:26.Yemen. It is very difficult to find individuals in Yemen. It is

:09:27. > :09:37.difficult to see Dale, even though there was close watch on what he was

:09:38. > :09:41.putting out on internet. The vast majority were reading al-Awlaki's

:09:42. > :09:47.sermons. But airport records? You mentioned that was relevant with the

:09:48. > :09:49.Underpants Bomber. We did a lot of work after that because it revealed

:09:50. > :09:57.a gap in international air information system and we fixed

:09:58. > :10:02.that. But we spent a year working with the UN and others to fix that.

:10:03. > :10:14.With the Boston bombers, these were young men, the sons of those who had

:10:15. > :10:20.fled from Russia. One went back. That's the older one. Yes. But there

:10:21. > :10:25.was no information, other than what the Russians said, that while he was

:10:26. > :10:30.in Russia he had somehow engaged in or become radicalised to the point

:10:31. > :10:38.of violence and indeed the records show that the VI -- the FBI

:10:39. > :10:42.interviewed him, they spoke to family members. They followed up on

:10:43. > :10:48.the lead. The Russians provided no more information. So they closed the

:10:49. > :10:52.case. And he was an ethnic Chechens. Talking about the road of technology

:10:53. > :10:56.and surveillance, there is great concern that whatever you are trying

:10:57. > :11:00.to do is going to be subject to perhaps cyber attack. You have said

:11:01. > :11:05.the United States may face some kind of major cyber event. Hywel Reddy is

:11:06. > :11:11.the US if something like that was to happen that could shut down

:11:12. > :11:15.infrastructure? -- Hywel Reddy. This is one of the risks for many

:11:16. > :11:19.countries of the world, not just the United States, that we are so

:11:20. > :11:25.willing to buy technology that there can be a major attack carried out

:11:26. > :11:29.through that. It could be committed to different nation states, but also

:11:30. > :11:35.different individuals using again the internet as... Weaponising it in

:11:36. > :11:39.a way. Very difficult to prevent, difficult to respond to. The US is

:11:40. > :11:44.not prepared if something like that happened? It would be a calamity? It

:11:45. > :11:48.could be. It depends on what it is, where it is, the extent of the

:11:49. > :11:53.attack, the technology used in the attack. There are lots of things

:11:54. > :11:57.that you have to go through. But, yes, in certain circumstances it

:11:58. > :12:04.could be calamitous. What is the nature of the threat exactly? Could

:12:05. > :12:08.it be some terror cells that are extremely good technology, all

:12:09. > :12:16.states that perhaps don't see eye to eye? Nationstates? It could be

:12:17. > :12:20.either. Actually, in terms of the kind of cyber crimes we have seen

:12:21. > :12:23.from the United States side, attribution is one of the most

:12:24. > :12:29.difficult aspects because you can see the attack, you can see what's

:12:30. > :12:34.happening on the systems et cetera. We do have things in place to stop

:12:35. > :12:38.attacks on three are detected, but the attribution can be awfully

:12:39. > :12:41.difficult. Talking about technology, there's quite a controversy going on

:12:42. > :12:48.at the moment because the federal court has said that it wants Apple

:12:49. > :12:55.to unlock the phone of the San Bernardino shooters and Apple is

:12:56. > :12:57.resistant with that. Right. The two top senators on the intelligence

:12:58. > :13:02.committee says there should be legislation to force companies to

:13:03. > :13:11.provide such information. What do you think? There's this tension

:13:12. > :13:15.between privacy rights and security, it is becoming more

:13:16. > :13:22.apparent. The Apple case puts a fine point on it. In my view, from what

:13:23. > :13:27.I've read, I do not all of the details, but from what I've read

:13:28. > :13:35.icon clue bat in all Lord there's no Apple exception. If you've shown by

:13:36. > :13:39.the information is necessary, that law enforcement should prevail and

:13:40. > :13:43.in previous cases that has generally been the case. But it is this

:13:44. > :13:47.balance between as you say the rights of citizens, the right to

:13:48. > :13:51.privacy, although with this case I think the phone was a work phone,

:13:52. > :13:55.but at any rate the chief executive of Apple Tim Cook says the

:13:56. > :13:59.implication of the demands are chilling. He says the worry is that

:14:00. > :14:01.if the software was developed foreign governments and criminals

:14:02. > :14:09.could break into many other phones and so that degrades privacy for

:14:10. > :14:14.all. So the commercial company says it is protecting the rights of the

:14:15. > :14:18.citizens. I don't know the basis for his statement. You have to

:14:19. > :14:23.understand what exact knowledge you we are talking about. Is it new

:14:24. > :14:29.technology that has to be developed? If you did it for this case, under

:14:30. > :14:31.these unique circumstances, why does that open the door for all phones

:14:32. > :14:38.and foreign governments able to use it? I don't know whether Apple is

:14:39. > :14:42.stating its case accurately or perhaps overstating its case in

:14:43. > :14:46.order to make a point. So you would back legislation that would compel

:14:47. > :14:53.companies to assist the FBI or other law enforcement agencies to unlock

:14:54. > :15:00.phones of people, as in the case of this couple?

:15:01. > :15:10.My view is that the law as it currently exists should enable law

:15:11. > :15:16.enforcement to prevail. I would say that one of the undercurrent here is

:15:17. > :15:21.where you deploy resources. -- undercurrents. What do you do when

:15:22. > :15:28.you follow up on the one Austin bomber and you can't find anything?

:15:29. > :15:37.-- Boston. Do you put him under surveillance? Where do you focus

:15:38. > :15:43.efforts? Trying to access a phone or computer? They don't do that all the

:15:44. > :15:48.time. It is a resource issue. I have to see that the FBI has many reasons

:15:49. > :15:53.it has put forward to the court as to why this information is

:15:54. > :15:57.necessary. What about the debate with President Obama talking about

:15:58. > :16:07.Muslims, going to visit a mosque this year, you cannot abandon values

:16:08. > :16:10.or given to fear. -- give in. When we talk about Muslims and the

:16:11. > :16:18.jihadist threat you have to make sure you don't change an entire

:16:19. > :16:27.community in the US. Muslims are by and large very well integrated into

:16:28. > :16:31.society. That is important. Extremely important. It is not easy

:16:32. > :16:39.because these kind of situations happen. No answer makes everyone

:16:40. > :16:48.completely happy. What is the best decision I can make based on the

:16:49. > :16:55.facts given to me. And in the Apple versus FBI situation, the San

:16:56. > :17:00.Bernardino shooters, there is a debate to intercept phone calls or

:17:01. > :17:12.get information that already exists. I don't know of an Apple

:17:13. > :17:15.exception. So when the hopeful for the Republican Party says he wants a

:17:16. > :17:23.temporary ban on Muslims entering the US until all four trees can

:17:24. > :17:29.figure out what is going on... -- authorities. It resonates with many

:17:30. > :17:36.Americans, doesn't it? Donald Trump is a leading contender, I would say

:17:37. > :17:41.the lead contender right now. Do you think you will get the nomination?

:17:42. > :17:45.If you look at the delegates and the states, he is in a very good

:17:46. > :17:52.position to get his party's nomination. But I would say without

:17:53. > :17:55.caveat that the statement about banning all Muslims on the basis of

:17:56. > :18:01.religious faith is very much contrary to American values. Another

:18:02. > :18:06.issue he has played within particular in the race for the

:18:07. > :18:15.presidency is that of migrants. In 2014, according to peer research,

:18:16. > :18:19.11.3 million unauthorised migrants entered the United States, half from

:18:20. > :18:24.Mexico. You are the governor of Arizona, or were, which borders

:18:25. > :18:29.Mexico... He is talking about building a fence. You have said you

:18:30. > :18:35.are not supportive of that. What do you do? Let me just say that not

:18:36. > :18:43.only was I the governor of Arizona, a border state, I corrupt in

:18:44. > :18:49.Mexico, I spent my whole life there. -- grew up. I have spent a lot of

:18:50. > :18:56.time on that border and know it well. My view is, show me a ten foot

:18:57. > :19:01.wall and I will show you a ten foot ladder. A wall is not adequate and

:19:02. > :19:09.is very expensive and doesn't solve anything. You need an immigration

:19:10. > :19:14.policy that makes it easier for immigrants to come lawfully. How

:19:15. > :19:22.immigration law is desperately in need of reform. -- Our. I worked a

:19:23. > :19:29.lot on that when I was Secretary of Homeland Security. That is a key

:19:30. > :19:34.part of migration policy. The underlying law doesn't work very

:19:35. > :19:41.well. When you were in Homeland Security you had a programme called

:19:42. > :19:47.the Secure Communities Programme. Under that 2 million were deported

:19:48. > :19:56.last year. America is expelling illegal immigrants and nine times

:19:57. > :20:02.the rate of two years ago. He is outpacing any previous president,

:20:03. > :20:10.Barack Obama. That is partly you're doing. Is that something you can

:20:11. > :20:19.really be proud about? -- your. That programme was an asset to say,

:20:20. > :20:24.look, we cannot deport everybody in the US illegally. -- effort. We

:20:25. > :20:27.don't have the resources for that. Let's focus on other crimes in

:20:28. > :20:39.addition to immigration crimes. Where do you find those people?

:20:40. > :20:46.Jails and presence in the US. -- prisons. That programme was a data

:20:47. > :20:54.base of... The criticism was that you didn't focus on criminals and

:20:55. > :20:58.deport them. This person says it is not focused on dangerous criminals,

:20:59. > :21:06.it is as significant amounts of tax dollars to sweep up those who pose

:21:07. > :21:10.no threat to the community. That was 2010. There have been numerous

:21:11. > :21:17.criticisms. There have been criticisms and evolution is in the

:21:18. > :21:25.programme. -- evolutions. Anything new is subject to evolution. I would

:21:26. > :21:32.disagree with that criticism. That is not how it was carried out.

:21:33. > :21:41.204,000 parents of American children deported between 2010 and 2012, that

:21:42. > :21:45.attracted criticism. One example, the president of the University of

:21:46. > :21:52.California, one person there said it has torn apart families more than

:21:53. > :21:56.any other administration, the Obama administration. That is partly your

:21:57. > :22:01.record. You have to put it into context. What immigration

:22:02. > :22:07.enforcement is. Their right instances where we would not have

:22:08. > :22:14.deported but the law made us. -- There are. We are seeking to reform

:22:15. > :22:18.that law. When you became president of the University of California

:22:19. > :22:30.there were concerns because of your past as Homeland Security chief.

:22:31. > :22:33.This student says he doesn't know what your goal is because you come

:22:34. > :22:45.from a background of Homeland Security. We have about 190,000 what

:22:46. > :22:51.we would call undergraduate students and another 40,000 students. We are

:22:52. > :22:58.the largest public university in the US. And we have about 3500 also who

:22:59. > :23:02.are undocumented and we provide financial assistance, we have a

:23:03. > :23:07.learning programme, special centres for them, and we work with them,

:23:08. > :23:12.because they are in this very difficult circumstance. When I was

:23:13. > :23:20.Secretary of Homeland Security, I recognised that. We did the first

:23:21. > :23:25.executive action to defer deportation on young people who had

:23:26. > :23:32.been brought here and grown up in the US but had come here illegally.

:23:33. > :23:36.Briefly, you are supporting Hillary Clinton for the nomination for The

:23:37. > :23:44.Democratic Party. You have a record of public service, why didn't you

:23:45. > :23:48.run yourself? Because I love being the president... Of the University

:23:49. > :23:53.of California. Thank you very much for coming on HARDtalk. A pleasure.

:23:54. > :24:18.Thank you. Thank you. Rather belatedly we are seeing

:24:19. > :24:21.more typical winter weather. We don't have to worry

:24:22. > :24:24.about flooding and rain,