|
||
|
DoD News Briefing with Geoff Morrell from the Pentagon [excerpts on non-disclosure agreements]
[...]
Q Geoff, President Obama last night spoke about
some Cold War weapons systems that could potentially be part of defense
cuts or he saw as room for saving money. What weapons systems was
he referring to?
MR. MORRELL: I don't know, frankly.
Q So he's never discussed that with the
secretary?
MR. MORRELL: Well, I mean, the secretary has discussed our efforts
with regards to the FY '10 budget that under way. But as you've
probably seen from some of the stories that have been out there, this
is a very closely held process, one that the secretary in fact has
asked the participants to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to
fully participate in.
Q What's the genesis of this nondisclosure form
that Mr. Gates had generals and admirals --
MR. MORRELL: Well, not just generals and admirals. Everybody
who's participating in this process -- these are the highest-ranking
people in this department -- were asked to sign this -- and the
secretary signed one as well -- were asked to sign an agreement in
which they would agree not to speak to any of the matters that they are
working on as part of this budget process.
This is highly sensitive stuff, involving programs costing tens of
billions of dollars, employing hundreds of thousands of people, and go
to the heart of our national security. And so he wants this
process to be as disciplined and as forthright as possible. And he
thinks that by having people pledge not to speak out of school, if you
will, on these matters while they are a work in progress, that you will
create a climate in which you can ultimately produce a better product
as people can speak candidly with the confidence that it will not be
leaked.
And ultimately, this product can't be judged by the sum of its parts;
it's got to be judged as a whole. So if bits and pieces leak out,
you start to tug on these strings and the whole thing could
unravel. This budget the secretary wants to be judged in its
totality because that's where you will see the strategic balance he is
trying to build.
Q Did this directive come from the White House
--
MR. MORRELL: No.
Q -- or was this a Gates initiative?
MR. MORRELL: This was the secretary's idea. And it's not
terribly unusual. I think this was --
Q It's highly unusual.
MR. MORRELL: Well, but it was used during the BRAC process, I
understand.
Q It wasn't used in any budget process I've
been covering, even under Rumsfeld, "Mr. Disclosure" himself.
MR. MORRELL: This is -- this is a big deal to the secretary.
Q When did he ask for it?
MR. MORRELL: I think they signed it -- what was the day I spoke to
you guys about the defense senior leader -- leadership conference,
which is when he COCOMs were in town? I think it was a week ago
this past Friday. Two weeks from this Friday.
Q Is the concern in the entirety the budget
process, or is there also a concern that there could be some
manipulation or problems on Wall Street at a very volatile time?
MR. MORRELL: I think it's a number of things. I think --
well, our primary -- the secretary's primary concern is the budget
process. But we're not naive, either. We understand these involve
huge corporations that have a lot riding on the outcome of these
discussions.
Q Geoff?
MR. MORRELL: Yeah, Barbara.
Q I do need to ask you an Iraq question, but I
first just briefly want to follow up on this, because I guess I don't
really understand one key point on this. But I do want to come
back to Iraq.
If the information is classified, there's criminal penalties for
disclosing it. So that is clearly something people are not
supposed to do anyhow. Are we talking -- are you talking about
nondisclosure of certain unclassified information? Is that what
we're talking about here?
MR. MORRELL: I think most of the information that's probably being
discussed is classified. But there's a process that the secretary
wants to try to keep as collegial and confidence-building as
possible. So you know, it doesn't have to be germane, necessarily,
to speaking to a classified briefing paper that they are working
with.
The whole process the secretary wants to keep out of the
limelight. He wants to keep it secret, because ultimately it needs
to be judged on the whole and not bits and pieces which may leak out.
And he wants people to participate in this with the confidence of
knowing that what they are saying is not being leaked, it's not being
disseminated, and therefore we can work together perhaps in a more
collegial and honest way and come up with a better product.
Q What does it say, Geoff, about the
secretary's own confidence in his most senior military and civilian
advisers that he requires them to sign a piece of paper rather than
just say, "I expect you not to talk," and believe that they won't
talk? What does it say --
MR. MORRELL: The secretary signed the agreement himself. He's
subjecting himself to the same standard that he's asked of those who
are working for him.
Q (Off mike.)
MR. MORRELL: He wants to create -- I'll say it again, Barbara --
he wants to create an environment in which the best possible budget can
be built. And he believes the only way to do that is to make sure
that we are doing this in utter and complete secrecy until that budget
is rolled out.
Q But if it's secret, Geoff -- just bear with
me a minute, and I still want to ask you my Iraq question --
MR. MORRELL: I'm not going anywhere, Barbara.
Q -- if it's secret, if information is secret
and therefore classified, there are criminal penalties for disclosing
it, why --
MR. MORRELL: Barbara, you've been around here long enough to know
that classified information with potential criminal consequences gets
leaked all the time. This is to reinforce the message that indeed
this is classified material, these are highly secret discussions, and
we should remember that, be mindful of it and honor it.
Q Did he require the Joint Chiefs -- if he
signed it, did he require --
MR. MORRELL: Everybody who is participating signed it. There
is no one -- and if you didn't sign it, you aren't
participating. So if you want to be a part of the budget process,
you had to sign it.
Q Can you just for the record tell us, did the
Joint Chiefs of Staff sign this?
MR. MORRELL: Every -- everyone is -- yes, all the chiefs signed
it.
Q Did you sign one?
MR. MORRELL: I am not participating in the process, which allows
me to speak to you with total honesty and a clean -- clear conscience,
and so no, I'm not participating in the process.
Q So he doesn't think the issue of
classification of sufficient.
MR. MORRELL: I think I've answered the question several
times.
Anybody --
Q Can I ask an Iraq question, Geoff?
MR. MORRELL: Yeah, let's finish this. And I -- I'm not going
-- I'm not going to leave you.
Q Can I follow up with you on that?
MR. MORRELL: Yeah.
Q How does that level of secrecy and control at
the beginning square with the new administration's stated goal of
maximum transparency throughout all -- the whole process?
MR. MORRELL: I don't think the administration has been advocating
a -- transparency in national security matters. I think that at
the end of this it will be apparent to everyone where the secretary is
and the process -- what the process has yielded. But I do not
believe that the president's call for greater transparency means that
we should get rid of classification of materials that are highly
sensitive.
Yeah, Luis?
Q Jeff, on the issue --
MR. MORRELL: Still on this -- and then if it's on Iraq I want to
go to Barbara first.
Q Well, what can we -- can we --
Q (Off mike.)
MR. MORRELL: Sure. Yeah.
Q Last question?
Yes?
Q You're leaving the impression with the
viewers and listeners that a lot of the material -- the budget material
is, like, stamped "top secret" and sensitive, compartmented and all
that, when, in fact, most of this is for official use only, or
unclassified. I mean, you need to bound this a little bit so
that you -- people don't think the Pentagon Papers are being floated
around here, ala the budget season.
MR. MORRELL: All right. Tony.
Q (Off mike.)
MR. MORRELL: Okay. So Tony, then this goes to answer
Barbara's question more completely, then. If, indeed, not all the
materials that this gang is working with are marked "secret" or are
classified and therefore for official use only, all the more reason for
a nondisclosure agreement so that those matters could not be discussed
as well.
The bottom line is, the process is one the secretary wishes to keep
close hold while it is under way. When it's appropriate, when
decisions have been made, when he has a budget to present, he will do
so, I am confident, in a very open and transparent fashion so everybody
knows what the end result is and likely how we got there. Okay?
Source: Department of Defense
|