'This Week' Transcript: Two Powerhouse Roundtables

WILL: And it turns out what if China is thinking, look, we can try and compete with the United States. Build a big blue water Navy and aircraft carriers and all the rest, or maybe we can just learn how to disable the massive infrastructure of our potential ally -- adversary.

ROGERS: This is a big difference. The United States does not participate, use its military intelligence services for economic espionage. We do not do it. It's prohibited.

Now we have -- to say as the chairman of the intelligence committee it would be crazy to say that we don't conduct espionage operations. We've done it since George Washington sent Nathan Hale to New York City to find out what the British were doing. It is a longstanding tradition between nations.

This is very, very different, very different.

ENGEL: I think this gets to a fundamental relationship with the Chinese. I think we have to make it very clear to them that they -- this cannot be business as usual. If they're going to continue to do this to the extent that they're doing it. There's a price to pay.

I was just in Beijing with the chairman of the foreign affairs committee, Congressman Royce, and we raised this with the Chinese, top Chinese officials. And they just let it roll off their back. They pooh- pooh it. They don't admit to it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Is the White House pressuring hard enough?

ENGEL: Well, I think they can always do it more. I think they are doing it hard enough. I think they're making it clear. But I think it's got to be a fundamental stand that we need to take with the Chinese. It can't be business as usual and everything else if they're going to continue to do this.

AMANPOUR: Well, what is the way to fight back? Is it sanctions? Is it some kind of trade...

ROGERS: Yes, yes, and yes. I argue you need to start indicting back actors. You need to start impacting individual's ability who are participating in this activity in China to get visas, their families to get visas. It needs to be a direct bilateral discussion point one, two, and three. It's that serious.

We have one American manufacturing company, a very large well known company who was hacked, had their blue prints stolen, if you will, that estimates 25,000 American manufacturing jobs lost.

AMANPOUR: Leon Panetta called it cyber Pearl Harbor. It could be cyber Pearl Harbor.

WILL: But again there's an intellectual blank slate right now on which the international community needs to write rules and laws about a new form of weapons. Again David Sanger last June, "it appears to be the first time the United States has repeatedly used cyber weapons to cripple another country's infrastructure."

I take your point it's different, but we are now--

ROGERS: You can't believe everything you read in the press, George, about ascribing who might be the author of that--

AMANPOUR: Are you saying (inaudible) he's not?

ROGERS: I'm just saying I would be very cautious about ascribing authorship of that particular event--

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, would there be anything wrong if the United States was trying to sabotage the Iranian nuclear program?

ROGERS: If it's the same type of activity that we would engage in to prevent a nuclear disaster anywhere in the world that would harm either our allies or the United States. So those kind of things happen.

Join the Discussion
blog comments powered by Disqus
You Might Also Like...