WASHINGTON –U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and a member of the Senate Banking and Finance Committees, today sent letters to Twitter and Google parent company Alphabet, requesting information about any data sharing agreements between the companies and Chinese vendors. The letter follows a disclosure earlier this week by Facebook that the company has partnerships with Chinese telecom companies including Huawei that allow them to access Facebook users’ non-public data. 

“Since at least October 2012, when the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released its widely-publicized report, the relationship between the Chinese Communist Party and equipment makers like Huawei and ZTE has been an area of national security concern. Since then, numerous articles in the tech trade press have focused on concerns by American and allied intelligence agencies that products from Chinese device makers, such as Lenovo, have security vulnerabilities that could allow Chinese intelligence to access data stored on, or transmitted by, devices.  And the New York Times reported in 2016 that firmware found in low-end smartphone devices, such as those of Huawei and ZTE, continually transmitted local data to Chinese severs, potentially for foreign intelligence purposes,” Sen. Warner wrote to the two companies today. 

It is publicly known that Alphabet has entered into strategic partnerships with Chinese mobile device manufacturers, including Huawei and Xiaomi, as well as with Chinese technology platform Tencent. In light of Facebook’s recent revelations, Sen. Warner requested that the company provide information about those partnerships, as well as any other agreements that Alphabet may have entered into with third-party vendors based in China. A similar request was posed to Twitter. 

Sen. Warner’s letter to Alphabet CEO Larry Page is available here. His letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey is available here.  

###

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and a member of the Senate Banking and Finance Committees, released the following statement regarding the Trump administration’s deal on ZTE:

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, released the following statement:

“The Gang of Eight exists in custom and in law to ensure that Congress can oversee intelligence matters without putting sensitive sources and methods at risk. If there is a clear and compelling need to brief Congress on sensitive intelligence matters, it should be handled through the Gang of Eight. The White House’s plan to provide a separate briefing for their political allies demonstrates that their interest is not in informing Congress, but in undermining an ongoing criminal investigation. 

“If they insist upon carrying out this farce, the White House and its Republican allies in the House will do permanent, longstanding damage to the practice of bipartisan congressional oversight of intelligence. They will also be sending a terrible message to anyone who works in or with our nation’s intelligence community that the White House will always prioritize partisan politics over protecting the people who help keep this country safe.” 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mark Warner (D-Va.), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, today requested three separate Inspector Generals open up probes into the Trump Administration’s failure to fully impose legally mandated sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). 

In a letter addressed to the Inspector Generals of the U.S. Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors, U.S. Department of the Treasury, and the Intelligence Community, the senators listed a series of instances where the Trump administration’s mixed signals or inaction have resulted in flouting seven mandatory CAATSA provisions, despite clear evidence of sanctionable activity.

“In light of these apparent violations and the lack of corresponding sanctions, we are concerned about whether the sanctions implementation process within the administration is fulfilling CAATSA’s mandate and intent,” wrote the senators. “Likewise, it seems clear that several weeks ago the administration had identified specific Russian entities that had played a role in supplying or otherwise supporting the government of Syria’s chemical weapons program, had prepared a list of such entities for sanctions designation, and Ambassador Nikki Haley publicly announced their imminent designation -- but then did not designate them, reportedly at the direction of the President.” 

It has been ten months since Congress overwhelmingly passed CAATSA’s wide-ranging mandatory sanctions measures to hold Russia accountable for their destabilizing activities against our country and nations around the world. 

A copy of the letter can be found here and below.

May 19, 2018

Mr. Steve A. Linick

Inspector General, U.S. Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors

U.S. Department of State

Office of Inspector General

1700 North Moore Street

Arlington, VA  22209

Mr. Eric M. Thorson

Inspector General, U.S. Department of the Treasury

Office of Inspector General

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C.  20220

Mr. Wayne A. Stone

Acting Inspector General of the Intelligence Community

Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community

Investigations Division

Washington, D.C.  20511

 Dear Inspectors General Linick, Thorson, and Stone:

We are writing to request that you conduct a review of your respective department’s/community’s role in implementing the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions law (CAATSA), signed by President Trump on August 2, 2017.  

Several mandatory provisions of the law have not been implemented by the administration, despite strong evidence that actions taken by or on behalf of the Russian government are in violation of the CAATSA sanctions law and applicable executive orders codified by CAATSA.  For example, the U.S. government released a joint statement on April 16, 2018 with British authorities that accused Russian government-backed hackers of conducting cyber attacks in other countries, including the U.S., which should trigger sanctions under Section 224 of CAATSA. Yet the administration has not imposed any such sanctions in response, nor has it issued waivers under this provision.  

Likewise, it seems clear that several weeks ago the administration had identified specific Russian entities that had played a role in supplying or otherwise supporting the government of Syria’s chemical weapons program, had prepared a list of such entities for sanctions designation, and Ambassador Nikki Haley publicly announced their imminent designation -- but then the administration did not designate them, reportedly at the direction of the President.  This raises obvious questions about the provision of Russian technology or support to Syria in violation of Section 234 of the law.

Overall, CAATSA includes seven mandatory provisions (Sections 224, 225, 226, 228, 231, 233 and 234) which we believe merit further examination.    We also remain concerned that the administration has not formally determined whether individuals are conducting significant transactions with the Russian defense and intelligence sectors under Section 231.   Without such determinations, it is impossible to ascertain whether individuals are substantially reducing significant transactions with these entities as outlined in the law.

In light of these apparent violations and the lack of corresponding sanctions actions, we are concerned about whether the sanctions implementation process within the administration is fulfilling CAATSA’s mandate and intent.  In general, with respect to mandatory measures, the President is required to make determinations in the event that he has established that sanctionable behavior has taken place, and then either impose sanctions or exercise a waiver.  We understand that only one determination, with respect to Section 224, has been made under new congressionally-mandated CAATSA sanctions since the law went into effect last August. 

As part of your respective reviews, we request that you address the following issues and make any necessary recommendations for improvement:

1.      Why have mandatory provisions of the law not been implemented, despite clear evidence of sanctions violations?

2.      What are the internal processes by which your respective agencies have contributed to the creation of Russia sanctions designation packages when CAATSA or applicable executive orders are violated?

3.      How has interagency coordination taken place with respect to CAATSA implementation, or other provisions of law or executive orders related to Russia, and is the inter-agency review process working as it should? 

4.      Are there obstacles in the inter-agency review process of which Congress should be made aware, as administration officials consider imposing additional sanctions on Russian actors consistent with current law?

Thank you for your consideration of our request.

Sincerely,

###

WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate ahead of an expected vote to confirm Gina Haspel as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 

“Gina Haspel is among the most qualified people to be nominated for the position of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. She’s served with the Agency for thirty three years, including tours as a case officer, four times as a station chief, the deputy chief of the National Resources Division, the Deputy Director of the National Clandestine Service, and currently as the Deputy Director of the Agency,” Sen. Warner said. “In many ways, her story is representative of the thousands of people at the Agency and throughout the Intelligence Community who serve quietly, without recognition, and often at great personal risk, in order to keep our nation safe from those who wish to do us harm… I would also note that, as a Senator from Virginia, the home to thousands of CIA personnel, and the Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I have heard from many Agency officers, and for that matter, members of the rank and file of other Intelligence Community agencies. And almost to a person, this rank and file have supported her nomination.”

Sen. Warner also addressed concerns about Ms. Haspel’s participation in the Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation program.

“Let me be clear—this has not been an easy decision. Over the past several weeks I have held multiple meetings and calls with Ms. Haspel and many others about her record and her character. In our open committee hearing, I have raised questions about her involvement with the Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation program, and if she were to be confirmed, her willingness to push back if President Trump asked her to undertake any immoral, or legally questionable, activity… I strongly believe that we, as Americans, have a duty to look squarely at our mistakes, and to not sweep them under the rug, but to learn from them, and in the future do better,” said Sen. Warner. “Most importantly, I believe she is someone who can and will stand up to the President, who will speak truth to power if this President orders her to do something illegal or immoral – like a return to torture. I believe this not just because she’s told me so, or because she wrote it in a letter, or even because she said it under oath in front of the committee. I believe it because I’ve heard it from people who worked with her and who have known her for years.” 

Concluded Sen. Warner, “I respect my colleagues who have made a different decision. This was not an easy choice. I too spent weeks working through it. But at the end of the day, and as we vote later this afternoon, I believe Gina Haspel should be confirmed. I look forward to supporting her, I look forward to her being a good Director of the CIA, and I look forward to her performance convincing those who could not support her today that her long-term value to our country will make our country safer and that she will act in accordance to the principles and values of our country.”

Below is the full text of his remarks:

Gina Haspel is among the most qualified people to be nominated for the position of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. She’s served with the Agency for thirty three years, including tours as a case officer, four times as a station chief, the deputy chief of the National Resources Division, the Deputy Director of the National Clandestine Service, and currently as the Deputy Director of the Agency.

In many ways, her story is representative of the thousands of people at the Agency and throughout the Intelligence Community who serve quietly, without recognition, and often at great personal risk, in order to keep our nation safe from those who wish to do us harm.

In addition, while she’s not emphasized this, we should not overlook the historic nature of Ms. Haspel’s nomination as the first woman to be nominated as Director of the CIA. Seeing her portrait in the halls of the Agency next to the long line of former Directors will be a long overdue but important breakthrough for the Intelligence Community.

I would also note that, as a Senator from Virginia, the home to thousands of CIA personnel, and the Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I have heard from many Agency officers, and for that matter, members of the rank and file of other Intelligence Community agencies. And almost to a person, this rank and file have supported her nomination.

Let me be clear—this has not been an easy decision for me. Over the past several weeks I have held multiple meetings and calls with Ms. Haspel and many others about her record and her character. In our open committee hearing, I have raised questions about her involvement with the Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation program, and if she were to be confirmed her willingness to push back if President Trump asked her to undertake any immoral, or legally questionable, activity. 

I questioned her willingness to declassify to the extent possible more information about her background at the Agency.

I still wish more could be done to discuss her background in an open setting. The Agency just recently has declassified more information about her service with the Counter Terrorism Center. I thank them for that, but I still believe that it would have been preferable if we could have found a way to be even more transparent. If she’s confirmed as Director, I will encourage Ms. Haspel to keep this in mind.

To those here who have concluded that Ms. Haspel’s background with the RDI program should preclude her from leading the CIA. I respect their arguments, and I know the passion with which they put forward their position. I myself struggled with this point. 

Many people at the CIA participated in the program. They were told it was legal by the Justice Department and ordered by the President. But, some of the actions undertaken were repugnant and amounted to torture. 

Since those days, America’s had a long debate about the standards that we as a nation, can, and should, apply to the treatment of detainees, regardless of who they might be. That is why I was one of 17 cosponsors in the Senate of the McCain-Feinstein amendment to prohibit torture and to prohibit any interrogation technique not authorized by the U.S. Army Field Manual. That is why I voted to both approve and to declassify the Senate Intelligence Committee’s extensive study of the RDI program. 

I strongly believe that we, as Americans, have a duty to look squarely at our mistakes, and to not sweep them under the rug, but to learn from them, and in the future, to do better.

Nor do I believe that we can excuse torture or the way in which detainees – no matter who they were, or what crimes they were guilty of – were treated. We are better than that, and we need a CIA Director who will ensure – in an ironclad way – that we will never return to those dark days; that we will follow the law, as enacted by Congress.

This is why I have pushed Ms. Haspel, both in our hearing and in our private meetings on this very point—what is her view now of the RDI program? And how would she react if she were asked as Director to undertake something similar in the future?

In both our one-on-one meetings and in classified session before the Committee, I found Acting Director Haspel to be forthcoming regarding her views on the interrogation program. However, I thought it was important that she say this in public, not just privately, which is why I asked her to memorialize those comments in writing.

Gina Haspel wrote, “With the benefit of hindsight and my experience as a senior Agency leader, the enhanced interrogation program is not one the CIA should have undertaken.” I believe this is a clear statement of growth as a leader and learning from the mistakes of the past. And while I wish that she would be more forceful, I also understand her reluctance to condemn the many men and women at the Agency who thought they were doing the right thing at the time.

I first met Gina at one of her overseas postings. But I didn’t really get to work with her until this last year, when the former Director appointed her to be the Deputy Director of the Agency. Over this last year, I have found her to be professional and forthright with our Intelligence Committee.

I’ve had the ability to have candid, unfiltered discussions with her. Whether the challenge we confront is North Korea… ISIS terrorists… or the long-term challenge of countries like China and Russia, I will feel safer knowing that the CIA has Ms. Haspel at the helm.  

Most importantly, I believe she is someone who can and will stand up to the President, who will speak truth to power if this President orders her to do something illegal or immoral – like a return to torture. 

I believe it because I’ve heard it from people who worked with her and who have known her for years. People we all know and trust—John Brennan, James Clapper, Leon Panetta, Jim Mattis, and many others who served presidents of both parties. Every one of them said they trusted her to push back on immoral, illegal, or just plain stupid orders from the President.

I furthermore believe that she is someone who will push back – and push back strongly – against any attempts by this President to undercut, denigrate, or ignore the professional men and women of CIA, and their responsibility, again, to speak truth to power whatever the political ramifications may be.

It is for these reasons that I am supporting Gina Haspel’s nomination to be Director of the CIA.

I respect my colleagues who have made a different decision. This was not an easy choice. I too spent weeks working through it. But at the end of the day, and as we vote later this afternoon, I believe Gina Haspel should be confirmed. I look forward to supporting her, I look forward to her being a good Director of the CIA, and I look forward to her performance convincing those who could not support her today that her long-term value to our country will our make our country safer and that she will act in accordance to the principles and values of our country.

###

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and co-founder of the Senate Cybersecurity Caucus, released the following statement after the White House eliminated the role of Cybersecurity Coordinator on the National Security Council, a position created to harmonize the federal government’s approach to cybersecurity and digital warfare:  

“It’s frankly mindboggling that the Trump Administration has eliminated the top White House official responsible for a whole-of-government cyber strategy, at a time when the cyber threat to our nation is greater than ever. Our adversaries are investing heavily in 21st century cyber warfare capabilities, and if we only view national security through a conventional 20th century lens, we’re going to find ourselves unable to respond to increasingly asymmetric cyber threats down the road.”
 

###

WASHINGTON – During a hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence today to consider the nomination of Bill Evanina to serve as the nation’s top counterintelligence official, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), the Committee’s Vice Chairman, voiced concern that rolling back trade restrictions on Chinese telecom company ZTE would pose significant national security risks to the United States.

In recent days, President Trump has publicity expressed his desire to reverse trade restrictions placed on the company for violating sanctions on Iran and North Korea. 

“On the question of counterintelligence with China, a number of members of this committee have raised concerns about certain Chinese telecom companies and their penetration into the American market. I was actually pleased that the President acted on one of those companies, ZTE. Now it appears that that is simply a bargaining chip in negotiations with China. I don’t think that is the appropriate way,” said Sen. Warner during the nomination hearing. 

“If this is a security threat, then it is a security threat and needs to be dealt with as such — not as a bargaining chip in greater trade negotiations,” added Sen. Warner.

On Sunday, May 13 Trump tweeted, “President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!” The next day, Trump followed with another tweet: “ZTE, the large Chinese phone company, buys a big percentage of individual parts from U.S. companies. This is also reflective of the larger trade deal we are negotiating with China and my personal relationship with President Xi.”

Earlier today, Sen. Warner joined a group of 34 Senators urging President Trump not to reverse trade restrictions on ZTE.

###

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joined a group of 33 Senators calling on the Trump Administration to put American jobs and national security ahead of China. The Senators wrote a letter to the Administration in response to President Trump’s announcement that he has directed the Department of Commerce to look at easing penalties imposed on China-based company ZTE for violations that include selling sensitive U.S. technologies to Iran and North Korea in violation of U.S. sanctions laws.

“Offering to trade American sanctions enforcement to promote jobs in China is plainly a bad deal for American workers and for the security of all Americans,” the Senators wrote. “American workers and companies confront rampant theft of U.S. intellectual property, agricultural policies that disadvantage American farmers, restrictions on market access for U.S. service providers and manufacturers, and mercantilist industrial policies that have cost U.S. workers their jobs.  America’s policies toward China should put American workers, farmers and businesses first, not China’s.”

“We urge you to focus on identifying effective strategies to reshape China’s policy approach in each of these areas, such as through enforceable commitments to eliminate forced technology transfer policies, market distorting subsidies, data localization policies, and foreign investment restrictions, and ensuring nondiscriminatory treatment of U.S. firms in regulatory and other proceedings. Above all, we urge you to remain steadfast in enforcing America’s laws,” the Senators concluded.  

In addition to Sens. Warner and Kaine, the letter was signed by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Carper (D-DE), Bob Casey (D-PA) , Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tina Smith (D-MN), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Tom Udall (D-NM), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). 

The full text of the letter can be found below:

Dear Mr. President:

Your recent remarks directing Secretary Ross to help ZTE – a Chinese company that has repeatedly sold sensitive U.S. technologies to Iran and North Korea in clear violation of American sanctions laws – call into grave doubt whether this administration will put American jobs and national security first.

If acted upon, your instruction would reverse a law enforcement decision by Secretary Ross to impose a seven-year denial of export privileges on ZTE, setting aside that decision made in the interests of U.S. national security to cushion the employment impact on the Chinese company.  ZTE not only violated US sanctions law but then repeatedly lied about steps it would take to remedy the problems. As Secretary Ross noted when he imposed the order, “ZTE made false statements to the U.S. Government when they were originally caught and put on the Entity List, made false statements during the reprieve it was given, and made false statements again during its probation. ZTE misled the Department of Commerce.  Instead of reprimanding ZTE staff and senior management, ZTE rewarded them. This egregious behavior cannot be ignored.” 

In addition to paying a fine of $1.2 billion, and pleading guilty to knowingly violating U.S. sanctions laws, ZTE agreed to a multi-year denial of export privileges, to be activated if any aspect of the agreement was not met and/or if the company committed additional violations of US export control regulations. Prompted by new violations, Commerce imposed the denial.

America’s national security must not be used as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations.  Offering to trade American sanctions enforcement to promote jobs in China is plainly a bad deal for American workers and for the security of all Americans. Bargaining away law enforcement power over bad actors such as ZTE undermines the historically sharp distinction between sanctions and export control enforcement and routine trade decisions made by the US.

Your order comes as your administration is in the midst of discussions with China to address China’s market-distorting policies and other tactics to undermine key American industries. Beyond appearing to risk American national security, the statement suggests that the administration is not serious about addressing the many economic challenges China presents.  The devastating effects of China’s trade policies are clear.  As your top trade negotiator recognized in his trade report on China less than six months ago, to address the “very serious and harmful problems generated by China’s trade regime”, China must “truly embrace a market-oriented approach, rooted in the fundamental WTO principles of non-discrimination, market access, reciprocity, fairness and transparency.”  There is no evidence that China has agreed to such a shift in approach.

American workers and companies confront rampant theft of U.S. intellectual property, agricultural policies that disadvantage American farmers, restrictions on market access for U.S. service providers and manufacturers, and mercantilist industrial policies that have cost U.S. workers their jobs.  America’s policies toward China should put American workers, farmers and businesses first, not China’s.

We urge you to focus on identifying effective strategies to reshape China’s policy approach in each of these areas, such as through enforceable commitments to eliminate forced technology transfer policies, market distorting subsidies, data localization policies, and foreign investment restrictions, and ensuring nondiscriminatory treatment of U.S. firms in regulatory and other proceedings. Above all, we urge you to remain steadfast in enforcing America’s laws.  

Sincerely,

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement after Reddit announced that it had taken action against nearly a thousand accounts that were controlled by the Russia-based Internet Research Agency (IRA): 

“I welcome Reddit’s announcement, nearly a year and a half after election day, that it has taken action to investigate and suspend hundreds of Russian-backed accounts responsible for interfering in the U.S. political system.   

“While I recognize that Reddit is fairly distinct among social media platforms in that its users are largely responsible for moderating content, I also believe that all the platform companies have a responsibility to do everything in their power to prevent foreign adversaries like Russia from interfering in our elections. As the 2018 elections approach, I will continue pressing the nation’s intelligence leaders and social media companies to be far more aggressive and proactive in responding to this threat. 

“It’s clear that the Kremlin will use any means at its disposal to spread propaganda and misinformation, and we each bear some responsibility for exercising good judgment and a healthy amount of skepticism when it comes to the things we read and spread on social media.” 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mark R. Warner, Vice Chairman of the Senate intelligence Committee joined with Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and four Ranking Members of key Senate committees on national security in sending a letter to President Donald Trump formally requesting the Administration provide a comprehensive analysis to Congress on whether a foreign government used chemical or biological weapons in the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the United Kingdom. The Senators’ letter calls for the imposition of sanctions if, as the UK government has concluded, the United States determines Russia was behind the chemical weapons attack in Salisbury.”  

Joining Menendez and Durbin were Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee; Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee; Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee; Mark Warner (D-Va.); Vice Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

The full text of the letter to President Trump can be found here and below:

Dear President Trump:

We write to express our serious concerns regarding the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury, United Kingdom. 

In the aftermath of their poisoning, UK officials identified the chemical agent used in the attack as Novichok, a highly lethal military grade nerve agent the Russian government is known to have developed.    

British Prime Minister Theresa May, in a speech to Parliament, said the UK government had concluded it was highly likely the Russian government was responsible for the attack in Salisbury.  The UK government based this assessment on Russia’s known chemical weapons capabilities and the Kremlin’s record of conducting state sponsored assassinations – including against former intelligence officers.   The United States, in a joint statement with the United Kingdom and other allies, said it shared the UK assessment that the Russian government was responsible for the attack and noted that Russia´s failure to address the legitimate request by the UK government further indicates its responsibility.

We formally request a determination of whether a foreign government has used lethal chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law and a report to Congress analyzing the attack.  Given the use of such a dangerous nerve agent, as well as the origins of the substance, we believe a comprehensive analysis of this chemical attack is vital to uncovering the perpetrators and, if necessary, you should impose sanctions on the individuals and entities involved. 

Moving forward, it is critical that we continue to stand by our indispensable ally and partner in the United Kingdom and take the necessary steps to confront Russian complicity in these heinous acts.  We appreciate your prompt attention to this request.

###

WASHINGTON – Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, in advance of today’s press conference with Committee members, made available the Committee’s initial recommendations on election security after investigating Russian attempts to target election infrastructure during the 2016 U.S. elections.

The Committee will hold an open hearing on Wednesday, March 21, 2018, on the threats to election infrastructure.  The hearing will cover attempted attacks on state election infrastructure in 2016, DHS and FBI efforts to improve election security, and the view from the states on their cybersecurity posture.  

The Committee’s initial recommendations are embedded below and available here.

RUSSIAN TARGETING OF ELECTION INFRASTRUCTURE DURING THE 2016 ELECTION

SUMMARY OF DRAFT SSCI RECOMMENDATIONS

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has examined evidence of Russian attempts to target election infrastructure during the 2016 U.S. elections. The Committee has reviewed the steps state and local election officials take to ensure the integrity of our elections and agrees that U.S. election infrastructure is fundamentally resilient. The Department of Homeland Security, the Election Assistance Commission, state and local governments, and other groups have already taken beneficial steps toward addressing the vulnerabilities exposed during the 2016 election cycle, including some of the measures listed below, but more needs to be done.

The Committee recommends the following steps to better defend against a hostile nation-state who may seek to undermine our democracy:

1. Reinforce States’ Primacy in Running Elections

• States should remain firmly in the lead on running elections, and the Federal government should ensure they receive the necessary resources and information.

2. Build a Stronger Defense, Part I: Create Effective Deterrence

• The U.S. Government should clearly communicate to adversaries that an attack on our election infrastructure is a hostile act, and we will respond accordingly.
• The Federal government, in particular the State Department and Defense Department, should engage allies and partners to establish new international cyber norms.

3. Build a Stronger Defense, Part II: Improve Information Sharing on Threats

• The Intelligence Community should put a high priority on attributing cyber-attacks both quickly and accurately. Similarly, policymakers should make plans to operate prior to attribution.
• DHS must create clear channels of communication between the Federal government and appropriate officials at the state and local levels. We recommend that state and local governments reciprocate that communication. 
• Election experts, security officials, cybersecurity experts, and the media should develop a common set of precise and well-defined election security terms to improve communication.
• DHS should expedite security clearances for appropriate state and local officials.
• The Intelligence Community should work to declassify information quickly, whenever possible, to provide warning to appropriate state and local officials.

4. Build a Stronger Defense, Part III: Secure Election-Related Systems

• Cybersecurity should be a high priority for those managing election-related systems. Basic but crucial security steps like two-factor authentication for those logging into voter databases can improve the overall election security posture. States and localities should also take advantage of DHS offerings, to include DHS’s network monitoring capabilities.
• The Committee recommends DHS take the following steps:
• Working closely with election experts, develop a risk management framework that can be used in engagements with state and local election infrastructure owners to document and mitigate risks to all components of the electoral process. 
• Create voluntary guidelines on cybersecurity best practices and a public awareness campaign to promote election security awareness, working through the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS), and the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED).
• Expand capacity to reduce wait times for DHS cybersecurity services.
• Work with GSA to establish a list of credible private sector vendors who can provide services similar to those provided by DHS.

5. Build a Stronger Defense, Part IV: Take Steps to Secure the Vote Itself

• States should rapidly replace outdated and vulnerable voting systems. At a minimum, any machine purchased going forward should have a voter-verified paper trail and no WiFi capability. If use of paper ballots becomes more widespread, election officials should re-examine current practices for securing the chain of custody of all paper ballots and verify no opportunities exist for the introduction of fraudulent votes.
• States should consider implementing more widespread, statistically sound audits of election results.
• DHS should work with vendors to educate them about the vulnerabilities of both the machines and the supply chains.

6. Assistance for the States

• The Committee recommends Congress urgently pass legislation increasing assistance and establishing a voluntary grant program for the states.
• States should use grant funds to improve cybersecurity by hiring additional Information Technology staff, updating software, and contracting vendors to provide cybersecurity services, among other steps. 
• Funds should also be available to defray the costs of instituting audits.

###