Presenter: Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell February 25, 2009

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