I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. I welcome all our attendees. We have several members. Several uniformed members which is always good to see. Several people from the foreign court, distinguished guests. I would like to acknowledge first hour sponsors. From Lockheed Martin we are by retired navy captain robbie harris. Textron systems is represented here. We have a stellar program. We have refreshments next door. Take advantage of that. Our speakers will allow for questions today. Attentiveybody to be to the idea that we use the microphones. That we useant those so people can hear your questions, and also for the people beaming in can hear your questions which is important. I thank you for that. I ask that you get to your question because we have a lot of folks here today. It is my honor to introduced our first speaker, our keynote speaker, mr. Richard spencer who is the 76th secretary of the navy. He is a proud veteran of the u. S. Marine corps. As the helicopter fight pilot. S a helicopter pilot he served as a managing director of a financial firm, and has helped positions on corporate boards to include the marine , the defense business board, and the chief of Naval Operations executive panel. Lets give a warm welcome. It is the first time he has spoken to enable audience. To the honorable richard spencer. [applause] it is a pleasure to be here. There are familiar faces in the as i look across. We were out at the Reagan National defense forum, and for those of you in the audience who might not have been there or see the live version on television, which if you are watching, i , becauseou find a life it was a beautiful saturday and you should not have been inside watching television. It was interesting. Timely topics. I want to thank you for asking , o come and address it is great to see all of you. It is Interesting Times we are living in. The chinese Fortune Cookie always says. I would like to address with this group who i know in looking here you have been enduring endorsers of National Security and forceful advocates for a strong maybe Marine Corps Team. I want to address my thoughts on how we are going to take this institution going forward. I will pause and give you an update. It has started out to be a good week in the pentagon, which does not mean that will keep on the same trajectory, the certainly is a nice day because i swore in the new under secretary of the navy. Therrow i get to swear in assistant secretary for rdna. Frame putting meat on a that is going to carry the Organization Forward and eight positive trajectory. One of the first things we do when we address the topic of National Security is acknowledge that we are a commercial nation. We are a maritime nation. Of thefit from the use sea lanes that are open for commerce, and we are protector of the sea lanes. We have a responsibility to provide security and crochet be up to the collective state and stability of a close quote of a global community. It is the right thing to do. It is in our best interest to do it also. To enablehing theme policy has always been freedom of sees. Freedom of seas. Threats to global stability put our notion and purpose of freedom of seas at risk. That, we cannot abide. The United States navys Forward Deployed for the preservation of stability. Their presence is a deterrence. And a reassurance of our allies. Whether it be the green suits of the navy on shore, whether it either gray ships in the harbor, presence provides stability. It is my job to make sure our forces have the fangs. The longer and sharper is the better. The Navy Marine Corps team needs to be able to fight tonight and win. That is easy enough to say, but it is a challenge to do. I must be blunt. We have readiness issues in the navy and marine corps. We are getting at them, but we have a ways to go. Despite the challenges, i am confident we are going to successfully tackle every issue and right this ship. We are going to utilize the aid of outstanding problem solvers we have within the organization, and we are going to task some problem solvers from outside the organization. Our fleet forces are under the microscope, and rightfully so. The comprehensive review is an example that leadership and the problemsolving within our organization will be done with locusts. In given us a deep deeper insight and provided a way forward to address the shortfalls that we see. Isstrategic readiness forthcoming, but we are looking at everything. We are looking at how the joint chiefs tasks our organization. Well aware, there are a multitude of obstacles in our path both current and emerging. Lets go over some to refresh your memory. On the issues born of that control act have taken a toll on readiness, maintenance cycles, and have cost us time and resources that we cannot lie back. By buy back. They showing shot are showing signs of strains and are woefully underfunded. Technological leaps have but capabilities in the hands of our adversaries. A number of these adversaries have begun demonstrating renewed aggressions that we have not seen in the some time. These points are simply the basis for the environment in which we operate. Howhe challenging world, can we maintain our advantage . The key is to remain focused on priorities inhree mind, people, capabilities, and process. People are our greatest asset. We do not win without them, and we need to keep the winners we have. We need to recruit, train, and power, the subject Matter Experts and hold people accountable. Our ships, planes, vehicles are chunks of metal. They cannot do much without human interface. They need sailors and marines to bring them to life. Our sailors and marines are sons and daughters are the best in the world at what they do. They are all volunteers and they have given themselves to ensure we can enjoy the freedoms we sometimes take for granted. They are hearing the reinforcing areage every day that they our warriors, and that is their job. And deserve the right gear lethal platforms to deliver the fight tonight. I am dedicated to ensure our people, these war fighters get the capabilities that they need. I am also dedicated to ensuring our Service Members and their teammates received the best training. Welltrained people will employ their gear and extract capabilities in the most efficient and effective manners. We must foster an environment were sailors and marines are paths to choice and challenge them, and give them a career path that will keep them in our organization. We need to ensure our people have the professional and Educational Opportunities they need to grow as leaders and critical thinkers. We must also ensure that families and loved ones of our dreams and sailors are taking care of. Those families are entrusting us with the lives of their husbands, wives, sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters. When we send them on the verizon, they need to be sure their loved ones are taken care of at home when our sailors and marines can focus their attention on the mission, they will be able to effectively apply work adding capabilities whenever and wherever they are needed. This leads to my second priority, giving the right capabilities in the hands of our sailors and marines. You all know our sailors and marines are the best in class, and they deserve the best in class. A deserted in a timely manner. Mythat end i have directed acquisition teams to do their part in expediting our research, development, and acquisition process. Our technological advantages are real, but they are diminishing. There are some countries and nonstate actors working hard to bridge these technological gaps, and that is why my goal is to never send our troops into a fair fight. I have learned from the world of business when you are facing competition, you need to have the resources and processes in place to compete and win. And to stay ahead of the competition at all times. It is when you take your hand off the throttle back competition begins to close. It is bad enough in business when you do not win, but the stakes here are much higher. I can assure you that adversaries are not just treading water, they are at full throttle and catching up quickly. Theyre spending the money needed to get the legal capabilities to challenge hours, and they have a path that is more expeditious than ours. But fear not, we will answer this challenge. Fronts,respond on all internal research and development, rapid prototyping, accelerated learning, and partnering with industry to get the capability our people need. A true partnership. We talked about this this weekend that reagan. It is based on the concept of shared risk. It will yield shared benefits. Cannot beovernment the only entity when it comes to acquisition that takes all the risks. We must come back to a true understanding of partnership with our Industrial Base so we can have a sustainable acquisition process. Not a transaction oriented downss that simply grinds the lowest common denominator. Partnership where we provide industry a clear line of sight to our needs, and we must provide them a clear line of sight to our resources so they can invest in the Necessary Development and provide solutions to our challenges. The challenges we have in the Navy Marine Corps are immense. There is no relief in sight that will have all the resources we need. We must leverage every single aspect we have. That is both internal and external partnerships. Bymust do this all the while making sure we do not squander the resources of our taxpayers. A component of the partnership requires that we be a responsible customer to industry, and frankly that is something we have room to improve on. Ouran start by focusing on third priority, process. To meet the threats of today and tomorrow, we must reform our processes now. We have been talking about this for decades. We are starting to move the needle. You will cease all this come to fruition in the near future. Sometimes that means joining with our aloe services to share expertise to meet a common goal. A partnership with the coast guard. We are combining best practices. The navy knows how to build ships. So does the coast art. We are teaming up to see so does the coast guard. The navy will benefit. The coast guard will benefit. The taxpayer will benefit. We have had success with congress to lower costs on improvement, but we have a long way to go. We appreciate congressional ,uthorities for multitier buys and we use those to fund our programs. Tools like these help us balance economies while assuring the help of the Industrial Base. A base that at the end of the day provides us our capabilities. I appreciate the bipartisan congressional advocacy in navy. Ng a 355 ship as not just the ships when we talk about growing a fleet, it is every asset across the board. Lord diligently to implement the position we will work diligently to implement position to grow the fleet of United States navy. As we press forward, i am committed to expanding the fleet in the sea, under the sea, and in the air. We have delayed a foundation for that growth. Lay ahave to to foundation for that growth. Fleet, the wayt that we should, so those that have these assets in future years have the capability to fight. I cannot tell you what the maritime fleet will look like in 25 years, that i can tell you it will not exist unless we get serious about providing funding needed to build those capabilities today. We cannot buy back time and if we do not invest for the future, we will be in a corner that will be tough to extract ourselves from. Urgency is the, battle cry. In addition to our efforts with congress we are working we are reaching out to our industry partners. Wherever there is a challenge, someone else has almost certainly addressed it. They have insights on what works. We are looking for the best practices. The practices of people who have gone through similar situations. I found out that by reaching out, talking about our issues produces amazing feedback from outside the building. Of the moste unlikely places that you can imagine. Thewill see that in forthcoming Strategic Review we will roll out in a week and a half. We have reached out to Industry Leaders to find out how they have improved safety. I am confident after seeing these people and what they have contributed that we will gain from their valuable insight and improve our own culture as we move out the road to work for sustainable readiness. What is needed . Inneed the right processes place to recruit, train, equip, and organize our people in a sustainable responsible manner. Giving them the capability to win any time anywhere. The challenge of doing this may seem daunting, but i see opportunity. Robert unity to enhance our part opportunity to enhance our partnerships. We had innovators. There is an opportunity to lead and address what has been the most impediment to reaching our ofl, the budget control act continuing resolutions we have seen. It will continue to be harmful unless we address this as soon as possible. Crs have cost the navy four dollars billion. 4 billion. Billion is enough to buy a squadron of f35s. 3000 harp and missiles. 2000 tactical tomahawk missiles. It is enough money to bias the additional cap capability that we need. Instead that money was lost of the of inefficiency continuing resolution. Each member of our all volunteer force make a promise to protect our nation from harm if called, and give their full measure to do so. It is time for our nation and congress to keep the same promise to them as secretary mattis has said. Another continuing resolution is a broken promise, and one more chip away at our ability to survive. In closing, i want to thank you for the opportunity to stand in front of you, and i am going to stop bloviating and take questions from the floor. That is where we find the most interesting things to talk about. So, open the microphones. [applause] thank you. Good morning mr. Secretary. Reagantion is, at the commanderrum, the said he aspired to be the Program Director and not the general. He said he had the responsibility to deliver products and processes to the war fighter. He also said when the lieutenants and captains want to be the kernels again, that is when we want to be the colonels again, that is when things will be right. How do you intend to fix the bureaucracy . To ensure that they grow up to be captains and not necessarily admirals . Richard it is a timely question. Not say it is an alarming rate, but the fact there are one of or two of these events shocked me completely. There are officers that are asking not to take command. Take anotherther path than command. When i was in the marine corps, the ultimate goal i had in front of me was to become a captain, and take command. We are doing something terribly wrong if in fact there is more than one person who wants to ck that box and say i will i would rather not take command. We are looking at dogma. We have to provide, and we will provide the environment for our enlisted and our officers to a challenging career, and provide educational environment to progress. Will it take moving cheese . Yes. Will we be able to do it in four years . We will set sail to try and do it. We have to do it. One example that someone asked some contextive me for this, and i said here is a fine example. When i flew the battle frog, you and fmot tune up frequency to an army frequency. We were such a center of excellence. We have now gone to joint. We had to prime the pump to joint. Everyone had to set up the joint command. Dna. Is now in our joint. E does can we say, we have the understanding of joint at an early dna stage, we dont need as many joint joint. . That may be an avenue we want to look at. Going back to the environment and tools to extract the best from our people is something we will have to do. It is a valid question and we are focused on it. Secretary, on the people issue, the navy is short 3000 enlisted men and women. In that context, the economy is improving, unemployment is down. We see, and i can go through type, but summaries and the last 25 years, there has been no reduction increased requirements. How are we going to man a fleet of more than 275 ships . Richard another timely question. You guys as mye red team. 2010, secretary in to his was brought office to get an assignment for what the defense business might be working on. He turned around, and all of a sudden since i was sitting with my mouth shut, i got the signed with modernizing military retirement, addressing the issue. Ary toasked his chief of staff get mr. Spencer a kevlar vest and send him on his way. One of the things we did do, we started the discussion, which is the defense board does so well. We started the discussion on military retirement. Now we have the blended retirement system. I have had a couple people say, ofsmarty, now your secretary the navy and you have to live with this. It allows people to walk out the door more easily. A walk out with assets. I turn around and say, good on us. We are going to have to work to make it more advantageous and more challenging and more desirable to be in the naval out these then be wooed door by competition. Will not win 100 of the time but we will make an effort to make those people want to stay. That is part one. Part two, the question you asked, with the economy bubbling along as it is, how are we going to find these people . Three weeks ago i got an update on how we are recruiting. The navy and marine corps, to separate pots are doing well. If we had the surge now, there might be some problems. The economy is strong. To grow 3000 we would easily be able to do that. If you to address i would like to stop and talk about the lcs. It is time for a conversation change on the lcs. It was an atrocious acquisition process according to everybody who wants to comment on it. You can take either side of the argument. I would like to find someone on the pro side. We are now getting feedback from the fleet, from the commanders who are using these platforms. It is good he back. That vessel there was structured for a more efficient crew. We have to do that going forward. Her legacy platforms, what can we do . We are somewhat limited but we will enhance the capabilities on board to possibly lighten the load in that regard. We have challenges. Point to the personal question, we have to be careful with her son elle. They are the most expensive asset we have. Compute the cost of the uniformed rear member, it is a very expensive proposition. Is benefits and personnel that i cannot touch. Is increasing. I do not complain about it. I have to make sure we are getting the best efficiencies and effectiveness out of the great people we serve. I have three sisterinlaws and a brotherinlaw in the navy as well. As we listen to the conversations about the Strategic Review and avestigations, we seek precision is we do not see the inquiries happening at our level across and this element of cynicism starts to set in. I am wondering how you are insuring or are you or does it matter, are you digging down to kind of get down to ensure that the he kind of exists at the lower levels is reaching the of filtered . Not in a confrontational way but people are genuinely interested in collaborating. Most certainly. One of the things and i want to make sure everyone understands how the copperheads of review which is the cnl and theeview, the sr, so it is ,mmediacy of the seventh fleet that is where it resides plain and simple. But those remedial programs are. Nderway right now getting the Christmas Trees to line up on green for all certification. Some immediate tactical things. Having the conversation is definitely what we have to do. People iconcept of said earlier is, who better to find a solution to a problem the personem facing up on the problem. Someone asked me what my job was and i said it was to man, equip, and deliver but my true job is to clear maneuvering cap for solutions. E who have the Strategic Review is going to be just that. Strategic level to a conversation about fixes that will take a cultural shift or big process adjustment. Tacticallyut there now working. It has obviously, overlays for the whole fleet and marine corps. Navy issue. Just a the five to bring up an example of how we are attacking this in a different way, one of the people who contributed some incredible insights was bowing. And not aviation safety. They were the kings of making aircraft and knowing how to produce it and the way you go up to 15 peronth month is to make people work faster and harder. All of a sudden, their industrial accident rate started increasing dramatically. And they said, stop. They did a big review and brought a couple people and from the outside and did a ball to to death tactical changes and did a multitude of tactical changes. You will whirly see the word boeing plan. Respect. For example, john, what are you doing on the floor without your safety glasses on . I respect you, i need you on my team. Please put your safety glasses on. Usedoncept back in the day to be, the bigger the safety signed the more the safety. Nope concept of how to roll it out. That is a kind of conversation we need to have, i agree with you 100 . With little time to let this languish on the shelf. Loop has to be tighter. I am serving at the marine corps at the pentagon. Thank you. My previous job was in the seventh fleet. The incidences that have happened had close to home. My question is, having worked in the portion of scheduling and seventh fleet, how do we expect to meet the operation temple and some sleep but also meet our readiness much or because the schedule is so hectic and aanging and we want to be responsible partner to our allies as well as our own sailors getting them ready for the fight. Look, it is not lost on anyone in this crowd. The Navy Marine Corps team is one that is biased for action. Sitting around waiting is not something we enjoy doing. Also, this organization finds it hard to reach into the bag to find the word no, i cant do that. But we have to come to a balance. We have to start weighing in a new word which is sustainable. We have to have sustainable readiness and sustainable operational tempo. We talked about the Strategic Review, dressing how the vice chiefs task as. The fact of the matter remain we so much capability and so much capacity. Primarily capacity to do the tasks we can do. We can stretch things, and strings are somewhat elastic but you will reach a tension point where that object cannot go back to its original form and that is what we are doing with. This is where we need teamwork. We are the backside of the power curve that we are come never the peak and we have worked to do. This is what we are working on right now. With military times. Keepst leonard scandal reverberating throughout the retired rinks of leadership. In your time so far, have you been able to glean any systemic causes of this scandal that, you know, keeps grabbing more and more leadership or do you view it as, you know, a failure of seventh fleet leadership or Navy Leadership at that time and it filtered down . I am curious as to what your take is on this all issue. Through thes python. We have processed and you saw i issued a secretary of the navy letter of censure last week and we are seeing the process do its job. To answer your question, yes. Im concerned. Im concerned across the board when i see packages come across my desk asking for exceptions on retirement, seeing actions that are unbecoming of an officer or an enlisted person and yet the board of inquiry says let them and floorll ruffles shows. I have a row problem with that. We have to make sure every decision we make when we are making a decision for the naval enterprise, supports and enhances the brand equity of this organization. We have a trust given to us by the american taxpayer and the american citizen. If that corrodes or goes off center, i cannot even imagine what the path is to bring it back on center. One of the messages were getting out to the navy, Marine Corps Team is when you are making decisions, whether in uniform or at home going down to 7eleven to pick up a quart of milk, think about the decisions you are making and what it does to your organization. It is that simple in some ways but it is that expensive because in todays world with todays media, everything you do represents the United States marine corps and the united to getnavy and we have that message through. It is something we are definitely focusing on and the message is loud and clear, the irony not lost on anyone in this room. I would say it is quite austrating, when you cross line from leadership to undo command influence it is something web to work on an something web to tell the American Public said they understand and we do not have people in the middle interpreting it for them. Raffaella ortiz, coast guard retard. We have been at war my entire career, going back to 1990. We have some of the best people that we spend a lot of time and money as you stated, into training. Yet they leave early and we lose thegiven the cost, giving ramifications of losing that expertise and not having it available to us, why are we continually decreasing the reserve sign in why have we not theher looked at congressional on retired reservists, letting that door swing both ways so as you say, we get the best from both worlds. They can go out, go to corporate, learn something, and come back with maybe some ideas without being detrimental to their career. We need to really change that. Love softballi questions for statements. Down fromming secretary mattis, the citizen soldiery, the reserves, are an absolute integral part of the war fighting nature we have. The institution has open itself in the last 16 years seamlessly. As we go forward and look at the challenges we have it must address all of them, lets address cyber as a blatantly obviously problem we are looking at. You really do have to ever revolving door and the reserve opponent fits this argument to 18 because if youre going to come in and help us with cyber you have to remain current. I would love the ability and so for thatretary mattis door to be swinging so our experts can go out into the private sector and become current and then come back in. You can overlay that to almost every single talent, coast guard, marine corps, navy. That is actually being addressed as we speak starting with cyber but theres no reason that is not a best actress that can be put down to every single mos or specialty. Captain. Retired naval with the allvolunteer military is aspect seems to be there continuance in Multigenerational Families into the military. A question about the separation from our general population. What are your thoughts . A lot of thoughts there. I am a from wyoming, Firm Believer that everybody ought to serve their country in some capacity. And, does done have to be in the department of defense. It can be in the post office, the department of the interior. But as i used to listen to my father who was a pt boat commander in the pacific, he said it was fascinating. When harvard met iowa, washington met florida. This country had a fabric that was intertwined tightly and superseded socioeconomics, superseded ethical interplay. It was when america was america. We getting polarized . That is the wrong word because only 1 serve right now. Within that one present, 40 are 1 , 40 within that are legacy. I dont know what i can do as far as the navy alone its content. I would like to but a footnote on the fact that it is an allvolunteer service. It is an allrecruited service. Outhat, we have to watch when we walk away from the word volunteer, and we start becauseto allrecruited we start encouraging on professionalism. I dont mean everyone is not a professional but all of a sudden ofare getting a dna strain provisional warriors and are we actually taken from the American Public. I dont have an answer, i have an observation. I share your concerns. On the other hand if i am to be completely selfish, i love the becausee are getting they understand the commitment. They understand the fabric will stop they understand their duty going in the door right away. Glass half to say full that, they certainly arent stellar contributors to our effort they certainly are stellar contributors to our effort. Night i went to dinner with two of my cohorts. Were all defense contractors. Two things struck me. All kind of working on some of the same things but we are coming at it from very different perspectives and backgrounds and solutions. At some point, and rst comes out and we retreat to our quarters and compete against each other and one of us will when and the other walks away with nothing. I was wondering it in your process change from acquisitions , is there a way to get away from the winner take all kind of thing . Sec. Spencer i am an unapologetic capitalist and free marketer. I have an appreciation for the Industrial Base at the same time. In the private sector, it leans more toward winner take all when it comes to competition although you can have a secondbest product that if in fact you can put lipstick on it, you can also the it at when it comes to question you are talking about, we have to think about this weause one of the feedback got, we had a panel out in california that was fascinating. A wall street impact for the department of defense and it was all based on capital inflow of capital for the Industrial Base and benefits and problems that lie therein. Were ive feedbacks let me back up and give you the [indiscernible] the acquisition processes quite painful. He said, richard, remember one thing. He goes, you are dealing with the free market capitalist and firemen. They are simply mirroring the environment they see. With do change the system we have and in that, the question was, how can you provide compensation for those taking risk . What i mean by that is, you might all attack a solution from different angles. Tested,he most robust, idea that i can get. Probably only one person will win but that does not mean i should not keep scoring and if in fact you have a stronger suit somewhere else with a requirement i have, that consideration not to take place. Awayot saying you strip competition. Im saying there is an understanding. This is done in Corporate America all the time called strategic sourcing when you have people around you that provide solutions on a real or bases that you could say, ok were going to have a sustainable longterm relationship. You will not win everyone but you will be able to have a terms you can go to the Capital Markets, says the Capital Markets you need and assess for me solutions. [applause] thank you very much. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time. We know it is precious. I have for you a book a tale of compares andwhich contrasts experiences in the arc of the royal navy. I thank you, sir, for giving you your time. Thank you very much. Spencer i think you all very much. All right. We are on track and will keep rolling. It is semipleasure to introduce our next speaker. To of the 31st deputy secretary of defense and served under three different defense secretaries across to administration. Previously he was the ceo of the American Security and from 200920 13 he served as the undersecretary of the navy. He served 27 years on active duty as a marine officer in a wide range of command including battalion. He was a member of the Naval Institute since 1974, lets give a warm institute welcome to mr. Bob work. Thank you. Good morning everyone. Just give me a second to get ready here. Thank you for the introduction. Pete said, to say as i have been a member of the Naval Institute since 1974. It is a wonderful, wonderful organization and i am very, very honored and pleased to be here today. I am going to be a Little Nation my interbreed. I do not know of the sides are available but if you could pop them up are they up . I cannot see. Let me just start by saying, rising global threats. What does it take to win . In my view it is very, very simple. The department of navy as well as the department of defense has to say and devote itself to one toand one thing only be prepared and ready and there is a difference between the two i will explain during my talk. Because i have to advance. Ha technologically challenged. We have to be prepared to fight and win our nations wars. Period. Thats it. It is not a mystery. From the top down, everything a person in the organization has just themselves am i prepared . Is my Organization Ready to fight and win tomorrow . Enter answer is no they be working on it. I always think of the United States navy 18981942, a 44year the fleetpeace, where nearp. Ught another in the midst of that there was a technological revolution but despite 44 years of peace, the United States navy shifted into wartime mode and immediately after one of the most grievous defeats they ever suffered and within six months have 11 of them greatest naval battles in history. Have won one of the greatest naval battles in history. Nimitz actually ran and ran. How did the navy prepare and be ready . May 12, 1989, that was a day that bush the other said in a speech at texas and him that the cold war was over and containment would no longer define the way the department of defense creates its program and budget. So even though the berlin walden not fall for another five or so months and even though the soviet union did not implode from another several years, from the departments perspective, that was the day the cold war ended. Single has known an entire. An entire time of peas. What do we have to do is that an organization to get them to ready to ship into wartime mode immediately. What is the first thing with to do . We have to unlearn the lessons of the post cold war era. They are a drag on all of our thinking and we better just flush it down the toilet of history and start looking to the future to decide how we are going to work as an organization, not to the past. This cold war era, it was almost timesible to think of a that was so strategically favorable to the United States. I would argue those 25 years could arguably be the most favorable time for any state since the era started. It was a contested u. S. Promise. You head up the allies and the forces economic and military potential, which are the two primary means to measure hard power, over 70 of both economic and military output from the United States and its allies there was an absence of competition. The separate union imploded. China had not yet risen. The United States was faced with a bunch of regional pygmies we could crush like cockroaches whenever we wished. Absence of any serious ideological competition, famously the and of history had occurred. Democracy was on the march. When you look back over this time, we had very good multilateral corporation on almost everything that had to do with global order. And coy navy captain lonel and below has lived in these circumstances by and large. Come to anings must end. The postcold war era ended. If it did not end in 2008, will talk but in the second, definitely ended in 2014 one serious dredging activities in the south china sea. That is when russia illegally annexed crimea and started destabilization efforts in Eastern Ukraine. Both of those activities mark the activities of great powers their to secure nearlaws. The west was grievously hurt and china not so much in the 2008 war with georgia, signaling to nato that you will not go any further in terms of nato expansion. Whether was a 20 year or 25 year period makes no difference. It was a coherent strategic period with these characteristics. We cannot know for sure what the future will bring but we are absolutely certain it is going to be a lot more difficult strategically for the United States than the last 2025 years. The United States is still the preeminent power in the world, the single most powerful nation but relativelys reeking the u. S. And its alliess hard power is declining in a relative sense, especially against our great competitors. We are to Great Power Competition with a vengeance. I declining russia, rising china, both meet the definition of a great power and that automatically requires us to raise our strategic game. Ideologicalunt the competition now unfolding as part of this Great Power Competition. We fought the cold war to make democracy. Afe for russia and china are competing with the u. S. To make the world safer with authoritarianism. The great democratic tie that started in the 1990s is receding and both china and russia are doing everything they can to empower authoritarianism around the world. A generalbeen anticipation of disorder and pronounced uncertainty and everybody, both our friends and allies and revels rivals on the willingness and sustaining power of the west what they hoped during the cold war and peri0od to build. Its as of the bottom it is in turmoil because of the essential elements going simultaneously. It was written in 1989 by henry kissinger. Those of you who say this is the most dangerous time in 70 years i was a dud is the height of conceit. I was a few talk to the people around the cuban missile crisis and the berlin airlift and all of the crises that occurred, i went to spain and 1965 as a young kid. My dad was based there. We were there for three years in the marine barracks, went to vietnam for two years. I left in 1965 whenever on was there wearing here as short as in 1970 afterback can stay, university of illinois, if i walk down the street in my rotc uniform i would have something front at me or i would be confronted. Our about how her nation is in a hypertension kind of mode. Well. Look. I would exchange today with that anytime. So it is dangerous, but not the most dangerous. But it is very chaotic. We need to unlearn the lesson from the post cold war because almost that of them apply anymore. We have to prepare for at least seven big National Security challenges. I do not have time to go over every single one. If youd like to talk to them about them and they q a, i would like to. But let me go down a because it is quite a dumping list. Daunting list. We have to complete compete with powers, great powers of war. We have not had a war in 70 nicehat is a night thing. Lets keep that. Were going to deter and respond all the means of strategic attack. We still have to worry about Nuclear Attack on the homeland. Lift him strong return. With a were about the strategic counter values Cyber Attacks. Our electrical grid or transportation grid or agricultural grade. We have to be able to be prepared for that. We have to be prepared for potentially 620 five years although it is a horrible thing to think about, population genomic attacks. Attacks of general book weapons designed to go after specific traits of human beings. We have to contend with Nuclear Armed minor powers. Pakistan is an unstable power that has a Nuclear Weapon. Dprk, north korea, is a hostile power. What areo talk about our allies thinking about deterrence . Where does extended deterrence go . We have to get that right or we could see a big breakout if nations pursue their own independent Nuclear Deterrent. We have to restore conventional overmuch. I disagree with the secretary. We are at parity right now with both russia and china. If we went to war with them it would be one of the toughest wars we ever faced. 19441919441950 45 when the u. S. Fleet was offshore and in range of an anonymous range of guided missile strikes, kamikazes. 5000 sailors died. 368 ships were damaged. That is what we were faced with. Faced witht we are in space. We have to restore our conventional overmuch. We have to take care of hotly contested the mans. Everyone knows about space, it is no longer a sanctuary. Some know cyberspace. Some say you should separate cyberspace and electromagnetic i contest that. There is one new operational regime that is totally new. The chinese had, hey, look, you know something . Eithern sensors, all are designed to find atmospheric air breeders that fly or they are spacecraft innd orbit. There is an operational den name end abovebelow which which cannot or butterfly. They said, were going to compete in that domain, were going to dominate. Were going to do it with hypersonics. They did. They thought of it as an entirely new operating domain that they could gain an advantage and they have an advantage. We need to get ready. We have to prepare for and with stand a looming technological tsunami. Betweenthe time 18981942, mechanization, and aviation, new developments like radar and sonar, it was a technological tsunami at that time. It was a military powers that can put them all together. Operational concepts and organizational constructs that they them an advantage when war came. We have to look at this technological tsunami, figure out what we need to dominate and that we need to get after it. So, what must the dod do to prepare and compete. And prepare is a mental mindset. One thing i do not like about our readiness metric. A command center to just say, im not totally ready. Office. O keep the but i went already this metrics to be absolutely objective, measurable so we can tell if we are materially ready to drop and go. If the commander wants to say were not prepared get for highend operations in the electromagnetic sector and wants to tell their commanders how theyre going to get there, that is ok but how do we prepare . How do we get ready to compete westmark if you take a look at this it really does get down to preparedness. You have to inculcate to everyone, we could be at war next week. Yet to have your Division Ready to go, understand what your sensors are capable of. Understand how to deploy your weapons. Talk to the guys up at the naval war college. The holes the group are the ones that do really detailed analysis. You know what they have to do when they get new people coming into the fleet . They have to spend a lot of time saying, this is what the rolling airframe missile can do. Anywhere werepared need to be at this point in my view. Were going to have all sorts of operational technological surprises. We have to strike them off and keep going. We have to figure out, Somebody Just fired a long rage torpedo at us. Eating longrange torpedoes in 1942. We havent figured that out until 1944. With to get after that. It is all about the talent, how do you bring them in . Big seven challenges and as the deputy secretary always thought about, one of the challenges and what do we have to do with the program . In my point of view all you have to do is look at what secretary mattis said. Were going to build a safer and Nuclear Deterrent while exercising fleet solidarity and readiness of a conventional force, saying i want to rebuild conventional overmatch, i want to maintain strategics ability, strategic parity, and i want us to be ready to go to war. And my view, there are five things we have to do. We have to recapitalize the nuclear triad. Well. I have to tell you i served the Obama Administration probably for four years, it actually seven of eight years but we are way, way behind where we need to be in terms of where we need to be in terms of recapitalizing our nuclear triad. We delayed, delay, delayed etc. Execute the program absolutely on time and absolutely on budget. We have to replace the groundbased deterrent exactly on time or exactly on budget. Live to do the between one greater, the bomber. Live to do the longrange strike option. Of the service life is out of the systems, they will all go away in the late 20s early 30s so we have to get after them. Up until 1962, we would always trade conventional capabilities for nuclear capabilities. President when kennedy came and he said where going to adopt a strategy of flexible response. I am going to have a Strong Nuclear force and conventional force. From 1962 until now, whatever who we built Nuclear Weapons well always felt on top of the conventional portfolio and now we are being asked to strike this huge recap. Ourpent about 3 of portfolio to maintain our strategic return. Of the next 30 years that will bump to 6 , maybe a little less depending upon where we end up. Were not going to get any extra money to do it, were just going to get a big plus out of defense and we are going to have to do this, to 3 detriment on capabilities are we have to be more efficient. I have lost a little weight, turning round that 120 Million Dollars was kind of hard. It was hard to hide it. Inside joke. Ok. We have to dominate cyberspace in the electromagnetic spectrum. Most of the things we have right now were built in a time we did not worry about this. Now we have to think of cyber others. G like we did we have to invest more in warfarenal Tactical Systems and tools and decoys. Live to practice, practice, practice. We cannot say, stop the exercise, not going to allow the red team to jim us anymore. Cant do that anymore. We have to fight through. We have to prepare to fight and win and space. In talks with the culture. Same thing. Providing got used to Space Capabilities as a service to the joint course. It was a function. You are going to fight under attack. You need to be space warrior. You might not be up there with your satellites but you better be ready to go after the satellite and perfect your own. We need uninterrupted space support and we have to be prepared to fight. Restore conventional overmatch, we will have to support these advanced technologies, aia and a time to me, first among them. In cars now youre not buying cars that dont take over from the driver and stop it they are about ready to crash. You delegate authority to the machine and they take over and does that. You have means where you cannot fly the aircraft into the ground. You cannot have a controlled flight into rain. The plane will take over. The number one thing in the navy right now is to have an ai thomas bridges system that says, hey you are about ready to plow into a ship that is about 12 times bigger than you, im going to take over until you get your fact together. That is what we ought to do. Start to infuse that throughout the battle network. Have autocollision avoidance right now. If we dont have a week of probably do it within a year if we really tried. If you have not read the chinese plan for ai and autonomy, you need to get a translation and read it. Here is the comic book story. We will catch the United States in ai by 2020, well surpass he denies nice is by 2025 and by 2030, we will be the world leader in a timing and ai both for Economic Development as well as military activity. When i read it, all i can do is think of Nikita Khrushchev taking off his shoe and saying. E will bury you this deserves a national response. This is the key competition and technology. With to develop new organizational constructs for overmatch. Look, what this means is it is not about technology per se. In 1975 come the u. S. Army said we are going to call it a night. And if all that was was a bunch of night vision goggles, that wouldve ended in 1966. But once you bring those and you have to train your squadron leaders, company commanders, others on how to operate and what are the control measures you need to keep a cohesive unit going. It is not about the technology, is about the operational concept in the organizational cause trucks that give you the advantage. What makes it a programmatic issue is with too many of our forces out and about doing silly things without question. We need to build up some slack so we can design new systems and test them, new organizations. What is the Carrier Strike route of the future . What does it look like . You have to do more gaming and Concept Development and that cost money. So there are two pressing questions for the navy and for everyone. Now, our challenges right do we do a bias toward capability your catastrophe, new capabilities and new weapons and new authorizations, or just building the fleet. Shaping . Bias toward two questions on how you have two prepared to win. I would say we should not count on Defense Budgets big enough to address all five of the challenges i went over. Capacity does not matter, capability matters. Take a look at where we are. We have about 21 billion more than the obama budget asked for helpful. Was very immediate, highpriority readiness efficiencies. In fy 18 we built a program and presented it to the Trump Administration based on a 500 600 million total. The Trump Administration submitted a president a jet that and 65, bigger than the program you already have right here built. The author risers, since they do not have a checkbook and are unconstrained by any let me say this but a little bit differently, they are simply unconstrained. A 66 base or 692 so if you take a look, it was about 60 billion more than the president asked for. That sounds awesome. Those who live in the real world, they are the appropriators. 6. 185ay look, it will be. Nd they have already given it will be closer to 6519 692. You already had a program built a six to three. If we get sixone, it is about 30 million per year. You can do a lot with that yearoveryear but you cannot to the army and do all the things you have to do to make this force fight. You cant do it. Yearlong cr. T a were going to go into a cr. Willuestion is, how long it be. Only to modify what the secretary said a little bit differently. Bca was a grievous wound and yes, cr, we have been crs for 2 of the time. The department of defense had an eight month fiscal year. Imagine a Football Team who could not block at tackle. They would lose every game. You would say, i wonder why they are winning. I would say that was because they could not black and could passeskle but congress budgets. That is her basic tactic. They have been totally inept at doing so. There is one other thing really causing the problem. Budget. Year balanced what happens is, if you take a look at the peak of wartime spending and where we went for sequestration, it is shallow that in and of itself is not will would kill it. What was killing it was cr, which made us an efficient. Inefficient. Thet when you would get chiefs to the point where you would say, you know something . I need to reduce in size of the force, they would say lets wait for two years and see what happens. Then we had another twoyear bba. I fear we will have another. Planning fiveyear program. We need to build a force over time. It would be good if we got an agreement on what our obvious resin and was on this. I think everybody here probably where i go. Listen, i hope the secretary is isht and the seventh fleet confined to the seventh fleet only. I do not believe that. I do not only that. I think all of our services have been forced to make cuts because of the last seven years of hasetary in competence that in competence that has undermined our preparedness and readiness to go to war so what we should have is, look, right now, what we are to figure out is what the future fleet is. I really resonate with what the secretary said which was, i dont know what the fleet will look like in 2025 years. I know it will be different and we need to get after it. What that means to me is the maintained, best and the most over provisioned force in the world, no more crossing the two we have. I am being facetious. But lets buy enough so we dont have to cross that at all. Ands have enough missiles lets have adequate war reserve stock. That is a big deal when you send that signal. We have to pursue modest capability gains, absolutely. But what we really need to do is. Eposition the spigot secretary rumsfeld used to describe the capabilities of the department of defense is a big whiskey keg or water keg or diet pepsi keg or whatever. But this they get was 1 but downspigot was want there from the top. He said, i could turn it on and get capability or capacity right getswhen but when it below the level, i cant get to it. We have two thirds of capacity i cannot even get to. E have 58 bcts instead of buying 10 more, why dont we buy another National Training center so we can train the National Guard bcts more quickly and get them ready for the second whatever it might be. And, this is a big debate the navy needs to have. The fundamental goal to be prepared to fight or is the fundamental goal to try to win a war. And the cold war, we wouldve never, ever had this. When we are faced against a near. Adversary, every time we sent forces forward with the possible exception of the fourth fleet etc. , we would send forward more fighting forces ready to drop gloves. We were not doing partnershipbuilding capacity and all of this stuff. Tiny babies around the world, what we had to be doing in my view is whenever they have an exercise we should send a Training Team from the United States navy, United States marine corps, to help him utilize their naval assets better. We do not need to send cruisers to sail around taking away from war fighting training in my view. This has to get back to preparedness rather than readiness. Ok. Secretary was a good call, i guess im the bad cop. Toeel strongly that we need rededicate ourselves to real war fighting navy. 1989, 44 years. 2033, and that time there will be a military technical revolution associated with military at tommy. It is going to happen. Lead that or we can fall victim to it. If we had to fight against russia or china, god for bid, i do not consider them adversaries we need tom compete, confront, and contest without question and remember, first goal. In my way, the best way to make sure you dont have a great power role war is to make sure they know if they go after the army, navy, air force, marines, it will be the worst date of their lives. I think our brand is really good. I do not know who did it, but the United StatesNavy Air ForceMarine Corps Team no better friend. I think we ought to say, last time we had a not down drag out enable fight with 90. 41945. The next time we have on the results will be exactly the same. I am ready for your questions. Before i go, i have been up on my bully pulpit and it reminds me of a joke about a pastor who would go around the Pacific Northwest and stop in towns and he would give sermons. He stopped in this one town and went to the church and there was just one cowboy sitting there and he goes, well, my son, i came here prepared to give a sermon and you are the only one here. What would you like me to do . Cowboy said, well padre, if i went up on the north 40 and i singlerailer and had a horse and it trailer full of hay i would not leave him hungry. The preacher said ok and started to do a hellfire brimstone speech, went for about 45 finishednd he said, yet . And the cowboy walked out of the rch and the cowboy said cowboy, preacher said, where you leaving . In the cowboy said, if i went up to the north 40 and only found one horse, i would not drop the whole load on him. [applause] bob kozak here, private citizen. Everything resented you make it compelling case but when i see things like restore overreach and i look at us as a country and what i see as a relatively old empire that is not very rich. Thistook a lot out of country. I know you came down on congress. God for bid i ever thought i would defend congress but i do not think they are and so much, they are inept but they are representative of the people and what youre asking is for the United States to go on heavy war wedding. Footing. Fromre asking people to go where we are heavy war footing and we have been there since 2002 but you are asking first us to go to a quantum level of more expenditure and commitment to war fighting footing. My question is, how do you see convincing the American Public that they should go in this direction . Question andgreat it is really going to be well, first of all i hope i did not come across by saying i wanted the United States to mobilize to go to a war footing. With the money we are going to be provided by congress, i believe that we can materially improve our conventional overmatch. I was not trying to say i do not argue we should try to fight at the levels we enjoyed in the postcold war era. Be the most can preeminent nation in the world, we can remain the single , with properion economic and military policies and working with our allies. To me, the best way to prevent war is to be prepared to fight saying to the American People is, look, i do not think that you know the state of our readiness. I do not know if you friend secretary mattis when he came aboard and said, i am shocked by the state of our readiness. So, this is done to more than saying, look, we need to really first of all i argue in different forms we have to up our strategic game. You know, we are so poorly operationally and technically focused. I sat in on a National Council deputies eating in which we were arguing whether to send one air force Master Sergeant to ukraine for training. If you look at the cia, they there than they have since the oss was created. General hayden gives a great example of when the russians when into Eastern Ukraine he said he came in and said i want a forward line of we could not do it initially because all of our national and intelligence means were tuned to lowpower radios in the of afghanistan and we lost the ability we needed to do against a near peer. This has nothing to do with a grand strategy. This is a grand strategy of trying to maintain u. S. Position as the preeminent force, preeminent nation in the world. Parity,trategic maintained the new start treaty because parity at the strategic level, mutual assured destruction, is our theory of deterrence. Im only talking about conventional overmatch. Aftereve we need to go overmatched, but we are up against the competitor we have never seen before. Im not arguing for immobilization. Im saying with the money we have now, the force we have, dedicate ourselves to war fighting readiness and we will be just fine. Does that answer your question . Yes . You are like my shadow. Everywhere i go, you follow. Except on cloudy days. For those ofnse you playing along at home. What we need is not another cr or twoyear budget deal but a fiveyear deal, and i too would like to sprout wings and fly but that may be overly optimistic. On a scale of disaster in disastrousness to a shutdown of shutdown cr t a to a shutdown cr to a twoyear deal to a fiveyear deal, what is actually achievable and how painful are compromises we will end up making, because we probably will not end up getting money in five years . Mr. Work essentially, what i believe should happen is i cannot count on congress on coming up with a deal. Dcbca, the budget control act, runs out in 2021. Compromises we will end up the bca caps supposedly go away. When you are seeing what is happening in the tax reform and when it does for deficit spending, i dont know how it is going to play out. What i would like the white house to do is to give the department of defense a hardcore, fiveyear projection. This is what you can caps on in terms of budget growth. 2 real growth per year, 3 , whatever it might be. You build your Program Based on that and we will fight as hard as we can to get it yeartoyear. Then wen just get that will be in pretty good shape. But, we really, really need to go after that. [indiscernible] mr. Work i was a young First Lieutenant and captain in the first buildup in the reaganmr. T lieutenant and captain in the first buildup in the reagan era. In 1981, 1982, we got a 50 raise one year and 855 raise the next year. We were buying f15s, perrys, life was grand. Started the longest defense pulldown of the cold war period. I personally believe that is another reason i would not start a big defense buildup right now because unless i am more confident that we arent going to be faced with the deficit reduction, pressures in the next four or five years, id rather put my money in the capability so i can draw the bank when i need it. Yes, maam. My name is veronica cartier. Im involved in a think tank group for nuclear policy. Thehave spoken about nuclear triad. I quite agree with your statement on our capability and to prepare for future conflict. Please speak about modernization of including Operation Navy n97 and navy n9. Carry miniature Nuclear Warheads to be squeezed and put into Operation Navy carrier . Mr. Work ok. Look, a Nuclear Posture review is coming to a closer and it will be very important. It will say what the Trump Administration believes about the Nuclear Deterrent force. I think it is no secret that president obama really was informed by a world where he wanted to go to zero Nuclear Weapons and that all of the decisions that were being debated in the white house, even though the Nuclear Review that his administration did called for maintaining new start numbers, the new strategic arms agreement with the russians, maintaining new start numbers and having a triad. There started to be a big debate on whether we should go to a diad, whetheror a or not we can get read of icbms. Whether or not we needed to develop a longrange strike option. He was ready to direct us to do things in the administration. In the end, hein the end, he sas better left to the Trump Administration. One of the things being discussed is do we make new Nuclear Weapons . 12 is the, the b61 single airdrop bomb we have. We have a Life Extension Program for that. You could make the case we would want smaller Nuclear Weapons that would allow us to use them on different platforms, etc. Upload in case the russians tried to break out. Right now, im assuming the Nuclear Posture review will say maintain the triad, have new start numbers, and you need a survivable Nuclear Deterrent and the ssbn force is the most of probabl survivable run. Im confident in how it will be funded. How many the missiles carried, how many armies the missiles carried depends on how the new start negotiations go. Right now we have the option to extend it to 2026. Im not sure President Trump would want to do that. I am not sure what the russians would say about that either. I dont have anything to say about smaller Nuclear Weapons because i dont buy the argument that you want to make Nuclear Weapons more usable. A Nuclear Weapon is a Nuclear Weapon, a threshold that once you cross, you cannot bring back. I would not necessarily spend a lot of money on nuclear risinizg use. Thank you. Mr. Work sir . Good morning. United states United States navy reserve. I concur we must make the forces we have prepared to fight and win a war if one got for good start in the near future. It is definitely in line with those idea that those who love peace are experts of war. The more better version would be general powells version of a reluctant warrior. What if any lessons can we derive from the world war ii and cold war era of military readiness and taking the forces we have, in some cases facing a deficit, and the cold war era of making the world safe for democracy. How that can be applied to maintaining a world safe for democracy and untenable to authoritarianism as is one by china and russia. I cannot help but question the wisdom of automation and say ai. Perhaps i am a little oldfashioned, but i prefer if there is a digital system there must be a rocksteady analog system. It is playing with a new type of fire to increase our capability, but i dont want us to be burned, if you know what i mean, sir. Mr. Work sure. Sdgactually going to the tomorrow night to have a more full some debate with a lot of strategists on how you should utilize fleet during this time peace. For the last 25 years, and i can track it. I know exactly how it happened. But, peace. I believe the department of defense is now the more the department of shaping that it is the department of defense. It thinks terms of more you take forces out than probably prevent more than being readied. The reason why i know this is true is because we put every ready courses that we have out and about, and our search forces are simply not ready. And we could that accept that in a period with no Great Power Competition. So i believe we should handle the navy just like we had of the submarines now. We tell the joint staff this is how many surface ships you will get over the next year. Eploy anywhere yound mesh, missions we hope more towards war fighting. It should be for forward defense like we did in the cold war rather than some shaping activity. Everything we do ought to be building war fighting readiness, allowing the ships of the practice thae trade they would have to do next week if they go to war. Im not saying to stop sending forces out. Im saying at this time, we need to rebuild readiness and preparedness without question. You set up only the ships that you can without the tracking with the readiness and the maintenance availability, and you concentrate on forward defense with our allies in europe and asia, then you take a look at the Central Command area of operations and from a strategic perspective, we simply cannot afford to do what we have been doing for 16 years and expect to be a good competitor against these two great powers. We are going to have to do something differently. That is the first part of your question. We can do both but i would buy it. War fighting readiness when we sent forces out. Look, people forget the navy was a search fleet in the cold war. We had 600 ship fleet and we kept about 125 ships out. The rest of the fleet was ready pound forward immediately. Fleet used to call the ssns pon the east coast and in 48 hours you will go out with full warlords. It was a hell of a demonstration. That is the kind of thinking we need to come back to then we can shape the International Environment by convincing adversaries around the world we could prevail if they tried to take us on. On ai and autonomy, i realize there is an argument to be made that democracy is usually going to have a human in the loop or on the loop. Our authoritarian adversaries may choose may not choose to find it that way. The soviet union conception of the Reconnaissance Strike project is fully automated. You press the button, you trust the machines and they make all the decisions. A democracy probably will not go there, but here is where i would push back on. Ai and autonomy actually will increase the resilience of your networks, not detract from it. If you design your networks right, your ai is going to be able to fight back against Cyber Attacks immediately. It is going to be able to do cognitive electronic warfare, cognitive radar. And it will keep you, i mean, it will actually protect you. Obviously, there will be vulnerabilities. Learning machines really rely on the data you give them and have a bad guy gets into the data and manipulates it, you are in big trouble. You have to think about how to do it, but we are in the early stages and i think we can solve that problem. Thank you. Mr. Work ladies and gentlemen one more. Yes, sir. Last question. Good morning. I have a question on an ally point of view, close ally. What do you think about interoperability with our allies . I fully understand your cherish thatd ii have a questin you need to keep the throttle full ahead. Since we have less means than you guys, what do you think about this movement . Mr. Work this is one of the central questions because the United States, we consider our advantagempetitive against our great power our alliances. That is our competitive advantage. That is why secretary mattis, his our second priority is to strengthen alliances and partnerships. When you are operating forward, in forward defense, the First Priority is to interoperate with our allies. Listen, i have to say this is one of the least understood things in our department. The alliance and the cooperation between the United States and france right now has probably never ever been higher, and the close cooperations we have in west africa and on a wide variety of Different Military things is quite remarkable. So, thank you for everything france does for Global Security and all of the things you are doing with the United States now. Think me, you have to less in terms of the thousand navy and you have to think in terms of maybe navy and you k in terms of maybe the 300 or 400 ship navy of our hardcore allies and we have to interoperate together. We try to get allied ships into our strike groups and vice versa. We try to have plenty of Liaison Officers put between our squadrons. We look to compete to interoperate whenever possible, especially our networks. Two years ago, the defense the defense tactical Industrial Base, it used to be defined as United States and canada. Two years ago, it was changed to the United States, canada, u. K. And australia. We need to add france and germany to that. We have to have an open market. Compete sohave that we have the best capabilities. I know that John Richardson thinks a lot about interoperating with our allies and how we can improve it, i sot essential to us because it is which we canys in remain, make the world continue to be safe for democracy by working with our allies. [applause] we just wanted to thank mr. Friendob work, who is a of the institute for his excellent and forth right remarks. We are presenting him this Naval Institute press book appropriately titled hell to p ay, about the invasion of japan which you brought up the first guided missiles. I think the answer is clear. Thank you, sir. We thank you for your time. Mr. Work thank you very much. [applause] cspan, where history unfolds daily. Seized and was created as a Public Service by americas companies andon is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. A look at the line outside the Supreme Court on monday afternoon as the corporate pairs to hear Masterpiece Cake shop v. Colorado commission. The owner of the cake shop reviews to make a cake for a gay couples wedding, calling the cakes art and says he does not bake cakes and if it goes against his religious beliefs. We will be outside the court as we hear oral argument from this morning beginning at 7 30 a. M. Eastern. Later in the week, we will have the full oral argument. After the release, you can watch that friday at 8 p. M. Eastern on cspan. We now take you to Salt Lake City where President Trump announced yesterday that large parts of two National Monuments of the state totaling over 3 million acres would no longer receive protection under the antiquities act. He made the announcement in a speech at the utah state capital more than 250 miles away from the sites. Ladies and gentlemen, please