Transcripts For CSPAN2 Joint Chiefs Of Staff General Dunford Testifies On Reappointment 20170927

A morning ive asked the committee to consider 3196 pending military nominations. All these nominations have been before the committee for the reset required length of time. All in favor say i. The motion carries. The Committee Meets this morning to consider the nomination of general Joseph Dunford as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. This Committee Thanks you for your decades of service to our nation, we are grateful to your wife for the support she has provided to into all hers urination in uniform. I also want to welcome your son patrick, you look like your mother who is joining us this morning. I know your other children, joe and kathleen send their support, even as i bet they are relieved that they do not need to sit through your interrogation. To exercise the legislative responsibility its important that this committee are able to receive testimony, briefings and other communication of information. Have you here to applicable laws and regulations . I have. To agree to give your personal views even if they differ from the Administration Power . I do. Have you assumed any duties or undertake an action which would appear to presume the outcome. Ive not. Will you ensure your staff complies with deadlines including questions for the record and hearings. I will. Will you cooperate in providing briefers for responsible requests . I will will those people be protected . They will. Do you agree to testify by request with this committee. I do. Do you agree to provide documents in a timely manner when requested by a duly constituted committee or to consult with the committee for the basis. I do. In my colleagues in a eyewear that is a routine but given the political environments today especially today and certainly not in a reflection on you, but those questions need to be asked. I think you for your responses. General dunford, my colleagues and i have a lot of questions about the many challenges we face. This also offers an opportunity to reflect on broader topics that have more recently been a major focus of this committees efforts. The unique role of the chairman internationals structure. As principal and military advisor of the president the National Security council the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is the most important military duty in our nation. The chairman is the one military officer to give advice and policy makers informed by the military services and combat commands and spanning global issues of National Security. It is now more important than ever. Our country faces a multitude of challenges all of which cut across the functional organizations that divide up the department of defense. The chairman is the only officer with the perspective on all the threats we face worldwide in the interplay between them. Thats why this committee acted last year to clarify the statutory responsibility to advise civilian leaders on the global strategic initiative. Chairmans unique role lends extra gravity to what every monetary officer possess. The responsibility to provide the best of us to civilian leaders. This is not a luxury, this is a duty. A duty that officers go to the American People into the men and women under their command. Civilian policymakers rely on our military professionals to better understand the military dimensions and the challenges we face the options at our dispos disposal. The best military advice does not stop there. Military officers in the chairman of the joint chief of staff must tell their civilian superiors what action they believe is best to take and they must do so honestly, but forcefully weather civilians want to hear it or not. The best military advice must be disregarded but it must always be given. Whats more is that its not be narrowly limited to technical military matters. When the chairman offers his best military advice is not simply offering his best advice about the military but rather the best advice from the military. That extends tissue of National Security, strategy, and operation. For example, a decision to take our nation to war properly russ was civilians. The military officers should not be prohibited from voicing their advice on the matter. It is their duty to do so. If you have not seen mr. Burns series on vietnam, i suggest you Pay Attention to it and i suggest you examine the tensions that existed between the civilian superiors in the military. I believe youll come to the conclusion that the military advice is not given the weight and effect that it should have which is one of the factors leading to 50000 names on the wall in granite, not too far from here. Just as we are clear about what constitutes best military advice we must be clear about its limitations. Advice is just that, advice. The chairman is not in chain of command, and our system Operational Command rest with commanders who report by law to the secretary of defense. The chairman must advise civilian leaders on plans both within and among our combat commanders. And it is his right and responsibility to provide competing advice to policymakers when he disagrees with the commanders. The chairman is not an Operational Commander. The best military device does not mean independent advice that occurs in the context of military operations. Professor elliott has described silver Civil Military relations is an unequal dialogue. The rules are not to be dichotomized and held apart. Rather they must be brought together of a process of discussing, scrutinizing and refining military operations on plans. A process in which leaders must plan active role and make major decisions, best military advice is central to the stylet but can never replace it. Unfortunately a sense this dialogue has become strained. At times officials have disrespected military leaders disregarded their advice and Critical Military leaders and shirked accountability for their decisions. Or recently oversight and control has morphed into meddling and micromanagement of details for political purposes which has harmed military effectiveness. The last administration distinguished itself in this regard. What we must guard against especially now somebody civilian leaders are either missing or recently retired military officers in an overcorrection we cannot afford to swing from micromanagement to civilian marginalization. We need to restore balance and relations were best military advice is rendered and received but done so as part of a dialogue was civilians participate actively and have the last word on policy, strategy, operational plans. This Committee Takes the application seriously. The Civil Military dialogue that only occurs within the department of defense, it occurs between the branches of government as well. The chairman also serves as to the congress. We ask current future chairman like all military officers to provide their best personal advice to this committee a fast. To ensure members of this committee in congress can meet our independent Constitutional Responsibilities to the americans we serve. This committee in congress is not receiving the information and respect it deserves as a co equal branch of government. We do not work for the president or the executive branch. We have distinct and equal responsibilities under the constitution and the administration is to understand its obligation to the congress in this regard. Too often members are learning in the media for the first time about major National Security and military activities that we as the committee of oversight should be told about and consulted on in advance. Even now, nearly ten months into this year were told theres a new strategy for afghanistan, but members have more questions than answers. The Administration Must do better, until it does the congress and this committee will be forced to use what levers we have to show the administration we are not and will not be a rubber stamp. We will have questions for you, we look forward to your candid, forthright and best military advice. Thank you chairman. On a welcome general dunford and thank you to your outstanding service. John by your wife on his son patrick, thank you. Like to acknowledge jerilyn kathleens other children are unable to join us today. We think the entire family for their continued sacrifice and support. Ms. Agree to to us and more particularly the people of the armed forces. Under leadership of chairman mccain our committee has heard from the senior political leaders in the department, and distinguished outside experts. Time and again the United States is offered with a myriad of challenges that require military leadership. During general dunfords leadership hes demonstrated deep understanding of the threats we must address. He has made it a priority to keep this committee wellinformed in the decisions impacting our forces and to counter the risk posed by our adversaries. This committee may not always agree general dunfords fees, hes been honest and conducted himself with an targeted. I believe he should be reconfirmed. His professionalism and commitment to duty have served him well. Its not the first time in history weve had to confront multiple threats from abroad. But as a dangerous and uncertain time. The north Korean Missile Program Provides a threat and they are deep cause for concern. Russias trying to reassert its influence around the world, china continues the asiapacific region and using economic corrosion on its smaller neighbors. Iran continues its missile activities as well as other destabilizing activities. Our military has been consumed by two prolonged wars. As we grapple with the threats we must be mindful that our president continues to show a lack of indepth knowledge with nuance and public defense. It was my hope that coupled with the enormous challenge we face would encourage the president to be more judicious with his comments, unfortunately that has not been the case. Her foreignpolicy has been predicated on alienating allies, discovering the value of organizations retreating from our leadership role in the world. While the same time decisions in the defense and complicated personnel issues are promulgated by tweets. This lends more uncertainty to dangerous times and i believe the risk of miscalculation and unintended consequences have never been higher. I commend general comfort for the steady hand he has demonstrated in for the example he is set for those who wear the uniform. Thank you again for your willingness to surrender nation. Welcome. Chairman mccain, i think you for the opportunity to appear today. Im honored to be renominated. Like to begin by thanking the committee for your support for soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. This Years National Defense Authorization act as a result of your commitment to assure that address these challenges to ensure our men and women never find themselves in an unfair fight. Listen carefully to your statement, i understand my responsibilities to provide the best military advice to the president , secretary of defense of the National Security council and ill be forthright in front of this committee. I am prepared to answer question. Thank you very much general. In june you testified in i guess within five years will lose her ability to project power. We still dont have sustained funding and as you mention, im not sure we will for the foreseeable future unless Congress Steps up to do his job. We will start fiscal year 2018 on continuing resolution with no insight as to what the final funding levels will be for the year. What is the effect of the average First Lieutenant who is out there as a Company Command and they dont have sufficient funds to carry out their training regimen and the pilots are flying less hours per month and their chinese and russian counterparts . What effect does that have in our ability to defend the nation . Secondly, what does it do to the men and women of an all volunteer force . Chairman, when you say what is it due to her ability to defend the nation in my opening remarks i mention competitive advantage. Done analysis about where are the current threats and weve used russian china to benchmark those. If you go back to 1999 or 2000 we have what we should have, a nation that looks and thinks globally. We were needed to advance our interests. We are challenged today to project power in europe and the pacific. In other nations to include nonstate actors at all they have capabilities that challenge our ability to project power. With regard to lieutenants and captains, i was up platoon commander in the 70s. We did have sufficient money for training or personnel and many times the task we are asked exceeded our capability. Ill give you the example of a pilot. If you look at a pilot specifically in the past they may have had 30 hours a month to fly, now may be as low as 15 per month. On a daytoday basis you might not be able to see the difference between pilot amb. If theres an inflight emergency the pilot was 30 hours will feel more comfortable and confident in their ability to deal with their situation and control their response. We may never find out about it. Although if its 15 hours a month we may really be aware of it. Noncombat casualties and fatalities are now higher in operations than in combat. They are. Attribute that to two things. One, the material condition that affects the number of hours a pilot flies. Its also the size of the force relative to the requirement we have. Going back to my lieutenant days to look at training on a ship, planar infantry on a series of tasks, when i was a lieutenant we didnt go to two oh one until we were wellfounded in one oh one. We may have trained a standard in the past with sufficient time and resources, now that ship go to see, the pilot will go to war whether or not theyve had an opportunity to retrain in basic tasks or not. To believe its possible for the United States to achieve its National Security objectives in afghanistan as well as pakistan provide support and sanctuary to groups such as the taliban . I do not believe we can attain our objectives in afghanistan unless we materially change the behavior pakistan. Have you got thoughts on how you do that . It will require broad approach to do it, i think its unacceptable that pakistan provides sanctuary. We are to bring the full weight of the u. S. Government and our Coalition Partners on pakistan to ensure they do not provide the sanctuary that they have provided historically in the past. Are you satisfied now with the rules of engagement to which have been changed with the new administration . I am. I had a long conversation with general mickelson to ensure that he also had the same degree of confidence secretary mattis have spoken in the past week to make sure hes confident to allow him to engage any enemy that is a threat to the afghan government, Coalition Forces or u. S. Personnel. Some reminiscent of our rules of engagement of the vietnam conflict. They may have been. I assure you that we have the rules of engagement necessary to advance our objectives. Thank you. Thank you general dunford. In response to the prehearing policy question you indicated that iran is adhering to the jcpoa. But you rightfully point out there engaged in destabilizing activities in the region, missile development, activities that clap tolerated. Going back to the jcpoa, is it your idea that it was designed to limit their Nuclear Capacity and its currently achieving that objective . It was designed specifically to address one of the five major threats of iraq, the Nuclear Threat what it didnt address is the missile threat, and the cyber activity they have conducted. And theyre still pursuing those other venues very aggressively in your view . They are. We see if physical manifestation of that. We see it in iraq, lebanon and syria. In this complicated world was so much going on i will focus on north korea, if we were to step away from jcpoa, that have an effect on the ability to negotiate or come to a non kinetic situation . Are holding up agreements we have signed would have an impact on others willingness just assign agreements. In terms of a force that we all agree upon is stretched, if we reject to the jcpoa which assumed the iranians would step up their activities causing us to have forces that would be in that area and not able to prevail . Watched every day with our relationship with iran, it indicators of iranian backed militia forces would pose a threat to the force. Is that accurate . To make it absolutely is. The dimension today is in full support, the economic and diplomatic Pressure Campaign and the secretary of state is leading in north korea. One of the things that is difficult to comprehend is we do not have an ambassador to south korea. We do not. We have a attache at the time. In effect, general brooks is doing double duty. Senator, we are very proud of what general brooks is doing right now is both as he sits at the nexus of the promilitary. As you have competence in general brooks, if we are in a diplomatic we dont have an ambassador until we have an assistant secretary for the area, of the state permit. We just dont seem to have the thing in place to have in all court press portable medic solution, is that senator, i would comment on it only because i clearly urge secretary tillerson to comment on the difficulty right now doing all the things the state department has been called upon to do with some of the gaps that continue to exist. In terms of the situation on the peninsula now, can you give us your judgment of where we are today, given the statements back and forth between leaders of both countries, given our area of operations off the coast and given the response yesterday that could trigger a reaction by the North Koreans. Can you give us an assessment . Senator, again, the political spaces clearly very charged right now and we havent seen a change in the posture of north korea forces but we watch that very carefully. We clearly have postured our forces to respond in the event of a provocation or conflict. We also have taken all the proper measures to protect our allies, the suffering, japanese, the force as well as americans in the area. What we havent seen his military activity that would be reflective of the charge political environment you are describing the back thank you very much. I would like to pursue two things. When is intelligence and modernization. I want to get three statements in the record. To begin with on kim jong released a propaganda video depicting a us Aircraft Carrier and palmer being blown up by north Korean Missiles and he further threatened that the us attack would see our forces, as he said, head to the grave ive been very proud of the uniforms coming out and talking about how real the threat is. General, the commander said last week that he views north korea ability to deliver a Nuclear Weapon on an icbm as a matter of when, not if and Defense Intelligence agency assesses that north korea will be able to reliably range the us mainland with Nuclear Icbms by the end of 2018. I remember when the 2018 was 2020 and 2018 and i have to ask you how confident you are in our intelligence communitys ability to monitor and detect just where they are and how accurate you believe the end of 2018 is. Senator, i think that what general height and said and what you just described flex the collective judgment of the Senior Leadership in the department. I think something that general haydn said was something i said in public and whether its x months or 18 months it is up soon. We ought to conduct ourselves as though it is a matter of time in very short time before north korea has that capability. Yeah, its important to get into record that the unique challenges in getting intelligence on north korea that dont exist in other places. While they may exist to some degree in other places, the North Koreans over time have buried much of their capability underground which creates a new challenge and there is also some specific weather challenges in north korea that limits our collection at various. The times. To be honest with you, senator, part of it has also been the competing demands for a limited amount of Intelligence Surveillance and reconnaissance. Over the last 18 months we have increased our collection against north korea but for a long period of time we had decreased our collection against north korea because of competing demands elsewhere in the world. I think those are three of the most significant challenges we. Good. I assume you are equally determined about their activity in treating technology and Missile Technology but other countries such as iran senator, we are. Weve looked at the nexus quite a bit and im not sure we have seen any transfer of Nuclear Technology but we certainly have seen Missile Technology in a wide range of weapon systems that they have exported or expertise that they had exported outside of north korea. And modernization, both the Army Generals anderson emery, said recently in our subcommittee given the complex range of threats the army has a short window to improve capability and capacity. Meanwhile, our adversaries are closing the capacity gap. I thank you said if i wrote it down quickly, you said if you dont have the same funding we will lose our quantitative and Qualitative Advantage over our adversaries. I think that is accurate. You have expressed her concern that we are getting very close on that, is that correct . I have. I think this reflects both the chinese the russians and the others. They have studied our strengths over the course 20 years and they been on a path of developing capabilities that exploit our vulnerabilities and we know what those are and we have a plan to correct those but if you dont crack those our ability to project power, for example when the army talks about protecting into europe but operate freely within europe to include to support our forces with logistic bases, sustainment efforts, will be challenging. I think your statement along with some of the other military and the uniforms are helpful to us because the American People really dont understand the level of threats that is out there, the complexity of the what is happened before and that we need to prioritize our military and defense issues. One last thing, general, it was testified during the 18 army Posture Hearing that we are now out raise and outgun district you agree contract. Relative to certain threats in certain conditions. I do, senator. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you general dunford for your service. In the uncertainty that bases our men and women in uniform have been deeply unsettling to members of the committee. Chairman mccain, Ranking Member reed, senator Susan Collins and i have introduced a bipartisan bill that would prevent the department of defense from separating transgender based on their jolt transgender identity. If they were told by the department of defense they would be allowed to serve openly and continually in the military chris. Many worked diligently within their chains of command to meet every requirement by the former administration. Now they have been plunged into a career of uncertainty and their service and sacrifices have been unfairly tarnished. Many of us on the committee are deeply disturbed by the development of the last few months. Do you agree that are thousands of openly serving transgender men and women have served their country with honor and valor . I do, senator. I would just probably say that i believe any individual who meet the physical and mental standards in his currently serving and is the floor a trip deployable should continue to serve. Thank you. Can you promise using transgender individuals who meet the requirements that they will not be separate from the Armed Services based solely on their gender identity question. Senator, i can promise that will be my advice. What i articulated is that. Have you had the opportunity to meet with the thousands of transgender serving in uniform and on active duty to hear how the recent developments have impacted their lives and if not, will you commit to doing so . I have not since august when the announcement was made but i would certainly do that, senator. Thank you. On the subject of military sexual violence, we have been at this for a while now, every secretary of defense has said zero tolerance for Sexual Assault in the military but we still have serious issues. The assault rate is still 15000 estimated assaults, Sexual Assaults but what we really arent moving the needle in the way we should. During a hearing of the last few years we had general dempsey presented putting he said that we are currently on the clock, if you will. If we dont make serious progress in a year we might have to look at legislation. Now, more than half of the senate has voted twice to take the decisionmaking of whether a crime has been committed out of the chain of command and giving it to trade military prosecutors as a way to professionalize our military justice system. This is a reform that our allies have already done long ago, mostly for defendants rights, whether the uk, israel, australia, canada, netherlands. They have done it purposely because they believe that if someone could be sent to jail for life that the Decision Maker makes those decisions should be well trained, as a criminal prosecutor, have no bias, not know the perpetrator or the victim, the accused or accuser and have that criminal justice background so that they can b leave bias at the door. Its weve done every type of reform that has been recommended by every panel that will look at this and we have special Victims Counsel in place to give survivors more legal advice during the process. We have changed the rules of evidence to make them more similar to civilians, more protection. We have literally done anything anyone can think of at the department of defense will not uphold. We made retaliation of crime, three years in a row. Not one case has gone to courtmartial a retaliation of the hundreds of cases i have looked at. The largest basis for each of the services, i look at all the Sexual Assault cases every year into a broadbased review. We are not fixing the problem. I would like a commitment from you that you will work with the on ways to his problem into honestly look at this command structure because more often than not the decisions that are made are not necessarily the right decisions. Using nonjudicial punishment going to courtmartial is recommended by those with on the investigation. Taking someone out to as many witnesses against them instead of taking them to courtmartial. These are kinds of decisions that are not making our military stronger. I would like the commitment that you will work with me on this issue this year to try to make a difference to solve this problem. Senator, i dont think any of us are satisfied with where we are and i would commit to work with you to look at this issue. Thank you. General, let me just say that this committee has had hundreds of hours of hearings input from leaders such as yourself. This issue has been thoroughly vetted by this committee and the secretary of defense is looking at this issue and others and i am convinced that the one aspect of this issue that this chairman will not tolerate and that is to undermine or cause the Commanding Officer not to have both authority and responsibility in this process. I just want to make that very clear to you. The position of the majority of this committee, we have a lot of work to do on the issue but to take away the Commanding Officers authority and responsibility would be a violation of everything i have ever known about the United States navy for seven years. Chairman, can i respond to . I am on record as having said, and i believe this, that we will not solve the problem unless Commanding Officers or singularly personal accountable and responsible for command climate and fixing the problem. What i answer to a senator hillebrand, to be clear, and to be honest today is to continue to look at the issue and find ways to address Sexual Assault. I was not referring to the chain of command not being responsible or accountable. My experience is similarly to yours of last four years that any problem we have ever had inside the organization has been a solved when commanders were engaged responsible and accountable for solving the problem. Fall, i thank you for that statement, general. We will continue to debate it. I think theres a lot of work that needs to be done, as i thank you would be the first to acknowledge. To say that Commanding Officers no longer have responsibility for the conduct of those under their command undermines about 200 and some years of military chain of command and responsibility. If Commanding Officers are not curing out those responsible these then their lack of assumption of response ability, they should be held accountable, too. But to take them out of the chain of responsibility in my view is a serious, serious mistake. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you general dunford for being here today and your continued service. On july 100 july 4th north korea tested a new missile now known as the k and 20. Based on the capabilities demonstrated in these test numerous press reports estimate that the missile has potential range of over 10000 miles which would put much of the United States within its reach. While i understand technical hurdles still remain before north korea to assess a reliable accurate and Nuclear Capable icbm system. What is your assessment of the Ballistic Missile threat to the homeland from north korea . Where do you see that trend line moving . Senator, for all planning purposes capability the moment we should assume now that north korea has the ability to ability and as you suggest there are technical elements that have been fully tested from a reentry vehicle to some of the ability to stabilize missile in flight but i view all of those as Engineering Solutions that will be developed over time and frankly, i think we should assume today that north korea has that capability and has the will to use that capability. The last major modification of our homeland Missile Defenses came in 2013 when in response to accelerating threat from north korea, then secretary hagel announced plans to increase the number of interceptors from 30s back to 44 and do you believe the current threat environment requires additional homeland missile capabilities . I do, senator. The last seven or eight weeks we did a very detailed look at increasing Ballistic Missile defense capability for the north korean threat certainly but for other pets as well. We do think an increase is wanted and i believe in the nba and we support that additional 21 in additional interceptors that are in the nda that was just past. Right. Should the Department Program Additional Resources toward Ballistic Missile defense acros senator, we should. Both the congress and the president have directed us to do that and we have. Take you. Id like to follow up on some previous questions that i think we were trying to get to what happens when operational demands arent necessarily met. As you no, we conducted a hearing recently on the naval accidents that are happening in the pacific and we looked at the concern that the navy is trying to do too much with too little. Demands are outpacing the supply, that is what we are seeing. I dont think it is just focused on the navy. I think there is concerns with other services, as well. We note the navy is doing its reviews and i think those focus on the supply side of the equation on that. Can you tell me if the joint staff is reviewing the operational demands that have been placed on the navy and have these incidences have an impact on the way that we are looking at how to assess a high off tempo how that poses a risk to our forces now. Senator, we have reviewed that and what we are making sure now is that readiness of the force is well as our ability to respond to the unexpected is a key element even as we meet the requirements. In the past, without going into a lot of detail we had a bottomup process for Global Force Management meeting each one of the commanders provided us with all their requirements and then we leveled across and met those requirements. We now have implemented for the first time a topdown process where we cents certain number of forces as a result of the services needing those horses to be back in the United States to generate readiness or somewhere else located where they are generating readiness and not allocated so we can continue to sustain a force. We realize that what weve been doing in the past is unsustainable moving forward. The demand does exceed the supply we need to make an adjustment to the demand as well as the supply, as you alluded to, senator. Do you anticipate reducing the demand . Anticipate managing risk in a different way and so we can grow the capacity to meet the demand. I do. Does that more of a threat on the readiness of our troops then . They are not just take the navy. They are not just out there on ships doing operations with no strategy in place. They are not, senator. We have to get to the point where we have to have a balance between the time and those training in home and from the time theyre deployed. Talk about the navy example, i was aboard the uss barry some months ago and the uss perry had been at sea 70 of the time in the previous 12 months. When we go back now and look at were they able to do all the training necessary and what was their life like during those 12 months, 70 of the time underway is an unstable rate and we will have to make adjustments that will incur managing operational and strategic risks, there is no doubt. Thank you. And also incurred, include 100 hour work weeks. German, absolutely. When sailors are at sea, 70 of the time they are at work most of every day. General dunford, i want to thank you for your leadership and continued service to our nation. Are privileged to have you in this position. In your written responses to the committee, your questions and answers hearing, you addressed a few of my questions about improving Mental Health and Suicide Prevention services. You highlighted the growth and Mental Health providers and the fy 15 nda with bipartisan position that i authored with senator with her. It requires every servicemember to get a confidential Mental Health assessment each year. In the past, service chief said that you believe it would be fully implemented, no later than october 1 of this year which is next week. General, are the Services Fully implemented the compartments for robust in all Mental Health assessment . Thank you. I have worked that issue personally now for some years and sheet your support in that area. The army, National Guard, several of our components are completely compliant and they will make the deadline. There are some outliers that havent met the standard and i prepared for that i was aware of that so the secretary and i will be engaged in cleaning it up. The vast security of the department has become compliant with the sextant act but there are outliers to the full details to you. I became aware of that this week as we prepare for testimony. Thank you. Can you describe your understanding of our strategy to counter north korea . And how are you working with your partners across interagency. I can. Very briefly, with secretary tillerson came in last year people told him that there were two things that he couldnt do anything about and one was the Nuclear Weapons were inextricably linked to survival of the regime in north korea and they wouldnt trade and that china would operate. Secretary tillerson is testing those two assumptions because the alternative that the time to not testing those were so dire so we have now eight pressurization campaign line economic and diplomatic means primarily to force the North Koreans to denuclearize the peninsula and we are also working closely with the chinese secretary tillerson has been almost relentless in dealing with the chinese over the past few months to get them to cooperate with the un regime. On the positive side, it has been for you and you and resolutions passed this year and the chinese operation to include the russian cooperation is having no sections is unprecedented. We are the phase now where implementations will determine whether or not we have a peaceful solution to do the station on the peninsula. We are to meet with the military dimension to support her merely secretary tillersons economic and diplomatic Pressure Campaign but also making it clear that there are military options available to the president if the up economic measure fails. We think it is for the north korea understands that and we think its more than that china understands that. I personally went to china in the middle of august during the recess to deliver that message to chinese Senior Leadership. When you look at north korea and there is significant speculation about kim jonguns motives but do you think it is about survival of the regime or do you think he is also looking to take over south korea, as well . Senator, i look back in our experience with north korea and i realized that kim jongun has only been there for a short period of their history since 1953 we have had effectively deterred korea from attacking south korea. My assessment, based on intelligence i have read, is that kim jongun is development of Nuclear Capability and his Department Official technology is primarily associated with regime survival. That is not to say that they dont pose a threat to south korea and others in the region but my judgment is that is what is driven his path of development over the past 18 months. Switching over a little bit to syria. You have had significant success in iraq, moving ice is out. There is ongoing battles in the rocca area, six months now where do you hope to be . Six months from now, senator, i guess from experience always cautious about laying out timelines and so i wont the campaign but i do believe that we will have completed operations more properly and our partners will have completed operations in rocca and we will be well underway to going after the external operations capability and the media capability of isis that remain in the Euphrates River valley. We will also be supporting our Iraqi Service partners on the side the border to better secure the border between iraq and syria. I think will have continued to degrade most portly their external operations capability, the ability to have to plan and conduct external operations. We will have undermine the credibility that they will not be able to say the caliphate is in existence. Will have an impact on the recruiting Preview Party seen the numbers drop in the numbers of individuals who are inspired to join the isis movement. So, i think we will continue to see reduction of territory, reduction in freedom of movement, reduce resources and less credibility in the narrative of those are the four areas will see progress. Thank you. Let me ask what your take is on the vote in kurdistan. Chairman, in the wake of that vote my primary concern is that the vote doesnt disrupt the cooperation that we have seen between the. [inaudible] and i rickys resources. The real challenge is that operations in the north and the successful in the north is because the cooperation between the Security Forces and if you look at the next areas where the iraqis are focused on which is southwest of it will cooperation between the kurds and Iraqi Services and im concerned that the referendum will disrupt that cooperation but my focus will be the mitigate the effects and i know thats what secretary matus are trying to do. Theyre trying to mitigate the effects. President aired one has made some aggressive statements. President has made aggressive statements and so has the iranians, chairman. Welcome back on your nomination and thank you for your decades of service. In your written testimony you say on page ten that iran has not changed its online activities at the jc poa went into effect. Have they increased the pace or scope of their moronic activities . Senator, i thank you could argue that they have is certainly in syria i think its been relatively constant in yemen with regard to their support for the and the support for lebanese has been at a high level for some period of time. In those three areas i would say that syria is one place where it is probably increased and you could argue over the last few months whether it is related to the they look to the end game in iraq. Thank you. Without going into the consistent rules of engagement which are honestly classified, rules of engagement have they changed in the last eight months as President Trump took office in the persian gulf, as it relates to iranian harassment using small craft or drugs. Are rules of engagement have not changed. What we have done in the wake of a number of instances we have gone back at every level from the fifth to the command and we made it very clear what our forces were capable of doing, were they to be threatened. Im confident that in application rules of engagement if our forces are given a threat they can effectively respond. Thank you. On page 29 and 30 of your written testimony you restate your support for our clear triad as well as modernizing the National Airborne operations. Strangely to me, the air force is Just Announced that the next version of air force one will not have inflight refueling capability. What you make of that . Senator, that was a decision that was not made by the air force but made by the white house and i think it had to do with fiscal constraints on the program. It will certainly be a limiting factor and will have to plan accordingly. I think we might need to revisit that decision here on capitol hill. I want to turn to the open skies treaty and not Many Americans know about that but allows russia and the United States to fly aircraft over each others territory to take pictures. Russia has been violating that treaty, secretary matus testified earlier this year. Do you agree with his testimony . I do, senator. We as a nation declared them in violation back in june. There was a journal article today say that indiana today we will take steps to curb their flights in response to their actions by the meaning our flights over. [inaudible] their limitations and chechnya and also their altitude fly over moscow. Are those steps that we are about to take smart. Those are all part of an overall effort. Senator, let me make sure that we make it clear that we believe that it would be best if the treaty continue to be in place but we dont believe the treaty should be a place if the russians are compliant. There is a decidedly aggressive diplomatic effort right now to bring the russians back into compliance which we think would be the best outcome. Do you think some of these reported steps putting flights over alaska and hawaii will bring them into compliance . Senator, i dont know. This is the best plan we have but we might consider other alternatives that given the size of our satellite constellation versus russia is it fair to say the rush to get more benefit from his wife and is the United States . I believe that argument has been made and it is compelling to make. Want to turn to missiledefense industry. We focus on systems like. [inaudible] or west coast sectors but what is it specifically from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles with hit to kill interceptors for with directed energy . Theres been a lot of work on the space as you know from asking the question. We dont have the ability right now. I would offer to you a classified briefing at a time of your convenience to walk you through we thank you may be right now but we do not have the capability today. I thank you have that scheduled for later today. It would be a helluva thing over a you av and to down over missiles over north korea as it was taking off. We need to look aggressively as canada. Finally, general, the deaths of the sailors in the western pacific has demanded a lot of attention, rightly so. Fifteen marines that were badly wounded a couple weeks ago, out of west coast in a fire involving in a previous assault vehicle and how do marines during today contract. Senator, i dont how each of them individually is doing but we been getting routine reports about their progress in the are making progress. Some significant injuries. I know that the marine corps is conducting a review of the matter and will have to report. What is the likelihood that the impact of the many years of frustration budget cuts could have played a role in either the level of training or operations and maintenance for that vehicle in this instance. Senator, i cant talk to that specific incidents but im confident that accommodation physical challenges and high operational tempo treated conditions that actually have led to some of these incidences. Of that, i am confident. Thank you, general. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you general dumper, welcome back. It was a pleasure to be with you not too long ago. With the National Disasters that have happened occurring i want to take this opportunity to thank the many members of our armed sources including the active National Guard and reserve personnel who were very instrumental in life and transporting supplies during the recent National Disasters. General dumper, in your confirmation hearing to serve as chairman you search stated that pressure presented the greatest art for National Security. You included their Nuclear Capability to interfere with our sovereignty of our allies and you said their behavior was nothing short of alarming. First, we can now add involvement in our elections plus. Is that right over north korea, china,. [inaudible] in the intervening time, we have north korea and my question as we sit here today is would you change your threat assessment order for it is north korea still third on your list . One thing said to staff is that we dont actually have the luxury of identifying a single threat today unfortunately. Nor is it necessary to look at in a linear fashion. What i would say is in terms of a sense of urgency today, north korea certainly poses the greatest threat today. In terms of overall military capability i believe china, russia poses the greatest type of Nuclear Cyber electroshock warfare and the activity that was seen from the crime unit to the recording. If i look up to 25 and a look at the demographics and the china probably poses the greatest threat to our nation by about 2025 and thats consistent with much of the analysis. In other words, i cant look at it just in terms of overall capability but ive got to factor in time in conditions and when i do that i look at all three of those threats in that way. I would agree with you in terms of your assessment in particular in regard to north korea being an immediate threat. Im always asked, hawaii been in the middle of the pacific, we felt vulnerable. It is on the forefront of our minds of constituents and particularly not just white but mom in alaska. I understand the results of the plastic missiledefense review our expected to leave this year, is that correct . Senator, they are but we didnt wait to review for increased. [inaudible] we also note in the nda a bit the address that. I know that a large new system is being planned for hawaii and i just had a meeting with admiral harris and take a few years and he indicated that it would be good to move up the radar for hawaii a year or two and i really like to put that to your way of thinking so that we can get on with that radar system. Certainly want to assure that hawaii, alaska and the rest of the United States are protected. As we sit here today, are we at her quickly protected, alaska and hawaii, United States smart. We are adequately protected against the current threat and i think one of the issues that we all are to appreciate is the capacity of the threat increases, that is a size, not just the legality or the fact that north korea can reach us but the number of missiles that they possess the creatures what we need to be concerned about is ensuring that our plastic missiledefense capability keeps pace with separate. Is important to have that ongoing assessment and in particular, if you project maybe three years down the road as far as north koreas capabilities, i believe there is an assessment occurring as to whether hawaii needs system in place beside the radar. That is my understanding. Absolutely. We are constantly assessing as recent as the summer weeks where we made recommendations based on that assessment. Our ability to protect the americans, guam, hawaii, continental United States. I know you were asked about the jcp away and you state that briefings you received indicate that iran is meeting its obligations under the jcp away. As long as it is compliant is it in the interest to maintain and. [inaudible] the support of proxies and terrorists in the cyber threat they pose. Yes, those are not areas that were covered under the jcpoa. They were not, senator. Do you intend to invite the president to recertify irans compliance ahead of the october 15 deadline contract. Mindful of the chairmans opening comments i what i would ask is that if i could provide advice that im writing to the present now prior to his decision to be in private, certainly share that not to do that publicly until after the president has made the decision. Thank you, thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you mr. Chairman. General, first of all, thank you for your service to our country. General, the budget control act is a symptom of a much larger Problem Congress has been avoiding for far too long. National Security Issues i hope you can comment on. The Congressional Budget Office reports that by 2025 mandatory spending will be 51 higher than it is today and it is pay on the National Debt will nearly double as a percentage of gdp. Cbo projects that the impact on Discretionary Spending will result in about a 13 reduction to defense spending as a percentage of gdp. My question is, as the future Years Defense Program begins to overlap the mid 2020s has the department of defense started to look at how this fiscal picture might change what we can afford and where we invest and has the potential fiscal future been accounted for in any of our future operating concepts for global power protection strategies . Senator, our plan to date is highlighted by the fact that our capabilities will require somewhere between three and 7 . We can debate that im willing to come over here with an analytic foundation for my assessment between three and 7 and thats dependent on how much risk you want to assume as you build the force. Between three and 7 will be required for us to build the capabilities we need. Where do we come up that percentage contract we looked at the capabilities of russia, china today and we looked at the trajectory they are on for capability development, we looked at where we are today and what investments we need to have to maintain a competitive advantage over those. Competitors. We use them as a . , if you will. What i would say i suppose in response to your question is that people have to fundamentally reorder strategy we are unable to build the capabilities and capacities to deal with those of your competitors. Right now what we have done is taken the National Security strategy and we take in its initial guidance secretary madison he will come out later with strategy for the first of the year and we looked at the military capabilities and keep the lease necessary to support the strategies. There will be a fundamental disconnect if we dont move on a path that i just described. Yet, at the same time as senator from hawaii has asked her concern is regard to the topic of the day which is north korea and the threat that they may pose and the additional responsibility to impose on our military to respond to this particular countries current activities and the threats they suggest with regard to the use of icbms against any part of our country or our allies. In this particular case, as you indicated you believe or at least you think that right now we have the capabilities but does that include the ability right now to protect hawaii against an icbm attack by north korea and was that plant in and what happened that occurs . Do we do that place our resources on that . Does that change the overall planning for the next seventen years . Senator, based on the current capacity of the North Koreans, the current threat, so both the type of the threat in the amount of missiles that they possess, we can protect hawaii today against an icbm and protect the continental United States against icbm. It seems as though the American Public assumes that is automatic and that we have the resources to not only respond to that and to be able to still build for the future threats or at least to maintain our ability to defend against those future threats from our other peer competitors. I guess that is my point. When we look at all of the different threats that are out there, the assumption that we simply have the resources right now and that we are not keeping pace but we are improving is that a fair assumption on the part of the American Public . There are a few things that i wouldnt assume i wouldnt assume access to space and all of that means for our economy and our military capability. I wouldnt assume our ability to protect our networks both for commercial activity and military activity. I wouldnt assume our ability to deal with the growing Electronic Warfare of our adversaries and i wouldnt assume the capabilities for the growing Ballistic Missile and Cruise Missile threat of our adversaries unless we maintain pace with capability development. Those the bad assumptions. And those would be will be found under the budget acts. Just to play perspective, senator, the bipartisan and da that was just past is 89 billion more than what the pca level would be and probably some number less then that should be. Thank you, general. Thank you, mr. Chairman. General, welcome and congratulations on the renomination and you have done a superb job. My vote will be that you continue to do a superb job. Thank you for the service. You have testified often to us about the Readiness Challenges and we have a pretty sobering hearing last week digging into the potential sources of these Navy Collisions and readiness issues and the extent of training of something that was on the table. We had a recent extended maintenance challenges have posed real problems on the navy side and i was with the commander of the Langley Air Force base and he described to me reduction in training hours as being a challenge and everything you have testified to us about diminished readiness resulting from the sequester is coming true. It wasnt chicken little saying the site is falling but what we heard from military on the budget caps and we are seeing and it puts an additional burden on our shoulders. I want to ask you about something that im worried about and that is the humanitarian crisis in puerto rico. So often when there are humanitarian crisis tsunami in Southeast Asia and the ebola crisis and its there and the humanitarian spirit and i am just stunned that this humanitarian challenge in puerto rico and american citizens with an amazing track record of serving in the military over generations, sentries really, could you talk a little about dod operations to try to prevent this humanitarian crisis from spiraling downward in a way that is. One of the last things i did for coming over was go to the Northern Command update and we had the most recent update for 8 30 working to the hill. For us its professional and personal and these are professionals that need support and one of the heads of my personal security detail until last night i hadnt heard and this is something that has been on our minds and thoughts and prayers are with people in puerto rico. The key thing that i think we are to be right now and the challenges in getting aid is the ports and airfields werent accessible so step one is we are doing all we can do to increase the input of the humanitarian supplies and thats what we can provide. We are also providing some generators for power and we dont expect them to have power for some time and that is something that is important that we can provide. This impacts hospitals and that is right. They cannot afford to be without continuous power. Exactly. That is why power and generators of the key areas we are focused on right now fresh water and food clearly right away and medical capabilities. These are the key areas that we are focused on right now. There is literally hourly meetings between fema and the government officials and that we are doing all we can. The guidance from secretary matus has been clear what they need. Make it happen and if so what were doing right now is making sure that every place that we can uniquely contribute to the disaster in puerto rico we are poised to do that. We are anticipating what they need even if they havent thought about it yet. For Committee Members and the public, i think i know the answer to this but how is the response to puerto rico organized and the dod has a piece of it but its that organized through dhs and fema and with the dod taking on an assigned role is that how its been led. Thats exactly right. This is anyplace in the United States and we are in support of fema and general robinson as the supporting agency to fema and we are doing all the support for puerto rico is being coordinated as you suggest to Homeland Security and fema specifically. Again, we are doing two things. For responding to the immediate request but we have experience in these operations and so i know what general was doing and they were offering things people have asked for today and looking around the corner to see what they might need next week. And very important for us to be honest because the scale of it is devastating. I put it your testimony. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you general dunford. Thank you so much for your support of our men and women in uniform. I know it is a joint effort. Thank you very much. We do agree, general, that properly resourcing a joint force really is a collaborative effort between congress and our military and military leaders. That is why any on this committee has pushed to repeal bca, senator rounds brought up the financial applications moving forward and what sequestration might do in regards to many other issues that we are facing with our mandatory spending. Looking at that we also need to use what we have efficiently and effectively. I am pushing for an audit within the dod and many of us support that. Many of us want to know that our tax dollars are spent well. For your part, can you describe the steps you take it during your tenure as the chairman to work with that joint force and make it more efficient. Are there specific examples you can give the committee today . There are, senator. The first one is that we are implementing the direction in which we have in congress to reduce our overall by 30 . That in and of itself is not a significant step that we have taken. We also, we alluded to it with Global Force Management but what we have done is weve done a number of things to integrate at the strategic level the prioritization allocation of resources to ensure that we are deploying the most effective into the context of our strategic objectives. There is number of things that wouldnt be something that i would do in the joint force but certainly am familiar with in the chiefs Business Practices across the departments are also an area where efficiencies are sought. The leader for that is the deputy secretary of defense in the joint staff sit with him on what is called the Defense Management Advisory Group and that involves all advice chief and is a wide range of Business Practices that we are looking to be more efficient. Cordially, we have expertise now from outside the department that is common and looked at us through different lengths and that is an area where we are most promise. The other thing i would say, senator is that since 2010 we have gone through a litany of deficiency drills. While we have gained some efficiencies they never quite realize the savings that you expect. You have to stay after it. This isnt something that we started in the past year but we have in a concerted way been after since 2010. Very good, general. I am certain that you will continue that push going on as we hope to see you continuing in this position. So, i thank you for that. In your answers to advance policy questions you also stress your concern regarding our dear peer over match and i share that concern, as well. Unfortunately, the department will send mixed messages to congress on the one hand, our services asked for rapid acquisition of commercial offtheshelf systems and as a solution but on the other they prefer appropriating dollars forward for the next best and greatest thing virtually, a lot of times the next best greatest thing never really materializes. So, how are we going to prioritize acquisitions moving in the future . Senator, that is, as you no, a completed issue and getting the balance right between moving out right now and find what is available and looking longterm for the most effective capabilities has been something to struggle with. On one hand you might quickly say we ought to be able to buy what is available but i remember when we ended up with 16 but they couldnt necessarily communicate with each other and i can also remember when we all went and bought our software only to find that we couldnt effectively cricket with each other. There is a balance in all of this and i think the key thing is in the committee and in an daa is to make sure that the joint Requirements Oversight Council which is led by the vice chair and report to me in the chief is effectively one overseeing the requirements that existing for capabilities and the process for making sure that we meet those requirements and those requirements are validated. I think thats a key piece of it to is the requirements. If you get the requirements right and Senior Leadership is engaged in requirements and status both in the perspective of my current job as well as a former service chief. Service leader engagement with the requirements before we look at material and nonmaterial solutions for those requirements in my judgment is the key to success. That is something that i think this happened to a greater degree in the last couple of years. With the pressure that has been put on by this committee, in part. Thank you, mr. In general. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, mr. Chair. I no, general dunford, you are a reader is going back to the chairmans statement at the beginning of this hearing about the relationship between the military and civilian officials i commend to you, although i suspect you have already read dereliction of duty by your colleague general mcmaster. Its a stunning analysis of what not to do in terms of the relations between civilian and military. I assume you know the book because united. I have read it. An additional one i would add to your list, its a little longer, barbaras march of folly which takes us from troy to vietnam. Again it talks about the relationships and how mistakes are made. This brings me to korea. I have a queasy feeling that we are in 1914 stumbling towards sarajevo and what worries me is not an instantaneous confrontation but accidental based upon the rhetoric that is going back and forth. The foreign minister of north korea yesterday characterized our president s comments as a declaration of war and he said therefore, as a district since the United States has declared war we have every right to make countermeasures including the right to shoot down the penn state strategic bombers even when they are not in the airspace over our country. That is what worries me. A misinterpretation, misunderstanding and an event, shooting down of a bummer, a strike on a ship that leads to a countermeasure that leads to a countermeasure and the end result is kim jongun feels his regime is under attack. And then the unthinkable happens. Make me feel better or worse about where we are. Informed by the need to avoid miscalculation and the inadvertent engagement do we have communication with north korea . We do not have the military communications with the military right now. The primary motivation of the regime is survival. Therefore, it seems the statements that suggest the regime destruction only by solidifying his determination to develop and maintain Nuclear Weapons, would you agree . Ive been very careful at the military level to make no statements that would exacerbate the Current Crisis and i certainly wont comment on these things but i can tell you inside the military weve made no statements and weve had a conscious decision not to make any such statements to ensure that we are right now and delivered by the state department. Department. But you do agree it is a kind of insurance policy for the regime but what of the debate could be that preemptive military strike on north korea in terms of the military effect . Theres a feeling somebody talked about the preemptive strike not in the same way as the administration but in this body. That would be a short easy action. You bring up a good point and part of the advice i provided is when we do something, we shouldnt assume at that point that we can control the escalation so we need to think about this in terms of what might have been as well as what we would want to happen. Part of the problem is the artillery arranged across the border about as far from here to Fairfax County which has 25 Million People in 250,000 any given day would certainly be threatened by the rockets and missiles. So the idea of the socalled Surgical Strike is really not valid in this situation. Thats right, senator we can do things from our perspective it could be less than a full excuse in the Operations Plan we need to be in informed no matter what we do in the peninsula i think this is fair. Do you support providing as i understand it dod visually made an affirmative recommendation in the state department so where is this decision and can you invite in the committee . Do you have any idea when we might be able to get an answer like that . I will ask when we get back today. But im not sure. I think its very important that the Ukrainian Government succeed in resisting further question expansion. What did you recommend in providing a useful aid . Ukraine needed additional and in 2016 we trained a member in 2017 we trained additional battalions and provided medical supplies, night vision goggles, radars and other things, that we felt like the ability to stop the vehicles and so forth would be essential for them to protect themselves into so we just looked at it as a military gap that existed and would increase the probability they could defend themselves. And i agree i would encourage members of the administration to move forward on that. With regard to the asymmetric threats such as information cyber attacks, i want to ask you specifically about the 173rd airborne brigade, which is said in the reports to be underequipped, undermanned, and adequately organized. According to an army review, three years after crimea why is this the case, and what can we do about it . I read the article and asked a couple questions after. I think what the leader was doing is describing the current character and indicating he believed the author makes some organizational changes and equipment changes to make the 173rd more competitive. I think you could make that statement more broadly so this was the leader looking at the unit and i think that you can look at that statement more broadly and see that we need to adapt the u. S. Military and the entire government to be able to compete at that level below the war where the russians so successfully integrated the operation and cyber political influence economic coercion and information operation. So we are describing it as a force that is designed for conventional war and needing to make some organizational changes and the different capabilities to be competitive in states that we are providing now. Said, with large this accurate statement about the 173rd could be said about the entire department of defense is that what you are telling the committee . But i would say is today the russians, chinese and others are on a daytoday basis doing what i describe as conducting adversarial competition in the love overflows become conflict and the integrated the entire government to be able to do that. In my judgment, we need to improve our ability to compete in that space and in the area specifically mentioned would be the Electronic Warfare capabilities and or information obligations. But those all have to be integrated in those things we dont have and the department of defense of course the economic and political tools but in my judgment bringing all of those together in a daytoday ba ships we had doing it as quick as practical . I dont think theres any question at all. It is a smaller right now then it needs to be and it is based on analytics and it should be a target that we shoot for. Of course many of the conversations we are having will inform our ability to do that, but we certainly appreciate the leadership in that regard. Thank you mr. Chairman. I want to followup on the senators line of questioning with regards to north korea. As you are aware of the Nuclear Tests that have occurred underground, that obviously contains the fallout. If you were speaking to the north Korean People right now what would you say regarding the risks of detonating the weapon . I think the best experience would be the Nuclear Reactor in russia some years ago and the incidents that took place in japan and even with something that isnt anywhere near what the North Koreans were suggesting ware suggestingwe hah challenges are many years and obviously the loss of life to conduct nuclear test in the pacifitests in thepacific as th, you know i think the north Korean People that hav but haveo realize how serious that would be i think this is the sort of temperament we need now more than ever. I want to shift gears. The commander of special operations general thomas said the use of customized commercially available drones by the adversaries was the most daunting problem. How serious is the thread and can you explain why it is so difficult to deal with it with conventional weapons . Go three months or four months ago we sent a team over led by the general to sit with the commanders to make sure we had a full appreciation of what they were dealing with so we could come back and send to them every capability we possibly could and we made progress in that regard in the ability to deal with this particular threat but its also going to require continued experimentation and adaptation to stay out in front of the technology so we have seen them deliver chemical weapons and provide increased reconnaissance and so it does create a significant challenge. That is where they suggested it would be tha for the current and emerging threats. Will you continue to support the use of the rapid authorities provided by the committe commito field new technologies like laser and highpower microwaves to help counter the drones . Its been a largely criticized acquisition process. I would agree it is a game changer for the rapidly developing situation i want to turn to hi to an issue that senr cain brought up earlier with regards to puerto rico. Its the number that are landing if there isnt a radar on the various fields. Do they have a role in restoring the airfield and what can you tell us about the bottleneck that limits how much we can get in a reasonable time period . Period . We do have the capability and tried to let us take you focused on that and we could provide as required the responsibility is to merrily dhs but at this point we are not trapped in the bureaucratic niceties. We are trying to make sure we get people to support the need when they needed and the key thing that needs to be done right now as you are suggesting is all the other support the need can come in until we get the airfields open. Thank you for being here today and thank you for your service. I want to remind the committee the first shift was the u. S. Mercy after the earthquake and i want to thank the military on the record here for always being the first in a crisis like this in puerto rico. I want to highlight again a quote that was already referred to by the chair man because i think you called out this crisis. We have a Global Security crisis and a debt crisis and right now you are the first one to call this out. Without sustained predictable funding iss within five years we will lose our ability to protect our on the basis of how we protect the homeland, advance u. S. Interests and meet our alliance commitment. If i could make a quick comment i know many times the perception is military leaders will never be satisfied with good enough and they will always want more, so somehow if people are not looking at those comments with a seriousness that i intended them to be, i wouldnt have made those comments without having gone on the journey to be able to quantify what i am talking about. I think that we share with you because of your interest we share some of the results of the work those words are backed by the fairly exhaustive and analytic effort that shows specific capability areas where we are in the process of losing the competitive advantage and in the aggregate when you go out four or five years, the loss in those specific areas means we will not be able to predict how or when and where to advance the interest into that does two things not only affects the response to the crisis that increases the probability there will be a crisis because it will have an adverse effect on the deterrent capability of the military. I believe one of the things that deters others from the conventional conflict is the knowledge that we do have a competitive and conventional advantage over any adversary today and we cant predict whenn and where necessary for the interest or we could lose that and i believe it would be an increased possibility of conflict particularly against competitors. If you look at the latest estimate in 2011, the secretary of defense made the estimate and that was about 753 billion in the last year we appropriated 623 and that is all category 50. This year it is a little greater than that. But we are still set of the complete list an than the secrey wanted back then. That was before ukraine, syria, north korea. You mentioned three to 7 . I dont disagree with that but i know we are at a low point right now and averaged after vietnam 4 and we are now at 3 and it is 200 billion, so any way you look at it today my estimate is between 100 to 200 we are short of today even with being 89 billion above. Every time that we are spending on the military today and on the veterans and the domestic Discretionary Spending let me say that again every dime we spend on the military and veterans today by definition is borrowed money and in the last eight years its projected to the next will be similar. 35 of what we spend in the federal government. 25 of that is discretionary military as a part of that. Given all of that, you and the secretary talked to the strategy. Are we on board doing that now with the appropriation this year and what does the next two or three years look like in terms of trying to catch up with. The way that weve characterized the recommendations is that we have Readiness Challenges that have been described. We have the liberality challenges and by that, we mean areas like Electronic Warfare, cyber capability to strike capability that needs to be improved then theres the capacity issue we would be addressing all of those, the current readiness of the force that we have, we would be improving the capabilities and increasing the capacity to get the overall requirements, so reo that they think theyve chosen to prioritized it is to make sure that number one, we make sure the men and women today in the units have the wherewithal to accomplish the mission. That is job number one. The second thing you saw this in the last two years its starting to make increased investments and then addressing some of these deficiencies and Electronic Warfare which was spoken about. What we have not done is come in with a recommendation to increase the size or capacity of the force because in my judgment, we shouldnt do that unless we can do it in a balanced way. Theres no way with the current level of resources we have that we can grow the force and a balanced way, so i think we are forced to fill the holes, addressed the readiness and address the capability in a way to maintain competitiveness today and tomorrow. But i dont see in the near term the ability to grow the force anand get at the dynamic that hs been discussed this morning where we have fewer ships them are necessary in a daytoday basis. And that is the challenge we have and that is the three ways we think about it. On behalf of the chairman, senator warren. They placed the program on the verifiable limits and the unprecedented inspections. The Trump Administration already certified twic twice that they e complying with this and if President Trump doesnt certify it again by october 15, he risks blowing up the agreement and iran may start again. When asked about the nuclear deal in january, the secretary told the committee that it is an imperfect arms control agreement but he also said, quote, when america gives her word, we have to live up to it and work with our allies. Do you agree with that . In my recommendation, it was informed by that. We deal with the other challenges that iran poses whether it is a terrorist threat and so forth. This is always the issue, iran supports terrorism and engages in these abuses and Ballistic Missiles but i think it is easier to counter destabilizing behavior if it has no Nuclear Weapons and it would be to keep them in check. The question that i have, aside from the Current Nuclear deal at this time, are you aware of any binding diplomatic agreement that would prevent iran from developing a Nuclear Weapon . The one thing we have to come to grips with is the sunset to the current that needs to be addressed in the near term. But there is no viable alternative and we need to keep enforcing the video. Most of the time the discussion is with china but i want to ask about the relationship which is also critical to influencing the north korean regime. Russia completed the railroad linking the two countries and operates between russia and north korea. Vladimir putin rode off 90 of the debt to russia and state department estimates 20,000 to russia annually. While we are trying to pull the International Community together to try to persuade north korea to stamp down on the Nuclear Weapons, reports emerged last week that the fuel shipments between russia and north korea are increasing. I do believe it is going on with russia and china and is diplomatic at this point and to the degree sanctions and can be implemented i dont think that there is at this point a military dimension to the challenge of Getting Better cooperation from russia and china that i do believe the things the secretary has proposed to do and has implemented over the past couple of months may be affecting russia and china although i think we are a long way from determining the path we are on which is what we all want to s see. I think there are very few places i could look out in the world where the u. S. And russian interests align and i think the primary focus is to undermine the credibility and if you look across the middle east to try to undermine the partnerships that we had in the road to confidence in the partners of the u. S. Commitment to the region i think by the same token they are trying to play a role to undue influence on the issue of the Korean Peninsula you spoke about a minute ago so i cant think of many places where russia is playing a role right now from maghrib to the middle east to north korea. It is critical as we talk about the alliance about the world and we recognize exactly this point that russia is doing everything it can to break up this alliance and the discord into the importance of keeping them together. Any importance of holding them accountable for what they are doing with north korea. When we develop a strategy that we are at right now, we determine the strength of the military is our allies partner and builtup since world war ii. Thethey recognized thatthey recg strengths so there is a concerted effort. Thank you mr. Chairman. General, congratulations to you and your family for your decades of Exceptional Service i look forward to supporting your swift reconfirmation. I want to turn to an issue that we talked about in the division this year that talked about the policy and how we should be looking at regular routine allies so in some ways its no longer newsworthy. Can you elaborate a bit on the departments policy and if this differs from the Previous Administration for example it was reported that the admiral is approved and one at a time under the obama administratio adminiss the strategy right now under the Trump Administration and how does that differ . When he came in in early february, we went to him with a couple of individual navigations that you spoke about and said how about give me a full strategy that leaves the south now for the long co. Of time and talks about the strategic effect to achieve. Thats what we are implementing right in the strategic approach to the navigations. We continue to validate those claims where we see international airspace. We can and always will take into account what has happened in the strategic environment whether it is the un assembly or some other event. But he turned to the Missile Defense that had a lot of questions today. Is it safe to say that the administration views a more robust Missile Defense as a key part of the strategy with regards to the rogue nations in the intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. I think that theres more that we should be doing. Does the administration have plans from a supplemental perspective or working with the congress beefing up the Missile Defense i think it is something that we all agree it is very bipartisan that we need to be doing. What far more specifics you can share with us on what we need to be doing and how can congress support you . We submitted it if you dont have a copy iv i will make sure that you get one but we look at the systems and as you know there is additional perception that are in there. All of those issues are part of it and just as you are suggesting i think it was maybe the first or second week of august to make sure it was in time for the budget cycle so i think what youve outlined combined with the supplemental that the administration has put together will meet the immediate needs but in the longterm strategic approach in buying the same capabilities that we have today its not going to be the solution as the threat and i know that youve received some of the classified briefings which means the Ballistic Missile also have to adapt. I think it is an area like the bipartisan cooperation in congress which is new and important progress. I want to applaud you and the general, the entire administration and the secretary on that strategy. I think what you are trying to achieve important is the engagement of Congress Asking us to play our part and also an important element of the strategy. You also talk that the credible but with three options in this as an important element of diplomacy, effective diplomacy which i think we are starting to see a lot of progress on that in that realm. If one of the options were preemptive or preventive groundwork on the Korean Peninsula, like the gulf war in 1990 or on 2003 that was launched by the u. S. My view is that would require from the congresss constitutional fee and politically this would help with regards to live rich and the ability to show the American People were behind that. Do you agree and is that something b the administration started to talk about . We want to be supportive and i think you are getting bipartisan support for the strategy, but that kind of issue to me is something that we need to be prepared to discuss. I think that i would narrow my view to the scenario that is described. I would want to have the full support of the American Congress if we do Something Like you are suggesting. And i would use that language very carefully. I know the president has a lot of authority to react to take the action but i that i am talg about a ground war. Lost by the United States although the 1950s there was no congressional authorization. I think thats an important topic. I think it gives us leverage and im glad to see that you believe that for Something Like that you would want that. Again i think we know from history that we are going to be much better degree of success if we have the full throated support of the American People. What you are suggesting is going to war and then having the full support of the American People and the congress is something we need to have. On behalf of the senator. You have certainly my confidence and the reason i said general mattis, i also have that confidence in general kelly. Is there something abou about te routines that inspires the confidence . I dont think you want me to answer that question. Vladimir putin cannot beat us on land or on the sea or under the sea. Cant beat us in the air or in space. But it can beat us in cyber. Do you want to comment on that and how the forces are organized to detour . I would agree with your assessment of the most significant threat in cyberspace we face today are the most advanced capabilities are the russians that is our assessment. I would argue though that its not only in the cyber capability. The one thing that the russians have effectively done is provide that with political influence operations, economic coercion on economic anofeconomic coming elc warfare and even military posture and if you take those and look at the centralized system that russia has even playing as we describe each of the domains within the overall theyve been able to advance their interests without going to war and i do believe that is an area not only should we be focused on in the department and the Global Campaign plans. It is included in the Campaign Plan that we need to take a look at it from all the government purse but as well to be competitive. You know what he can do in the next election. The newspapers reported that hes already in several states registration records. The precincts go in and eliminate every tenth daughter. You can imagine the chaos that would occur if the voters get their and you are not register registered. That would be significantly disrupted to our infrastructure and to the underpinnings of the country. The president budget make significant funding cuts in the department of state and usaid. Does that make sense to you . There is no challenge that i am currently dealing with that the primary factors in a key diplomatibediplomatic, economicd certainly in the campaign and in the security gains as one example that every place ive been over the past 15 or 16 years in iraq and afghanistan. As you all as military commanders rechecked American Power in both forms o the formso many other agencies of government so that you become not only a warrior but you become a diplomat as well utilizing those others that weve seen used very effective effectively. And if you dont have those other agencies, and i just mentioned to, state and usaid it clip your wings and being able to function as a military commander. I think i just reinforced the one point for today any of the military commanders to be successful have to achieve unity of effort. If i think of the fbi experien experience, the Customs Border police were there, so i agreed with the thesis in the challenges we face today are complex contingencies and required a womans of all of the government to be successful, so trying to draw the distinction in one department is not possible today. General, thank you also to your family for the sacrifices that theyve made over the years and allowing him to continue to serve this country and for you while continuing to serve god country in the role that you have, which is substantial. Thank you, general for your service. Why should i vote for you . I think i provided the best military advice. Okay, youve got me. Do you agree that sequestration needs to be fixed but we are going to go backwards . Do you agree if you do not reform entitlements there is no money left to do anything other than entitlements . We are headed towards a situation where it can be difficult. I want t to get pick up the thrs Going Forward do you agree there must be an option on the table when it comes to north korea . I personally convey that to china and our allies in the region. Do you agree that iran is taking the money from the Nuclear Agreement and has done more damage with it then good . It has been put back into the activities and i would be hardpressed to find anything they do that is good. The goal was to get them back what you see this far tha say ts not been achieved . Do you believe that its going to be difficult to end this war . Its great to be necessary to have a stable construct in terms of russia over the last six months if they gotten better, b, worse or about the same . They certainly havent gotten any better. There may be evidence that russia was more deeply involved in sending out fake news during the last election does that trouble you . The recent decision to add more capabilities with rules of engagement do you think that is necessary to be continued there is a new emphasis where they need to be a better part of the team. That is the key assumption in this strategy that cannot continue to be a sanctuary for the others and we have very skilled ambassadors representing both pakistan, afghanistan and india i would agree. We confirmed that the ambassador to go to afghanistan. I watched them deal with difficult situations so i think we have the right man headed to afghanistan. Is it just a matter of time do you agree with that . I believe they are on a pretty good trajectory right n now. If they would accept a followup force do you believe in the interest this time to leave the troops beyond to continue to work with the iraqis . For those that continue training the Security Forces that will be necessary to be selfsustaining from the military perspective i believe that is necessary. Of the worlif the world is ss capitulating against the United States they will watch and have a different view of where they should be going . All of the potential adversaries will watch closely what is happening in the Korean Peninsula. And finally it is the policy to deny the regime the ability to develop an icbm to get the homeland. That is the policy. Do you agree with that . I do, senator. The men and women in the military speed to witwould be recognized senatr blumenthal. Thank you for your service and to your family as well. I would like to focus briefly on puerto rico. If there is more of the department can do to provide assistance in the midst of the humanitarian crisis that involves not only human suffering but also in production for some period of time of communication and travel logistics and lifeblood in terms of what the military can do the last update i got off to come over here but that is how constantly we are getting updated on the efforts and puerto rico. To dat date what theyve identid are the things that would allow us to open up and get that immediate electricity fresh water and food to the people in puerto rico. Its providing all the support that they need. Do you anticipate that the aircraft can and will be used more extensively . I do believe the military is uniquely capable of helping to clear up the debris and get them up and operating and i can assure you whatever capabilities are required in that regard whether they are resident inside the core of engineers or operational units we will make sure the capabilities at the right place and they are americans, senator. Are there any sort of lessons or intelligence that you want to discuss in this forum there is the meeting with the chief of defense says it was one of the topics and then came back out through norway with my norwegian counterpart to talk more specifically about challenges in the northern flank of nato and some of the things weve seen in the exercise, but i can assure you we watched very carefully what theyve done during the operations to make sure that we understand where they are into the implications arandwhat the r the security and the un securi security. And they drive wedges in the Nato Alliance with our allies. Would you say that it is in good health right now . Senator, i would. And i certainly now have probably a fiveyear perspecti perspective. I would even say that a year ago there was a strong debate about 360degree security think over the past year with strong leadership they had been a part of that. It is not either or and the nations need to make a significant contribution to prepare us for both of those challenges. I think that the Overall Health is i would assess to be very strong. I will be strongly enthusiastically supporting you for another term and thanks for your service and is wel i spokee family. Thank you. I think im the last one so we will be quick. General, thank you to you and your family for your willingness to continue to serve in this role. I think its fair to say there is a lotheresa lot of support e committee for your nomination. Friday it was reported that the refueling program was hit with three category one deficiencies including one that was reported as possibly jeopardizing the willingness of the air force to accept the aircraft from boeing. How concerned are you about those and are you worried that we wont be able to take the delivery of the scheduled time by the spring of 2018 . Were going and concerned about is the capability that that wathis would imply. And i think if you add up the transportation commander here its one of the significant challenges in meeting the requirements, so i am not familiar with the details these deficiencies. Its been through time for me at this point but with regards to the capability i capability itse of the markets with the based on the ability to meet the requirements i assume you would give the commitment to follow up and find out how serious the deficiencies are and whether they jeopardize the scheduled time frame. You talked about the importance of coordinating the efforts and also thereve been several backend for this and how important that is in its current capacity to engage can you talk about how the military is looking at for the cyber tools and how we are looking at other departments of the federal government. Its as well as the select industrial pieces that support the department so that is our primary focus. And then defending the nation which includes the offensive capability. So, being able to have the defense of operations as a piece of it but with regards to the collaboration, one area that the admiral rogers and his team focused on is the role that is identified for sharing the action taken to address the vulnerability as an important piece and that is going to require not only as you suggest great cooperation in the government and we are in a pretty good place in that regard, but its also going to require a great publicprivate cooperation as well so that when the assistance is offered and there is a degree of trust what we are trying to do is help them mitigate the risk and that is one of the key areas of cooperation. You paid close attention to this issuissue and there is always a debate about the agencies and the governmengovernment is bestd performing. Its about the organizational construct itself and also the departments role in the broader government effort. I certainly agree with that however. Is there somebody that you are aware of that is the person actually in charge of those activities . I cant say that there is. Bubut that doesnt mean there isnt. Right now somebody that has designated and interactively i will certainly find out. Thank you. I think it says something. You also talked about the importance of alliances and partnerships and how that contributes to our other adversaries. Do you have any sense of what ththeir reaction would be among the part is if the United States were to aggregate the commitments under the treaty . I know what everybody else does from the open source and i dont think that the unanimity of those will walk away. Thank you for your willingness to continue to serve. Senator petrus, please. Thank you for your testimony here today and for the service to the country. I also just want to thank you for your thorough answers that you give to the questions that are very candid and not only your questions in a formal setting but youve been accessible to us and the answer to the specific questions i appreciate that immensely. I know the department is concerned about the geopolitical implications of the cities including the growth of the cities of over 10 Million People. I spoke with him about this when he testified earlier this year and he testified that there are ten cities in the world with eight of them into pacific capabilities. In the contingency and the humanitarian assistance, we have particular concerns given the threats that are associated with North Koreans actions. If you could access plans that we have for dealing with the cities and how you plan to deal with that issue and are there needs for us to invest additional training and not only of the soldiers and marines but developing the procedure is Going Forward that we should be assisting you in that perspective . I think the core of what we are doing is found in our exercise and Experimentation Program and reflects the priorities of innovation and so if you take a look at the exercise and Experimentation Program is focused on the ability to deal in a very complex urban terrain i think all of us have looked at the demographics we look to where people will live and where the sources and conflict will be and in preparing ourselves and preparing ourselves accordingly to do that, theres some unique challenges in the cities, command and control is one of the challenges, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Minimizing Collateral Damage while delivering effective fires and those are all areas in the department of me are working on. When you were as the previous as question about things not to assume to dominate in the space and i would like you to talk a little bit about what we are seeing with the chinese does that seem to be developing at least i would suggest they are developing as many as three different capabilities and conduct multiple tests in space of the direct systems and they also establish a new Service Years ago to make that capability even more robust. You could address how concerned we would be in from the congressional perspective do we need to be putting more resources into this critical area . As a result of that analysis and recognition probably in the last three years you have seen increased request from the department for space related capabilities. Again my priority this point would be on space resilience but theres a wide range of capabilities we need as well and that again is informed by the developing threat, military threats and Space Capabilities that we have. It might add the point you made its not just our military satellites. We need to be working with our commercial suppliers communication satellites and other space technologies. We should be stepping up our activities working with the commercials or i assume. Absolutely in one of the areas is to better leverage commercial activities for example to expand Intelligence Surveillance recognizance ability. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you for your Selfless Service and the marine corps and your nation and thank you for your family alongside you and on behalf of chairman kaine i will declare the hearing adjourned. We are adjourned. Thank you senator. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]