vimarsana.com

Ultimately harming consumers because then it giving access to the best information from across the internet. Watch the communiques tonight at eight eastern on cspan2. X, general mackenzie answers questions on the president 2021 Defense Budget request and how the coronavirus outbreak is impacting the middle east. Our meeting will come to order. The Committee Meets today to receive the testimony of the United States Central Command. I would like to welcome our witness, general frank mckenzie, commander of the United States Central Command. I want to add that immediately following this mornings open hearing well move to svc217 in the Senate Visitor center for a closed session which will be an opportunity for general mackenzie to answer some of the questions that might make a note of questions that come along that are not appropriate answer in the setting so that we can do it later. I would like to begin by recognizing two United States marines, gunner Sergeant Diego Pongo and captain moises navas, who were killed earlier this week during a mission against the isis stronghold in iraq. I also want to recognize that two additional americans who were killed yesterday, whose names have not yet been released. Released. That was in a rocket attack in taji. Their loss is a painful reminder that even where weve been successful, such as in destroying isis, the caliphate, we still have troops in harms way. And when store rounds and i had the opportunity to meet with some of our troops just two weeks ago in visiting iraq, we had a chance to really talk over some of the things like this with them. General, later this month youll be commemorating your oneyear anniversary as centcom commander, and im sure youll agree it has been a tough ride. Since may 2019 we have seen iran and its terrorist proxies escalate their asymmetric aggression against the United States and our partners throughout the region. In may they hit our partners oil tankers. In june they downed an american drone. In september attack saudi Oil Facilities, threatening the Global Energy supply. And throughout this uptick President Trump announced new sanctions on iran, bolstering protection of our troops in the region, but he sought to avoid a military escalation and even offered to negotiate with iran. Caveman. Then in december irans proxies killed a u. S. Citizen at attack the u. S. Embassy in baghdad. These actions caused the president s redline, which we knew that by his very nature hes going to adhere to its own red lines, unlike some others in the past. The president responded by ordering a strike that ended up killing soleimani. I ran counter by firing Ballistic Missiles that thankfully missed our troops in iraq, the over 100 soldiers sustained concussions. Since then the situation seems to have deescalated. Iran countered by firing Ballistic Missiles and thankfully missing our troops, though over 100 soldiers sustained concussions. After that attack, however, the situation appeared to deescalate. Yet despite the deployment of approximately 14,000 new troops to the region editor iran, your written testimony says including from your testimony, general, quote, apple intelligence exists indicating that irans regime desired to continue maligned operations that threatens lives. In early me to report suggest iran backed groups were responsible for yesterdays attack at camp taji. So if the deployment, approximate 14,000 troops in the region will not deter them, im sure a good question would be, what will deter them . Will have ample opportunity to respond to the question. Ask this middies topper is effective implementation of the National Defense strategy which has to focus on china and russia as the central charleston u. S. Prosperity and security, and as you highlight in your written testimony, to accept a a greatr risk in the centcom aor. Countering iran is an important aspect of american credibility in the middle east, and bolstering american credibility is vital to preventing our partners from looking toward china and russia for their security needs. But every battalion that we sent to the middle east is a battalion that is not being sent in supporting someplace other priorities in europe in the pacific. Are over, this ramp up in the middle east comes while other priorities such as counterterrorism and Security Cooperation in africa or being under sourced. So i hope you will address how these new developments to the middle east are changing irans behavior for the better. Or if conflict with iran remains likely in your view, we would like you explain to us what these new deployments are achieving. And with that, i will turn to senator reed. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Let me join you in welcoming general mackenzie back before the committee, and we look forward to your testimony and our discussion. Thank you, general. Let me also join the chairman and expressing my condolences for the loss of the three Coalition Personnel at camp taji last evening and two of whom were reported to the american personnel, and the death of the two marines conducting operations against isis in iraq earlier this week. Our thoughts are with the families and those who were injured in those incidents. The agreement between the United States and the taliban announced on fabric 29th was a notable step toward bringing our nations longest war to a close. It is born to keep in mind that it is only a first step, and the pastor longterm stability in afghanistan will only be found through a through a negotiated settlement between the taliban and Afghan Government. With that in mind im concerned we are not a properly leveraging u. S. And Coalition Military presence to support a settlement that protects u. S. Security interests primarily and values, including the hardfought gains on issues in afghanistan like womens rights and education. Financing a timetable for the complete withdrawal of u. S. And International Forces before into afghan negotiations have even begun, im concerned we are in some respects anyone Afghan Government and validating the taliban to longstanding perception that they can wait as that. Despite the specific time i can think in the agreement, summing administration of said that the 14 month timetable is aspirational and that will left ample time to assess the taliban say intent and capability to uphold their security commitments. General mckenzie, i hope youll help us better understand how we intend to monitor and verify taliban compliance. In particular, do you believe it will be possible for u. S. Forces to conduct the rigorous monitoring and evaluation necessary to ensure that terrorist threats will not reemerge in afghanistan while simultaneously tearing out a fullscale withdrawal . I would also like your more about the commitments we make to our afghan partners and how our efforts to build credible Security Forces and instructions will be sustained. The afghan Security Forces have been nearly completely built and funded by u. S. And coalition funds. Until the signing of the u. S. Taliban agreement, the afghan secretive forces received robust advising and enabling support from u. S. And Coalition Forces on the ground and in the air. Even with the Peace Agreement there is little to suggest that the afghan economy will, within a foreseeable timeframe, provide enough revenue to fully fund the countries Security Forces. Notably, the administrations fiscal year 2021 budget request contains funding for afghan training and equipping programs that will extend well beyond the date of the planned departure of the last u. S. Military personnel. Its important to understand the plan to ensure those resources are invested in sustainable and responsible ways especially given the likelihood of increased taliban participation into Afghan Government. Despite the focus of the National Defense strategy on a more resource sustainable approach to the National Security challenges in centcom, we have deployed more than 14,000 troops in the region since may in response to malign iranian activity. While i understand the need to ensure u. S. Personnel, facilities and key Strategic Interests are protected, i question the extent to which we can deter asymmetric attacks iran to the deployment of additional conventional u. S. Military forces to the region. Indeed, the rocket attack on camp taji in iraq last night reportedly carried out by iranian backed militia would seem to challenge the notion we have reestablished deterrence with respect to iran. I believe that the administration socalled maximum Pressure Campaign has isolated us from our allies, given iran a pretext to violet constraints placed on its Nuclear Program by the joint company to plan of action and may, in fact, have increased the likelihood of conflict. The killing of the leaders of isis and all kind in the Arabian Peninsula were significant counterterrorism operations, and the administration should be commended for those operations. But the turkish incursion into northern syria, fall upon the killing of general soleimani, and political unrest in iraq, lebanon and elsewhere have disrupted our efforts against isis. I remain concerned about the longterm disposition of the more than 10,000 isis fighters being held by the Syrian Democratic forces as well as the unknown number of internally displaced people that retain an allegiance to isis. I look for to an update on centcoms operations to ensure these groups are not able to reemerge. Thank you, mr. Chairman, 30 much. Thank you, senator reed. General mckenzie, we will recognize you for your Opening Statement. As you know your entire statement will be made part of the record. Chairman inhofe, Ranking Member reed, distinguish members of the Senate Armed Services committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to provide an Operational Update and testimony in support of the fy 21 budget request pertaining to our area of responsibility. My senior enlisted leader, fleet master chief jamie erdell of the navy is also with you here today seated immediately behind me. I appreciate very much your remarks about the sacrifices of captain navas and Gunnery Sergeant pongo as well as corporal zavala, a a marine was killed in a vehicle rollover during an exercise in uae just a couple of days ago. Additionally, the two u. S. Service members and the United Kingdom servicemember who died in the attack at times yesterday and iraq, they will be remembered. Today there are nearly 90,000 men and women serving thought the nations. I am proud of the remarkable dedication and humbled by the personal sacrifice and its my honor to serve with them. They are Young Americans in the line of fire working to prevent attacks on the homeland, counter stabilizing regional influence, prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass distraction, and ensure the freedom of navigation through international waterways. Your annual and time of passage of both the National Defense authorization act and the defense Appropriations Bills honors the courage and sacrifice, and i encourage you to maintain this tradition. Keeping a place for my confirmation hearing before you here in december 2018, i a pure now an offer you my best military advice. While my written statement highlights several nations and areas of interest within the Central Command area of responsibility, my Opening Statement will focus on iran. The National Defense strategy directs us to work with partners to deny fiorini regime all paths to a Nuclear Weapon and to neutralize iranian malign influence. This is no easy task. Irans regime is persistent and resilient, going its are sold Ballistic Missiles despite international condemnation. I ran rings the Worlds Largest state sponsor of terrorism. Since may 2019 iranian proxies have increased attacks on u. S. Interests and conducted scores of unmanned aerial system, aerial unmanned system reconnaissance flights near u. S. And Iraqi Security force bases. Fiorini regime has attacked or seized foreign vessels, sponsored attacks by houthi forces, continued the export of lethal aid to destabilizing groups throughout the region, and in september 2019 carried out an unprecedented Cruise Missile and uas against Oil Facilities in saudi arabia. In early january iran launch more than a dozen boasting vessels in a delivery attack against u. S. And Coalition Forces in iraq. This statesponsored missile strike cross thresholds compared to previous attacks and is probably set a lower bar for future action fighters you against a Hostile Forces most likely she militia groups launched with in a dozen rockets and u. S. And Coalition Forces at camp taji and iraq killing two u. S. And one british servicemember as well as wounding several more. While we are investigating the attack i will note that the arena proxy group Kataib Hezbollah is the only group known to produce a an indirect fire attack of the skin against u. S. And Coalition Forces in iraq. While. To decrease tension may provide the illusion of return to normalcy, ample intelligence and yesterdays actions indicate the iranians regimes desire to continue malign activities that threaten lives, destabilize sovereign nations, threaten freedom of navigation, regional commerce, Global Energy supplies in the Global Economy itself. At centcom we recognize that so long as the u. S. Applies diplomatic and economic pressure, the joint force must be postured to deter iran from employing the military element of power to counter our actions. Our presence since a clear message about our capabilities and our will to defend partners and u. S. National interest. It is centcoms objected to posture forces in the region with the operational depth to achieve a consistent state of deterrent against iran and even adaptable to future iranian threats. The departments fy 20 one budget supports centcoms ability to keep our forces agile, lethal at the battle. And adaptable. The National Guard state Partnership Program cultivates relationships and approves interoperability with six nations cost the centcom aor, with more applying for entry this year. The 2021 budget supports building new partnerships and enabling the formation of enduring middle east coalition. As centcom continues operations we appreciate the efforts of our duties of the leadership in technology the teamwork of the interagency and we thank the members of congress and your staffs without his consistent backing will be unable to accomplish our mission. In order for Americas Armed forces to sustain all the main dominance, the department partial support as was predictable, adequate and timely funding. Thank you again for all you do for our troops and families, and i look forward to your question. Thank you jennifer and much. For any of the numbers who came in a little bit late, we announced we are going to have closed session immediately following this down in svc217. General mckenzie, in the past year, in response to the iranian provocations we have deployed some 14,000 additional troops to the region. Youve indicated in your statement that more attacks iran are likely. And if so in one sense this new deployments to the middle east deterring and what level of deterrence do they provide . Is another form of deterrence that might work . Chairman, i believe deterrence is born of and appreciation in the might of the adversary of both capability and will. We over the last few months have demonstrated both of that. As a result of the i believe we have reestablished a rough form of deterrence, what i would call contested deterrence, with iran at the love of state on state attacks. By that im referring to things like attributable elastic missile attacks from ayn rand launched against u. S. Forces. They have stood their missiles down. I dont think thats an imminent threat. What has not been change is the continuing desire to operate through their proxies indirectly against us, and that is a far more difficult area to deter because they believe they can generate a measure of nonattribution. We we would not agree because we believe we will be able to distill it was behind these attacks Going Forward. Were in a period where state on state i believe we have achieved deterrence but with the proxy activities, and while there principally in iraq that are not limited to iraq and there are other areas where the activist will. That is the period we are now in with iran, mr. Chairman,. I appreciate that. As it is right now, we have kind of a deal with the taliban. We are bringing our troop level down from 12,008,600, and they in turn have commitments to us. I would have two questions. Are they keeping their commitments . Does it appear that theyre keeping their commitments to us, and if not, what would be the next it after our withdrawal down to 8. 6 . Might cancel concert on the military equities because that is what im knowledgeable on. What i would kill you in terms of what we see the taliban to militarily, they are honoring some not all. Attacks continue. Attacks continue at an unacceptably high rate across the country. Those attacks, although at a a high rate, are not delivered into the city centers, urban areas or against Coalition Forces. The attacks are generated against afghanistan outpost, checkpoints and isolated combat unit. Those attacks continued and i would say that level of attack by the taliban is not consistent with an organization that intends to keep its word Going Forward. However, in other areas if not attacked into the urban areas. They have not attacked Coalition Forces. We have a pretty good picture what the taliban is doing it is that doing. We have a picture right now, but anticipating, lets say they dont keep them and they start going the other direction. What would be our action at the time . We are on the glide slope to go to c8600 forces with our nato partners in the country by the middle of the summer. We will still be able to pursue all of our objectives and afghanistan. So if they do not and it becomes obvious theyre going not keeping their commitments we would maintain 8. 6 as opposed to going into lord . That would not be a military decision but a but a policy de. We believe we will have ample opportunity to see if theyre going to keep their word. In some areas that are, in some areas of the are not. Im troubled by these attacks that continue to occur. There are some political things that have to go forward that im not the best person to talk about in terms of the Afghan Government, rosener releases and things like that. All of those things have to occur in order to find a path forward. Lets go into barzani. We had, senator rounds and i had the opportunity to go through not just iraq but irbil and go up and spend time with him. Of course there are two groups they deal with, the code to link with their. One of them, a lot of people upset and may be misunderstood what the president was doing when he was talking about the turks coming down into that area. Area. But as far as the senior, that would be barzani, hes the one that a lot of people are saying or trying to project that he is past a lot of things to his son and to i guess his nephew. Its been my opinion that he is still in charge. I know can ask you whether you agree or disagree with that, but i got a very clear message when we spent most of a day with him up in irbil, and he is very satisfied that we keeping our commitments now. I think we need to keep reminding people how many kurds have lost their lives working with us. So would you agree that he is now in pretty good shape with the United States in terms of our keeping our commitments to him . I could not agree with you more. I believe that is the case. As you know we had a vision of a unified, tingle iraq Going Forward and support that, and we believe he is a key element in that equation going for. We talking about the senior barzani. We are. I agree with you. Thank you. Senator reed. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Just to clarify a point the chairman has raised, the number of publicly has been released about increase in forces and, since approximate last night is about 14,000, is that i could . Its a little less the net and varies as carriers come in. When a carrier comes in you will bring 5000 people in. Today i have actually two aircraft carriers in the theater so the number goes up and down. Within range of say 1000 personnel . I would say it is over 10,000. I know youre working on attribution of the attack last evening at camp taji. Have you finish that attribution . We are working very hard right now in my headquarters as we speak now. Thank you. With respect to the agreement between the taliban and United States, looking at the public documents that are available, there is no reference to a prohibition of violence by the taliban against the Afghan Government. There is at least an interpretation that what they are doing now, attacks against afghan personnel, afghan personal inner outside cities is within the scope of the agreement, that we would continue to go forward. Is that i could . So when i have an opportunity to give advice on the subject, and a do have an opportunity to advise on this, i would not consider what the taliban is doing as consistent with any have to Going Forward to come to a final endstate agreement with the current government of afghanistan. Those attacks are going to have to come off considerably. We are never going to be a bloodless state and afghanistan. There are pockets and afghanistan the probably still think the russians are there. Its never going to be perfect but we need to get way below where we are now. There is a possibility that they could, at least until we withdraw, maintain their ct commitments but continue active operations against the Afghan Government. In fact, it could escalate what would be either a major or a significant civil war in the country. When we still be in the position was to be predisposed to depart . Just speaking look at the military equity, it is difficult to see how if the taliban is still pursuing largescale operations against the Afghan Government, against Afghan Government forces, it would be possible for us to maintain a ct platform there without a significant presence. Its just hard to see how you would get to that level. Going smaller requires integration, requires intraafghan dialogue and some report involving both parties. And implicit in whats been discussed by the administration about the arrangement is about the final departure will be conditions based. But those conditions have not yet been specified. Would you decide the conditions, or how will those conditions be established . So what would happen is general miller and we would report the military condition on the ground and i would be input into the large element of that. But for military conditions, weve got very clear vision of whats happening there. Taliban attacks against the government would have to go down to a far lower levels than the art of. That would be probably the principal thing. Intraafghan dialogue should ideally lead to some condition where the taliban can never be part of some future afghan military. That would be a matter for the afghans, not for us. But its hard to see how you can go forward without some interafghan dialogue to take you to that. Just one point is it takes to sidestep a a dialogue, and the current government of afghanistan is in some disarray. You have two individuals claiming the our president to give a dual inaugurations. It is slightly outside juuling but that is a complicated fact i think. It is. With respect to our involvement even within intraafghan dialogue and even on the thought of an optimistic thing, you would assume if there is a dialogue that we some joint and is in the government. Taliban elements coming into the government. It comes down to sustainability over the long run, and as you well know, their Defense Budget is about 6 billion a year. We and our Coalition Partners provide 4. 5 billion a year. If we were to pull the money or decrease it significantly, their ability to function as a military and police force in the nation would probably be guided. Is that correct . I would agree with that assessment. So were going to be faced, this is the best scenario, with the government that might be taliban, et cetera, not fully consistent with all of our values and views, and we were wd still be asked and need to provide the means of dollars. Is that fair . It would. Many of those things outside of my confidence. My advice would be unable to do the thing we are there to do, which is to prevent the generation of attacks against the United States and her homeland and those over allies from isis and alqaeda, typically in eastern afghanistan. Is that what youve described going to yield the result . That would be the basis for any advice that i would give. Thank you very much, general. Thank you for your service. Senator cotton. General, thanks are coming back. This is a first appearance since your troops killed Qasem Soleimani. I want to commend you for your role and their role in removing the worlds worst terrorist mastermind from the face of the earth. Is it fair to say that irans leaders were somewhat chastened by the killing of Qasem Soleimani . I think it is. Just little early would talk to a capability and will. Theyve never doubted our capabilities are they often doubt our will and they think they give them something to think about. Back in the day in the 2000s, Qasem Soleimani traveled with extreme Operational Security. Is that correct . That is correct. During much of the 20 teams did he shed that Operational Security and travel more openlo the point of posting pictures of himself on social media . I think he communicate a lot to a lot of different people, ill just leave it at that. He was actively suggesting he felt impunity to travel around, impunity that he didnt have after all. Let us stay on iran and lets talk about coronavirus in particular. We always know it is impacted some of the Senior Leaders in their regime. Weve seen it on television news. Do you have an assessment of just how extensive it is among irans leadership . Certainly. We have seen public admissions of various Senior Leaders that are ill and a couple had actually died. I think it is having an effect on having make decisions, and i think it slows them down. There are a couple pressures on iranian leadership right now. Coronavirus victims in iran, so we look at that pretty hard Going Forward because the pe permability and the porous border. Iran sits on the border and their ability to pass to other states is very worrisome. I suspect it may be the worst outbreak anywhere in the world, contrary to what iranian media would say. Does that presumably apply to irans troops as well, the regular military and irg troops, do you suspect that troops are as well . I would say its going to have effect on the military instrument. We could do more in closed session and id like to do that, but we watch that very closely. What do you assess to be the impact of the Oil Price Collapse over the last four days on irans government and its military capabilities . I think it probably hurts them. Theyre under great pressure right now through a have a right of economic instruments, the sanctions applied against them. I dont think this particularly helps in any way. I think they have an active policy of trying to find ways to swap tankers around and do that, which is moderate, marginally successful, so i dont think i dont think it means anything good for them. Aside from that id just like a little more time to take a look at it, but i dont think its a good thing for iran. Theres been some talk around the world about providing more humanitarian aid to iran. Secretary pompeo recently called for iran to release all Foreign National prisoners before a nation provides humanitarian aid. Do you think thats a reasonable step . I defer to the secretary of state on that one, sir. What about the coronavirus among our troops. What steps are we taking there . We in the theater right now, we have one contractor with symptoms. We have another person who actually picked up at the airport after he returned from a trip outside the theater, who is in quarantine as well. So we watch that very, very closely. Right now, we have we believe we have good precautions in place. Weve cut back significantly on intratheater travel. For example, someone, pick a place, kuwait and wanted to go to uae of liberty, we dont do that. Thats essential only. And yesterday put restrictions into bahrain from outside the theater. We try to maintain isolation. So we protect the critical functions, some things we cannot accept the risk of infection so we look very hard at those things and try to maintain good physical separation. One final question, you say on page nine of your written testimony that Unmanned Aircraft systems are, quote, the most concerning Tactical Development in the centcom area of operations since the rise of the improvised explosive device. Anyone who knows what those improvised explosive devices did our our troops in iraq and afghanistan would find that a very troubling statement. Weve spent billions of dollars in the department of defense on counter drone systems. Im concerned that were still under grave threat to them, but im also encouraged to see your command has been experimenting with so many new and effective counter drone systems. Im worried theyre not widely filled yet, but wonder if your needs are being met or if this committee could be more effective on counter drone systems. Theyre working hard. The executive director to this is in the army. Which i think is good. It will be focus it and be more responsive to our requirements. The key thing were simply in the stage of the development of the systems and you see it in the back and forth of warfare where the advantage is with the operator and with the offense. We will catch up, its going to take us a little time to do that and really, its what we call group one and group twos, the small ones that you can go and buy at costco, duct tape a grenade or mortar bomb to and fly it into an objective. The larger ones we have a way to deal with them, more like aircraft in a traditional way although theyre still very concerning. So we have not yet integrated a solution to this. The army has a lot of great ideas and a variety of good things out there working, but we havent yet manage today bring it altogether and we work this every day. I believe the energy is there, but were still solving the dynamic. Thank you. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here, general, and thank you for your service over many, many years. You havent been here as has been remarked since the hearing on december 4th, 2018. So were very glad to have you back. A lot has happened and unfortunately a lot of the information that this committee receives is behind closed doors in a classified setting, reference was just made to it by the chairman to follow this meeting. I am very concerned that the American People, as well as Service Members and military families are lacking the kind of transparency and accountability that they really deserve and that is necessary for the American People to assess how were doing in centcom and other places around the world. And i dont know whether you have any comments on that, but the overclassification, the accepted secrecy, denies the American People the opportunity to know about the brave ab and dedicated service of the troops in your command as well as what theyve accomplished as well as the challenges Going Forward. I might just also say that your testimony today at 15 pages is considerably shorter than the more than 40 pages of written testimony that your predecessor, general votel provided, im not judging the quality by the quantity of pages, but i wonder whether you have any plans to submit additional comments or background that would elaborate on some of the con chewinclusio particularly as to the issue that senator cotton just raised, i think is very important, unmanned aerial aircraft and the threats they pose analogous to the ieds, with i which were easy to make, proliferated in the region and caused more than 50 of the death and major part of our casu casualties and i can see the same with many of repeated small scale attacks on our troops or the afghanistan. Let me just ask you on the issue of transparency, im at a loss to know why the annexes to our agreement have not been made public. Obviously, theyre known to the taliban. Is there any reason why we cant make them public so the American People can see them . Sir, im going to defer that to the department of state, they are the classifying authority in this case so i would defer to them. In your military opinion, just from a military standpoint, i realize there may be other factors, do you see any obstacles to making them public. Sir, as i work with the military side of the problem and i annexes, i would defer to the secretary of state. I know youre deferring the ultimate decision and i apologize for belaboring this point, but strictly from the readiness, the preparedness, the effectiveness and the ability to accomplish missions in the field, im at a loss to see any reason why they cant be made public. So from a purely military perspective, thats correct, but there are other issues beyond the military that need to be considered and i would not be confident to pass judgment on that. Thank you. Let me ask you, in terms of covid19 and its impact on iran, is it likely that the crippling effect of this disease on certainly the political structure, the economy, and possibly the military are delaying any reprisals for the shooting down of for the killing of soleimani . Sir, we spent a lot of time talking about that very point. And the short answer is, i just dont know. I would tell you that totalitarian, authoritarian regimes when theyre under extreme pressure typically look to react to a externn external. Theres not focus on the internal problem, the source of their problems, rather that looking for something to unify the masses of people to the external target. Im informed by that view and i think thats a possibility. Theyre fractured now and having difficulty dealing with a number of things. So i think it probably makes them in terms of Decision Making more dangerous rather than less dangerous. Thats my assessment. There are competing views from smarter people than me on iran. I thank you for that very wellinformed assessment and thank you for being here. Thanks, general. Mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman, general, thank you for being here, thank you for your service. I want to take an opportunity to extend again my sincerest condolences to the families of the four american heroes, and i think the british allies who have given their lives in iraq. Can i go to the question that senator reed raised with you, you said were having some trouble against asymmetric aggression. Can i ask you about iranian asymmetric aggression and where are we at strategically . Ultimately you want to convince the ultimate source of the aggression that the object they pursue is too costly to pursue. So when you think about that, you think about going to the source so you really look to iran. Iran needs to understand that we hold them ultimately responsible for sng attacks in iraq. The shia militia groups and other proxies across the region and there are other places across the region where theyre active, theyre not entities to themselves of the they all have some form of causal relationship with iran. And so i think the best way to convince those convince iran to cease giving orders to those activities, convey that and they may not get what they want and it may have significant consequences for them. Theres one element that the control and shia militia groups in iraq and others as well, its not perfect, its not 1 is 1. 0, thats not the way it works with those groups. Theres a degree of theres a gap there between intent and execution, so its not perfect control, but i think the key thing is, if you want to operate in if you want to stop attacks in the gray zone you need to convince the ultimate person behind the attacks its not in their best interest to continue them. Let me ask you about the pretty sizable force buildup weve had at centcom since last may. If that has so far not succeeded in preventing asymmetrical attacks, what in your judgment do you need, do we need conventional sources . How do we go about practically reaching this asymmetrical deterns condition . You may have a low level and may not completely do away with that. I would tell you certainly, i believe a red line for the United States is going to be the death of u. S. Service members or those of our partners and allies, so thats a red line. As you know, the there have been a variety of attacks the last month, no casualties. And of course the attack yesterday was a tragedy. I believe the way to deter those in the longterm is to convince the source of those attacks that theyre not going to reach their object through nos attacks. Let me give you an example. In iraq, i think an iranian goal is to eject the United States from iraq as part of a larger view that they want us to leave the theater. Iraq is a good place to start because theyre certain there are certain political c constructs that would aid them. They were fairly quiet pursuing the military track. I was on the side of it, i think well come to an agreement with iraq where we would remain. I could be wrong, thats not a military decision. I think when iran realizes that and they have, theyve laid their attacks low and then theyll begin to pick up a little bit. If were going to have to live with some continuing asymmetrical threats, thats part of what it means to be in the theater. Lets talk about the 14,000 troops or so, you said maybe its close tower 10,000 sent to theater since may. How long in your judgment, in your judgment, new long do we expect that troop buildup to last in the theater . Something that needs to be continued on a relative basis . I think salons we give a maximum pressure against iran and places diplomatic pressure against them. Its in our best interest that activities they carry out in the military domain, thats really the only way to hospital. They have no effective way to operate against this diplomatically or economically. Therefore their response almost by definition has to be in the military domain. And its what these forces do and what centcoms suggestion is, to convince iran, its not in their best interest to react directly or indirectly at state actions to try to reset the balance of the campaign. They get to your question of how long. My answer would be so long as the campaign continues. Talk to us about the tradeoff, and about the perspective. We think about again as the chairman mentioned about the shift in the pay com as the theater, we had this threat in centcom. What does it mean if we have to sustain the troop buildup, what does it mean for centcoms. Centcom, troops and airplanes is a fraction of the total United States military. In my last job i was a director of the joint staff and about of that strategic plans and policy so im infinitely in the nds and a believer in the nds. I believe in the longterm we need to be postured against china and against russia. Being a global power allows you to do both at once and these are not binary choices. We have a chose to execute a maximum Pressure Campaign against iran. That was not in the nds. The nds i believe is broad enough to accommodate what were doing against iran and maintaining pressure against the real existential threats that we place r face. Thank you, general. Threw, chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And general, just to follow up on a point by mr. Hawley. Did i understand to r believe iran dont really have diplomatic pressure leverage and they dont have an economic lever of any kind . Senator, from where i sit, that is my judgment. So the iranian activities that are military in nature are directly connected to the maximum Pressure Campaign, i would agree with you on that. And one of the things that interested me was joint naval drill by iran, russia and chi china. Had they had done exercises like that together in the past . Theyve done bilateral exercises, i think the first time theyve done an exercise of that nature. Although i will tell you its not an exercise in the way that we could do with an exercise with nato or in the theater . Not as full scale. That would be an understatement, actually. In centcom and more generally, we should be very, very attentive to instances with are our adversaries are doing anything in combination. Senator uabsolutely right. Many of us on the committee are concerned about the ability about the mining of the straits of hormuz. We had an amendment that required the navy to halt mine sweepers because we were worried about this. What is your view of our current capacity to handle the mining of the straits or stop scuttling ships that would be in the straitsments currently we have four mine sweepers. The brits, the british have four mine sweepers. And i have four mine sweeper healths and a variety of other things to deploy as well. Should the straits be mined, it would take a while to clear that channel. And drifting mines out there, and iran might choose to act in the waterway or as a condition of a larger war. And we would not begin the clearing, and the vessels themselves. We have the ability to clear the straits. The time would depend on the iranian action that was the precursor for it. I see, i see. A question about afghanistan bun more question about about iran. I have note seen an answer to this. Is there an assessment that the coronavirus spike in iran, a question why iran has become an epicenter and italy outside of china . Theres a lot of travel between iran and china, but i wouldnt go beyond that. Im just not enough of an expert to tell you. Got it. Okay. A question on afghanistan. What is your krn assessment of kind of the mill to mill space, and pakistan, and the work we need to do in afghanistan . I remain with a close relationship with him, and ive visited him in a couple of times in pakistan. Their support has been very important in directing the taliban to come to negotiations and their continued support is going to be very important as we go through this difficult period of deciding is the taliban actually serious about this or are they going to live up to their commitments. Do you see that level of u. S. And Pakistan Cooperation on the mill to mill side with the Afghanistan Mission sort of in Getting Better . Its always been good . I mean, how would you assess this kind of historically . So weve always had at u. S. Central command and i have about 10 years of experience in the organization. Weve always seen an organization with pakistan as critical. Whether at the political level, theres up and down we always try to keep the military channel open. There are good reasons to do that, to prevent fratercide and key work to keep that open. And one last question, it seems outside of your area of authority, venezuela, but deals with centcom, uae. We do a lot with uae. Uae and russia, and have you ever asked them about their interaction with maduro in venezuela . Senator, i have not. I appreciate it, thank you. Thank you, mr. Chair and general mckenzie thank you so much for your service to our nation and i echo the thoughts and prayers from the rest of my colleagues on the losses that weve had in the recent weeks. So please extend that to those families, if you would, i remember is. I do take very seriously congresss role in authorizing the use of military force and we have to ensure that our troops have the correct authorities to do the missions that we ask them to do. Now, there have been a lot of debates, not just within this committee, but with a number of our colleagues outside of this committee about repealing an aumf and maybe putting a new one in place. Can you tell us what the Operational Impact would be of repealing either the 2001 or 2002aumf in your view do you believe that a now authorization for military force is to many of those questions above my level of competence. I have the authority i need now for operations in centcom. Utilizing the current aumf youre able to operate. Yes, maam. I appreciate that. The debate weve had has been pretty extensive what we could do for that aumf. Thank you for that feedback. Thats a debate for us, but we do need that input to know whether youre able to adequately operate. Moving on to a different topic, with our special operators, the Washington Post had an article on the fifth of march that stated, quote, a new network of special Operations Forces will serve as the backbone of a smaller u. S. Military mission in afghanistan, end quote. Of course, the purpose of our special Operations Network is to continue rooting out isis in that area and apply pressure to the taliban if they fail to live up to the their end of the Peace Agreement. So what can you tell us about this new special Operations Network . Maam, i begin by saying i dont think its actually new. I think its the way weve done business quite a while in afghanistan. We have embedded ct forces that operate against that specific mission and done it for many years and it would be the way that we would go forward. Its important to understand that for special Operations Forces to be most effective, they need to operate within a conventional force structure, and that provides the eco system that they use to move around, if they get in trouble, theres someone that can come to help them and we always tend to think in that way. Not only there, but in other places across the theater as well. Special Operations Forces are vitally important to us, but they exist best when theyre flourished within a network of a, conventional forces and then host nations will. Yeah, which was going to be my next question about the conventional forces. So i was just trying to understand within this article what was new about what they were being required to do. Well, maam, i often look at the Washington Post articles and understand what theyre saying. In this case, i dont see anything particularly new. Okay, outstanding. And of course then, our special operators will they need to maintain a different strategic locations than where they are now or will they largely remain in place . It will depend if we go to the force level ive been told to go, 8600. We have a good laydown for that, going below that level with require guidance to me and it would depend on the permissiveness of the environment. If you go lower and go to fewer bases, typically youre going to do it because the security situation is permissive. You dont have to defend yourself against taliban attacks even as youre executing against isis and al qaeda. So, it would be strictly dependent on the overall permissiveness of the situation and those days are ahead of us and we have a variety of ways for looking at that and we will look at that very closely as we go ahead. Wonderful. A number of us did travel to afghanistan prior to thanksgiving and we were able to visit some of the commando training with the Afghan Forces and do you feel that they are now getting to a point where they will be able to nest with great capability with our special operators on the ground . Weve made Great Strides with the Commander Forces in afghanistan. Youre exactly right. Thank you very much, i appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, mr. Chair. I realize that the questions im about to embark upon is more policy and your job is executing policy, but i just want to get some of your thoughts. In your testimony on page four, you said since may of 2019, iran supported groups in iraq of attacked u. S. Interests dozens of times and it unmanned aerial reconnaissance flights and attacked and seized foreign vessels. And list all the things that iran is doing and i think you testified in response to senator hawleys question theyre not deterred in the asymmetric area, in the proxy area. Its always been a proxy war, i mean, thats what its always been. Here is my problem. In 2017, we left the jcpoa, which was which they were abiding by, all intelligence, unequivocally said that iran was in compliance with all of the jcpoa and we put on the maximum Pressure Campaign. As you testified it doesnt seem to be working because theyre doing what they were doing before. The major difference today is and i dont want to get into classified material, but iran is significantly closer to breakout to a bomb than they were when we left the agreement in 2000. I think it was 2018. I dont get it. Its exactly what many of us were worried about before the jcpoa. Youve got a malign iran acting irresponsibly throughout the region, getting close to a Nuclear Weapon. Help me out here. It just i dont really understand it. Theyre still doing it and well probably find out the attack last night was a shia militia supported by iran. I think thats probably where the evidence is going to head. I dont have any intelligence on that, but im speculating. Give me some thoughts. Senator, so the maximum Pressure Campaign, i would in terms of its effects on the iranian economy there are other people than me no question it had an effect on the iranian activity. Theres no evidence that it had an affect on what we hoped to deter. I would say that the iranian over the summer and the maritime conduct and straits of hormuz are no longer harassed, theyre passing back and forth without any problem, not because were taking actions aimed directly at iran, but rather that we and a coalition are shining a spotlight when the activity occurs, activity is not occurring. And interesting you mentioned the International Coalition we blew up when we left the jpoa and they didnt agree with our decision, we took a unilaterally, but thats another discussion. Again, do you believe theyre being deterred from their proxy attacks throughout the region . I believe were deterring from state on state attacks. Thats not the issue. Its not been a state on state situation. The attacks have always been through proxy. Theyre actually on january 7th, we had a clear state on state attack. After we killed soleimani, correct . That was the missile attack. Thats the missile attack. Yeah, okay, but that was we killed soleimani and then they responded, but historically the attacks have always been through proxies and my point is theyre still doing it. The only difference is, theyre also headed toward a Nuclear Weapon and i dont get how thats in the best interest of the United States or the region. Sir, i understand your argument. Many of these issues are not centcom issues, i would tell you i come back to what i think my military task is as the maximum Pressure Campaign continues. My military task is to prevent iran from taking actions directly or indirectly to challenge the activities ongoing. I appreciate that and youre doing an excellent job and its a tragedy what happened yesterday in the last week to our troops. I think everyone here recognizes that. Just in a few seconds left. Is there a plan b if the taliban doesnt abide by this agreement in afghanistan . In other words, are do they believe that were going to leave come hell or high water or do they still have some worry that were going to stay there if they dont act right because as you testified, theyre doing plenty of attacks right now. I worry that after 17, 18, 19 years were going to end up exactly where we were in 2001 with the taliban in charge of the country and open season for terrorists. Senator, i had the opportunity to give advice on the plan that were executing now and my advice was to proceed with it. The principal reason i supported it the conditionality inherent in it. We will have a opportunity to see what the taliban does. Do we know what the conditions are. I would does the American Public know . Sir, i dont know that id be the one to answer that. Well, thank you for your testimony, i appreciate it. I understand your job is it to execute policy, but youre the nearest that we have to policy maker on the issue this morning and i appreciate your candid answers to my questions. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, general, for your service and for being here and i, too, express my condolences to you and to the families and for the loss of your, our soldiers and those from the United Kingdom. General, this year, of course, the air force is asking us in their Budget Proposal to divest in critical isr assets and the way to allow for more room to invest for new technologies and future isr assets and im very aware of the Critical Role that these irs assets, the Legacy Assets have played in centcom, including some from my home state of north dakota. And im just id like your take on, first of all, what the department of defense and or the air force have told you to expect with regards to meeting your isr obligations or requirements, if fy21 budget is enacted. Thank you, sir. I actually possess most of the isr assets the department has, and im cognizant of that. At the same time, as we were talking just a few minutes ago, as the former director of the joint staff and the j5 im very much aware of the need to prepare and turn to face the threat from china and the threat from russia. Those are existential threats we need to capitalize and divest and move in that direction. Pour me to comes to a platform, for me the platform from centcom, it can gather intelligence, strike, do all kinds of things and its a jack of all trade. And i would prefer the air force doesnt divest of that right now to the degree theyre doing. I acknowledge they have tough decisions to make when they look at the china threat and the platform isnt in an air sense environment. And theyre closer, theyre deeper and graver. I favor retaining those assets as long as possible. I appreciate your answer and i agree, the mq9 is a remarkable asset and were trying to assess the risk and whether the risk is worth it and how we transition because i also agree that we need to get to another place. And with that in mind, i want to transition then in the discussion to the space force and of course, we understand that many of the new technologies were talking about would be space assets, and im just wondering how, first of all, are you expecting to get some benefits in centcom from space isr assets . I would expect the answer would be yes, but then the question becomes the gap between here and there, and the risks in the middle of it. Are we preparing to adequately mitigate that risk . Sir, i use space assets every day and every hour in Central Command and they provide unique capabilities. The total isr are complimented by air platforms as well. I for all of my life and particularly in Central Command we cant survive without space assets. I think youve answered my questions, including a couple i havent asked yet so i appreciate that and i appreciate the time and happy to yield back some time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. General, as long as were on the subject of isr, are your general isr requirements being met . Yes, they are. And are you able to leverage the isr capacity of partners and allies in the region . Im able to leverage both partiers in the region and partners and allies into the region that deploy into the region. Regarding the Peace Agreement with the taliban, you testified not long ago before the house Armed Services committee that the u. S. Had not developed military plans for the first withdrawal. And based on what you testified today and also, how you testified before that you dont think that, you didnt have much confidence that the taliban would honor its commitments. So at this rate, are we ever going to meet a timeline of complete withdrawal by the end of the year . Senator, that will be or by the end of the year or for any forseeable future. So im confident well go to 8600 by the middle of the summer. I think a decision to go below that level is a political, not a military decision. Ill have a opportunity to give a recommendation on that and then well be directed what to do. As there arent many indications that the taliban is going to stop doing attacks as you say theyd have to decrease the attacks against Afghan Forces substantially before wed go much below 8600. The troops though it seems to me we are going 0 to be in afghanistan had a long, long time. Certainly cant predict when were going to be out of there and this war has already cost us 2 trillion, killed more than 3500 american and coalition troops. This is a very troubling area of the world, the entire middle east is. So you would agree the stability, such as it can be, in the middle east, is a good thing for the United States . Senator, i would agree. Yes. And so, meanwhile, senator king had pointed out that iran is pursuing its Nuclear Ambitions and that they could very well have a Nuclear Weapon. Wouldnt that wouldnt iran having a Nuclear Weapon add to the instability of the region . Wouldnt it encourage other countries in the region to also develop Nuclear Weapons that would end up being an even more stable region than we currently have . Senators, i understand the object of our policy is to prevent iran from developing a Nuclear Weapon. Well, theyre going ahead with it from what we can see and our departure from jcpoa has only hastened that situation. I think overaround, the impact of our withdrawal from the jc pchp jcpoa is certainly being manifested. I have a question of china and russia, as they continue to make significant investments in the area of your responsibility so theyre cultivating relationships and providing Financial Support and in particular china has invested an an estimated 200 billion, 200 billion in the middle east in the past 15 years and both russia and china continue to develop relationships with leaders in the region such as syrian president bashar assad. And what of the United States as russia and china increase in your area of responsibility knowing full well russia and cheer are our near peer competitors . Senator, i think the greatest risk although its in the future is from china and you noted correctly, theyre leading with economics although theyve established a significant military presence in djibouti. Their military presence throughout the rest of the theater is actually quite small, but i think were seeing the leading edge of economic inroads. I think that russia is a little more complicated. Theyre not spending much more money, but military presence, but harder for them to sustain with the exception of syria. What are we doing . China has the whole of government approach to what theyre doing not only in this area of the world, but clearly in the indopacific area. So what are we doing . Are we pursuing a whole of government approach to counter, particularly chinas activities in both regions . Senator, again, this is not an area of my particular expertise, but i believe were looking at whole of government responses to china in the aor and in the bridge between centcom and u. S. A. Africom. That may sound reassuring, but i question whether were taking the whole of government approach that china is. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman and general for your testimony here today. Id like to join my colleagues in offering my sincere condolences to the loved ones and families of those members who we lost recently. You have command in a very dangerous region. Over the past several months our Service Members and installations have suffered several rocket attacks. Im concerned about the serious miscommunications to the American People and quite frankly, to the men in uniform and their families about the Damage Assessment following an attack in january that we had against our facilities. We were initially told there were no injuries, then we were told about a dozen soldiers suffered dramatic brain injuries, then several dozen. The latest reports show that more than 100 troops have been diagnosed with a brain injury from this attack many transferred out of the country for treatment. So my question to you, sir, is how did that miscommunication occurred, was centcom force today give a rushed assessment or did the white house make an announcement without having any facts . Senator, thank you for the question. Id actually like to talk about that i am solely and responsible for the notification with there are no casualties. I have the officer who gave that report, there was no pressure for me to give that report. Thats what we thought in the immediate hours after the attack because it was not evident to us that there had been concussion injuries. You know, maybe if we were smarter, we would have picked up on that, there were no kinetic injuries, no bleeding or bones broken. It was my assessment for those on the ground and im the Single Person for that report and i bear total responsibility for that, no one else. After that concussions presented themselves. Tdi presented itself. As you know, thats not an injury like a broken arm or leg that could be immediately diagnosed on the spot. These injuries come back and forth and sometimes manifest over times and sometimes takes months to do that. Two things i could tell you i was never under any pressure from anyone at anytime to shade this reporting. Secretary of defense never said anything to me about it. The chairman never said anything to me about it. The president never said anything to me about it. We were driven solely by medical diagnosis on the scene. Thats one point. Second point, i am confident that every military man or woman got the best treat that could be provided. As people presented and evaluated i took the trouble to actually dig into whats called a mace 2, a clinical two given on site to develop initial indications are you concussed and what is it . Its a pretty good tool so i want today make sure i understood it fully and the difficult of administering it. Youre right 110 people were diagnosed, we evacuated 35 of them out of the theater to landstuhl, and we continue to take a look at that. I would never minimize the brain injury and just the description is concerning. We still have a lot to learn about it, but i believe that people injured, received injuries of that nature at alassad have gotten good treatment because of it. Thank you for that answer and youve answered some of my next questions. The president i think he said, quote, they had headaches. A couple of other things, but i would say, and i can report it is not very serious, end of quote. Thats what we heard from the president that they had headaches. Question to you, there are hundreds of thousands of u. S. Military veterans suffering from tbi as youre well aware, do you agree theyre serious and not merely headaches. I believe any head injury is it serious despite the death of baghdadi in october, isis remains a threat in syria and most assassinating and intimidating local leaders and extending influence in rural areas throughout syria and iraq and similar to afghanistan, most of the Intelligence Community feels that without pressure, isis could reestablish. The president seems to have a different view. He takes 100 the defeat of isis and used that as justification to withdraw troops from syria back in october of 2019. So my question to you as a commander, because theres inconsistent here on what were hearing from the president and you. How do you navigate between the department of defense and the ics assessment of the isis threat . Based upon what ive been given by secretary of defense, what we call the eastern security area where were carrying on operations against isis with our sdf partners. Those are effective and i think as long as we maintain pressure on them, well be at a place where its difficult for them to generate and deliver external attack plotting. External attack plotting meaning the United States and europe. As long as we have the ability to do that and we have the ability to do that now with the forces there and were going to keep the pressure on. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And general, thank you for being here. And i join with others in expressing our condolences for those or to those last nights, the two americans and the brit that we lost in the attacks. Just to be sure that weve got our notes right, its not 14,000 troops that were added, it was 10,000 issued. The number goes up and down. Okay. Based on forces flowing out of the theater all the time. I would say the number is closer to 10,000. Got it. But its difficult to put a single figure on it. When a carrier comes in, 5,000 people come in, so, and then it leaves, so, we thats roughly correct. I wouldnt want to give you a single number. All right. Thats fair. Lets talk a little bit about what youre doing to deter gray zone attacks. I think that thats we need to hear a little bit from you on that, if you will. Sure. So as the maximum Pressure Campaign against iran continues, they seek theyre unable to really respond economically or diplomatically. The two channels that were use to go place pressure on them. As they seek to find a way to respond, the only way left is the military component and the military component, they can do it one of two ways, they can do it directly, a state attack and theyve done that with the attack on alassad or indirectly, proxy attacks or gray zone attacks as you indicate there. There is evidence over the course of the summer and the fall that iran wanted to pursue those gray zone activities, know ared to force us with the Pressure Campaign in order to make us back off of that and so where we are right now is we believe as a result of the Ballistic Missile attack on alassad, in the wake of that, rough state on state deterrence has been reestablished and that iran does not seem to want to engage in another exchange of that nature because that would ultimately be a very bad outcome for them. They recognize that. However, theyre still of the opinion that they can pursue their objectives through attacks that they would hope would be unattributable. Or below the level they would respond and thats poses a great danger for them because im not sure they have an exact understanding of where our red lines are and where were not going to be pushed. We see that in iraq and other places in the theater and see it principally in iraq, and thats where we see it most readily. Okay, then let me ask you this, when were talking about iran, do you think theyre more bold or less bold than they were a year ago . So they were very bold in the spring, late spring, early summer of 2019 and they were bold because they have never doubted our capability, but they doubt our will. So additionally, in the spring and summer of 2019, the theater had been significantly drawn down in terms of capability. So they could observe the centcom did not process the forces it had in the past. So a confluence of judgment about our will and a judgment about our capability led them, to answer your question, to be pretty bold. I believe they are less bold now, probably most significantly impacted by the death of Qasem Soleimani. So as we talk about their presence in iraq and their goal of ejecting us from that theater, then outside of adding personnel, which i think its fair to say, you dont have the personnel to add, then what can we do in iraq na is going to end up enhancing our force protection . How do we do that so that we keep iran in a diminishing posture instead of a bolder posture. First of all, you look to the source. If the source is iran, you it reestablish deterrence, you want to establish the idea in the mind of the opponent that the object they seek will be more painful than its attainment. More may feel to get there than to actually hold it. So do you that by being very clear to them about things that were going to tolerate and things were not going to tolerate. Thats one path. The other path at the same time in other words, they have to see our will. Or as my kids would say put the hurt on them. Thats a very good way to state it, maam. Yes, okay. So meanwhile, in iraq we are in iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi Government. The Iraqi Government has responsibilities to provide protection for us. And actually practically the best way to get at this problem is to continue to work with our iraqi hosts and partners to get off the smg threat because it threatens them as well. Okay, yield back. General mckenzie, excellent testimony we appreciate it very much as we stated at the beginning of this hearing. Were going to go downtown to svc217 for a closed session. Well see who shows up. All right . We are adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

© 2025 Vimarsana

vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.