Money we have given them. And theyebuild china know it. I have many friends from china. I dont have any objection to china, i think its wonderful, i am angry at our people, not their people, if you can get away with it. So look, weve rebuild china. It is not free trade, it is not anything, this is horrible, stupid trade. When you have 500 billion a folks, weve got to get smart. I have carl icon, i have the greatest negotiators in the ahn, i havearl ic the greatest negotiators in the world. We had pfizer, a great company, pfizer, they Just Announced they are leaving. They are a huge drug company. They announced they are going to ireland. Companies are going to mexico. Nabisco, ford, where are they going . Mexico. Mexico, mark my words, exit code is a small version of china. We better get smart and we ter get smart quickly mexico, mark my words, mexico is a small version of china. We better get smart and we better get smart quickly. Ivanka, she told me to act president ial, act president ial. She said, in the next debate, act president ial. I didntattack marco, attack little marko, and i didnt attack ted, lyin ted, lyin ted. But ted cruz, he is not going to be the right guy, he is not going anywhere, so it is not going to happen. I say we make is before the convention, by the way. You have these stiffs like mitt romney. The guy is a total stiff. Did he let us down . This guy is a loser. Did he let us down . I mean, here is a guy, he goes is so devastated, he forgot the campaign in the final month, he gave it to obama. Win,eave me, i am going to i am going to be hillary, but let me tell you, beating obama four years ago was easier than beating Hillary Clinton now, believe me. And mitt romney choked. Pure and simple. He choked, he choked like a dog, and thats not going to happen. Thats not good to happen with me. So heres the story. Heres the story. Come on back, folks. Come on back. You left. We had incompetent leadership. You left. Some folks said, we are not coming back, we had incompetent leadership, but now we can bring you back. You went to mexico, will bring you back. But im a conservative, and i am spent 48 look, i million in new hampshire, jeb spent 48 million in new hampshire, and i spent some money, too, my own money, but i won. He is a joke. People who have no clue about money or deals that have not read the art of the deal in all fairness, it is not of interest to them. Look at john kerry. Look at the deal he made with iran. One of the worst deals ever negotiated. One of the worst deals ever negotiated. Is a disgrace, it is an embarrassment. By the way, on that deal, we should have never, ever, even started, until we got those prisoners back, we should have gotten them back years ago, and once we got them back, we should have told them, by the way, the 150 billion, no, we are a debtors nation, folks. After about two days of turmoil, we would have saved, believe me, 150 billion dollars. That deal is such an embarrassment. Well, our trade deals are just like that. Our trained deals are just like that. Bowe bergdahl, he is just like that. He is a traitor. We get bergdahl, and we get to give them five of the great killers that they have coveted. Thee guys are now back on battlefield, trying to kill us all, and weve got a traitor. Big deal. And by the way, a traitor that , fivepposedly, supposedly or six young beautiful soldiers were killed trying to get him back. That is our deal. That is the way we negotiate. That is not going to happen anymore. Not going to happen anymore. Is wet we are going to do are going to tell our wonderful businesses that deserted us, they left us, and im not even blaming them, they had no reason not to, because nobody talks you think somebody went to carry her and said, you listen coming you let all of these people go, dont go to mexico . They dont do that. So they move into mexico, and i would say, and i would do it myself, i know it is not president ial, it is not president ial, it is not president ial of the president of the United States to call up the president of carrier, hello, this is the president. But this is so much fun for me. Please, dont take that away. Dont take that away from me. I love deals. Orwhether it is one of me one of my representatives, i know the good ones, i know the bad ones, that whether it is one someese killers or one of real for me, please, let me do it. Let he do it, please. So i call up, and they would say, the president of the United States is calling the president of carrier, get them on the good luckuld say, in mexico, enjoy your stay, but here is the story, you let go of 14,000 people that helped to build your company, and i really love, by the way, i really love the new pictures of your facility. Every single air conditioning unit that you make, every single one, as it crosses the border, and we are going to have a real border, because we are going to have a wall, we are going to have a real border, we are going to have a date, beautiful wall that nobody is crossing, just in case you had any questions, dont worry about the tunnels and stuff, nobody is going over it and nobody is going over it and we are going to have a big, beautiful door, but people are going to be coming into our legally,egally, legally, so i tell the head of carrier, everything will unit that you make in mexico and that you sell in the United States, we are going to put a 35 tax on that unit, and i hope it works out well for you. And here is what is going to happen, they are going to have lobbyists call me, but i didnt take any money, they are going to have special interest, and, and i didnt take any money, they are going to have donors, donors, donors, but i didnt take any money, i dont give a damn for them, folks. I care about you. To here is what is going happen. Within 24 hours of that phone call, ahead of carrier and ford and so many other companies, i mean, you just take a look, i could give you a list and you could read them all day, the head of nabisco, leaving chicago with their plant, they are headed to mexico, no more oreos oreos to eat. E so here is what is going to happen, folks, i will get a call within 24 hours, a president of carrier, mr. President , we have decided to stay in the United States. And then i would say, thank you very much. Dont want it in phoenix, arizona, or anywhere in particular, we just want it in the United States. Going to happen a lot. We dont win anymore. We dont win at anything. We dont win at anything. We dont win at anything. We are going to beat isis. How about general George Patton . He is too tough. He is too tough. He couldnt be a general anymore because he is too tough. He is not politically correct. Away, just chipping like i said, chipping away at the second amendment, they are chipping away at christianity, they are chipping away at our religion, they are not going to have it anymore. When it comes to christmas time, they are going to put up a fight, but we are going to put signsign as is, that says, merry, merry, Merry Christmas we are totally impotent as a country. We are going to knock the hell out of crisis and we are going to rebuild our country, we are going to rebuild out of isis, and we are going to rebuild our country. Were going to rebuild our country. Our country is going to be so strong. Somebody at that company that stole the equipment had political connections to these characters that i run against. We are going to have a great military and we are going to ofally, finally take care our great veterans, were going to take care of them. Going to win with the military, we are going to win. Oh, thank you, look at you. Look at you. Usa is right. Usa. Crowd usa usa usa , we arep so, folks going to start winning again. With ouring to win military, we are going to win for our vets, were going to win for our vets, right . We are going to win for our vets, were going to win with our military, we are going to win with a obamacare, we are going to get rid of it and going to make something much better, were going to win with every aspect of our lives. Were going to win the league with our second amendment. We are going to keep winning at every level. We are going to win so much that you are going to common you are going to say, is the president , we are winning so much, i cant stand it anymore, and im good say, i dont care. Ofs is for the people phoenix, and the people of arizona, were going to win a for our border, and we are going to build a wall, and ladies and gentlemen, i love you. You have to go out. You have to vote on tuesday. You will never be disappointed with me. I will never disappoint you. We are going to bring our country back. We are to take our country back. We are going to have victories again. Youre going to be so proud of your family, yourself, your country. We are going to win again all the time. Thank you very much. I love you. I love you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. This . Ll ready for mr. Trump thank you, everybody. Go out and vote go vote yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah, yeah announcer Campaign Rally with the donald trump will air at 8 00 p. M. Eastern here on cspan. Tomorrow, bill clinton will speak at a Campaign Rally in the sun, arizona for Hillary Clinton. Also scheduled to appear, got big efforts and her husband, mark kelly. Beginningage of that 5 30 p. M. Sunday here on cspan. During campaign 2016, cspan takes you on the road to the white house as we follow the candidates on cspan, cspan radio, and cspan. Org. Ashton carter and joint cheesed of staff chair general Joseph A Dunford testified thursday about the president s 2017 Defense Budget request. Among the topics discussed for isis, force readiness, cyber warfare, and the potential return of sequestration. Quickly welcomed by witnesses, we think each of you for your service to our nation into the marines serving here and around the world. Before i proceed with my say that, let me just yesterday, disturbing statements the by Senior Executive of United Launch Alliance were reported in the media that raised troubling questions about the nature of the relationship between the department of defense and ul a. This committee treat with the most seriousness and the Partnership Show favoritism or that efforts have been made to silence members of congress. Make a full will investigation into these statements and take action where appropriate. Last month, the director of National Intelligence provided this committee and unsettling picture of our worldwide threats. Russia has invaded ukraine. It is now regarded by chairman dunford in many of our military leaders as our nations greatest threat. China has continued its Rapid Military modernization, steadily military zynga the South China Sea and used coercion and the threat of force. Arth korea has launched brazen Cyber Attacks against the u. S. , continue to test their Nuclear Weapons program and productive conduct provocative missile testing. Rather than moderating its malign activities in the middle east as advocate of the Nuclear Agreement predicted, it ran i ran has increased terrorist proxies, conducted advanced , and fired rockets near u. S. Aircraft carriers. Detained 10y, iran u. S. Sailors and cap again dies to the entire instance in total violation of International Law and centuries of maritime tradition. These are the growing threats we face yet the department of defense remains guarded by a strategy that predates these developments. It is based on assumption about the world that no longer apply. The same is true about our Nations Defense spending. All requirements for our military have grown, the budget control act cap to suspense defense spending in 2000 11. Despite periodic relief, each of our military Services Remain unready and underfunded to meet the current and future threats. This translates into real things as remarkable and determined as it is cannot do for our nation. Our aircraft carriers no longer provide constant presence in the middle east or the western pacific. One third of Army Brigade Combat Teams are ready to operate decisively. The air force is the smallest it has ever been and more than half squadrons are not mission combat ready. Marine corps aviation is in crisis. The effects on the present force are bad enough. The effects on the future for star wars. Years and years of deferred maintenance and delayed modernization are creating a mountain of bills that will soon 2018 to 2021 alone. The department of defense needs 100 billion above the bca caps just to meet current requirements. In reality, those requirements are an adequate. Additional resources will be needed in the longer we delay the bill, the worse it gets and the more he runs the risk of return to sequestration. This is a crisis of our own making and im speaking of the congress as well. It is why many are concerned about the presence budget request for fiscal year 2017. Like about this request. Many of the investments are critical and long overdue. Though our nation is asking our military to do more, the president s Defense Budget is actually less than it is this year. The department was forced to cut 17 billion. Regions to beget sure temporary effects of positive economic assumption soften the blow. The department cut over 10 billion in a real military capability. These are just some of the consequences. 24 army had to cut helicopters. The air force had to cut five and 45 over the next four years. The navy plans to lay up an additional five cruises. The marine corps cut 77 tactical and Family Housing has been cut. Certain Critical Nuclear have beenion efforts further delayed. The unfunded requirements of the military services now total more than 18 billion. That represents the additional helicopters, biting field fighting vehicles, Training Programs are military leaders say they need to carry out our. Ntiquated Defense Strategy last year, the former chairman of the joint chief described the future Years Defense Plan as the lower ragged edge of manageable risk in our ability to execute a Defense Strategy. 17 we are one year later billion less than what our military needed and planned for. I dont know what lies we need to lower the bridge of risk of but i fear our military is becoming less and less able to deter conflict and our nation will deploy Young Americans into battle without sufficient training that will cost more and ultimately claim more american lives than it would have. This is the growing risk we face course soon change enough. We should not threaten the stability provided by the bipartisan budget act. Therefore, we make a virtue out of stability. This budget agreement ends this year and defense spending is cap to buy a law at 100 billion less than what our witnesses will testify our military needs. Is notnd of stability the answer, its the problem. If we cut into our military muscle again this year, are problems just get worse. Another priority over maine the lastse effort we began year, including a review of the Goldwater Nichols legislation now marking its 30th anniversary. Over the past year, senator reid and his staff have held hearings and conducted interviews with dozens of military and civilian defense leaders, including discussions with our witness today. I believe we have a rather clear definition of the challenge we must address. The focus of Goldwater Nichols was operational effectiveness, nations military ability to fight as a joint force. The challenge today is strategic integration by improving the ability of the department of defense to develop strategies and integrate military power globally to confront a series of threats. Of which is span multiple regions of the world and numerous military functions. Put simply, our competitors are catching up and our Defense Organization must be far more agile and innovative than it is. We are committed to work closely with both of you and we would welcome any thoughts and recommendations you are prepared to share today. Senator reid thank you very much. Fy 2017 audits includes nearly 583 billion dollars in Discretionary Spending and complies with the funding levels amid bipartisan budget act of 2015. Of this amount, of under 23 point 9 billion included in the base budget and 58 designated for the Contingency Operations account. We must be mindful of the risks facing our country and National Security challenges. China continues to invest aggressively in its military particularly and capabilities that allow them to deny access to others. North korea continues to be an immediate and present danger to global security. Is a significant danger. Our nations counterterrorism fight continues to be a top priority. It has been a year of security and political transition in afghanistan. In iraq, isil has lost significant territory but difficult tasks remain. Furthermore, the dangers posed by the district must to be addressed. In syria, eiffel maintains as isilof money areas loses ground in some areas, it gains foothold in donations. We must closely scrutinize the budget request to include and allocatending money to those areas that need additional fund. With regard to our military forces, we must take a hard look at the levels across all services. This committee has repeatedly heard testimony from senior rebuildingaders that number as their highest priority. It will take time to rebuild readiness. That is why its important accounts of the protected from cuts. I would welcome any comments on our witnesses on the importance of revealing readiness. Another challenge is the modernization of military platforms and equipment. While the readiness of our troops is paramount, we cannot yet invest in modernization. Our forces are required to have access to equipment properly upgraded. In order to meet the top funding 2015 bbva, thehe carter request modified acer budget fundings basin budget fundings. It does notre affect targeted investment in research and technology. The wellbeing and quality of life for men and women in uniform remain a priority concern. We are mindful we must support and maintain a high quality of life and service. The administration request includes a 1. 6 pay raise of the the military and civilian employees. These are critical to ensuring the pay remains competitive to retain the very best. The Committee Also understands we are committed to a booming reforms that will slow the growth. We need to address the longterm budget situation. Last year, the center had a healthy debate on how to manage the needs of the budget control act. It is a daunting task to decide Client Resources and i recognized the department has to make hard choices in order to comply with the 2015 budget agreement. I believe the senate should repeal the bca and establish a more reasonable limit on Discretionary Spending. Thank you. Welcome, mr. Secretary and we look forward to hearing from you and general dunford. Thank you, chairman. They key for the opportunity. Reid, thank you for the opportunity. Above all, for your steadfast support to our dod men and women all over the world. Im a very pleased to be here with chairman dunford and we will be discussing the president s 2017 Defense Budget matters, a budget which marks a major Inflection Point for the department of defense. In this budget, were taking the long view. We have to. We must be prepared for what might happen 10 and 20 and 30 years down the road. Gavefalls bipartisan nafta us much needed stability after years of gridlock and turbulence and i want to thank you and your colleagues for coming together to help pass it. That budget set the size of our degree of with this certainty, we focused on its shape, changing it in fundamental but carefullyconsidered ways to adjust to a new, strategic europe and Sees Opportunities for the future. Let me describe the assessment that drove our budget decisions. Its evident america is still the worlds foremost leader, partner, underwriter of stability and security in every region of the world as we have been since the end of world war ii. That is thanks in large part to the unequivocal strength of the u. S. Military and as we continue role, itsthis evident we are entering a new, strategic error. Todays security environment is demonically different from the last 25 years, requiring new ways of operating. China, north korea, iran , and terrorism are now driving dods planning and budgeting. I want to focus first on our ongoing fight against terrorism and especially isil which we must and will deal a lasting defeat. Most immediately in iraq and syria. Doing that in africa and elsewhere and afghanistan where stand with the Afghan Government and people. Although loyal, continuing to help to protect our homeland. In we are backing a campaign up with increased funding this year , requesting 50 more than last year. We had gained momentum against isil since the chairman and i last appeared before you. Notably, the iraqis retook ramadi and are now reclaiming further ground. Capable and motivated local forces supported by the u. S. And are Global Coalition have ,etaken in east syrian town severing the last major northern artery between rocca and mo zul. Meanwhile, 90 of our military Coalition Partners have committed to increase their contributions to help defeat isolate. We have increased strikes on isil, helped cash depots and oil revenues, conducted targeted strikes in libya, and recently killed icicles minister of war isils minister of war. I want to say a few words about russias role. Russia said it was coming into syria to fight isil but thats not what it did. There military has only prolonged the civil war, propped up Bashar Alassad and we havent seen whether russia retained low leverage to find a diplomatic way forward. Impact ourtry didnt campaign against isil. Along with our Coalition Partners, we intensify our campaign against isil and we will continue to do so until isil is dealt a lasting defeat. Two of the other four challenges reflect a return to great power competition. One is in europe where we take a strong, balanced approach to the router russian aggression. The other challenges in the asiapacific, where china is rising but behaving aggressively there, we continue our rebalance to the region. Allowing so many nations to rise and prosper in this, the single most consequential region for americas future. Otherile, two longstanding challenges posed threats to specific regions. North korea is one. That is why our forces on the koran peninsula remain ready to fight tonight. Iran. Her is a run concerns persist and while im on the subject, i want to say a few words about their treatment of our sailors on farsi island. Outrageous,ns were professional, and consistent with International Law and nothing weve learned about the circumstances of this incident since then changes that fact. Iransecause of recklessness in that part of the world the dod remains. Eat ahead and in our investments, planning, posture to ensure we counter the malign influence and uphold our commitment to our regional friends and allies, especially israel. Addressing all of these five challenges requires new investments on our part. New posture in some regions and new and enhanced capabilities. We know we must deal with all five challenges across all domains, not just the usual airland at sea but also especially cyber, electronic warfare, space. The adversaries are eager to exploit. Q2 our approach, being able to determine our most advanced competitors. The ability to ensure anyone who starts a conflict will regret doing so. In our budget, our capabilities, we must and will be prepared for a highend enemy. Andhis context, russia china are most stressing competitors as they continue to advance military systems. We see it in the South China Sea and syria. In some cases, they are developing weapons in ways of of war that seek to achieve their objectives rapidly before we can respond. Dod has elevated their importance in our budgeting. I have detailed how the budget makes critical investments to better these five evolving challenges. We are strengthening our posture in europe by investing three point 4 billion for European Reassurance Initiative, quadruple what we requested last year. We are prioritizing training and readiness of ground forces. Our navy, we increase the number of ships with new weapons and extend a commanding lead in undersea work there with new investment in unmanned undersea vehicles and more submarines, tripling their strike capacity. We are doing more inside their in cyber. A combined total of 34 billion. In short, dod will keep insuring our dominance in all domains. This, our budget seizes opportunities for the future. That is a responsibility i have two on my successors to ensure the military and Defense Department they inherit is just as strong as the one i have the privilege of leading today. Are makingwe increase investment in science technology, building new bridges to the innovative system as we always have to stay ahead of future threats. Thats why were building what i call the force of the future. Our technology is nothing compared to our people. In the future, we need to continue to recruit and retain the best talent. Recruiting good people is a critical part of our military edge and everything should understand this need and my commitment to it. Because leo it to taxpayers to asnd our defense dollars wisely and responsibly as continuously improve acquisitions and for the reduce overhead and produce new of our that defines much institutional organization. Goldwater nichols reform is a focus of this committee and i appreciate this. Goldwater nichols was important, had positive results, but after 30 years, it needs updates. There are some areas where the pendulum may have swung too far, like not involving the Service Chiefs enough in accountability. There are areas where subsequent events suggest nudging the pendulum further like taking more steps to strengthen the joint chiefs of staff to help address trends regional threats, threats and multiple domains, multiple threads within overlapping timeframe. Know, last fall, we begin a comprehensive departmentwide review to identify any potential redundancies and other areas of improvement to help formulate dods recommendations to you. I expect internal findings by the end of march. This work is important on what is within our existing authority to do so. We look forward to working closely with with the needed reforms. As we discussed, i look forward to working with you, senator reid, on this important matter. The Defense Department doesnt have the luxury of just one opponent or the choice between current fights and future fights. We have to do both. That is what this budget is designed to do and we need your help to succeed. I think the committee for supporting the bipartisan budget act that set the size of our budget. Focuses on the budget shape, making necessary and consequential changes. We hope you approve it. Some may be looking at the difference between what we proposed last year and what the deal gave us. In a total of about 11 billion. Ess we i want to reiterate that have mitigated that difference and we can be prepared to explain how and this budget meets our needs. The budget deal was a good deal. We are grateful for that. s greatest risk is losing that stability this year. And having uncertainty and sequester return in future years. Thats why going forward, the biggest priority for us is congress averting the return of sequestration to prevent 100 billion in automatic cuts looming. So we can maintain stability and sustained these critical investments over time. We have done this before and the same support is essential today to seize the opportunities within our grasp. As long as we Work Together, i know our National Security will be on the right path and americas military will continue helpfend our country and make a better world for generations to come. Thank you. Quotes thank you for the opportunity to join secretary carter in joining in appearing before you. Airmen,iers, sailors, the greens remain our most competitive advantage. The mostmilitary is capable fighting force in the world. With your support, the force will continue to adapt and when in Current Operations while an invading and investing to meet future challenges. I dont believe we should send americans into a fair fight, rather maintain a joint force that has the credibility to andre allies and partners overmatch any adversary. Improve ours us to capabilities, restore readiness, and develop leaders that will serve as a foundation for the future. The u. S. Is confronted with challenges from traditional state actors and nonstate actors. The department identified five strategic challenges. China, iran, north korea continue to invest in military capabilities that reduce our advantage. They are advancing their interest through competition with a military response. Examples include russian actions in ukraine, chinese activities in the South China Sea, and the malign activities across the middle east. Isil and al qaeda pose a threat to the home win, American People, partners and allies. Even the opportunity, such groups would change our way of life. The fivetend with strategic challenges, we recognize successful execution requires we maintain capabilities. Is agingar deterrent and requires monitoring station. We are prioritizing investments he did for a safe and secure nuclear to turn. We are making advancements in capabilities. We must further develop capabilities in the domains of cyber and space. We respond to challenges in the context of a fiscal environment that has hampered our ability to allocate resources most effective way. Has absorbed 800 billion in cuts and faces an additional 100 billion dollars in reduced risk through fiscal year 21. Absorbing significant cuts over the past five years has resulted in her underinvestment in critical capabilities. The fiscal year 17 budget begins to address the most critical investments required to maintain a competitive advantage. Within the resources possible provided by the 2015 bipartisan act, it addresses the departments five challenges. Major areas e investment and highend capabilities, the capability and capacity to meet car operational demands, and the need to rebuild readiness after an extended period of war. We will need predictability to further recover from over a decade of war. It will be several years before we fully restore full Spectrum Readiness across the services witheplenish our stocks critical precision omissions. You will take your continued support to insure the joint force has the flexibility, readiness, responsiveness that insures our men and women never face a fair fight. Do you have any statement . I do not. Thank you. Secretary, i appreciate your comments about the iranian behavior and their subsequent behavior exploiting this humiliation of American Service members. What action had he recommended we take in response to this . What action do you recommend we take in response to this . Everything we are doing in the gulf, including actions , d in this budget all of these things are planned in the budget and i wonder if you planned on any specific action that the iranians would know is a result of our humiliation of our servicemembers. Ive made it quite clear. Areou made it clear you outraged but what specifically have you recommended to do in response to that. Where continuing to take all of the actions we need obviously, the specific action in response the iranian outrage. Incident,time of the we prepared to protect our people. It turns out they were released in time and we later had the opportunity to see them being filmed and it made very clear that is the kind of behavior we wouldnt want to engage in. Do you want to add anything . Is stability in afghanistan in our National Interest in light of the testimony of theral campbell that situation in afghanistan is deteriorating . I will start and ask the chairman to chime in. Is situation in afghanistan very important to us. The afghans had a tough fight to this last fighting season and will have a touch season this we endd its important the rest of our coalition stay with them not just this year but in 2017 and so forth and we are andinually assessing adjusting how we give support to the Afghan Security forces. Request you dont disagree with general nicholson and general campbell that the situation is deteriorating in afghanistan . They provide an accurate assessment of the situation in afghanistan. The taliban to be a threat to afghanistan stability . I do. Why did the u. S. Forces not have the ability to target taliban fighters in support of afghan fighters . If they are a threat to our stability and the situation is deteriorating yet we still dont give the authority of American Forces to target taliban fighters. Now, our authorities focus on supporting the Afghan Forces. Even though the situation is deteriorating, even know they continue attacks, even then we still dont give the u. S. Forces the authority to target taliban fighters unless they are directly attacking the u. S. Said is correct. Does that make sense to you . Are in the process of learning Lessons Learned from 2015. We are well into 2016. The plan right now is to cut the to 5500om 9800 and drop and here we are in march. We have recommendations from general campbell for changes to make in 2016. The Lessons Learned in 2015. This week, we conducted a teleconference with general nicholson on the ground in afghanistan now and we are in the process of making recommendations to the president for changes that may be made to make us more effective in supporting Afghan Forces and making them more successful. Including force levels. Full range to include capabilities. Last year and the 2016 Defense Program when you indicated you needed additional , the then chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said we are at the lower ragged edge of manageable risk. Now you say it seems to be ok even though the army had to cut 24 blackhawk helicopters, the of 35s. Cut five the navy plans to lay up an additional five cruisers. Cut 77ine corps plans to tactical vehicles and 1. 3 billion in military construction. All of those cuts are being made as opposed to what you asked for last year. I theu are saying way, we have seen this movie before. When you cut f 35s, the blackhawks, you increase the cost because the original plans are at optimum cost. With there satisfied level, which is 17 billion less than last year even though your predecessor said we are on the lower edge of manageable risk with the amount we had last year. Its hard for us to understand. Clear, i said the budget this year is sufficient to execute the strategy. There is associated risk with that. Some of the investments we have made this year are designed to address that risk. My most significant concern is the byways modernization that has been deferred that we will 19, 20, 21,l year and 22. What i said is this years 2017 budget is sufficient to meet the strategy. 24 blackhawks. Five of 35s. Marine corps cut 17 tactical vehicles. Year, you told this committee you needed. I didnt say it was ok to do those things. I said with regard to this budget, weve made the best decisions. What is comfortable with is we havent made the right priorities. Is we have made the right priorities. Thank you for your testimony. One of the key issues that the committee is focused on is readiness is a function of resources and time. Can you i think the question within the constraints you faced, you have tried to maintain and improve readiness but that will not happen just with more money. That will take time. Thats right. There are three components. There is money, the time, and operational tempo and the operational tempo has maintained at a very high level. Result of sequestration particularly in 2013, we laid off a lot of engineers, artists since, a backlog of maintenance. In some cases, we deferred modernization issues that will have an impact on readiness. And being able to recover from a training perspective requires an operational tempo much more sustainable than the one we have now. In the near term, one of the services will be ready in three or four years. The air force has identified 2024 before it fully recovers. Much is that of that is maintenance. Of thehe context resources you have available for readiness is sufficient at least to continue the improvement in readiness you must achieve. That your estimate . The secretary prioritized the readiness of the forces that will deploy. We have got as much readiness as year 17. Fiscal with respect to procurement, my understanding is that you have done all you can to maintain multiyear contracting which keeps us in the ballgame if you will. But we have not fixed the sequestration problem. Next year, the structure will fall apart but we are maintaining the costefficient multiyear contracting. We are. This gets to what the chairman raised about how did we accommodate the difference between what we planned last year and what we got in the bipartisan budget agreement. As a net ofcribed 11 billion. , wehe chairman said protected readiness. The principal impact came in a number of modernization programs. O include shipbuilding that is what we did. Its all out there. Do was not fond the Service Readiness recovery as they got to move that the full Spectrum Readiness from where theyve been. Thats what we need and ill of the services is full spectrum. Making up some of the maintenance backlog that particularly affects marine corps, aviation. Any of our endge strength the goals. We did not change military compensation to make this a difference. We didnt terminate any major programs, any multiyear contracts. Didnt risk any employees. But we did have to make adjustments and they are there for you to see. Are we happy making those adjustments . Is what we needed to do to accommodate the budget agreement. If the agreement were to fall apart, that is our biggest strategic danger because that will affect in future years our ability to recover. Term recover full Spectrum Readiness. That is how we adjusted. The opinionsint, expressed by everyone here about the need to end sequestration for 2018 is a critical paramount. That is the greatest Strategic Risk to the department of defense, is there a version to sequestration. I very much hope we can avoid that. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im not going to ask a question about gitmo. There are two groups of people at this table, one who think its absurd to think about giving the resources we have their and simply in light of the fact we have a recidivism rate of 30 . Others will be asking questions about that so i will let them take the time but that will be one of the considerations. Saying that im not hearing glowing reports right now but we do hear all the time we have the best equipped, the best trade and all of that. Side but there is a bad side. We are not where we normally should be and have been in the past. Theave had more hearings in years ive been on the house and Senate Armed Services committee this year than ever before. People are on tap to wake up and know the problems that we have. Committee, Lieutenant General mickelson said the security situation in is deteriorating. Lastly, general austin before in response to senator mccains question, testified just last week that it may be time to reconsider the plan to reduce americas military forces in afghanistan. General dunford, is he right . Thank you. We are in the process right now of reviewing. Its a constant process and we have spent a fair market time on it just this weekend we spent some time with general campbell before he left. Is it a better idea to let the conditions on the ground determine what and when changes we will make . That is what we did in the fall when the decision was made. The two quotes i gave from general austin and general mickelson, have you discussed with them specifically about the four Structure Requirements . We have. Lucks have you presented any of the recommendations to the president . We have not. Were still in the process of deliberating. We had a teleconference with the general mickelson this week. He has had a chance to invoke his predeployment site survey and has been on the ground. It was important to the secretary and i that we heard from general and before moving forward. We have had a lot of people testify. I have a great deal of respect for all of them and they are very blunt about the problems we have. Justal courtney testified last week that north koreas recent Nuclear Tests and satellite launch demonstrate kim toguns commitment developing strategic capabilities and is a disregard for the uns security resolutions. We can all agree with that. He testified to this committee that chinese coercion, militarization in the South China Sea threaten the most fundamental aspect of global prosperity, freedom of navigation, and forces are opening at a higher tempo than ever before. Do the two of you agree with that . I certainly do, senator. Why we need to remain vigilant with respect to north korea. Is why we need this budget we are asking for. These are all serious matters. I contend we are in the most direct in position weve ever been as a nation. Now, we have mentally deranged people who might have a capability of wiping out an american city. I would only leave you with a quote both of you heard last week from congressman freeling house ann. He said from what i have in what putin isd doing, he said 70 years ago, from what i have seen from our russian friends during the war, im convinced there is nothing to admire so much as strength and nothing for which they have respect for then weakness, especially military weakness. Keep that in mind. Of you for your service and this hearing. I want to talk briefly about Cyber Attacks against the homeland. Case of severe domestic attack, dods unified command will be responsible for coordinating response. Reported a projected shortfall for 2018 and there are concerns dod cyber operators may not be able to seamlessly operate under the current patchwork relevant to authorities. What could be done legislatively to complement of those relationships and can you describe the level of involvement the National Guard operators might play in the event of a major domestic cyber attack in do you believe there adequately trained and equipped to make that function . Thank you. Let me take the part about the guard first if i may. I was out in Washington State a couple weeks ago where theres a terrific National Guard unit working on exactly what you are talking about, defending the nation and defending our dod , upon which we are so dependent. These are people whose day job defendershese cyber for some of our most important i. T. Companies and tech companies. They are the highest skill level sector has and yet theyre making their skills available to their country through the National Guard. This is a tremendous strength, the ability to bring a talent we would otherwise have difficulty attracting and retaining. We do try to attract and retain and we do have some success in that regard and that is what we are doing as we build out Cyber Mission teams. Does it work on wartime needs, including joining , but alsoagainst isil defending the country. We do that in connection with Homeland Security and law enforcement. Legislative acts that have enabled us better in that regard. Its possible we could still do better in that regard. I will tell you we adjust justrities continually and this week, we are talking about what we can do to expand them. Could you submit a letter if there is additional authorities you feel you need . Will do. With regard to military Sexual Assault, ive been asking for files from the major bases and this year, i added the Major Trading basis. How do these cases go, what do they look like once they are filed and taken to court . We find more than half of a victims are civilians, which isnt entirely captured by our survey. I learnedcond thing was that there is a 50 drop off rate once someone files a complaint. Continue withot their complaint during the course of the year. One of the things this committee has done is we are going to put in place a defense advisory and that is supposed to be an independent civilian review board that looks at this designated by the president. The important that executive director of this committee is independent so they can give us advice and i would like your commitment you will look at the staffing of that individual and im hoping you will choose a civilian to be the director. I thank you for your leadership in this issue. Its a really important issue. Of course we will work with the committee on this and i promise just sayand i will very clearly to you how much i appreciate your leadership on this issue because this is unacceptable and our military because our military is about honor and trust and Sexual Assault violates honor and trust and the more we learn, there are other dimensions to it. Civilians, retaliation, which is another thing you have rightly stressed when he did Pay Attention to. Stopis something we cannot learning about and doing better about and i promise to continue to work with you. Thank you. Gender role, i will submit for the record a specific question about combat integration i would love your response on. Think you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Secretary, i would like you to offsetre about the third initiative, specifically what is new about it . Is it new money, a new way of using the money . We spend tens of billions of dollars researching and developing technologies and that is in excess of our adversaries. This committee has heard a lot about how our technological edge is eroding. That level ofif investment and the way we are using it was sustaining our technological advantage, what about the offset initiative is going to ensure Ashton Carter thank you, senator. Our advocates are about getting new money and finding new ways for that money. The new money we are looking for in this budget notwithstanding, 11 billion that we absorbed. We did not take them into the anddtd, Research Development relative to last year, science and technology, which is part of that also. We are doing it in new ways. I will give you a couple of examples. Out to thehing hightech industry that does not have a traditional working with the apartment of defense. When i started out with this business long ago, it was all the major Technological Companies in america worked with the Defense Department. It was part of the legacy of world war ii and the cold war. I am trying, we are trying to rekindle those relationships with the hightech industry we find willing, patriotic, eager to help serve. We have to do it in a way that is compatible with their business and technology models, and we are doing that. And secondly, we have some Innovative New parts in our department i want to call attention to. The capabilities office, which is specifically looking at and ,as already made major progress in highly innovative things like electronic warfare, drones. That is the place where the idea of the sm six missile came from, taking an old system and giving a new capability. We are tracking back the innovators in our department as well as connect with the best parts of innovative American Society areas next to our people, our technology is what makes us great, and we get technology because we are the most innovative country in the world. Sen. Fischer so you would say that the process for developing these technologies would you say that it has not been working in the past and that is one of the main focuses then of the offset, is to not only work within the department but also to reach outside the department, and not necessarily looking at havingc programs but more open, innovative mind on this then . Ashton carter certainly that is what it comes down to. Both traditional programs, we need to make them move along faster, more agile, do a better job of incorporating Technology End them, and reaching out to the innovative part of our society and getting them interested in these vitally important National Security problems and working with us as has been the tradition in america for decades and decades. Sen. Fischer and you know, innovation is very risky. So when we are looking at putting more money into the program, i think all of us realize that losses are going to occur. We are not going to see a success rate with every program that you are trying for. There will be no result in some areas. Ashton carter that is correct. Sen. Fischer we are not in a risk tolerant environment. How do you address that . Ashton carter that is a problem. We want our innovators to take risks. Taking risk by definition means sometimes things wont go the way you had hoped. When your exploring a technological frontier, when you test a weapons system, we have to be tolerant of risk. Provided that risk was taken advisedly in the interest of making a leap ahead in technology. We have to do that. We are too riskaverse, then we will always be behind the technological curve and not before it to read and our enemies take risks. Our potential enemies take those risks. We need to take those risks also. Sen. Fischer thank you, sir, thank you mr. Chairman. You to all of you for your testimony. General dunford, you look at the b17 and it does all that you might want to do. You said our budget is based on the top line that Congress Gave us. As a look at your written testimony, i will just read it. To accommodate a constrained top line, a b17 will only exacerbate this capitalization and other requirements. More broadly the cumulative effect of top mind reductions over the past several years have limited the resiliency of the joint force. Looking ahead, i am concerned the demand for future capabilities and capacity will outpace the resources available, forcing even more difficult decisions to met strategy and resources. The strength talking about with respect to these top lines is cash,11 sequester bca correct . Ashton carter that is correct. As i recall, 2013 was particularly devastating. Sen. Kaine we had an opportunity to turn on request support when in effect, we chose not to turn it off. That has created downstream challenging consequences. Us,real issue i think for if we put National Security for us, what can we do about that constraint . What we have done, we have 22year budget deals in a row deals in a row. That provided some relief. In each instance, we also pushed the badgett cap budget cap out a few years. You are facing the reality like an automatic stamp back sanction in these budget caps. If congress were not to agree on a budget, and we have a history of not agreeing on stuff over time, we will snap back to a punishing sanction against our own nation ability to defend ourselves, and we have now pushed that out significantly into the future, the late 2020. That is the risk you are talking about. The risk of falling back into sequester and punishing our National Security is the significant concern we are struggling with. Ashton carter that is exactly right. Even if we reverse sequester, we havent united bills that will come simultaneously. As i alluded to in my opening statement, the modernization of nuclearization will start to recover from the modernization over the last several years. Even though we originally projected the funding the department asked for, i would assess that probably in the late teens and early 20s, we will hit this bottom wave of modernization that will make it very difficult to balance readiness, infrastructure and modernization. That is the balance we try to have. The more out of balance the of become, the more difficult it will be to get out of this. There are some who i have some who i there are think i have heard argue that we dont need to worry about this. What we can do is just plus up the old accounts as we talk about budget challenges each year and try to deal with these issues. From my way of thinking, that can be shortterm temporary leave, but also, we should have a particular role in the defense that it. Oco is not really money you can count on. You can count on it for following years. Money in a oco year, but not sure if you can count on it in the following year. Wouldnt you agree with me that we are relying upon successive annual battles about oco funding is not providing you with the certainty that you need to have . Joseph dunford we need three things. We need predictability, the right level of resources, and we need them to be in the right areas. I couldnt agree with you more. Sen. Kaine we were talking about the nva this year, and we will really grapple with this sanction we are imposing on our self, which is, if we ever fell into it, and i hope we will always be able to reach agreements, we have now pushed capssequester and the vpa out quite some time. If we cant reach an agreement for a goodfaith reason, we have built this self punishment into our neck mechanism. What i hope is we can agree. We are not required to continue a sequester that was put in place with budget caps in the summer of 2011 free isil, prerussia into the ukraine, precyberattacks. Preebola, free zika. We dont have to live by 2011 reality in 2016. If anyone will see this, the importance of it in congress, it will be the Armed Services committee. I know the chairman will make this an abort and priority. Thank you very much. Ashton carter thank you, and i am glad senator kaine brought this up. The chair has made this a priority. Let me ask secretary carter and general dunford. Goodlooking back several years was headedequester our way, but we didnt think it was a reality, i would ask people in your chair, other people, are you planning for sequester . And they would say no, we are never planning for it, it is not intended. We assure you we will fix it. It is unthinkable we would do this. And the unthinkable happened and we had to deal with it. We have dealt with it once, and that was bad enough. But tell us about how going be a a second time would whole new problem. And also, general dunford, and i will let you go first, did i , if we avoid sequester this time, we still dont have enough money to take care of the national propensity you have to take care of. Is that what you are saying . Joseph dunford it is. Even at the level to avoid sequestration, we have a bottom line of modernization that is a result of the last three or four years of the budget. Bottomresult of that wave of nuclear raise nation. Nuclearization. We of Nuclear Enterprise all coming at or about the same time. Beassessment is we will challenged even if we are above the sequestration level of funding. In regards to the other 100 billion, senator kaine has listed all of the strategic guidance written in 2012. My assessment is that if we are confronted sen. Wicker lets reiterate those. I interrupted her train of thought. We are talking russia, isil Joseph Dunford i am talking russia, isil, north korea, increasing the line influence from iran, and i am talking about the activity in china, which concerns us in terms of maintaining the competitive advantage. Their investment in their investment in the defense capabilities and some of their behavior in the pacific also concerns me from a perception competitive perspective. Each of these five areas have been challenged by the secretary and should inform future budgets. Sen. Wicker ok, secretary carter, are there some room in your shop where we are planning for this disastrous eventuality if we are not able to reach an agreement, and if the law of the land, which is sequestration again, kicks in . Ashton carter let me associate myself with everything the chairman said. Sadly the department did learn what it was like to feel sequester. I can say with some of the effects are, and you will immediately see why we are so concerned about taking back in the future. Uncertainty and turbulence cause us to do things inefficiently, managerially. Like issuing shortterm contracts, turning things on and off. The strategy that the chairman was just referring to and the five major threats we face, those arent oneyear things. We cant budget and program one year at a time per fashion and meet those. It is unfair to our people to have that budgetary uncertainty. They look here, they look to washington, and they wonder what is going on and what is their future. I am concerned about the picture it paints in the world and we do this to ourselves. To our friends and also our potential foes. We do know with the consequences are, we did go through it in recent years. On how weious effects manage ourselves and how we protect ourselves. The last thing i would like to say is, i would like to associate with something the chairman said with respect to the Nuclear Enterprise. We see bills out there for the safe, secure and reliable nuclear arsenal. This is one big item which will require the replacement of icbm, nuclear submarines, modernization, we go down that road, and other things. That money will have to prove ride be provided. Sequestration absolutely necessary, but on top of that, we need the funding the country needs to defend ourselves and our people. Sen. Wicker thank you, we rely on you to tell us what you need. Speak out loudly and clearly from both sides of this table and make it clear what is at stake with the National Security of americans. Thank you all three. Thanks, mr. Chairman. We often remark in this committee to thank the witnesses for their service to our nation, and we have three individuals this morning who have served our country over many years with extraordinary and unique distinction, so i thank you for all of your service to our nation. Noted in carter, you your testimony that we do not have the luxury of choosing between strategic challenges that our nation faces and certainly one of those challenges is undersea warfare. As you know, our attack submarine force is projected to fall below the minimum desirable of 48 votes by 2025. By 2029. As low as 41 our submarines are among the most versatile, stealthy, and strong forces available to conductnd also to offensive operations. Considering the gap we are approaching in submarine capability, wouldnt it be wise to consider Building Three submarines a year, to virginia class, along with the Ohio Replacement Program . Support such a move . Ashton carter senator, thanks. To speak to your general point about the critical importance of undersea dominance, that has been an area where our military excels over all others. It is a critical area that we are targeting in this critical budget to keep and extend that advantage. It involves submarine construction, it involves the virginia payload module. Some other things like undersea, unmanned undersea vehicles which i can talk about, some of them i cant. That is a major thrust of this budget. With respect to submarine building numbers, we have laid into the budget this year as we planned, and we sustained them. Twotuck with that, our submarines per year. Your question is, will begin to the point of the higher class replacement in the future . We want to add submarine shipbuilding tunability and ships per year, yes. That gets back to the point of having the money we begin the ohio replacement to keep a safe, secure and reliable deterrent. We cant have that at the expense of the general purpose. That is the point we have all been making, and that would require additional funding. Sen. Blumenthal if the shipbuilding capacity is there, you would favor going that route of three submarines a year if necessary to feed to that gap . Ashton carter yes, we are going to need to build the ohio class replacement summary. Sen. Blumenthal secretary carter, thank you. Earlier in the week you met with Israeli Defense minister and others in the military assessment there. Establishment they are. Can you commit to us that israel will retain its quality military . Can you say when the memorandum negotiations will be done . Ashton carter i have that commitment. That is something my good friend and colleague the Israeli Defense minister and i discussed, and we will do that. With respect to the mou, that is something the president and the Prime Minister discuss. That is not something the defense ministers decide. In our conversations, which are frequent, the minister and i do discuss with israelis need now and going forward. We use that to inform those discussions about the mou and the amount of help we give to the israelis to defend themselves in what is a very dangerous region. , i. Blumenthal and finally have long been concerned as have many of my colleagues about the Iran Ballistic Missile Program that is continuing testing. I read a letter to president obama with a number of colleagues calling for the sanctions against iran and the department of treasury following the letter did indeed enforce that. 11 agencies and individuals supporting the program, clearly more mustdone be done to continue the pursuit of this program. General hotel and general austin literally within the past week or so advise the committee about the need of increased sanctions. Do you agree . Ashton carter i do. That is not a response ability of the department. That is not a responsibility that we very much fulfilled. You talked about the defensive commitments with respect to the iranian ballistic missiles. With respect to our friends and allies in the region, that is why we have the Missile Defense and other capabilities in the gulf and my we need to keep them strong. I can discuss those also with the i read Israeli Defense minister. And others, the three tiers of the Aerial Defense against illicit missiles. Sen. Blumenthal thank you. Senator sessions, please. I would say thank you, would be chairman, but actual chairman, i suppose. The man who would be chairman. [laughter] it is a political world we are living in. General dunford, when you have when we look at the middle east, we have a number of witnesses testifying over recent months about it. I have come to the conclusion that there is going to be a lot of violence for a long time. There wont be one victory that will make us safe. I talked with democratic colleagues, and from their comments in the committee meetings, it seems to me that we a need to even agree upon strategy that can be bipartisan and extend beyond the election, maybe the whole world be able to support on how we confront on this rising tide of violence and extremism. Do you think that is possible, and how close are we to achieving Something Like that . Joseph dunford i do think it is possible. We have done a lot of work for the department. We take a longterm view in the middle east and how to challenge the problems there. We cant, no more than we can year,p a budget year to can we develop a strategy year to year and making merging changes and expect to be successful. The basic thesis, can we get a bipartisan strategy and approach to the middle east that will carry out but we assessed to be a generational conflict . I definitely concur. Sen. Sessions meaning more than 20 years or more. Joseph dunford when you look at the underlying conditions that have led to violent extremism, i cant imagine addressing those in any less than that period of time. When you look at the political issues, educational issues, those are all things that would take a long period of time. Violent extremism in some form will exist until those conditions are brought to the middle east and addressed. Sen. Sessions secretary carter, do you agree with that . Ashton carter i do, and i will go further than that. First what cant be tolerated in a generational way is isil. That is why we are so intent upon exhilarating the defeat of isil. To get to the chairmans point and your point, senator, that is not going to automatically create a middle east that is free of extremism, and it will not create a world that is free of terrorism. Puttrends in technology more destructive power in the hands of smaller and smaller groups. We recognize, and as part of our approach to the future defense, that both nonstate and state in theneed to figure investment portfolio of the defense of this country going forward. Both of those are featured in our longterm budget, even though we expect and need to defeat isil in the short term. We are making investments to protect ourselves against nonstate actors for the more distant future, and i think we have to. Sen. Sessions well, i tend to agree with that. We need to focus on who needs to be confronted militarily and defeated as soon as possible, and certainly idle is number one on that list. Would you agree . Ashton carter absolutely. At the same time we have allies in the region, allies who opposes some of these forces we have pros. We oppose. It is a very complex region, is it not . We have to be and we need as many allies as we can have. Some of us fighting me to be fighting other people than us over a decade or generation to calm. Would you agree . Ashton carter i completely agree, and i will add i was in brussels a few weeks ago. All the defense ministers of all the countries part of the counter isil coalition, and the mission was the same. E are willing to lead this we are willing to do a lot because we are powerful. But we need others to get in the game, and particularly we need those in the region to play their part. Need moreonally, we partners on the ground, because both in syria and iraq, it is not only necessary to defeat isil, but it is necessary to to sustain necessary to sustain the defeat. We can help them and lead them, but they need to do their part. I emphasize to them that we are going to defeat isil, and we will remember who played their role, and who did not. Sen. Sessions thank you, i guess my time is up. I would think my colleagues that express concerns about this overall policy in the United States. I believe we can get there, i believe we can achieve a policy that extends legitimate interest of the United States and bipartisan way. It can be sustained no matter who is elected president in the years to come. I think it is important as a great nation cant be flip flopping around on commitments around the globe. Thank you all. On behalf of chairman mccain, senator douglas. Secretary carter, we are still losing over 400,000 sacred members each year due to suicide. Every set of Member Service member receive a person to person assessment every year. Can you provide me with an update of the act implementation, and when the department will roll out those Mental Health examinations . Ashton carter thanks, and thank you for your interest in this. It is important part of welfare in our folks. It is something we have become increasingly attentive to. I will get back on the specific asians of that in limitation specific implementations of that program. As you know, we spend about 50 billion a year out of 600 or so billion dollars requested on health care. Over the last years we have increased greatly the Amount Health tot mental provide our folks with resilience, which is what the program you are talking about, so they are not as vulnerable and susceptible to the kind of things that might drive them to such an extreme act. And also we are treating people that have already reached the point really have that kind of impulse. It is very important. Sen. Donnelly we continue to remove the stigma. Ashton carter we want people to seek Mental Health treatment when they need it, and we want everyone who is not seeking it to look sympathetically upon that like getting any other kind of medical treatment. Sen. Donnelly and mr. Secretary, i know how is you are with challenges we face around the globe. And pointing to those problems, the national lapse. A navalna we have warfare center. We have talked about you coming to visit. Just a morning or Late Afternoon or late evening, or a midmorning at 3 00 in the morning visit. So you can get an understanding of the strengths and challenges. When can we make that happen . Ashton carter i look forward to it. When you come with me . Sen. Donnelly yes, even at 3 00 in the morning. Ashton carter it is a deal. I love visiting all our folks. Nothing better than going out among the people that serve this department. Whether they are troops or scientists or full at industry, they are all part of the military. We will have a wonderful time, i promise. Sen. Donnelly thanks. General dunford, when you see what just happened with vladimir putin, how do you judge that . How will that affect things in syria . Joseph dunford senator, honestly it is too early to tell what he is doing, and i think those who are trying to predict Vladimir Putins behavior have been universally proven wrong. What i would say is this when putin went into syria, his express was to go down and address isil. Isil has not been addressed. What it does do is it makes it clear that his original intent was not what he said it was, which was to go after isil, but was obviously to support the regime. But it also does, for those who question whether the United States is the most reliable partner in the region or not, i would say for the record, we are still there. Sen. Donnelly let me ask, how do we get to raqqa . And the next question is, and there is no index date exact date, but if you have an idea of how we get this done and eliminate isis presence on the ground, because it creates a danger to us. Joseph dunford one thing i would say is we are already isolating raqqa right now. We have made progress in a limiting the movement and cutting the line of communication between iraq and syria. A to thelimited raqqq north, and other lines and communication. We have grown the capability and compassion of indigenous forces supporting syria quite a bit. Had i testified quite a month ago, we had 2500 arabs inside the Syrian Democratic forces. Today we have 25,000. We are planning another operation that will further isolate sen. Donnelly do you see that number continuing to grow significantly . Oseph dunford senator, i do the more successfully have and we always said we wanted, the more success as the secretary described as a snowball effect. People want to join because they see the level of support we are giving, and the success of these forces are having. Ashton carter that is exactly right. But we described in december is fdf isring, mainly the growing in size, the arab component of that. They are on the move, and you keyright, raqqa is a target, because that is what isil called it capital. We need to make it sure that a state based on the ideology of isil is not tolerated. We are in addition to backing those forces, pressuring raqqa in other ways. In the air but other ways as well. I want to raise something while we are on this, which is, which is very important. In order for us to win, we need to constantly revise and adjust and take advantage of opportunities. We are trying to take advantage of opportunity right now with syrian and arab coalitions. By may, i need to plead for your help in releasing some of the allocated toe precisely that purpose. It does not just about this committee, but we made a request for those funds, and we got four different answers from four different committees. Not how theis system works, but it is tucked away to campaign under those circumstances. Like to please, as we be agile, if we get some want to respond to the funding request sen. Donnelly it is time urgent right now. Chairman. Ou, mr. , mr. Chairman, and thank you all. I want to thank you for your service to our country. New hampshire is facing a oin. Ible epidemic of her it is coming over the southern border and killing people in our states. Recently we passed the comprehensive rate that very act recovery act. We know from prior testimony from north comments of them, commanders that the networks drugs intoto traffic the country can essential traffic anything. Youso i want to ask both of , what can we do to get south com and north com to get the resources they need to hamper down on these networks that are not only killing people in our country but also could be used to traffic other Dangerous Things into our country including terrorist networks . Will comment. I the basic story is that as you say, while we do everything here back home, try to protect ourselves on this storage, we have got to try to predict the chains of supply. Com, butorces in south also north com are part of that. One reason i am so committed to working with you up here on the old water nichols Goldwater Nichols revisit that that can chairman and this committee has spearheaded. It is because that is an area, to your point, allocating resources between cocom, it in , thatle and effective way is where i would like to strengthen the role of the joint chiefs of staff and the chairman. Differentcocoms mean things in the regions. So many needs to put it all together and give advice about that, how to synchronize all those forces. I look to the chairman and the joint staff. I would like for them to have more ability and authority to do so. I hope that is part of our effort. Overthat, let me turn it to the chairman, who was in the region last week. Command, isouthern columbia. E on the bright side, i was encouraged by the amount of information and intelligence we have as far as what we used to have. When you look at the joint chief of staff alone, 15 nations are selling intelligence sharing intelligence. As far as our ability to act on this, i saw exactly what you are alluding to, which is a shortfall of the resources necessary to interdict. And i came back with a much better appreciation. Given all the challenges we are having and all the competition for resources, i am still not convinced we can find some innovative ways to address the addiction. If we took action on just intelligence and the information that is currently available, then the other thing, senator, we have a joint task force bravo. I think you are familiar with them. We have a pretty good understanding with what is increasing. Both the interagencies and the international cooperation. Abilityo found with the to see what is going on over land is also stronger than it was. When you are alluding to, and i came back with this wrigley as me,rankly the priority for we have all this information and intelligence. I understand the competition for resources, but we have an imperative to actually do something about this. And you have looked at the issue. What i seen this study say is about 40 of interdiction is where you need to be. There are other things you need todo, prevention, treatment do with the issue. You get 40 interdiction, that is the contribution you can make at the interdiction level. We are probably half of that were below. Or below. And so, i want to get is as close to 40 as we can. If nothing else, to get us to the point where we are acting and interdicting based on intelligent information we have today. It is not a solution to the problem, but encouraged by what we know, we can do something about it. It is not just the issue. The coast guard plays a hold issue, the National Guard sen. Ayotte i appreciate you saying that. I remember also in general kelly was commander at south com he talked to me at length about this. We have the information, we can see this stuff coming over, we just need Additional Resources to interdict it. I really appreciate your focus on it because we are we need to do the work on the prevention and treatments. We are focusing on that. The interdiction would be very significant, because it is so cheap on the streets right now. That will help drive up the costs. These networks are used to traffic used by terrorists and others. It is important for Homeland Security as well. Joseph dunford and one followup, the other thing i came back with was the imperative to keep the partnership and building efforts in the region, funding those adequately as well. Clearly we cant do it all ourselves. The investment we make and the ability of others to support the interdiction is also important. Sen. Ayotte thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First i would like to associate with the comments of senator sessions. The idea of helping a longrange strategy for the middle east and violent jihadism is important project. We cant just ad hoc it all the time. This should be comprehensive. The muslim and arab countries and other countries. I commend the senator for bringing that up. I would like to go back to the budget and pull back a bit. We are facing a series of challenges. One is a huge debt. We are approaching 19 trillion and we are passing on to our children, and that is utterly irresponsible. The second is what i call the interest timebomb. Nevernow we are in never land of low Interest Rates. It is for a unusual. If Interest Rates returned to 5 kind of average over many years, just interest on the National Debt will be almost equal to the entire discretionary budget billion, way more than the entire Defense Budget. Just the increase from 2 to 5 would almost equal the Defense Budget. That is money that has got to be paid, and that is impending disaster out there. The third fact is that all of the discussions here today and in the other committees about nondefense discretionary budget, the total about we are talking about is a little over 20 of the total federal budget. 50 is mandatory expenditure, which is being driven largely by demographics. We are all getting older and healthcare expenses. Another 25 to 30 is tactics miniatures, which are really discussed tax expenditures, which are rarely discussed. We are trying to solve a huge onelem, looking at only piece of it. It is as if you had a big problem in your Family Budget and you said we are going to solve this whole problem just by focusing on the electric bill. And that is where we are. If you trim the lines out, we are already at the lowest point in 70 years in defense spending as a percentage of gdp. We are at the lowest point in 70 years with nondefense discretion. We are struggling within this box that was created in 2011 to try to solve a problem that we cant solve within the space of that 21 of the overall federal budget. It seems to me that you are doing a mighty job of working within the constraints, but if we dont go back and revisit the decisions of 2011, particularly in light of the reality, the world that we face today, we are facing a longterm catastrophe. You are a student of longterm federal budget. It is an accurate assessment, mr. Secretary . Ashton carter it is. I say again this year, and i said it when i presented the budget last year when i became , it is notf defense something we can solve in defense. Sen. Sullivan but we are being forced sen. King that we are being forced to try it. Ashton carter that is right. We are trying to solve an entire problem on the back of discretionarys ending, and is not enough, and is not sustainable. There are other parts of the budget that have to be in the picture, i understand that. That is what is necessary to have everybody come together behind a budget future, and what one of the things we are asking and relief stability from those sequestration caps. Sen. King weve gotten to the point where two years sounds like stability. We are feeling good we have a twoyear budget deal. Let me change topics lightly. We have been talking about the bowel wave. Submarines, longrange strike bombers, missile upgrades all of those are what i would be calling Capital Expenditures and that they are ready or 40 of our assets, and get in this strange world they are treated as rent expenditures. There is no way we are going to be able to handle those expenditures and do all of the other things. It shouldnt we be thinking about them in a separate category . I believe there should be a Capital Federal budget assuming we could figure out what it is we owe. We should have a Capital Budget for longrange investments like the 40yearold ohio class submarine as opposed to trying to find them out of current operating funds. Ashton carter we try to think that way as he put together budgets one year at a time. We prepare budgets five years of time, even though you consider just one year at a time. We try to have longterm perspective, and i hope you understand when i say we did take the long view. That is an important new thrust in this budget, is to look ahead in 20, 30 years from now. In order to do that, you have got to be confident the reasonable resources will be available. The specific point about class replacement and the Strategic Forces cap replacement, you have already made the point that even with sequester relief, there is going to have to be additional funds. Sen. King it is so large a bill that we cant afford to have it squeezed out all of the other submarine construction or other shipbuilding. We have to take that longterm perspective, i agree with you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to continue along the same vein of questioning. General dunford, anytime your friends in the navy come to testify about their top priorities, well chart different budget scenarios, no matter the budget scenario. The seabased Nuclear Deterrent is always green, a bunch of other things might be yellow or red. Can you tell us why that is . Joseph dunford that reflects the priority of the department to provide an effective and safe Nuclear Deterrent, which is why that is green. It really does address the most important requirements that we have, which is to prevent clear war against the United States. Sen. Cotton do you know what percentage of the overall budget is spent on our Nuclear Deterrent . As one of the infrastructure . Joseph dunford i dont know that. Sen. Cotton secretary carter, you look like you know. Ashton carter it is about 20 billion a year. It is a couple tens of billions of dollars. Not anymore miss not an enormous part of the budget. 4 . Cotton 45 three at or 5 . Ashton carter we want to keep it that way, just that we are paid in this year for the Nuclear Deterrent bill. Sen. Cotton i asked because of the sizable deals coming due, modernizing the triad in the structure i sometimes hear people saying, why do we spend so much money on weapons we never use . The response should be, we dont spend that much money in context with the fiscal budget, and second, we use Nuclear Weapons every single day. There is a Seabased Deterrence Fund created last year in anticipation of the large expense of the ohio class replacement submarine. Obviously we also need to , andde the be 21 program there are also landbased and for structure that is needed areas rather than having merely a seabased fund, should we perhaps have a nuclear Deterrence Fund . Ashton carter i think that may make sense. For whatever we decide to do with respect to the icbm force, missiles and their land base, the be 21 bomber could also be put in that. Bomber for b21 nuclear and nonnuclear missions, capable of both. Like the current force, we will use it for both. Sen. Cotton what would you have a Seabased Deterrence Fund alone and not a broader nuclear Deterrence Fund . Ashton carter i agree with you that broader sen. Cotton i recognize that the b21 at like others have dual capabilities across all of these systems as a Nuclear Deterrent. Im not sure we should have any of these deterrent funds if we decide we want to treat the Nuclear Triad in a special kind of way. I think we should do all three legs of the triad. Secretary carter, i want to turn to the South China Sea. You said two weeks ago china must not resume militarization in the South China Sea. Specific action will have specific consequences. What specific actions are you referring to . Ashton carter specific actions of china are actions to press territorial claims, not through International Legal mechanisms and peaceful mechanisms but through militarization. That is with the chinese have been doing in the South China Sea. They are not the only ones, but they are by far and away the Largest Military risers militarizers or features in that region. The action we are taking, examples sen. Cotton what are the consequences . Ashton carter rim them more in another we can go through them or in another setting. In respect of our own posture, which we have been strengthening this part of the balance for several years, we are doing extra strengthening of that this year. Detailed in the budget statement particular has to do with increased legality of platforms out there and technological capabilities. In addition, one of the other effects that chinas behavior is having is a is driving many of our partners and allies to want to do more with us, give us more access. We will have that in the philippines. We are doing more with vietnam. Much more with japan. India, and so, not only are we reacting, but the countries in the region are reacting too. And our relationships with them accordingly are blossoming. You are doing much, much more. Sen. Cotton obviously our religions are getting much better in north asia and Southeast Asia because of that. To do an action will be necessary, otherwise they will resent us with something. My time is expired, happy Saint Patricks day. Ashton carter and thank you. I will defer to senator manchin. He has to leave. I will have my spot after the next turn. Senator sheehan, thank you so much. And secretary carter, general dunford, i am concerned about russias recently announced revolt in the military forces from syria, saying they have the field of their mission. Putin communicating with president obama on the present military forces withdrawing in ae next steps to fully cement ceasefire with goals in advance of political negotiations on the resolution of the conflict in syria. And then i just have today, i see the syrian kurds planted declare a federal region in northern syrian territory. And i guess i was asking, do you anticipate a change in the u. S. Military force role in syria . Based on russias military with rural . . Withdrawal it is russia claiming success, and is their strength their swagger through political clout in that area . Ashton carter as i said before, headedly,e in wrong because they said they would fight isil and they did not. , which ledd to assad to a civil war, a huge civil war. Their effect has been the opposite of what they stated and certainly the opposite of what is needed. It has not had an effect on our program in syria. The counter isil campaign. It has had an effect on the syrian civil war. Maybe russia can do what it should do, which is used its regimece over the assad to promote transition, and that is what geneva is about. To get to the question about the kurds, that is what is being discussed in geneva. The russian contribution has not been positive, and we are watching the which rural thatrawal to see how far will go. The russian effect was not what they said it was going to be, and it was as i said, wrong headed. Sen. Kaine but still but still, the syrian kurds are being met with resistance from assad and his regime. The correct . Ashton carter that is correct. Sen. Manchin do you think russia can negotiate that . Ashton carter no, i think that we and others in the region including the turks will have a major role in geneva about deciding the manner of participation of the kurds. So russia will play a role in those talks, that we have an apartment role to play as well. With respect to the syrian kurds, they have proven to be excellent workers of hours on the ground partners of ours on the ground. Infighting isil. I am grateful for that, we continue to recognize the complex of these overall. Manchin genital dunford general dunford, you describe isil in the russian forces. I would ask for the basis from that number. Joseph dunford first i would say we dont have the luxury of racking and stacking. We have to address each men in their own way. I would restate today that the one that has the greatest capability in poses the greatest threat to the United States is russia because of its capabilities. Its nuclear capabilities, cyber capabilities, and clearly because of the other things we have seen in leadership behavioral over the last couple of years. Sen. Manchin and what do you make of the kidnapping of the young student in north korea . Joseph dunford iwatch that over the last couple of days, and you cant help but feel for him and the family, but i think it is a reflection of the absolutely irresponsible leadership in north korea. It exposes the regime to those who may not have appreciated what the regime is, that behavior was not a surprise to me in terms of north korean regime behavior. I think probably many other people have now seen what north korea is all about. Sen. Manchin why do we still have americans traveling in that area . That was a religious group, was it not . Joseph dunford it was. When i heard this morning as we had 15,000 people over at the north korea as tourists, and three of them have been apprehended. That was a statistic in the news. The department of defense is not involved. We dont have members of the Defense Department visiting north korea. Sen. Manchin the only thing i want to add, because it is finally in view of north koreas threat about prosecution including missile launches that we stand alert with our Missile Defense forces, with our allies, the japanese, the south koreans, that is a daily task. All sorts of Missile Defenses as well as Deterrent Forces on the dmz and south korea. We use the fight the night, and that is the slogan. Nobody wants that to be occurring, but to make sure it does not occur is to be ready each and every night, and we have some of the most highly and ready capable forces. Sen. Manchin thank you, my time is up. Thank you gentlemen for being here today. Yesterday i was joined by a partisan group of lawmakers to advocate for some incredible women who really do deserve the honor. They are the Women Airforce Service pilots, otherwise known as wapsps. It is a travesty that these women were pioneers in the that hadhad the honor their ashes in Arlington National ceremony was revoked. You opened up a session that was previously closed in combat to women. I would like to see that addressed, and the pentagon should do the right thing and honor these women by restoring their rights to have their ashes injured at the National Cemetery into heard at the National Cemetery. It is my understanding that a waiver can be doing for waiver women to do so. I would like to see that action taken. They are all part of americas greatest generation. , a pledgemit a record for the record, and would like to have response im you on this issue. It is something we are very passionate about making sure that women are honored as well. , i do secretary carter continue to remain concerned about the lack of capacity and capability provided to ucom in order to do its mission protecting the nation and allies. And especially as we look at russian aggression, and we have heard a number of members speak on that today. General agreed love has come before our committee multiple toes talking about ucom match terrorism. This is a top concern of his, the lack of support for force protection of our Service Members of dod civilians and their family members. Considering terrorists have displayed capabilities to stage and execute attacks in europe and in turkey, i would urge you to take immediate action to increase our force Protection Capabilities in the ucom aor. There is a request to quadruple funding for the European Reassurance Initiative in fiscal year 2017, and specifically, secretary and general dunford, how will you build capacity and capability to enhance force protection in that area and ucoms war fighting to better counter russias aggression and transnational terrorism . Sec. Carter thank you, senator. Both of the issues you raise with respect to europe are serious ones we are adjusting to, and i will say how. With respect to russia and the potential for russian aggression, outright aggression or the little green men hybrid warfare phenomenon that we saw, that is why we are quadrupling the European Reassurance Initiative. The rotational presence of forces in europe, including in border states, states that border russia. It provides for increased prepositioning of heavy here, in germany, and elsewhere. It provides for doing more exercising with baltic states, with poland, with romania, and so forth. Sets that our troops fall in on. The European Reassurance Initiative, which this year, we are asking for 3. 4 billion its extremely important. We are adjusting to a fact we havent had to face for a quarter century, as i said in my statement, that we have a russia that is threatening western europe, and we need a new playbook. I regret to say that, but there it is. Separately, you are right in that this is something that general breedlove and i and general dunford watch closely, the protection of our people. That is of paramount concern to us everywhere, force protection. Everywhere overseas, but europe also, so we watch that very closely, and we are taking steps to work with our host countries to increase the protection. We are taking steps ourselves with our own people, procedural and technical steps. We can go into them with you in another setting, but it is extremely important. Our people are protecting us. We owed them protection, as well. Exercises,d the senator, its not only the capabilities we bring. We preposition forces for responses to assure our allies and partners on a daytoday basis. Are designed to build the capacity of our European Partners so the 28 nations of nato can be prepared to deal with the russian threat. I would say that if we fully leverage the political, economic, and military capabilities of nato, it wouldnt be a fair fight. Sen. Ernst thank you. Let me recognize senator shaheen. Thank you all for your testimony today. Senatoro follow up on questions. Tors europe is facing more challenges today than it has at any time since the end of world war ii. The european reassurance intiative is very important letting them know how committed we are to the peace and security of europe. I was pleased to see that the president s budget increased funding for the eri. Can you talk a little bit more about what the risks are if we dont support additional funding initiative,surance and also, tell me if you share general breedloves review i dont think i am misquoting him when he was before this committee, he talked about the need to put more of our troops in europe. Sec. Carter the effect of not funding the european reassurance physicallywould be that we wouldnt have the funds to put equipment there. That is equipment that forces could fall into in a crisis to reinforce the forces. It has always been our strategy in europe, and it would be now, that we would have forces there all ready, but we would fall in with a much greater force. In fact, the full might of the u. S. Military behind nato in the event of a crisis, but we need the equipment there, and we need our forces to be familiar with the terrain, which is why rotational training is so important. We need them to know how to work with their allies. We need to have them be able to do all the logistics that allow a forced to flow quickly. That is the kind of thing that general breedlove needs to be able to exercise and prepare for. That is our approach, and we need the money. That is physically what it does. Politically, its also important, because the reassurance is important. The allies want to know that we are there with them and we see what they say in the behavior of russia. We do, and we want to match our behavior to theirs. We are asking them to do more at the same time we are doing more. Sen. Shaheen i had a chance to visit some of the nato exercises last summer in let the a, and it was very impressive in latvia, and it was very impressive. You could see the synergy that existed because there were a number of countries coming together to Work Together and to work out the bugs of any future challenges we might face. Theme switch topics here to issue of energy. I have the opportunity at the readiness hearing this week to ask all of the vice chiefs of about thee branches move towards more Energy Efficiency and alternative sources of energy within our military. Theres a perception that some people have that this is being done because people are being forced to do it as opposed to it is part of our military imperative to improve our strategic readiness, that we have and are other Energy Sources we can count on so we are not so dependent on fossil fuels as we have been. Can i ask you all if you can speak to that, why you think this is an important strategic move as we look at our National Security . Sec. Carter it is important to our overall National Security. Energy security is. We play a part in that, but everything we do needs to make defense, as well as play a part in the Overall National energy strategy. Some things we do to increase the Energy Efficiency of engines, develop new engines, very important for our air force s, but also will have a good consequence for the economy generally. We spend money in order to save money on facilities making them more energy efficient. Ofhave large existing bases buildings, installations, and so forth. We work on making them more energy efficient. We do that for the very reason that it frees up more money in the future we can invest in real military capabilities. Everything we do in the Energy Sphere has to make sense as a military investment. At the same time, these things are beneficial for the nations Overall Energy strategy. We try to align them with the department of energy and the overall strategy so we are not doing something that somebody else is already doing and that we are benefiting from what , but itople are doing has to make military sense. General dunford, can you speak to the readiness benefit of our being able to take advantage of some of these technologies . Gen. Dunford general dunford, can you speak to the readiness i could. From my perspective, if you save money on base operating expenses, that money is available for other things. There is also operational flexibility, as well. The less reliant you are on fuel, the more operational you are. That is not only at the level of aircraft and ships and some of the other big programs, but also, if you look at the load of an individual infantryman batteries is an example. If you look at the weight our young men and women are carrying around, it is prohibitive. We spend a lot of time trying to reduce the load of individual sailors, airmen, and marines. We have been able to reduce the weight that they carry in batteries alone, which is one of the biggest things that an infantryman has to carry. From a readiness perspective, you save money with fuel. You are able to reinvest that money, and from an operational perspective, both at the platform level and individual Service Member level, theres a lot of utility to that. As the secretary said, its got to make sense. Sen. Shaheen thank you all. Senator graham, please. Raham the Freedom Caucus in the house do you want to go . The Freedom Caucus in the house has taken a position that the house budget should go back to sequestration levels for this year. General dunford, what would your response to that position be . Gen. Dunford my Immediate Response would be, we will have to revise the Defense Strategy if we go back to sequestration. We will not be able to do what we need to do right now. When i say revise the strategy, its important to emphasize we will have to revise the ends of our strategy. We will not be able to protect our interests in the way that is articulated in our Defense Strategy. Sen. Graham what effect would that have on our National Security . Gen. Dunford it would cause us to expose us to risk. Sen. Graham would you say significant risk echo gen. Dunford i would say significant risk. Sen. Graham it would actually put our freedom at risk . Gen. Dunford it would absolutely affect that. Sen. Graham i sent you a letter, and youve given me a very timely response, and i appreciate it, general dunford. Some have suggested that we intentionally target civilians in the war on terror and we go back to using waterboarding or more aggressive interrogation techniques. You have given me a good response i will share with the public later. I forgot to ask one question. What effect would this have on the war fighter if we started telling our men and women in uniform to intentionally target civilian noncombatants and engage in techniques like waterboarding or extreme forms of interrogation . Gen. Dunford what i have said publicly before is that our young men and women, when they go to war, they go to war with the values of our nation. Those kinds of activities you have described are inconsistent with the values of our nation, and quite frankly, i think it would have an adverse effect. One would be on the morale of the force. Frankly, what you are suggesting are things that arent legal for them to do anyway. Sen. Graham i dont think ive ever met a tougher guy than you. I think it would hurt your morale if you were ordered to kill innocent noncombatants. Raqqa fallingsee this year, taken away from isil . Gen. Dunford we are focused right now on isolating raqqa. I cant put a timeline on when raqqa wqillill fall. We are working with indigenous forces sen. Graham do you agree with me that the likelihood of the city fallen between now and the election is pretty remote . Gen. Dunford i havent put a timeline on it. Sen. Graham when it came to liberating fallujah, how many soldiers or military personnel were involved . Gen. Dunford we had 14,000 u. S. Personnel involved immediately in the operations around falluja, but obviously, many more in the surrounds that had an isolation affect. Sen. Graham if they hadnt been there with the outcome have been different . If we were not using military personnel, American Military personnel to deal with falluja . Gen. Dunford at that time, we did not have capable indigenous forces. There was not an alternative in falluja. Sen. Graham compare the indigenous forces in syria with the indigenous forces that existed at the battle of falluja. Are they more capable in syria . Gen. Dunford the Syrian Democratic forces, based on their performance in recent operations, are more capable relative to the threat that exists in syria than what we had in iraq. Sen. Graham are they more capable of taking raqqa . Gen. Dunford in 2004 in 2005, i would assess yes. Sen. Graham how many arabs are in the Syrian Democratic forces . Gen. Dunford we have about 10,000 to 15,000 Syrian Democratic forces, of which 5000 are arabs, and there are an additional 20,000 to 30,000 reserves. Sen. Graham is it your testimony that the people returning in syria are capable of taking raqqa back . Sen. Graham at this time, senator, no, but we intend on growing their capabilities overtime. I would qualify that by saying they are going to require some support from the coalition. ,en. Graham iran postagreement, is iran becoming a better actor in the region, or has their behavior gotten worse . Gen. Dunford iran was on the malignfluence in the influence in the region before the agreement. Iran remains a malign influence. I would emphasize that operations against mosul are ongoing. Is taking muscle going to be more difficult than taking falluja . Gen. Dunford significantly more difficult. Sen. Graham if you take mosul without 15,000 military members, does that make it more significant . Gen. Dunford it is a coalition of forces issue. We have identified 12 brigades of Iraqi Security forces, additional peshmerga forces, and we are in the process of generating sunni forces. The idea is we will isolate mosul until those operations are successful. Sen. Graham between 2016 and 2021, the next fiveyear window, we have talked about what has happened since 2011 until now. Generally speaking, the National Security threats, do they maintain at this level, go up, go down . What kind of budget should we have . Gen. Dunford i would assess based on the trajectory we see today, i dont see our security challenges decreasing over the next five years. Sen. Graham do you agree with that, mr. Secretary . 1 i do. Sec. Carter i do. Senator nelson . Sen. Nelson mr. Secretary would you give us your advice for that 20182022, of, being able to put our payloads into space . I am mainly talking about dod , in additionloads to nasa payloads and commercial payloads. Would you give us your advice on the question of whether or not we should continue to be able to have access to the rd 180 engine, which is the engine in the first stage of the atlas 5 rocket, until we develop the new one . Sec. Carter it is reflected in our budget, and i know there are different points of view on how to approach this problem. I think everybody agrees we have to have assured access to space. We have to have a way to launch our National Security payloads into space. Our countrys security depends on that. One way to do that, which is reflected in our budget, is to continue to use the atlas , including a limited but 80ntinuing number of rd1 engines, notwithstanding the fact that we dont like the fact that they are made in russia and buy them from russia. That is the approach we recommend, because it is less expensive. The alternative, which i understand, that we dont recommend in this budget because it costs more, would be to use the delta as a replacement, which is more expensive than is required. If we are forced to do that, it ends up giving us a bill of 1 billion, maybe more, which is not a bill we would like to pay. Its that simple. We will get to space. We have to, because our security depends upon it. We are recommending to you a less expensive way, but which does, however, causes us to hold our nose and so far as the 80ocurement of the rd1 engine. That is my advice. Sen. Nelson can, in your opinion and what you have been advised, can they ramp up the production of enough of the to get all of your payloads into space even though it is going to cost more . My understanding is that yes, that alternative is available, technically available. Obviously, it is much more expensive, which is the reason for not recommending it. Sen. Nelson it is more expensive also because the has to be used on the atlas 5 for a number of the nasa payloads, including the americans on the new boeing star spacecrafth is the that will take us to and from the International Space station, what we expect the falcon 9 and its spacecraft dragon, but also all of the commercial payloads. If you shut down part of that production and until we get the new replacement engine and new replacement rocket, because you cant just take a new engine and plug it into the atlas 5 its going to cost everybody more, including the commercial sector. Sec. Carter i cant speak for nasa or for them, but you are right. The delta route is more expensive than the atlas route. It is available, and we have made our recommendation. Where we would like to go in the future and where we are headed in the future is a competitive provision of launchers. Thats important for cost and quality reasons, and to have two or more competitors, from whom launch services. We dont buy the pieces of the them. Or develop they do that, and they provide us launch services. Thats an efficient and way. Titive thats the route we are going to, but i realize there is a difference of opinion about how we get to that destination. We have made our recommendation. Sen. Nelson fortunately, that competition has started. Spacex, has been a very viable competitor. In fact, that competition has brought the cost of the atlas 5 down. There is a good example of competition that, in fact, is working. Anyjust conclude comment on our aging Nuclear Triad and the need for the longrange strike capability . Sec. Carter yes. , the nuclearorce deterrent of this country is not in the headlines every day, thank goodness, but its not in the headlines because its there. Its a bedrock capability of our security. We need it for the indefinite future. We intend to have it for the indefinite future, and we are going to need to spend the money required to have that. Of particular concern, i would single out the ohioclass replacement submarine, to take one example, but a big example, because the trident submarines are going to age out. They are effective but old submarines. They will be replaced by the ohioclass replacement. You mentioned the bombers. That is one of the reasons why start, anding to have started, the longrange bomberbomber, the b21 program. Making sure we have a safe, secure, and reliable Nuclear Deterrent for the future is a bedrock responsibility. The department will need the funding to do that. We have plans to do that. Chairman,lf of the senator . I particularly appreciate both of you outlining the five strategic threats. I think thats very clear. I think the American People need to hear that. I think senator grahams questions about how you think those are going to continue is also very important testimony. Those threats and how to counter them include the aggression of russia, which, as you know, secretary and general dunford come is not only in europe but the arctic. The ability to continually forcence our asiapacific posture in light of our challenges with china. In light of those serious threats, you may have seen that general milley recently decided to reverse the armys earlier decision made last year to , which, as you know, mr. Secretary, is the only airborne ect in the entire , a Strategic Reserve that would be very involved in any kind of conflict in korea. That is arctic bct trying to fight in mountains and extremely cold weather. Ive raised this issue a number of times in the committee over the last two. Several Combatant Commanders recently mentioned they were supportive specifically of what general milley is trying to do, given how critical these forces are. Mr. Secretary, do you support the armys recommendation to more effectively posture its forces to best meet the National Security threats you outlined in your testimony, particularly as it relates to the 425 and what general milley mentioned . Sec. Carter thank you very much for your interest in this, and i had the opportunity, which i appreciated, to discuss this with you. Thank you for your leadership with respect to the overall rebalance and also for your states hosting of forces that are so critical to so many. Cenarios with respect to 425, i looked into that after our conversation. I have spoken to general milley. If he makes that recommendation to me, i want you to know im going to approve that. Importantat is an part of our force posture in the pacific, and i appreciate you calling attention to it. I appreciate that, as well. Let me get back to the rebalance issue you mentioned. A lot of us met with you last year in shangrila. You and i talked about it at the defense ministers meeting out there. An important demonstration of u. S. Legislative, executive, bipartisan support for that strategy. I think a number of us are planning on going again. Doing that again would be important to show a strong, acrosstheboard american resolve. Sec. Carter thank you. With regard to the implementation of the strategy you laid out in your speech last year, which i thought was a very strong speech, on number of us have for it and the president , encouraging him to make sure we implement this policy on a routine basis. I am talking about the south nota sea and our ops there, only on a routine basis, but also with allies. Ould like you to comment both you and general dunford on the opportunities that what is going on out there presents the United States from a strategic perspective, and more specifically, as you know, mr. Secretary, and you see it out in the region, many countries them up because of what china is doing in the South China Sea, many countries are very much being more interested in working with us, drawing closer to the United States. Are there strategic opportunities we should be looking at in possible new basing, new training opportunities with the marines in the asiapacific, clarifying strategic relationships . I think there are a number of questions about what our strategic obligations are with regards to a country like, say, the philippines. Looking at the next challenges, i know there is concern on this committee about the scarborough shoal. What are the opportunities we have . It seems we have challenges, but i also think there is a norm a strategic opportunity. Could you and general dunford talk to those, particularly the idea of new basing arrangements, new training arrangements . I think there is a lot we could be doing, and i would like to hear both of your views. Sec. Carter you are absolutely right. There. Re opportunities they are presenting themselves because countries in the region recognize that their region has had peace and stability for 70 years, and that is what has given them all the opportunity to rise. Miracles,ian beginning with japan, south korea, taiwan, Southeast Asia, today india, and yes, china, all of that has occurred in an atmosphere of peace and stability, which they know that we had played a pivotal part in