Transcripts For CSPAN2 Defense 20240703

Security u. S. National security and investment in submarine production and maintenance. This is held by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] this hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. In march, President Biden stood alongside the leaders of the United Kingdom and australia to announce the agreement. A generational opportunity that will enhance u. S. National security interest by interests y transforming our alliances. Toot deterring aggression from the peoples republic of china fostering a more peaceful and stable indoic pacific. Beijing today has the Worlds Largest navy. Xi jinping hyper nationalist government has been laying claim to territory in international waters. They have built artificial buils for new operating basis with runways for military aircraft and ballistic missiles. At the same time they are aggressively trying to influence australia politics and civil society. Buying Critical Infrastructure like port facilities in darwin, making political donations, even hacking australian parliaments parliamentand Major Political p. A critical moment which unites he seems to show we are serious about our commitment to at free and open end of pacifi. Congress is a vital role to play in cementing this longterm vision and time is of the essence. Unfortunately the codification has not gone as smoothly as some of us would have hoped. Senator risch and i worked incredibly hard to codify the two central pillars and i want to acknowledge senator keynes engagement on that initiative as well. Pillar one include selling u. S. Virginia Class Nuclear powered submarines to australia making themsu the only other country other than the United Kingdom that we share this technology with. Training australian to crew and produce such as submarines and significant financial contributions from australia to expand our own submarine production capabilities. We offer legislation with all of these elements that we moved to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with strong bipartisan support. I want to think senate wrist for his partnership in helping us to advance pillar one. However it did not make it into the senates version of the National Defense authorization act. In addition to the french are submarine industries some of our colleagues in the senate expressed concern about the primary purpose of office, the submarine transfers and support. If we fail to move forward with full congressional support including that Nuclear Powered submarines, we are doing beijings job for them. China is against as it is complicates their across the in the pacific. With Nuclear Power these thesubmarines can travel long distances underwater and undetected. This will give us to read the ability to protect security interest from thousands of miles away. We will be able to cruise submarines together that operate directly out of naval bases in australia. Further enhancing our already deep bilateral relationship. And enhancing our reach into the region. Congress needs a place part at ofthe agreement is going to wor. We need to send the message the United States can be relied upon. Australian all the partners in the region are watching. President xi is watching. Thousands of americans employed in our shipyards would build these as submarines and would benefit from the austrian contributions to support and expand our submarine infrastructure are watching as well. So i hope our witnesses will help us understand why both the pillars will improve the National Security interests of the United States, australia and the United Kingdom. Based on Mission Requirements set by the name of the United States and australia need these submarines faster than they are currently being produced. I think will be helpful if you could clarify exactly how the department of defense plans to increase american sub production. How we go from a glum point for subsidy zero to three subs a year . A secretary hope you can shed some light on the perspective. What will this deal up meeting with our alliance for australia in what is the cost of inaction . Finally secretary at lewis, how will you ensures we codevelop advanced military technologies with australia or products will be safe from chinese espionage. Will this require changes to all parties export controls to protect u. S. Military technology . As wilson military technology we developed together through thisy new partnership . Imug supportive of pillar two f the agreement the Co Development of advanced military technology which will require streamlining strengthening export controls among the partners. But i do not want to be used by some as a trojan horse to undermine u. S. Export controls for the sake off commercial, industrial interests that are unrelated to the partnership. It should be about modernizing our historical alliances with two of our closest partners who fought alongside the united ststates in defense of democracy and free with that when we turn to Ranking Member for his opening statement. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. And certainly want to associate myself with remarks you made both of us recognize how important it is. We are anxious to see it move forward. Im certainly there have been disappointment so far. But that does not mean we cant do better in the future. And that is the purpose of this hearing to try to get this thing on track and move it more quickly and more efficiently. As the United States enters into a period of strategic rivalry with china and it includes military competition on a scale we have not seen in generations. China has undertaken the nucleat breakout in fields the Worlds Largest navy in a fully modernized air force free to meet this challenge we must move quickly to expand the reliance the resilience and capacity of our Defense Industrial base u. S. Allies should be full partners in this effort and the partnership is an important first step. The defense trade partnership between australia, theth uk and the u. S. Is meant to bolster collaboration on joint advanced military capabilities. In particular our goals include increased Technology Sharing an expedited export licensingsi processing. Only one focus on acquisition of conventionally Armed Nuclear submarines assist bowls and essential its also highly contingent upon supply and unlikely to produce increased submarine capability in the end of pacific for a decade. Important many of the capabilities needed to fully implementmp pillar one including cruise missiles the combat system or advanced computing capabilities will heavily be dependent uponpe pillar two. If executed as intended pillar two offers the potential to produce meaningful results and can expand and build resilience across the supply chain of industrial basis and imperative given the lingering impact of covid and u. S. Limitations exposed by russias invasion of ukraine but however export control system remains overly cumbersome and treats our closest allies with proven track records of Technology Protection as if they were new or emerging partners simply put australia in the United Kingdom have legal regulatory and Technology Control regimes that are comparable to those of the United States demands of the administration australian take reform of their domestic political regulatory system are frankly condescending. It had seating for clear shift in the states attitude toward defense cooperation with its allies. I fully appreciate what we do not want to open the door as the chairman said to using this as a trojan horse to do some things we dont want to do. I have served on this committee for 15 years now that ive been in the senate. Ive also at the same time served on the intelligenceve committee. I would like to report to this committee one of the very first things i noticed between the two committees is there is a very distinct difference between the way we treat allies in the intelligence field versus how we treat them on other things like export. I thinknk it would probably behoove state and the department of defense to spend a little bit of time with the intelligence community. We share incredible, incredible sensitive and importance material but the five eyes. And so here i do not have the concerns that some have. As far as the chairman is concerned on usingng this trojan horse it is a legitimate concern it certainly deserves attention. But having said that there may be an overreach a there. I think we really ought to take a deep breath. Sit down and review how we can reconcile how we treat ourur allies in the intelligence field. And make it more compatible with how we treat them in trade and in industrial matters. The department of state in concert with the department of defense and commerce and other relevant agencies to clearly communicate to her Office Partners our requirements to ensure robust technology, security expert control measures and then adhere to them. In addition the agency should work to reduce barriers to defense, innovation, cooperation, production and sustained with the government and Industry Partners of the kingdom and australia if it realizes its potential it will set a precedent incentivize similar agreements with other close u. S. Allies. We need to gethi this right befe we at other partners. But these agreements are necessary if we are to prevail in the long term competition with china, russia and their partners if it fails to achieve its goals would not only shows to be an unreliable ally but would also signal we are fundamentally not serious about competing. Thank you sander risch. Lets turn to our witnesses its my privilege to welcome back to the Committee Assistant secretary for the bureau of Political Military Affairs jessica lewis. Prior to assuming her role as assistant secretary she served here on the committee as a democratic staff director for five years. Those were the most glorious years of her career at. [laughter] from 2007 until 2014 assistant secretary lewis was a National Security advisor and Foreign Policy advisor and senior National Security advisor to Senate Majority and minority leader harry reid. We also welcome assistant secretary of defense for strategy plans and capabilities. Who is currentlyie performing te duties of the deputy under secretary of defense for policy. Doctor carlin is working for six secretary of defense. Strategic planning defense policy budgeting future conflicts and Regional Security fishes previously perform the duties of deputy under secretary for policy from august of 2021 to february 2022 and prior to that serve as acting assistant for interNational Security affairs. Last were pleased to welcome has been serving as the Principal Deputy assistant for the bureau of east asian and Pacific Affairs since june the 15th of 2021. In the form service for 29 years has diplomatic stops in taipei beijing and soap. Prior to this role he was the acting assistant secretary of state and the bureau of intelligence. Welcome to all. Want to thank the witnesses for their participation in todays hearing for their service to our country. Your full statement to be included in the record without objection ask you summarize them in about five minutes or so so they can have a conversation with you for that will start off with you secretary lewis. Thank you so much mr. Chairman for the kind introduction. Ranking member and honorable members of the committee. I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify today but enjoyed by my colleagues and i am excited to talk to you about the role of the state department. One of this administration hallmark National Security and Foreign Policy initiatives. I want to start first by thanking both the chairman and the Ranking Member and the entire committee for your leadership role in making it possible. Through your support passed by this committee and the state authorization act much was included in the National Defense authorization act passed by the full senate in july. Want to start giving an overview then discuss legislation in the interim plan we are also putting in place. One month ago i was with secretary blinken and secretary austin statement with their austrian counterparts. During our time in austria our leaders emphasized both the chairman and the Ranking Member noted was poised to be a transformational initiative. Perhaps our most consequential Indo Pacific Defense partnership in a generation. Bite modernizing longstanding partnerships, it will strengthen our defense, enhance deterrence and contribute to peace, security and prosperity in the end of Pacific Region. It comprises two pillars in pillar one we are working to provide a story with the Nuclear Power conventionally armed a submarine capability as soon as possible. Impeller two we are partnering with australia and the uk to truly develop advanced military capabilities based on the most cuttingedge emerging technologies our nation possesses. Es the pastor is made significant progress on both. In march 23 United States, australia and the United Kingdom announce the optimalal pathway o prevent a story with a conventionally armed Nuclear Powered submarine capability at the earliest possible date. Modernizing the elf fleets will be a longterm multi decade undertaking and partners are moving had to implement this phased approach. On pillar two as a recent joint experiments on hypersonic technologies have demonstrated, we are leveraging the collective power of our industrial basis to create a trilateral ecosystem that combines the competitive and comparative advantages of each nation to strengthen our joint capabilities. Let me turn to legislation. As was noted by both the chairman and the Ranking Member for it to succeed we need to enable speedy seamless and secure technology and information sharing between our countries. Earlier this year the administration submitted a pillar to legislative proposal to congress. And as i said earlier were extremely grateful to this committee for insuring broad bipartisan support the substance of thehe proposal was included n the National Defense authorization bill. We look forward to working with congress and help the final version with the legislation needed across all four of the restoration proposal so we can deliver on the promise. To put it simply under the sentence a language most defense items will be able to move forward without needing a license. In approve entities within the three countries will be able to move defense items will retransfer them without meeting new authorization for this groundbreaking approach will ensure pillar two can have its full potential. Also ensuring safe guard the crown jewels of our Defense Technology. In the interim while the legislation is being worked on here the department of state is also implementing a novel use of existing authorities to expedite andd optimize and defense trait among our partners. The state Department Office trade authorization mechanism is an interim solution to stream my defense trait into legislation is enacted. Weve begun engaging with thehe committee on art mechanism will continue closely with congress as we finalize ourwo approach. We are also working with australian and british counterparts to ensure equal opportunity and access for american firms and workers within efforts. An alignment with the respective and International Trade obligations. Will have a stake in australia and the United Kingdom are two of our closest allies. We are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder as we strengthen our Longstanding Alliance and implement this Historic Partnership i look ahead and i look forward to work with this committee in congress to promote agile secure defense and cooperation between and among the partners. Thank you. And among the partners. Thank you. Chairman, Ranking Member thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Almost two years ago President Biden alongside leaders from us troy and the United Kingdom announce the creation of enhanced trilateral Security Partnership. The modernization of our australia for the security challenges of the future disparate peace, prosperity and stability. It deepens our Diplomatic Security in line with President Bidens vision with allies and partners it enhances United States security the allies and partners and global peace and security preet since its print since its announcement much work has been done to realize this commitment on march 13 is the assistant secretary noted President Biden australian minister and uk Prime Minister announce the optimum pathway for australia to acquire conventionally armed Nuclear Powered submarines. Aukus partners are pursuing a multi phased approach over the coming decades as a goal to deliver the simmering capability to australia at the earliest possible date. Under pillar two of the partnership we continue to scope a variety of events capabilities to ensure our defense expert systems are prepared to meet this challenge. These commitments have critical implications for our Foreign Policy and National Security. Aukus is a critical element of her efforts to advance, implementation of the u. S. National Security Defense it into pacific strategies. With the goal of advancing a freeg and open connected secure resilient and prosperous and a pacific. Aukusre supports our shared visn of a world that is stable and prosperous were countries thrive, trait and collaborate to address shared challenges. Were all countries are empowered to make their own sovereign decisions free from coercion. Free and open Pacific Region is global to security and prosperity which is what we must deepen cooperation now. Like our other partners across the atlantic and end up pacific aukus partners understand the Critical Role the region plays in global trade and global prosperity. Economic growth and prosperity required stability and predictability conditions aukus seeks to undergird their enhance deterrencee and security. Our alliances and partnerships have played a foundational role in contributing to peace andtr prosperity in the end of pacific for the last 70 years. Aukus is a concrete commitment to strengthening these partnerships by integrating our partners in europe and asia. Recognizing our world is increasingly interconnected in the security of all the worlds regions in our security here at home in the United States are all linked. It reflects a criticalcr role bh our european into Pacific Partners will play in supporting our shared vision for enhancing peace and security in the indo pacific and around the world. Aukus will bolster the security of the United States, both to the development of cuttingedge defense and Security Capabilities butcu also by ensuring our allies are best position to contribute to their own security and shared interest as they continue to modernize their military capabilities. Aukus is more than submarines and military its a generational commitment to work with two of our closest allies to strengthen security, cooperation to meetio the many multifaceted challenges of the future. It is an unparalleled opportunity to boost the defense capabilities, industrial basis and economies of all three nations will increasing Economic Prosperity here at home. It will bring together our wsailors, our scientists and or industries to showcase the best of American Ingenuity and technologygy along with that of ourec allies with the optimal ph we now set the hard work of implementation begins the size, scope, complexity of actualizinn partnerships with this partnership cannot be understated or assumed. The work must advance now to develop capability to meet the moment is interNational Security environment continues to rapidly change rate for august it will take the full support of the u. S. Government, congress, and the American Worker working alongside the same constituencies involve us troy and the uk. They continue bipartisan support of congress is absolute critical. Passing relevant u. S. Office legislation is notng only needed to enable progress, but also to send critical message a critical message that will be received around the world the United States industry to u. S. Industry to provide assurance to succeed to her closest allies australia and that uk to and tho demonstrate that we stand together as we advance a plan to bolster joint security. Two are others in allies and imparted on though demonstrating isis delivers on its commitments into our adversaries and competitors to demonstrate the seriousness of our intent and resolve for continued peace and prosperity think you and look for an answer your questions. Dr. Karlin . What determinant menendez Ranking Member and established members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on the Aukus Partnership which is an unprecedented generational opportunity to deepen our Security Partnerships with two of our closest allies. To start acknowledging the service of three of our marines who lost their lives in military training exercises north of dublin, austria in august 27. I want to express my heartfelt condolences to the families ofan the three Service Personnel who lost her livesdo there. Like to thank the committee for this broad bipartisan support of aukus its vital to ensure aukus jewelers on the promise of this opportunity. As we approach the twoyear anniversary of our three nations leaders announcing this Historic Partnership, it is clear we have made tremendous progress in advancing but we still have far to go to realize the full potential of what aukus can achieve breaks and i hope to reinforce three main topics. How aukus fits into advances a 20 National Defense strategy how we are seizing generational opportunity aukus presents and why we need to expand defense cooperation with our closest allies. First, how does aukus fit the National Defense strategy . 2022 describes a peoples republic of china as a most consequential strategic competitor underscores the importance of new and fast evolving technologies to meet the shift in Global Security environment. Nd a critical part of how we will achieve the goal of the National Defense strategy will also describe integrated deterrent as a holistic response to the strategies that our competitors are pursuing calls on the department of defense to build enduring advantages across the defense ecosystem. Aukus will help us realize the concepts laid out both the National Security and National Defense strategy rate second, how we are seizing on the generational opportunities are pillar one of aukus the United States, the United Kingdom and australia have committed to conduct Naval Nuclear propulsion cooperation in the manner that is fully consistent with our respective legal obligation sets the highest nonproliferation standard we are moving out swiftly. Since the announcement of the optimal pathway in march of this year, three of straight officers of graduate from u. S. Nuclear power school the uss North Carolina conducted the first under our commitment to increase rotation of Nuclear Powered attack submarines to australia. To the aukus line of cape ability we are enhancing cooperation of the Critical Military capabilities. For example in april under the auspices of the Artificial Intelligence working group, which are laterally demonstrate the joint deployment of Artificial Intelligence assets in a collaborative swarm to detect and track military targets in real time. Through collaborative investment height andiv capabilities we are insuring our ability to maintain free and open it i a pacific wih two countries who have stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States for more than 70 years. Third we need to expand defense cooperation with third aukus partners even more. He was network of alliances and partnerships as a strategic advantage that competitors cannot match. The been fortunate to have great partners the department of state and commerce, we are working with us to ensure word enabling environment that securely streamlined and promotes deeper cooperation. We appreciate the continued support of congress to enable us to accomplish his critical objectives but as you are aware there are four areas in which the administration requires congressional a action to facilitate implementation of the generational opportunity. First the path it requires ship transfer legislation to authorize the u. S. To self virginia class summaries to austrias interim capability before ssn comes online. Second legislation is required to allowsl us to accept austrias historic investment into the u. S. Submarine Industrial Base through financial contributions for third comment to move out on trading austria submarine workforce requires legislation is required to let u. S. Government to coordinate submarine workforce training with us troy and private sector entities. Finally at your request legislation to enable export licensingna exemption defense trade that would facilitate the goals of trying to raise our collective standard to protect Critical Technologies that provide u. S. Forces with were fighting advantages. We cannot implement aukus without your critical supportedn all these areas. Mr. Chairman distinction member to the committee, thank you for the opportunity to meet with you today i look forward to answering any questions you may have. Think you offer your testimony pair before we start around five minutes going to ask unanimous consent to include in the record in article that is entitled meet the tiny state Department Offices clearing billions of dollars worth of weapons for ukraine. They have handled one or 50 full increase in work by doing and hours what used to take months without that happens to be secretary loses department. Well start a series of five minute rounds. So let me ask you dr. Karlin, how are we going to increase our sub production . We do about 1. 3 we need to get to at least three . One of the issues here that was raised during the whole nda is the concern about giving our subs at the time we are not producing sufficiently arete to replace them. So how do we meet that concern . Quick senator, as you know we have two really important advantages are undersea capability Historic Network of alliance and partnership. I want to hone in on the first mixer get at your question there are two pieces to this maintenance and production. Waited to make sure investing in both of those. That we can have more operationally available submarines. Particularlyly out in the end a pacific given the focus we are talking about today. With congresses leadership and support the administration has been able to put in billions of dollars, indeed approximate 4 billion that latest president s budget for both production and maintenance of submarines. Theres a lot of really hard work to help increase those numbers. If i can hone in on maintenance for one moment the navy in particular has been doing really good work to increase the availability of submarines and indeed since may that availability is gone from 60 to 67 the goal is to get to 80 which they think they are on track to do and about 2027 or so. That would allow there to be seven more operationally availableng submarines and our arsenalbm per this is really important. You are suggesting a significant increase in maintenance opens up more subs to be put it see . Workste indeed. Okay. What happens if we do not approve pillar one question was on top mixer entertainer question sir. Is approve the request . Works if we do not make pillar one as a transfer of submarines to the australians as part of very broad deal, what happens if we dont do that . We think it is a priority to keep investing in the submarine Industrial Base and will continue to do so that is a separate issue. Look, australia has demonstrated a commitment to purchasing these conventionally armed Nuclear Powered submarines they have shown they will treat this responsibly. I would note theres a bit off a crawl, walk, run approach how to do this. Getting submariners who are trained in how to do so getting workforce training that builds on pieces so that aukus can deliver its full potential to deliver deterrence at every phase. But if we were not to do that there would be consequences for us not only with the australians but in the indo pacific the message that we would send his one of unreliability and to, our reach to be significantly limited. Those who have a concern about this will find a way to be supportive. Now i am supportive as of evidence we passed legislation in a bipartisan way both pillar one and two. Having said that however i do have some questions for the secretary at lewisite understand uk and australia export control regimes operate differently. And are not reliably comparable to that of the United States as of this moment. That means is a greater risk u. S. Military technology that is expected boarded could be compromised by u. S. Adversaries including the peoples republic of china. Can you confirm for me the asteroid and british governments that if the asteroid and british governments were to make certain adjustments to the export control regimes and safeguards their regimes could be deemed comparable to the United States system. Let me start by sayingby yese are confident they might not end up with comparable standards i think what you are pointing to others trying to gain to our most sensitive technologies we are very confident we are also committed we are protecting our war fighter and our technology progresses of the country committed to bring the export controls up to u. S. Standards we are protecting u. S. Defense goods technology and services as this committee passed in the meantime . My understanding is each country is looking at changes they may decide to make it. I do not want to speak for them. But again i am confident one last question. If we lower our comparability standards significantly, which ofhi course senator roush is pointed out they are very, very long term reliable allies i get that. What do you do and other partners tell us they inevitably want the same lower standard they will not be insignificant allies as well their longterm relationship with us. Shouldnt we use this opportunity to leverage enhanced out for controls we are protecting our own taxpayerfunded technology . , think youre absolutely right. You can stop the answer there thank you. [laughter] im just kidding. Im fun around here sometimes. Im sorry go ahead. I think the bottom line is, as we work very hard to increase and make the system work so that we can creates we are providing are mostov sensitive, highly lethal defense articles to other countries. We want every bite of the best possible standards let me give you the an example does not specific to a story or the uk but let me give you an example of a kind of things we should be concerned about. For example we have recently seen some chinese pilots getting training from other countries including pilots here in the u. S. We need to be able to prosecute those. We went our partners and allies to be able to do the same. We want to make sure that if a country is trying to acquire a certain technology it cannot get around the system by going into a place where the instrument export control. I think to me it is common sense to Work Together to bring all of us to similar standards. Its not just to protect our companiess fundamentally is to protect our war fighter for these technologies are exploited and used as our war fighter we are putting them in danger. We take that responsibility very seriously. Think of a much mr. Chairman first bellamy sam incredibly mey proud of this committee in producing legislation coming to agreement on this. I want to thank the chairman for working inin partnership. As always the devil is in the details. I hope no one gets the idea some different views on how we handle the technology transfer. Somehow there is daylight between us there really isnt. We are all on the same page here. And i hope we can move forward in that regard. Interestingly enough you mentioned the Pilot Training of chinese citizens weve got the same problem. Even with our standards we haved the exact same problem. Thats not a good example. The other thing i find ironic and personal will be backup. You are aware that the other parties to the agreement are growing a bit at the United States insisting they make certain changes in their standards . You are aware of that . First and i went back to what you were saying issa this committees work has put us on a path to achieving all of our goals onn aukus. As someone who works on the committee i know how much work goes into that both by you and your staff. And just thank you again for that. I will say i was just in australia with both our secretary of state, our secretary of defense and their equivalents. And across the board we heard a broadt support for what were doing together. I have to tell you i spent a lot of time meeting with other countries is possibly when the positive meetings ive ever participated in. I think the australians and of course they can speak foror themselves. But they are very committed to pillar two in particular on how we can look at the comparable advantages theyt may have for example in production off of certain items as they were with our Defense Industrial base. So really the conversation i participated in was about how do we take advantage . How do we bring our companies and our Research Institutions together to work on pillar two . First of all let me say my experience in talking with both australians and the brits is the same as yours. It is incredibly positive. Certainly we dont always agree on everything. But everyone is rolling up their sleeves and committed to get this done. It is a little ironic we are beating the drum about different regulatory changes when in fact we are the ones who have been the victim of the chinese and espionage and what have. You. I am not aware of any publiy reported instances of the same thing happening to the australians or the brits. Is that an accurate statement . On the shirt i am aware of. I think because we have our laws in place we are able to prosecute those who were chaining the chinese pilot. While i was in australia i did learn and australian pilot also participated. It was used under our laws to deal with that issue. But again these kinds of issues, that is an illustrative example thats really not the only one. I am concerned also what we talk about are the known unknowns. The other ways none of these are to the failure of this program. These are things we could work through their things we cant wd should work through. I would really hope you do not view as being a solution to the problem. It is temporary. Theres got to be more to it than that. Number one we got to get finalized, fair enough . I agree with you. The purpose is to be internmentm measure so if something in place legislative process is being completed. And so absolutely agree we will continue. I think for those of you who are not living in the world of state department acronyms this is our interim measure that we are working on wahlberg for august legislation to pass. The good news is a lot of the work we are doing to put this interim measure together will also be helpful when the final legislation is passed. I appreciate that. Again i would urge the finalization given a very high priority as quickly as you can. And also have everyone understand this is going to take more and with that my time is up thank you mr. Chair. Thank you sent risch. Beef let me just say we share intelligence with government officials. Two non government persons. So our bill requires of export controls only on u. S. Origin defense items. Not all of their own indigenous products. I think its important to note destroys the dna counterpart publicly warned about the extent of chinese espionage directed at australia. I think we all agree on what we want to achieve. The concerns are legitimate on both sides. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to add my thanks to you in the Ranking Member for the manner in which our community has been engaged. I strongly support this alliance and recognize that Congress Needs to act. I want to thank our witnesses. Dr. Karlin i want to start the realities of our budget. I have an understanding whether you talk about increasing our capacity on maintenance to get more subs out there and perhaps increasing production. Senator wicker has asked for additional submarines to be produced. You also mentioned the fact that australia will be contributing toon the cost. We have tough budgets. Give me an idea as to whether the implementation of tier one will require Additional Resources from the unitedte states. Thank you for highlighting this issue. We have for years, thanks to the great support of congress, been investing in our separate Industrial Base. We will want to continue doing soso given that undersea capabilities are unparalleled advantage for us. As it relates to aukus, to the extent legislation passes that would permit this. Else troy has offered a unprecedented and historic investment into it. To help ensure the submarine Industrial Base can be as strong as possible. So, we will want to keep investing in it. And aukus is a piece of that. But more broadly having the undersea advantage is critical. I understand im just trying to get a bottom line as to what it will require additional allocations of our defense resources in our budget. I see pillar one increasing our collaboration with asteroid and uk and really building on investments we have made two dates and will want to contagion the spirit of the National Defense strategy focus on pacing the need to deter the peoples republic of china. So are you saying there will be no increase in the projected resources necessary . Is or do you believe there will be additional stress on our Defense Budget . I do not see there is additional stress on the defensive budget due to aukus. I see at the strategic level aukus being immensely helpful for what we are trying to achieve strategically and trying to ensure we haveo deterrence in the end of pacific. On point to secretary lewis if i might, i think this discussion has been very helpful in trying to understand how we are going to share technology. And be able to advance the next generations as they come along. We know there are many other allies interested in pillar to both in the asiaPacific Region as well as our nato partners being engaged in pillar two. So what standards will the administration use in order to deal the requests we areo going to be receiving from her other allies . Senator, thank you for raising this issue. Let me just start by saying that right now we are really focus on getting australia and that uk and the ukover the line. And you can see the significant amount of work that is taking. So if not made plans at this point to bring others incorrect as our chairman Ranking Member mentioned whats done here is going to be used by other allies to say why are weakening comparable considerations . Looks absolutely. If i make, it would be helpful for me too talk a little bit about sort of exactly what we are putting in place . I think for any kind of exemption that allows factor defense trade machine with the chairman pointed out not just government but between companies, to universities and other places its important to understand that. What we are asking for here is we need to make sure we know who is going to be receiving these items, for obvious reasons you want to know who the recipient. You want to know this is not an item that is prohibited under one of our nonproliferation regimes. And then you want to make sure that once you have that information, when it lands in the country they are going to have their own protections in place so that it does not get transferred to a bad actor. And so those are the kinds of requirements for the technicalities are in the weeds but that is what we are looking for across thes, board. So we have the shared community, we know where things are going. We have an understanding of making sure somethings will some things willstill need to ma license. Still need to be looked at more llcarefully. And that all countries participating have the sameip standards. And so i do think that is a precedent we are setting moving forward. To address something sent risch reads is that we want to make sure what we are talking about is licensed free movements of these defense articles. That means, if you are on the list of companies or entities that can receive it you do not have to come ask permission to export a lethal weapon. You can receive it. That is why this is so important. Make sure that entity whether its a university, or a company, receives it that nothing is going to happen in the next step will re end up having it exported to a bad actor or someone who may want to exploit it. I think those of the standards we need across the board. Thank you competitor but mr. Chairman. We have talked a lot today about deterring the peoples republic of china. As the chairman said they got the largest navy in the world. They are expanding their capabilities. This is all part is xi jinpings plan to dominate the world by 2049. And in some areas they are outpacing us regards or technological capabilities. But one area they cannot do that and it is our allies. That is why this agreement is so important. It is important that we get it right. We get our ducks in the row to be able to meet the commitment. Ththe navy has a requirement to have 66 fax intact Nuclear Submarines to be able to defend this nation. Right now we are sitting at 49th and i think doctor you mentioned up to 40 are not were not available due to maintenance issues. I think theyve got it up to down to 33 not available. Theyre hoping to improve upon that. But, by 2030 will be dropping down to 46 submarines. So even adding additional submarines to availability of maintenance you are still not going to have inner close to 66a submarines. So we are producing somewhere about one point to submarines a year. We need to get up to 2. 3 or 2. 5 maybe three to be able to do that. So we have too make sure how ths is going to get done paid my understanding is some months ago the navy to offending requirement how to meet the u. S. And aukus requirements. Is that accurate is this this dd study been done . A lot of study what we can do to make sure we are prioritizing this undersea advantage. Quick so it has been done . There has been a lot of setting what we are doing to ensure investing as much is possible for. Has the cape sediment done clustering is that done . Works have been working on a steady precooked is not finished yet or it is finished. I dont think i should represent. I will say they have been looking very hard at this issue in setting it. If it is helpful, i would welcome asking my colleagues from that office too. s car the crux of the problem, right . One of things that are wicker, myself and others have asked is okay, australia is obviously making a generational investment. In the sudden light Industrial Base and in ours. We ought to be doing the same, i agree with you. This is a huge competitive advantage for us. Hi the question is what is that number . What is the numbers going to take i think senator carter was asked the same thing you dodged him too. Obviously we are grateful the asteroids went to invest 3 billion. What are we going to have to investigate the 66 submarines . Has that sediment done and if it has been heavily supplied to congress . And if not what is going to be done thats were looking for. I give a raise this issue senator. Asin you know post close work e close out a whole bunch of the separate Industrial Base and consolidated given the post cold war peace dividend. Theres been really important investment by this congress, by the administration to try to build it up and to make sure we can put it in the right places and then see what fruits will grow from that in terms of workforce and talent management. In terms of supply. Theres been a lot going in there put it is a priority and will continue to prior to Going Forward progress again, when we are trying but how are going to make this happen once it is a success we have to have these plans is not sufficient just to say we are working on it. This ise part of the concern soe of the folks habit what to make sure it is a success but i think it is incredibly important. If your going to make a success we have to know what we are investing. That is why the administration going to ask for supplemental to be able to do this question rick and i will throw that open to any of the panels as the is administration going have a separate to have this investment and what would be the timing . Are we going to get a study . These are the costs would like to know to make sure its going to be successful does anybody have an answer for that . Senator we want to make sure we are robustly sharing information on this topic because we know how important bipartisan congressional support has been and also in investing in our separate Industrial Base. Quickset is great so share the information. Thats what im saying i keep hearing you say want to share the information but im not getting any information here. So what is the information question or is there say this is yes this is what were going to need to do, this is how much money ito cost him expecting is probably not a small number for a quick senator, we have been able to share a lot of information over the last few months about what were doing both and the aukus of the semi Industrial Base i am aware of approximately 45 or so, to members and two staff over the last seven or eight months. I would be delighted to take this back and work with colleagues in the office of the secretary defense to share the information that you are requesting. Okay it is there going to be supplemental from the administration requesting more dollars to be able to invest under separate base . Im not able to speak to that at this time i defer to my colleagues as well progress anybody else know . No, nobody else knows. Okay thank you, mr. Chairman. I will say whether in public or classified if the numbers somehow classified consequence to it i think the centers question is well poised i think all this to be interested in knowing that answer if you could take that back to the department would appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I guess i like to follow up a little bit on the questions and senator cardin. But first i went to go back, dr. Karlin you mention the maintenance piece of our Industrial Base capacity. Obviously shipyard Structure Plan is making a huge impact on that. Like to speak of the shipyard were about to double our drydock capacity its going to give us much more ability to maintain nuclear subs and get them out in an expeditious i way. But i guess, and i would agree we have made substantial investments in her Defense Industrial base that is in a way contributing our ability to proceed submarines we need. I have talked to suppliers in New Hampshire who are beneficiaries of that investment. It still seems clear to me despite all of the investment we dont yet have the capacity and that Defense Industrial base to build the subs we need to meet the agreement. Is that an accurate assessment . Orcc do you see Something Different . Is that an accurate assessment . Or do you see Something Different . We absolutely need to produce and maintain more submarines for our strategic interests. For our ability to be able to the indo pacific and globally. I think we would all agree with that. I dont think thousand answer to my question though. Think my question was based on what i know about our situation at present we dont now have that h capacity. Is that correct or not . I want to make sure i understand which capacity you are talking about. The weight aukus is set up we are not actually going to be assuming congressional support obviously. We would not be selling submarines to australia for at least a few years. And in terms ofou delivery. If we continue on the trajectory one with maintenance we have approximate seven more operational at that time. I think white look at that picture its a whole lot more satisfying to be able to ensure lease strategic intent of aukus. What youre saying is with we continue to invest at the rate we are investing that by the time our commitment to provide those submarines comes due, we will have the capacity . At this stage with the information we have it does appear we are on the right trajectory in terms of the impacts of investment. I think this is an area one needs to monitor very closely. I am delighted to your case study the impact of investment to date. Were just all going to need to watch that very closely. Have hm our Industry Partners that they face challenges realizing aukus related Defense Technology transports. Not at the senior level, because we have gotten those assurances, but more at the action officer and manager level. Can either of you speak to that and whether you are seeing that move as we hoped . Absolutely. We are in regular conversation with industry across the board on these kinds of issues. Let me talk a little bit about what is going to be different once assuming the legislation moves forward and i think that will help presumably some of the concerns that youre hearing. When it comes to australia and uk, we know where they are sending an item to and we know its not prohibited under an international agreement, they will be able to move without actually coming to the state department for a license. That is a very significant change, but the second piece which i havent talked as much, the thing that we hear more on countries about. Right now if you have a defense article, like a weapon and you want to transfer it between one company to another among the 3 countries, you also have to get in essence you have to come for authorization to to that and among, between the 3 countries, u. S. Testifiesd items, again, within the caveats that i laid out are going to be able to move. When i sit town and talk with companies that i met with the us when i was in usa real i when we talked to those through issues, those tend to be the core of their concerns. Theres always specific things that we have to work through but thats why what we are i think to here is so significant and we are i think to it, again, with australia and the uk because they are some of the closest allies and because of a long history of working with them on defense trade. Thank you, thank you very much. Thank you. In fact, i cant think of assiege member of congress, whether theyd be republican or democrat that doesnt support aukus and at least the objective is aukus. I think the question before the congress right now is how to implement aukus quickly and effectsive for everybody that is concerned. But the Administration Still hasnt put forward longterm plan to ensure that our navy can meet its requirements to have 66 attack subs in a reasonable time frame. Ladies and gentlemen, thats a problem. Today the navy has 49 attack submarines. Roughly 25 short of goal of 677 submarines. By giving the submarines to australia that will put us 3 to 4 years behind in our production process. Looking at the navys most optimistic projection, before taking into account the submarines that we wound send to australia i understand theres talkhe of maintenance, maybe extending the life of the submarines that we to have in service but we are only at 75 of our goal right now in terms of how many submarines that we have. This is ago bandaid fix. We have to look at our capacity. Theres no real substitute i think for having strong Industrial Base to build the submarines and to meet our deterrence goals. To youet agree what i said or do you disagree in any way . I appreciate the points on strategic points of aukus and undersea capability. It is absolutely a priority. The National Defense strategy underscores this as well. The points on maintenance are no pay to ignore, to be clear the importance of production as well. Its just we are working through congress support and throughgh the administrations prior station to build up on Industrial Base that thankee was not as strong as everyone thought it to be. Speaking of cooperation between administration and congress, i look forward to the president working with congressp to make the necessary hard choices andin work through regur order to get this tone so we are prioritizing resources rather than coming to some emergency situation. We need to do that in a way and implement this in a way but aukus works to make both America First interest and our allies interest first as well when it comes to nuclearnd power submarines. Next i would like to turn, pilar two folks is on tri lateral cooperation. Advanced capabilities advanced under sea technologies, quantum technology, autoonus systems, advance cyber, electronic warfare, information sharing, all of these are absolutely critical and i want to make an important suggestion to you and i would be encourage today hear your thoughts on this. You know that i served as ambassador to japan. I got to see firsthand japans superior capabilities between it comes to computing. So my question, i will put this to both assistant secretary louis andto carl. Do youas agree with me on the nd to find ways to incorporate allies into the pillar town the line . Let me thank you for your leadership on trade. Weve had a lot of conversations and i100 agree with you on the bipartisan need and strength and consensus around these issues. To get to your question, i think, in the first thing is first, we are really focused on getting this right for our uk and australia. Then we can look at whether there are countries who want to, need to bring capabilities for specific projects. My conversation is i assure you that they want to. We can look at discreet partners for his crete projects. I want to thank you for leadership on u. S. Japanese alliance which is flourishing in just extraordinary way. Well, thank you. I wantur to reignite how importt to our National Security interest and i look forward to working with all of you and looking to work with the interagency. Thank you. I think its a very important move. I agree with the chairmans remarks that we should move forward expeditiously in implementing. I think that further delay will undermine our credibility both in terms of the strategy but also with partners that we enter into agreements with. So i hope we can overcome the current they on that front. I also support the idea of streamlining export stroll provisions with respect to these two allies. I also share the chairmans view that should beth accompanied by applying the highest standards with respect to protecting our technologies and its going to be veryie important that these o partners, the uk and australia adopt very strong export controls as has been said, we need to make sure that ours are as strong as possible, the pilot issue was raised here and so we all need to be looking at ways that we can to it but at the same time providing some flexibility when we are talk about these kind of partners. I want to talk about a little other piece of Technology Sharing and coproduction piece. Dr. Carl is for you or maybe for assistant secretary louis. As i read this, it doesnt vision Technology Sharing and coproduction. Is that correct . It us the, indeed, look at that. Im looking at series of weapon systems thatt we may be coproducing autonomous underwater vehicles, Quantum Technologies for position navigation and timing. Those have r the kind of things that is this envisions, is that right . Yes, thats absolutely correct. May i add one thing here, i think part of why we are talking about these advanced technologies and dr. Carolyn may want to add more on this, we think this is a w unique opportunity to leverage the capabilities and strength that different the 3 countries bring to this problem set. And so thats why we are talking about coproduction and thats why the defense trade needs to be smooth. Right, so beforehe you dont need to convince me of that, but here is my question and my concern and this is going to be important with respect to precedent. Lets take a hypothetical coproduction agreement of autonomous underwater vehicle where the United States with lion share, 80 , whatever it may be, with either australia, uk in that scenario have the ability to veto a decision of the United States to transfer that system to say our ukrainian friends fighting russian aggression as we speak because i think its very important that we dont give up our ability and authority to transfer a system where weve done the lion share of the production to other allies and needs. So can you talk to that, either of you . Let me make sure i get you the correct answer. Let me start by saying coproduction and codevelopment agreements vary significantly. We to these without office so i need to be careful about not getting ahead of whatever maybe written into these agreements. But fundamentally if a u. S. Company would ownwn a certain kd of technology, then we would still be able to control the export of that technology, but, again, i need to be careful not to get ahead of the way these agreements are written because they all to tend to be slightly different. Right, i understand. In fact, my concerns are raised by some of the current coproduction agreements and c te fact that some other countries are limiting our ability today to transfer our own systems to the fighters in ukraine and so i think open the door to the larger question when we enter in codevelopment agreement and coproduction agreements where the United States is primary actor and primary financial backer. In my view, we should not be giving up our sovereign right to transfer those weapon systems to other allies in need. Syso, for example, today to the ukrainians. Im going to want to pursue that question Going Forward. May i add one more thing on this. Part of the reason we are i think to this with australia and the uk is because they are among our closest allies where we would not anticipate those kind of issues. D but the coproduction agreements do vary. Im happy to follow up with you on that. Thank you. Senator coons. Thank you, mr. Chair, Ranking Member. It is encouraging to have us in a hearing where the two of you are really pulling in the same direction and leading the senate in a positive and an important direction for our country and to have such strong and unified testimony across the 3 witnesses today, this is a critical strategic moment in the United States as the president repeatedly said and many of us have agreed, our Global Network of allies is our critical competitive, economic, development and political advantage and nothing has strengthened and deepened that partnership in the indopacific so it is up to congress to deliver on the legal authorities, the framework, funding that you need to take advantage of it and accelerate it. I recently had din we are ambassador, given his former service as Prime Minister, his deep and intimate knowledge of the challenge pose bid the prc and joined senator murphy and a number of other two republican senators and in House Republicans on a trip to the united king tom where we had a series of meetings about aukus. Im interested in pilar two and the questions senator van holland raised. Let me briefly at the outset if i could, secretary louis, are there can you be specific, are there any legal authorities that are required from this scongress that you think havent been precisely defined in the previous round of questioning back and forth with you . I think just to make a point of clarification i think as you know there are 4 different pieces of legislation that we are t looking to move. One of them which is focused on pilar two is focused on the export controls. I would say it is and im going to take that one to talk about. I think the reason we need that legislation is because of what you just laid out. The companies and the countries need surety about how these defense articles are going to move and we need confidence that they are going to move speedily and safelyy and so it is missin critical for us to have this legislation. Dr. Carley may want to add more on the other two but the shift transfer legislation is also Mission Critical for achieving pilar one. Im happy to go into any more detail that would be helpful. Before i turn to dr. Carolyn, let me add a simple observation i made in our observation in the United Kingdom. Cambridge and oxford, if not others. Many leadership there are focusingan on their particular capabilities, Artificial Intelligence, quantum computing as well. As you mentioned repeatedly, pilar two in many ways has the longerterm greater significance in that it may align our 3 nations more closely in terms of developing really challenging and important new technologies, autonomous, underwater drones, for example. I would argue that our defense procurement system is ocified, pick your favorite multisyllable description. Is it possible that through the pilar two partnership with australia or the United States given that they are smaller militaries, that they may have different legal constraints or operationall constraints that we would find in them a Research Development and deployment partner able to move with more agility particularly emerging technology areas. Thank you very much, senator. I think thats quite conceivable. As you note, whether its procurement system or export control system. This was designed for a different world, where we the United States had uncontested military and technological dominance and the security environment has changed in a whole bunch of ways. Its our center of gravity. Just as our system is able to learn and move in different ways so too australia and uk and i suspect you heard ato lot on yor trip both of whom put aukus at the front. Im struck how ukrainians take off the shelf product and take material from dozens of country all over the way in a way that our system just not capable of i think to. Its my hope that aukus and pilar oh two and out of the war in ukraine we are learning how to innovate in defense procurement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator kaine. I want to mention their names, Corporal Spencer from arlington, virginia, major tobil lewis from jefferson colorado. We have great partners in the aussies but in dangerous line of work. When they fall in the line of work they have to be recognized. Aukus is great example how the u. S. Can work hand in hand to promote stability in the indo pacific. Its a good example of how we do things globally. In europe we have nato. We dont have nato equivalent but we do have networks of allies. I to want to applaud the Biden Administration working with south korea and japan. That camp david meeting, it probably wasnt as big headline here at home because we have good relationships with japan and south korea but the work of the administration to forge closer relationships between those relationships, its been limited by challenges of Political Leadership level. That was a really important summit and i just want to applaud the Biden Administration on that. From my Vantage Point on Foreign Relations committee and chairman of the c power subcommittee of armed services, this Aukus Partnership is very exciting to me and its also very exciting because the virginia submarines were built in virginia and connecticut. Some of the questions that have been directed about the current pace of production and how we can build up that pace not only to meet our own needs but to meet the needs the commitments that we have made in aukus. I want to followup on a question that senator menendez put in, what if we didnt to pilar . Pilar two i think everybody is excited about and everyone is supporting pilar one. We are asking detail questions. But theres a little bit of chicken and egg with pilar one because australia will make historic investment in the u. S. Industrial base but they are only willing to make that investment if they know that during 2030s, we will be willing to deliver subs. If they make the investment, it will help increase the pace of production. They dont make that investment, it will be harder to increase the pace of production. We would like to be good on our commitment but we are sort of saying, we will only be good of our exitment we are confident if we can increase pace of production, well, we will be able to to that with the australian without the Australian Investment, it would be harder. Each side has something we definitely want to to and each side has resource that is can help each other but we have to get the timing right. Australia is not going to make the investment unless they have surety that theres going to be a deliverable for them. It would imagine going to the parliament and saying, you know, lets invest billions in the u. S. Submarine Industrial Base, the question is going and what are the guaranties that the virginia class subs will be there. We should use this historic opportunity of the Australian Investment to enhance our ability to meet the production goals that we areha talking abot and obviously thats not just an Australian Investment. We have been investing in the submarine Industrial Basee and e have more to do and the question is how much more are fair questions. On your crawl walk run, if we were not to to the virginia class transfers, the ultimately goal was that australia which currently has no nuclear at all, i mean, the only Nuclear Australia has is medical isotopes. They dont have civilian nuclear. We dont have this interim step of the virginia class subs, the ultimate goal that australia will build their own subs, chicago full of american technology, they are notthey would be significant delayed in their ability to develop a domestic submarine manufacturing capability if there was notca a timely delivey of interim step because with the virginia class subs they are trading officers to operate nuclear subs. The virginia sub transfer would happen after we had done significant training of the workforce and with the virginia class subs, they are learning to operate nuclear subs an maintain nuclear subs, possibly to refuel nuclear subs and all the skill sets are needed before they begin to be a worldclass producer of their own nuclear subsbe in the 2040s and beyond aukus framework and im talking about pilar one, train them and accept investment so we can expand our Industrial Base, ramp up our protection, deliver assets to australia that they can use and then learn on so they can develop their own capacity and that capacity would be fantastic for the United States and for all of the nations in the indo pacific who care about stabilityhe there. So i think the crawl, walk, run analogy which i hadnt thought of, its a really important one, we want to get the ozies to a place where they have their own production capacity. The only way weie can do that ia timely way is through the first step of the virginia class deliverables. Their investment in our Industrial Base with our own investment is going to get us there and benefit American Security and security of australia and regions of the nation. Have i stated that rightin secretary karlin . You said it more beautifully than i everth could. I dont know about that, but i will yield that. A lot more beautifully what a complement that is, i tell you. I mention it as a policemen to be very clear. I was echoing your complement. I wasnt questioning it. I brought back a hat from the us new jersey. Bravo, bravo. Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today. Last month a letter to philippines, thailand. This is following up on what senator canni kaine is talking about. The white house talks about new Security Partnership that will rspromote indo pacific thats secure and stable. I agree. It extends beyond 3 allied countries. In fact,yo i received positive comments in the 3 nations i visited, indonesia, taiwan and philippines. For each of the witnesses, how doeses pilar two impact the indoPacific Region as a whole beyond the australia and the United States and how would our partner nations in Southeast Asia benefit from a strange tri lateral relationship from the United States, australia and the united king tom . Thankia you, madame senator. First of all, i wanted to express appreciation in your investments in Southeast Asia. It does matter that you have taken interest in asia. What i would like the say of those countries and countries in asia where you have been is we have taken we have invested a lot of time in diplomacy in making sure that all countries in asia understand in a transparent way what we are trying to achieve there. We sated earlier, aukus, long standing relationships that would recognize the security in the environment for the future. And when we talk to Southeast Asian countries, you mentioned 3 yourself. There are more than that. When we talk to countries like singapores of the world, malaysias, they also recognize the challenges and they believe that our transparency, our candor of the challenges that we see ahead that aukus will help to addresss that. We are not trying to challenge. Aukus can beat complementary to centrality so we look forward to more discussions in the future with our t allies and partners in asa and around the world to make sure they understand the truth about aukus, to make sure that the disinformation coming from other parties does not prevail and that they have facts and that when where he provide those we will prevail over them in ensuring the security of these t east asia Pacific Region in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Im actually going to agree with pete moy. When we talk about aukus, its not J Just Alliance and the strengthening of that alliance between australia and uk, its really the question, we say it a lot but we really mean it when we talk about a stable, secure, free and open indo pacific. Thats what this alliance is about and fundamentally i think as pete moy was talking about, we believe that benefits the countries you listed as well as others and resilience is another word, a term that we have been talking about meaning that we are investing in a way that countries will be able to feel more secure and more resilient facing and i think dr. Carla mentioned this earlier, a whole new set of challenges and threat that is we need to be able to respond to collectively as well as individually. Thank you. Dr. Karlin. Thank you very much, senator. The visionon that we have of a secure an stable indo pacific i think is the a vision that is manifested by aukus but also so many of our allies and partners around around asia as well and to the extent you have more more partners who are actively involved in ensuring that that security and that stability can be realized through clan ration and cooperation, i think it really becomes a better, better situation for all. So this feels like a pretty positive and simbiotic effort. It can only help our interest in the indo Pacific Region in particular. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator merkley. Theres a fair amount of of confusion i will say as we talk about aukus, the cuad and reinforce centrality of aussie, there are individual issues for vietnamin and indonesia, two vey different nations. We have quite positive responses from aukus from the philippines, japan, taiwan, a little bit whats this all about and how does it affect us. I know a lot of work has been tone and the word transparency has only up a number of times, thats important. In vietnam its a lot of appreciation for senator leahys program of cooperation to heal the wounds from the vietnam war including addressing ammunitions that continue to explode in the docks and contamination from agent orange but as you assess it now and i would address to both secretary lewis and moy, do you feel like we have sauged or feeling left out . Thank you very much, senator, for that question. Its very important that wees he the candid conversations with not just the countries that you identified but with all partners, allies in asia. Its nearly that something so new, so novel would again rate questions and so what we have done is undertake a very expensive efforter to make sure that countries in the region to understand what this is and what it isnt. There is there are rivals out there. There are adversaries out there who will try to paint aukus in a different light suggesting perhaps that the u. S. Is a provoketory. We are changing the security environment in the future and taking steps with likeminded countries, with allies, partners to address that and we will exercise, we will two to all efforts to inform others in the region to reassure them of our intentions, what this is really about. Im gladis that our partners, or australian and uk partners have undertaken the efforts to make sure that regional friends and others are fully aware of our intentions and what this is. And so we are committed to this. Its not to say that our work is done and satisfied. We will continue as aukus evolved to inform our friends and partners out there just to make sure that they do understand what we are trying to achieve. May i would like to just add something in addition to the aukus question but to bring up something that you raised which is part of whats really important is that our investment in the region is much broader than aukus and i think what you pointed out, my bureau actually runs the demeaning and unexploded programs. We are the largest supporters of the programs in the world. We consistently hear from countries about how important that work is and obviously senator lahey was a leader in this and his vision helped us achieve theseac goals. But i think its important to remember that as significant as aukus is, we are doing a lot of different kinds of work investing and working with countries on the issues that are critically important to them and in this case helping save their populations from stepping on ordinances. So just to support what moy said but also really thank you for raising that question. Thank you, and i will continue to really advocate for those programs in the context of of vietnam. Theres the sense in the conversations, that, hey, we really appreciate the counterwait to an aggressive china but we are also concerned about the relationship withh china because they are a powerful nearby ally. We referenced countries like vietnam and indonesia and we have both an opportunity and a concern and as you recognize secretary moy, china in particular accuse us, aukus of being a imperialist assault, cod war version attack on china, if you will, and discredit it but theres certainly a desire among a number of countries to have strength in counterweight and i think we areth working effectivy nation after nation and with different issues because each nation is so different but good work. I am you probably addressed this earlier. But if you at no time address it, feel free to address it, that we do not yet have pilar one in the Defense Authorization act and have level of concern that you might have about that. Thank you, senator. Pilar one as senator kaine was discussing is critical to the success of aukus and the broader essence is a crawl, walk, run approach. Its important that congress enthusiastic and supportive of the key legislation, like the training legislation and the legislation that would allow us to accept this historic and unprecedented investment by neaustralia. That can ensure all the right things can happen so australia would bee able to responsibly operate our Nuclear Power submarines as soon as possible and the strategic picture is critical as well. As you know tout heard from your travels, all eyes are on aukus. It e is a spectacular effort and showing that together these 3 allies can deliver, deterrence in every phase and help ensure that tinnedo pacific remains secure and stable today and in the future is crucial. What what state are those submarines being made in . I believe they are being in they are actually parts from a variety of states. Ting word virginia is a word that you were searching for there. Thank you all very much. Thank you. You just made it in time, senator young. I give senator young a moment to to get ready for his questions. As i i to, let me ask you one lt question, this committee has demonstrated willingness to provide legislative relief where required to facilitate exports under aukus, as has been said here, the u. S. Arms export system is convoluted and technical, the system not built to move quickly yet solutions to many of the channels do not require legislative relief. I knowo the administration has developed an aukus authorization framework utilizing existing authorities but this challenge goes beyond aukus to ukraine to taiwan and across the globe. So i want to ask dr. Karlin and secretary lewis, can you update the members of the committee of efforts underway in state and dod to improve the efficacy of arms export . Senator, you are correct. We haveta taken a number of stes to improve our system. Let me talk about the Foreign Military sales systems. We havebo been focused in this hearing on the commercial to commercial or commercial to federal government side. And weve undertaken a plan which we call fms2023. The goal of which is to streamline how we move cases forward when we are selling between federal governments. The good news front, where we stand now we move 90 of cases within 244 to 48 hours but its the 5 or 10 of cases that we need to look at how do we make changes. Im not going tot go through every detail but just to give you a sense of what we are doing. We are asking questions. I meet with my team every two weeks. I heat with them yesterday. How can we do a better job of prioritizing . That does mean deprioritizing . Two, how can we better train the people that have to execute these programs . That sounds like a simple problem, its actually quite significant. We are looking at improving and continue to go improve work with congress where you play a Critical Role as we come with congressional notifications and then we have a whole host of other pieces that we are working including some things that i think are very important in terms of looking at questions of exportability from the beginning of the process. Often what we find with the complicated systems is their design for our military which they should be, for our own war fighter but they need to be adopted or changed as we look to export them. We need to make the decisionmaking about that much earlier in the process so we are not slowing down at the end. Much more there but i want to give dr. Karlin a chance as well. So one is working on pulling together security comment operating picture and that is because looking being able for folks to be able to see initiation untilel delivery, looking across. Thats been a really important step that we have been working for transparency and communication. Another piece i want to highlight is the process improvements and some of that is i think in line with what secretary lewis was saying, not only folks can see the entire picture but elevate the challenges, right, and being able to figure out, hey, we need to deal with accountability problem, something is not moving here. The third piece i want to highlight is secretary austin announced over the last few months the creation of the Defense Security Cooperation Service which gets at the crucial issue of t training, so much of this start with the folks in the u. S. Military who are working in the country, in ourki embassies with our partnes and allies and trying to understand what is it that they are looking for, why are they looking for that how does it fit within our National Security interest so we are standing a robust training effort so that we can ensure, we are organizing and training the folks appropriately to be able to make this all as successful as possible. All of this is hand and glove with colleagues in the state department. I just will make a comment. I know there are people at state, maybe defense too who rally against the informal process. I have to be honest with you, when my staff gives me the sales notice, i generally to it in the same day. It depends. Its very rare when the enduser who youre going to sell to has problems and i am concerned about those problems because i have no ideological problems in selling american weapons abroad. I am have a problem when the end user is going to use it wrongly against civilians and other entities. So for our part, i know as a chair, ive tried to expedite our response so it can be quick but i think it would be a huge mistake if anybody tried to unto the informal process. Senator young. Thank you, chairman. I thank our witnesses for being here today. I know its been a long morning for you. As a committee, we need to recognize pilar two of aukus would be impossible to achieve without Critical Minerals. Chinas dominance, has led to account for approximately 60 of worldwide production and 85 of global critical mineral processing. Fortunately australia is well position today help refuse the dependency especially for critical testifies requirements including cobalt, tungsten, manganese and lithium. I believe that we need to assure that aukus role into consideration. This should start with the strategic decision to designate australia as a domestic source under the production act as was included in the senate past ndaa and if time permits i will ask dr. Karlin how the goals of aukus would be advanced by extending certain authorities such as the designation of domestic source to other trading partners with Critical Minerals not found in the u. S. But in my time, i certainly want to geti to secretary lewis and start by asking what existing regulatory or statutory barriers might be hindering our foreign procurement of Critical Minerals and how would this impact the goals with auks. Thank you for the question, senator. Im not an expert on Critical Minerals but what i can say is that we do have discussions with a number of countries about the availability of of these Critical Minerals or rare earths. And so we do know that this there are supply chain issues. We to know that it is of critical importance to get off reliance on specific countries that may have cornered the market ors may have dominance n these areas. Those countries, including australia indonesia, we are talkingre with bostons to discor ways to stay off that kind of dependence on a single country or other countries. Thank you very much for raising this, senator. On dpa and and australia in particular you would highlight that adding uk and australia as domestic sources which streamline collaboration, it would strengthen aukus and purchase ofed Critical Minerals exactly as you note and Critical Technologies and other strategic sectors. I would see this as perhaps a complementary effort to the export control that conversation that is also happening but probably not a substitute for bsthat conversation. Okay. Thanks. As much as anything else, i i keep bringing this issue up in theee hopes that these critical mineral conversations are happening among almost all the stakeholders within our federal government with our counterpartys and foreign federal governments as well because i believe and feel free to correct me if im wrong that this is a real factor in implementing priorities aukus and if not regarded as risk factor, im concerned because i think one of the risks is this is so little discussed compared to other issues, and so hopefully the administration will engage this committee on on Critical Minerals, maybe another context. Given the essential role of Critical Minerals and advanced weapon systems would itar apply to Critical Minerals from australia . Based on my understanding, i dont think itar would apply to inCritical Minerals. We the itar comes on applies to items on the u. S. Ammunitions list. Thank you. Given the importance lastly to aukus, how should the United States be considering supply of minerals in response to the recent brick summit and emphasis on Critical Minerals . Aabsolutely, senator, that s something that at the highest leverages of the state the president we have had discussions with a number of countries including the ones i just mentioned. I can cite a few examples. Philippines and nickel. Congo and other countries as well. This is of great importance and maybe notot known as well to the American Public but it is something that we are definitely see when we see theres opportunities again to take to take action where in the past we may have been overreliant on specific countries so just as a followup, are there particular minerals that our federal government deems disproportionately, brick, brick plus, country or countries that need to concern us . Whateverat the risks, the threshold might be for a particular mineral, i will leave it to the government to establish those. Have we identified a mineral that can be cartelized in bricks plus construct and we need to come up with alternative sources or Processing Capacity in othero address vulnerability . Thats right. You put your finger on one of the main issues here and that is the processing part of this as well. As we know many countries have these Critical Minerals but the experts on the processing are its in another country, right. We all know what that country is. And so i think it is our priorityit to whenever possible find or Development Alternatives to what we have seen, again, an overreliance on one country has put us in a vulnerable position, has put the world in a vulnerable position and thats thank you. Is there a plan that you can point to to address this larger issue, for example, processing . Yeah. Im personally im not overseeing the area, i can actually ask colleagues who do have an expertise on this area to consult with you and your team, members of this committee. Thank you. One final question. Secretary moy, this is beyond aukus, we talked about alliances. Talk a little bit about the value of this camp david summit that President Biden pulled together with korea and japan. Ive been waiting for Something Like this for ten years in the senate, i was overjoyed to see this happen. Talk about Going Forward how this will help regional stability. Arkansas i have to tell you, thank you,hi mr. Senator, for raising that because we follow these issuess in east asia have been waiting for a Movement Like this for a generation, really. The fact that this was the first time foreign leaders were invited to camp david since i think it was 2015 was the last time tells you about the significant of this and to bring together these partners, we know that there are historical painful, historical painful history here. We have to applaud the courage. Strategic conditions in east asia have changed and we have to recognize that we have to respond to this and the best way to unite and have so much in monoin terms of values, bring them together in an effort to push back on what we have seen out there. When we talk about the Regional Security, environment and changing, we are not talking about one country, we are talking about russias illegal and unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation. Tt we can talk about since 2022, nearly one hundred launches of missiles from the dprk including icbms this year. This environment created an opportunity for us to unite a likeminded countries and to protect our security and this is important but it is about American Security as well as the entire east asia Pacific Region. Absolutely significant and we look forward to more nvconversations. Its not easy. Its notno going to win a lot of votes in each of the countries because of the shared painful history but we think it is the first stepha in a significant change to the future of the security environment in the indo Pacific Region. God speed. This has been robust hearing record will remain open until the close of business friday, september 8th. Wed ask the o panelistses if ty receive questions to please respond to it and respond to it in a substantive way. With the thanks of the committee for your participation and your insights. This hearing is adjourned. Order your copy of 118th directory. Its your access to the federal government with bioand Contact Information for every house and Senate Member and Important Information on congressional committees, the president s cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. Scan the code to the right to order your copy today or go to cspanshop. Org. American history tv saturdays on cspan2, exploring the people and events that tell the american story at 9 00 p. M. Eastern North Carolina state professor chris talks about North Carolina native, first u. S. Soldier to die during spanishamerican war. His death was seen as key moment of reconciliation of the country. Discussion on how comics an cartoons have portrayed president s hosted by the White House Historical association and congress. Exploring the american story. Watch American History tv saturdays on cspan2 and find the full schedule on your Program Guide or watch onle any time at cspan. Org history. This fall watch cspans new series, book that shaped america, join us as we embark in captivating journey in partnership with congress which first created books that shipped america list to explore key works of literature. The then book provoked thoughts, won awards and led to significant societal changes and still talked about today. Hear from featured renown experts who will shed lights in the profound impact on works and journey to Significant Locations across the country tied to celebrated authors and unforgettable books among our featured books, common sense by thomas payne, their eyes will watch in god and free to choose by milton and rose freeman. Watch our tenpart series, books that shaped america starting monday september 18th at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, cspan now free mobile video app or online at cspan. Org. Cspan is your unfiltered view of federal government. We are funded by these Television Companies and more including comcast. You think this is just a community center, no, its way more than that. Comcast is partnering with a thousand Community Centers so students from lowincome families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. President ial envoy for climate, john kerry defended the Biden Administrations climate agenda from gop lawmakers as they challenged the administrations mission and policies. Mr. Kerry also discusses federal efforts to reduce emissions and the paris climate agreement. This hearing before the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on oversight and accountability is about 2 hours