D if they are working. Y are this is about two hours 20 minutes. s. [inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order. Thank you, all for coming today and thank you to our witnesses for joining us today as we examine the current relationship with russia. To assess our relationship with russia as we have recently celebrated the 30th anniversary of events that led to the collapse of the soviet union, the fall of the berlin wall, the election victory of solidarity in poland. Among others. Many former soviet states have become prosperous democracies with memberships in nato and the eu. Mr. Vladimir putin has taken russia down a darker pass. Any russians suffered today. Tosia rates its elections make sure that only kremlin approved politicians make the cut. The russian people are inhumanely imprisoned and tortured for daring to disagree with the government. Not only does the Russia Federation make life at home painful for the average russian, but Vladimir Putin is making life hard for people around the world. He has propped up the murderous regime of the syrian president , president assad. In venezuela, the president continues to hang onto power thanks in large part to russian assistance. We all know about the invasions of georgia and ukraine over the years and about the poisoning of russian people in london. On sovereign soil. Moreorld today is dangerous unless free because of the Russian Federation. The relationship of the u. S. With russia is at its low point. During the cold war, our leaders had a lifeline to make sure that neither state made a disastrous calculation. Risk of a growing strategic miscalculation on the ground or in the skies. To be clear, our problems are with Vladimir Putin and his cronies. Our allies have been pretty tough on his regime. We have imposed dozens of sanctions on many Russian Companies and nationals involved in the takeover of crimea, the war in ukraine, as well as human rights abuses in russia. In 2018, after russia used chemical weapons on a nato ally, we helped coordinate. The u. S. Rotates troops through poland and the enhanced forward presence that nato has stationed troops in the baltics. America has provided lethal and nonlethal weapons. Each of these sanctions is important. Awever, they do not form cohesive u. S. Strategy. To successfully determine future aggression, america including Congress Must think strategically about russia now and in the future. These witnesses to discuss the administrations current strategy towards russia and what it is intended to accomplish. I must also urge caution to the administration and congress about focusing our strategies on sanctions. Sanctions are not a strategy for dealing with russia. They are simply eight will. All u. S. Financial preeminence makes it an easier to will, i have serious concern about the consequences. More sanctions do not necessarily make us tougher on russia. Im concerned about the absence this was a well targeted sanctions bill. More general sanctions actions were not connected to specific goals and they can be counterproductive. And sanctions not done in coordination with our european closer to are far russia is a dangerous action that can undermine our alliances. Cases, when insufficiently vetted sanctions have helped Vladimir Putin. These cannot be the outcomes that we want. Wessume these are outcomes oppose. With that, i yield to senator mendoza. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for calling this hearing. Thank you for joining us today to talk about the administrations policies with respect to the Russian Federation. Before we hear from our witnesses come i would like to outline five essential elements i believe should be comprised in our policy. We must make clear that so many elements of kremlin aggression are unacceptable and cannot become the norm in international affairs. The invasion of ukraine, the legal opposite occupation of crimea and the attempted assassination of political opponents on foreign soil, were crimes in syria these are just some. Russia is not a country that belongs in the g7 despite whatever President Trump might believe. It is still mystifying that President Trump refuses to stand up to this behavior. Says of thecome he kremlin attack on our election that it was a hoax. Repeating lies of kremlin propaganda coming he said it was actually ukraine. During the cold war, those that unwittingly broadcast soviet propaganda work called useless idiots. Useful idiots. Call them today, they do a lot of damage. Second, we must implement a come a clear sanctions regime. Sanctions on russia have not had the desired effect. Why . Several mandatory provisions today still go ignored. I wont go through the list although i could other than to point out the most egregious example. It is been 144 days since turkey took delivery of the Russian Air Defense system. 80 significant transaction. Turkeyt last week, tested the system against an american produced at 16. An american produced of 16. Enough is enough. Sanctions must be imposed without further delay. Any new russian sanction legislation must make clear our policy goals and what kind of behavior we are trying to change as well as how sanctions can be lifted in the event that behavioral change takes place. If we are going to increase pressure on moscow, we have to be honest that could that it could have spillover effects. American investors may no longer benefit from the russian sovereign debt market. The Energy Market may be impacted as could the banking sector. We seek to minimize the effects but our ultimate measure must always be how continued kremlin aggression impacts our National Security. That is the ultimate measure that matters. Third, arms control. The negative consequences for the United States of abandoning new start when russia is in compliance with the treaty and is seeking to extend it would be grave in the short and longterm. Without new start in place, russia would be able to upload many new weapons. This rapid expansion of russias Strategic Nuclear arsenal would place the United States at a strategic disadvantage. I look forward to hearing your views on this. Theth, we need to remember plight of the russian people who continue to live under endemic corruption and relentless propaganda. Process, human rights and universal values. This must be at the center of u. S. Policy especially with respect to russia. Fifth, we need to support our friends in europe. Especially those on the front line of russian aggression. Recently, the administration decided to redirect money to the president s border wall. Instead of mexico paying for the wall as the president promised, our closest allies in europe will air the cost. What a deal. I want to close on a note regarding the american citizen that has been just that has been detained in russia. I am skeptical that evidence exists. Him go. Uld let in closing, i am under no lotion that president n trump shares my view. He simply is not interested or compromised. Oureed to step up to defend security and our institutions. Didhank you, senator mendon senator menendez. First, we will hear from david hale. He was Deputy Assistant secretary of state for israel, egypt, and love aunt. And levant. He has been a member of the Foreign Service since 1984. Ambassador hale, please. Thank you, very much and good morning. The opportunity to be here today with a assistant secretary ford. Under President Trump, the has takentes Consistent Actions against moscows attempts to undermine us and our allies. We will continue to use all appropriate tools including diplomacy to address and determine further threatening actions from moscow. As articulated in the president S National Security strategy, america is in a competition and we must start sure our policies accordingly. Russia is a determined competitor with the United States. It does also have weaknesses which hinders which hinder its ambitions. We do not seek an adversarial relationship with russia. This administration will protect our National Security and that of our allies when moscow threatens to attack them. This must be backed by military power. Increasedstration has the defense budget. And it has prioritized infrastructure. Weakness istemic reflected and Vladimir Putins aggressive foreignpolicy. This all of regime relies on oppression to stifle public discontent. The russian people increasingly realize that the corrupt regime is either incapable of addressing their problems or is in many cases the sources of them. Russia seeks to dominate its immediate neighborhood. We are encouraged by the positive steps that the ukrainian president has taken. The threat from russia is not just an external or military one. Technologiesigital to target us and our democratic allies from within. It includes election meddling and influenced operations directed by the highest levels of the russian government the very heart of the western world. We provided significant foreign assistance in europe and eurasia, almost all of which supports building resilience to an increasing pressure on russian malign influence in accordance with the fine. The department has increased his its support for the Global Engagement center through additional funding and tapping. We have degraded prudence ability by imposing costs. The administration a section 321 russiarelated individuals and entities in january 2017. These sanctions and related action serve as a warning to the russian government that we will not tolerate inactivity aimed at undermining or manipulating our 2020 election. I confronted Deputy Foreign minister on russian interference in our elections in july and have raise the matter with Russian Ambassador several times. We likewise have taken firm action against russias diplomatic presence. We closed four russian facilities when russia attacked u. K. Citizen with a military grade nerve agent, we closed russian facilities in seattle and expelled 48 russian intelligence officials from the russian embassy. Our diplomats and other regions including the middle east south america, africa were russias actions exacerbate instability and undermine u. S. Interest. In syria, Russian Military support to the assad regime has exacerbated the humanitarian crisis. In venezuela, were pressing russia to withdraw its diplomatic and military and economic support the former maduro regime. In africa, we have called out russias destabilizing policies including support for mercenaries. Russias serial disregard for its interNational Security and arms controlled commitment represents another significant challenge for our policy. The president has charged us to pursue a new era of arms control agreements. We know congress has a Critical Role to play providing the tools and resources to implement a russian strategy and we are committed to working with you in this regard. Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me today. I look forward to the questions of the committee. Thank you, ambassador. We have now have christopher ford. He has been delegated the authoritys and functions of the undersecretary for arms control and interNational Security. Dr. Ford previously served as senior director for weapons of mass destruction and cut proliferation at the National Security council. He began his Public Service in 1996 as assistant counsel for the intelligence Oversight Board and then served on several staffs and served as principal Deputy Assistant secretary the state Departments Bureau verification and compliance and u. S. Special representative for nuclear nonproliferation. From 2008 to 2013, he was a senior fellow at the hudson institute. A native of cincinnati, he is the author of three books and holds a doctorate and a law degree. Dr. Ford, welcome. The floor is yours. Thank you. In his remarks, undersecretary hale has summarized the broad sweep of our strategy to approach the challenge that russia presents us with today. In my own testimony i would like to address these questions from their respective where i am. I will abbreviate my remarks for oral delivery and request the full version be entered into the record. Thank you, sir. From the perspective of arms control and the ongoing challenges of managing our relationship and strategic sense with moscow, i think it is important to remember we come to all of these tasks out of a long background not just of tensions and problems, but also notable successes over time. The changes in the strategic environment that were occasions by the waning and ending of the cold war made possible strategic arms reduction that has seen both Countries Nuclear arsenals come down to small fractions of what they once were. I mention this because i think it is important to remember this background. It reminds us it is possible to make progress in reducing Nuclear Tensions in our standoff with moscow when the circumstances of the security environment are conducive to such movement. We hope to get back to such an environment. Our policies are designed to help make this possible as well as protect the security of the American People and that of our allies until that point. For now, however, the security environment is challenging. Russia is developing extraordinary new Nuclear Delivery systems for which there are no u. S. Counterparts and most of which seem likely to fall outside existing arms control frameworks. Russia also has a large arsenal of nonstrategic arsenal weapons. It is projected to expand this number of weapons considerably over the next decade. Most observers will be familiar with the Russian Ground launched Cruise Missile postproduction and deployment of that system placed russia in material breach of the inf treaty in russia unwillingness to change course in that regard forced us into the unhappy position of having to withdraw from the treaty in the wake of those russian violations. But that missile is only one a broad range new Russian Ground, sea, and air based nuclear or dual capable systems. These systems have longer ranges and lower yields than before and theyre coming online in support of a Russian Nuclear doctrine and strategy that emphasizes and demonstrates periodically both coercive and military uses of nuclear weaponry. We assess russia does remain in compliance with the new start obligations, but its behavior in connection with most other armscontrol agreements and not merely the illfated inf is nothing short of appalling. There is also the problem of chemical weapons where russia condones and seeks to ensure impunity for continued violations of the Chemical Weapons Convention by its syrian client staples of further alarming russia has itself used chemical weapons in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention by developing and using a socalled military grade nerve agent on the territory as the chairman indicated of a nato ally, the united kingdom, in 2018. Moscow is up to no good in new and emerging domains of actual or potential future conflict such as cyberspace and outer space. It has been developing capabilities in these respects and even as it is been trying to promote hollow and disingenuous proposals that went on address the challenges russia itself is working hard to create. This track record is a miserable one. I would are free to buy written statement for some of the details of how our responses are being directed. I would stress we are working to address these challenges on multiple fronts. They are robust and they are extensive. These efforts in the department of state are being approached increasingly and systematically is recording them into an integrated strategy for pushing back against russian mischief. The u. S. National Security Strategy makes clear it is our duty to take great competition seriously and we are doing so. If this resolution and focus in the face of National Security threats i think we very much need and can be our ticket to getting through this phase of geopolitical competition. We need to stay on course, maintaining our deterrent strategy, completing our own military modernization and reassure our allies not just of our capacity, but our enduring willingness to side with them against intimidation and aggression and keeping these initiatives on track while still seeking good faith negotiation to advanced shared interests where it is possible. I think we can stabilize and turn things around and that is what our policy is devoted to. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im going to ask a question to start with and we will do a five minute round. Mr. Ford, give me your thoughts, if you would, i was one of the strong opponents of new start. New start has been in place as long as it has an we cant talk about in the setting the absolute compliance by the russians, but from a general standpoint, i think we can say theyre substantially more in compliance with the new start, the major weapons, than they ever were with the more intermediate weapons that were covered by the inf. Why the disparity . Why were they so far out of whack on inf and totally would ignore us as far as the pressing we did to get them to comply . Why the difference between the two treaties and the two agreements and the difference in the weaponry syst