Delving into how defense secretary mattis has changed his position on Nuclear Weapon developments since becoming defense secretary. Among the highlights in the article, secretary mattis used to question the u. S. s nuclear ar san nal andcalled for certain elements to be removed or reduced . But since joining the trump administration, secretary mattis has seemingly reverse the his position and now supports building more. His u turn suggests it has become important as the u. S. Conference china and russia. You can read the article at business insider. Com. This hearing should get under way in just a moment. The meeting will come to order. The Committee Meets today to hear testimony on the Administrations NationalDefense Strategy and Nuclear Posture review, both of which were recently released. We welcome back the secretary of defense and the advice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff to discuss these important documents. I cannot count the number of times i have heard members of this Committee Talk about the importance of having a Defense Strategy to help guide decisions that we, in the executive branch, have to make. Now, we have one. It is a component of the Broader National Security strategy released in december and it has within it the Nuclear Posture review, the first of its kind since 2010. A lot has changed since 2010 and both documents come at a critical time. As the National Security strategy points out, quote, americas military remains the strongest in the world. However, u. S. Advantages are shrinking as rival states modernize and build up their conventional and nuclear forces, end quote. There will, undoubtedly be criticism of both documents, some of it will be based on valid shortcomings, some of it may spring from more ideological differences. Depates about the particulars are fair and to be expected. But its also fair, i think, to commend the administration to bring structure and rationality to our wideranging National Security efforts in cwhat is surely a dangerous and volatile world. One last point. We must never forget that with any strategy the heart of our nations defense, our most valuable asset, remains the people who serve. It is morally wrong to send brave men and women out on missions under any strategy for which they are not fully trained, equipped, and supported with the best that this country can provide. That support should not be conditioned on any other issue. And we can never forget that theres a real human cost to failing to fully support them. Strategy is important, but nothing is more important for congress than for us do our job to support the men and women who protect us fully and unconditionally. Yield to the Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you, secretary mattis, general selva, i appreciate you both being here. And i very much appreciate the fact that as the chairman said you put out the National Security strategy that is obviously a crucially important step in figuring out how we put together our budget and how the department of defense does its job. And ill start by agreeing with the last point that the chairman made. I think it is the most important one. It is whatever our strategy is, whatever it is that we tell the men and women who serve in our military, this is what we expect do you, it is our paira mouramo obligation to make sure we fund that. We dont want to give them so many tasks but not enough resources to train for them. I think that is the definition of a hollow force, when we send them into battle unprepared do what we told them to do. Unfortunately due to a lot of budgetary challenges weve had in the last six or seven years, thats been happening far too often because we have leathered from continuing resolution to Government Shutdown, to continuing resolution to sometimes an appropriations deal. Its very difficult for both of you and your predecessors to plan what youre going to do when you dont know how much money youre going to have one week to the nex. I think that say very seen problem. I appreciate the strategies put together. Does it match the amount of resources we have to fund it . We are 21 trillion in debt and counting. The deficit last year was close to 700 billion, and its going up, not down. So how do we how do we make this fit . How does this work . And then you look at the broader picture and we just cut taxes by what is going to amount to 2 trillion. The immediate shortterm impact of that is that we are going to hit the debt ceiling sooner than we had expected to because less revenue is coming into the treasury so well have to do that. In the face of a 201 trillion debt, and all of the needs that the chairman outlines and the your strategy lays it out and i think in this committee certainly we all know the list, its sort of up on the wall over there, minus iran and the threat from radical islamist extremisms, those are the threats that we face and how do we meet them . In the case of all of that, we decided to give away 2 trillion. I could make an argument that in so doing this congress made a Public Policy decision that we were not going to fund defense at the levels that this committee thinks they should. We decided not to fund it and then, okay, well theres other places we can get the money. But the president has said he is not going to reform mandatory spending at all. The state of the Union Address promised more money than i think i can possibly imagine. As a side note, i think we ought to ban the state of the Union Address, and i say that for democrats and republicans alike because the main thing it does is it gives the executive a chance to stand up there and promise things that are absolutely utterly and completely impossible to deliver, and then the American Public comes to expect it and rightfully gets a little bit irritate whend magic doesnt make it happen. And again, thats bipartisan. Every state of the Union Address ive seen since ive been here ive walked out of there thinking we dont have that money, what is he talking about . So we need to make improvements on that, to be sure. And i worry greatly about how this strategy is going to be implemented in the face of our debt and our deficits. And if Interest Rates go up, i mean, weve been incredibly lucky that weve been able to borrow all this money on the cheap. If Interest Rates go up to 3 , you can forget about all this stuff. And i dont blame that on the Defense Budget. I understand its a piece of it, its 17 of the budget. But our overall budget picture doesnt add up and i worry that ultimately that will wind up costing the men and women who serve, costing our ability to give them the training and equipment they need to carry out missions that we all hear that we need. Last thing id say and what i want to hear is as ive said, we have the list, china, russia, north korea, iran, violent islamist extremist groups. How do we confront those threats and protect our country . I want to make a couple quick comments on that. Theres a Common Thread between all of those threats, and that say threat to represent a democracy, freedom, and capitalism. All of those groups want to make the world safe, i guess, for autocratic dictator ships, though each one of themes that a slightly ditch view on what that dictatorship should look like. But its a fundamental threat to democracy and representative government. I think we need to understand it in that context and push back comprehensively to try and create a world thats safe for freedom and democracy. Because i think thats incredibly important in kiepg peaceful and prosperous world. Lastly im interested in hearing from you. We hear a lot from the military about what down the have, where were not spending enough money, about the threats were not meeting. If were going to get to where we need to good, we need to hear where can we save money . If we dont hear places where we can save money, theres no way were going to have to meet all the places were being told we need if the we want to hear that. I think your leadership at dod and the leadership that came before under ashe carter has really and the leadership of the chairman has done a good job at getting at procurement reform, getting at trying to get more out of the money that we spend. Employing commercial technology, a bunch of different ideas that can enable us to get more for less money. But thats never going to be more important than it is Going Forward given the fiscal situation that we are in and given the threat environment that is as described. How do we meet that . So were going to have to be a lot smarter about how we spend our money given the situation that we are in. With that, i yield back and i look forward to your testimony. Commit ttees pleased to welcome general mattis and general paul selva. Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Without objection your full written statements will be made part of the record. Mr. Secretary youre recognized for any comments youd like to make. Thank you chairman thornberry, Ranking Member smith and distinguishes members of the committee. Im here at your invitation to testify on two subjects, the 2018 National Defense strategy and the Nuclear Posture review, and im joined by the advice chairman of the joint chief general selva. Even in the midst of our ongoing counterterrorism campaign, my role is to keep the peace for one more year, one mormon, one more day giving secretary tils and our diplomats time to resolve crises through diplomatic channels. They do this to ensure that our diplomats negotiate from a position of strength. Up front i need note three days from now i will visit our nations First Security sas brigade in georgia as they prepare to deploy to afghanistan. To advance the security of our nation, these troops are putting themselves in harms way in effect signing a blank check payable to the American People with their lives. They do so despite congresss abrogation of its constitutional responsibility to provide sufficient, stable funding. Our military has been operating under debill tating continuing resolutions for more than 1,000 days during the past decade. These men and women hold the line for america while lacking this most fundamental congressional support of predictable budget. Congress rightfully mandated this Defense Strategy rrts first one in a decade, and then shutdown the government the first dave its release. It is not lost on me that as i testify before you this morning we are, again, on the verge of a Government Shutdown or at best another damaging, continuing resolution. I regret that without sustained predictable appropriations, my presence here today wastes your time because no strategy can sur vaf, survive without the funding to resource it. Yet we all know america can survive. Russia and china have chosen to be strategic competitors. They seek a world consistent with their authoritarian models and want veto power. Rogue regimes like north korea and iran persist in take outlaw actions that undermine and threaten regional and global stability. And despite our successes to date against isis physical caliphate, violent extremist organizations continue to sew hatred, insight violence and kill innocence. Across the globe democracies are taking notice. We recognize Great Power Competition is once again a reality. We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorism by, with, and through our allies, but in our new Defense Strategy, Great Power Competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of u. S. National security. Our military remains capable, but our Competitive Edge has eroded in every domain of warfare, air, land, sea, cyber, and space. Under frequent continuing resolutions and see questers budget caps our advantages continue to shrink. The combination rapidly changing technology, the negative impact on military readiness resulting from the longest continuous stretch of combat in our nations history, and insufficient funding have created an overstretched and underresources military. During last weeks state of the Union Address, President Trump said weakness is the surest path to conflict. To those who might suggest that we should accept a yearlong continuing resolution, it would mean a return to a disastrous sequestration level of funding for the military. And in a world of wash and change and increasing threats, theres no room for complacency. History makes clear that no country has a preordained right to victory on the battlefield. Framed with the President Trumps National Security strategy and aligned with the department of state our 2018 National Defense strategy provides clear, Strategic Direction for americas military. A longterm strategic competition requires the seamless integration of multiple elements of national power, diplomacy, information, economics, finance, intelligence, law enforcement, and military. The departments principal priorities are long term strategic competitions with china and russia. Given the magazine teed of the threats and prosperity today, Congress Must commit to both an increased and sustained investment in our capabilities. Concurrently, the department will sustain its efforts to deter and counter rogue regimes such as north korea and iran, defeat terrorist threats to the United States and consolidate our gains in iraq and afghanistan while moving to a more resource sustainable approach. More than any other nation, america can expand the competitive space. We can challenge our competitors where we possess advantages and they lack strength. To restore a competitive military edge, this Defense Strategy pursues three primary lines of effort. To build a more lethal force, to strengthen traditional alliances while building new partnerships, and reform the departments Business Practices for performance and affordability. Our first line of effort emphasizes that everything we do must contribute to the lethality of our military. In war, an enemy will attack a perceived weakness. Therefore, we cannot adopt a single preclusiv se se set of warfare. If deterrence fails, we must win. To defend our way of life, our military will embrace change while holding fast to traditional proven attributes that make us the most Formidable Force on any battlefield. Those who would threaten americas experiment in democracy must know if you threaten us, it will be your longest and worst day. To implement this strategy, we will invest in key capabilities recognizing we cannot expect success fighting tomorrows conflicts with yesterdays weapons and equipment. Driven by this strategy, next week you will see in our fy 19 budget investments the following. Space and cyber, Nuclear Deterrent forces, Missile Defense, advanced autonomous systems, artificial intelligence, and professional military education to provide our highquality troops what they need to win. We will prioritize rebuilding readiness while modernizing our existing force. We will also be changing our forces posture to prioritize readiness for war fighting and major combat, making us strategic predictable for our allies and operationally unpredictable for any adversary. Our second line of effort is to strengthen traditional alliances while building new partnerships. History is clear that nations with allies thrive. We inherited this approach to security and prosperity from the greatest generation, and it has served the United States well for 70 years. Working by, with, and through allies who carry their fair share is a source of strength. Since the costly victory in world war ii, americans have carried a disproportionate share of the Global Defense burden while others recovered. Today, the growing economic strength of allies and partners has enabled them to step up. As demonstrated by more than 70 nations and International Organizations participating in the defeat isis campaign and again in the 40some nations Standing Shoulder to shoulder in natos Resolute Support mission in afghanistan. Most nato allies are also increasing their Defense Budgets, giving credence to the value of democracy standing together. Our third line of effort serves as the foundation for our militarys Competitive Edge. Reforming the Business Practices of the department to provide both solvency and security and thereby gaining full benefit from every dollar spent. Every day, we will earn the trust of congress and the American People. We must be good stewards of the tax dollars entrusted to us. In this regard, we will deliver our departments full financial audit this year, because results and accountability matter. The first audit in d. O. D. s history will reveal how we can be better stewards. The department is tran