Come together to address a serious challenge. We all took an oath to protect the nation and its interests but to do so we must Work Together. I know everyone on this Committee Takes the isil threat seriously. Everyone at this table does as well. We encourage a serious debate. I ask you to pass the president s amf because it provides the authority and flex wage and recurrent campaign and because it will demonstrate to our men and women in uniform that all of us stand behind them. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. Let me add my personal thoughts and prayers to those at the loss of folks on that helicopter. A reminder to us that those who serve put themselves at risk in training and combat. We will work to which were those survivors their family members will be well cared for. The committee will join in. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I just returned yesterday from a trip to the middle east. I spent a day in baghdad with iraqi and u. S. Leaders discussing our strategy. I spent a day with our french counterpart. Aboard the Aircraft CarrierCharles De Gaulle in the arabian gulf. These two great vessels sitting sidebyside, there can but their combat aircraft and their crews are a powerful image. The solidarity of all of our Coalition Members is fundamental to the strength of our campaign against this transit regional threat that isil represents. The government of iraq has a lot of work to do to make sure that isil stays defeated. That will take time. I have been consulted on the proposed authorization for the use of military force against isil. It is suitable to the campaign. We should expect our enemies will continue to adapt their tactics and we will adapt our spirit bipartisan support for an amuf i met with some of them over this past weekend and they are performing magnificently as you would expect. I thank you for your commitment and i look forward to your questions. Senator corker thank you all for your testimony. Let me begin with secretary carter. Secretary kerry mentioned he felt the amuf we have from 2001 and 2002 gives the nine states Legal Authority to do what is now occurring. I want to know whether you believe that to be the case. From your perspective, you will make a unanimous everyone is that has come before believes currently we are operating under a legal premise with what we are doing against isis today. Secretary carter and chairman dempsey, has there been any indication to the people we are dealing with the Congress Today is not behind what is happening on the ground with isis . Defense secretary carter i cannot speak to that, mr. Chairman. The folks i have talked to do in fact believe the outrageous secretary kerry described on the part of isil warned the operation they are involved in. We dont do anything that is senator corker there is no when you deal with that Congress Defense secretary carter i have talked to people. They know a hearing like this is going on and they know its purpose. I presume they welcome a good outcome of it. Senator corker chairman dempsey . German dempsey i have no data to sit just they have any doubt about the support of congress or the American People. Senator corker we have had some great conversations and always appreciate your candor. Should there be any concern of people here that iran is influencing the outcome against isis . Does have she and militia on the ground, does have some of their own personnel is that a concern anyone that cares about u. S. National interests should have . Chairman dempsey of course. There are six things that concern us about iranian influence. The four regional concerns are circuits and proxies surrogates and proxies, weapons trafficking, Ballistic Missile technologies and minds they have developed with the intent to be able to close the straits and certain circumstances would cause them to. The two Global Threats are there Nuclear Aspirations for a weapon, which is being dealt with through the negotiations on a diplomatic track and ciber is the upper other global threat. Cyber is the other global threat. They are concerning, of course. Senator corker as it relates to dealing with tikrit, should we care that irans militias and others are involved in helping move isis out of those areas . Chairman dempsey there is concern that anything anyone does to counter isil is a good outcome the activities of the iranians is a positive thing in the military terms against isil but we are all concerned about what happens after the drums stopped beating and isis is defeated and whether the government of iraq will remain on a path to provide an inclusive government for all of the various groups. We are very concerned about that. Senator corker when it appears isis is on the towards their end come the shia militia and others would turn on our own military and negative things could occur at that time. We have no indications that they intend to turn on us. What we are watching carefully is the Popular Mobilization forces, when they recapture lost territory, whether they engage in acts of retribution and ethnic cleansing. Senator corker i know we have talked about syria. This is a term even the administration has begun to utilize themselves. We are in a containment mode. We are not taking aggressive steps to turn the tide there. We are involved in some aerial attacks. It is more of a containment mode. We have a train and equip program right now. I wonder if you could talk to us about two major decisions. If we are going to try to equip folks in other countries that are being trained against isis there has been an alleged other program that is against us on himself. Assad himself. If we are going to have a program that is going to deal with isis, i would assume we would consider it only moral that if we are going to train them and bring them in what we would supply air power and other support to protect them, especially from assads barrel bombs. Senator graham may have asked a question about whether this amuf provides that Legal Authority. Does it provide the Legal Authority for our military to protect those we are training in other places against isis, to protect them against assad. Talk to us about why we have not yet agreed into the air exclusion zone that turkey has asked us to approve that would more fully bring them in on the ground and get something much more positive occurring as it relates to having some ground effort there. Chairman dempsey i take it you are looking straight at me so i assume the question is for me. Let me briefly describe the way we characterize our campaign against isil. I would not say that our goal is to simply contain isil inside syria, but in main effort and supporting effort. Our main effort is in iraq because we have a credible ground partner for whom we supply this airpower to distribute and degrade and defeat isil inside of iraq. We dont have that credible partner inside of syria yet. We are taking steps to build a partner. We are attacking isil where we can you was using isr. It is intended to disrupt their activities so they cannot complement each other. They are no longer able to do that they are isolated and degraded in syria while we can talk conduct our main efforts inside of iraq. To your question about whether the amuf provides Legal Authority to perfect protect the Syrian Forces, the answer is no. The administration has not added any Syrian Regime or assad component to the amuf. We are in active discussion about what support we would supply once the new Syrian Forces are fielded. Militarily, there is a pragmatic reason, a moral obligation let me speak to the senator corker we are spending congresss money to train and equip people to go against isis and we know assad will barrel bombs them. The president has sent us an amuf that does not allow us to protect them against what we know they will be facing down the road. That to me is somewhat odd and does not think congruent with previous steps relative to train and equip. Chairman dempsey im not discounting the moral obligation. Im giving you military advice. Militarily, there is a pragmatic reason to support them. We will not be able to recruit men into that force unless we agree to support them at some level. Senator corker militarily, we have had a good crop that signed up on the front and. We cannot recruit more if we are not able to protect them and the amuf we have before us does not allow them allow us to protect them. Senator corker we are under active discussion part of that discussion is the Legal Authority to do so. Senator corker i know i am way over but the air exclusion zone, what is keeping us from those types of chairman dempsey we have been in two rounds of discussion with our turkish counterparts about that. We are continuing to develop that option should it be asked for. Senator boxer had to go to be part of that hearing. I asked that her statement be included in the record. I have heard all of you refer to no geographic limitation. But it reflect that the amuf passed out last year that the democrats put together has no geographic limitation. Although that was a subject of debate. Nonetheless, they came to the conclusion that it has no geographic limitation. To that extent, i know you have all raised it and i want to deal with it. Let me ask you, general dempsey is it fair to say that irans sponsored shia militias in iraq fighting isil is definitely their immediate interest . Do they have others beyond that . Chairman dempsey that has not become evident but is of great concern to us who have served in iraq since 2003. Iran is not a new entrant into the crucible of iraq. They have been there since 2004. In some cases, their influence their economic influence has contributed to this it has been disruptive to the inclusiveness or potential for an inclusive government. I share your concerns. We are watching carefully. The decree operation will be a strategic inflection point. In terms of using our concerns or increasing them. I would like to believe it is only to fight isil but i dont believe their purpose is at the and of the day, we have different goals as it relates to iraq, both in the short term and long term of a democratic multiethnic government. Chairman dempsey, you said in your remarks something to the extent that the authorization is proposed by the administration. It deals with our campaign as we hav presently devised ite. Does it also deal with a campaign that may alter . Chairman dempsey it deals with the campaign as presently designed and has statements in their. Im not sure what part of it you might senator menendez if your campaign as presently designed it needs to change to the realities of what is happening. Do you believe the authorization will allow you to do that . Chairman dempsey as most of us who have studied and served against these kind of threats at we believe the primary way you defeat these groups is with partners in the region and through sustainment of a rock coalition. Broad coalition. The u. S. Forces involved should be enabling, not necessarily leading the effort. I will always go back to the commander in chief through the secretary of defense of defense and recommend whatever i think is necessary to accomplish the task. As i presently can s conceive of this thread, this amuf is adequate to the task. Senator menendez i appreciate that answer because it underlines the challenge that members of the committee have in getting to the right point to support the president , to degrade and defeat isil and not to provide the open ended nestness. If you believe it has the wherewithal to be a feature criteria, that is the essence of the challenge. Last week before the Armed Services committee you in response to questions set your view of what and during combat operations would mean chairman dempsey it is not a doctrinal term. It is a statement of the commander in chiefs intent. Senator menendez we all know it may be the intent of someone not to have any largescale, longterm offensive combat troops. That intention can change along the way. That is part of our challenge here. General allen testified before this Committee Last week and we asked him he said that could mean as long as two weeks or two years. Considering his experience, it was not an insignificant statement. Secretary carter, what does it mean to you as the secretary of defense who oversees all the armed forces. What does no enduring offensive combat operations me to you . Defense secretary carter there are two ingredients to this. The how and the when. The amuf as proposed is provides for a wide range of activities to defeat isil. It has one significant limitation. The one you refer to. It does not authorize the kind of campaign we conducted in iraq and afghanistan. That is not what we foresee as necessary for the defeat of isil. It means my objective of having necessary possibility. There is that limitation. That is what the meaning of those words is. In regards to the threeyear limit that is not based on assessment of how long the campaign will take but how long thats how our system works here. Senator menendez it can still commit thousands of troops or a long period of time. It may not be the size of afghanistan or iraq. Secretary kerry, one of the criticisms of the residence proposed amuf is that it does not make clear that it is this amuf and not that he doesnt want that the 2001 and not the 2001 amuf that governs this situation. The isil amuf precedes any other amuf . Secretary of state john kerry only if it was absolutely clear that there was no limitation whatsoever with respect to the other activities authorized by the 2001 amuf. That is the principal authorization with response to al qaeda. The president has made it clear if a Congress Passes senator menendez there is no reason secretary of state john kerry as long as it is clear. Senator menendez over the weekend, boko arouharam declared allegiance to isil. With a be a target would they be a target . Secretary of state john kerry thedefense secretary carter the language indicates the possibility of other groups aligning with isil. The text says the amuf would cover such groups that associate with or fight alongside if they also have the attempt that intent of threatening americans. Senator menendez swearing allegiance would be enough, then . Secretary of state john kerry if they are defense secretary carter if they are associated with my isil and threatening americans. I want to thank you all for recognizing what happened this morning in my home state of florida. It is inherently dangerous work even under training. Our thoughts and prayers go out to them and their families and loved ones. I want to ask you about iran. Iraqs goal is to become the regional most ominous regional power. Most dominant regional power. They see American Military presence in the region as a threat or impediment to that goal. Defense secretary carter yes. They are never excited to see additional american troops. Defense secretary carter i cannot imagine that bombing isil is unwelcome to them. I believe much of our strategy with regards to isis is being driven by desire not to upset iran so that they dont walk away from the negotiating table. Tell me why im wrong. Secretary of state john kerry the facts completely contradict that. Im not at liberty to discuss all of them here for a lot of different reasons. At this delicate stage, im not sure that is advisable. Can you state that irans feelings about our military presence in the region and could you tell me today that under no circumstances is how iran would react they are not fans of us bombing isis because it involves our presence in the region. Are you telling us that is a nonfactor in the negotiation . Secretary of state john kerry they would welcome our bombing additionally of isis. They want us to destroy isis and they want to destroy isis. Isis is a threat to them and the region. You are misreading it if you think there is not a mutual interest. If the u. S. Sent more military personnel, they would support that . Secretary of state john kerry they are not going to come out and openly supported. Obviously, they would be nervous about it, but they are not going to object to it. We have bigger problems with that because the shia militia might have something to say about it. Other people might react very adversely to that. What is important understand this. This has been a misreading by a lot of people appear on the hill. There is no grand bargain being discussed here in the context of this negotiation. This is about Nuclear Weapon potential. That is it. The president has made it absolutely clear there will not they will not get a Nuclear Weapon. The presumption has been that some out that somehow we are not aware of that goal even as we negotiate that goal. Our negotiation is calculated to makes sure they cannot get a Nuclear Weapon. It is almost insulting the resumption here is that we are going to negotiate something that allows them to get Nuclear Weapon. I believe our military strategy towards isis is influenced by our desire not to cross redlines secretary of state john kerry absolutely not in the least. We will do what is necessary in conjunction with our coalition we have 62 countries. Five sunni countries that for the First Time Ever are engaged in military action in other countries in the region. General dempsey outlined the need to have a Broad Coalition that involves these sunni countries like the jordanians and saudis and others. These are countries that are deeply concerned about iran and they feel we have kept them in the dark about our negotiations with iran. The way we proceeded with negotiations and iran have impacted our trust level. Secretary of state john kerry that is flat wrong, also. I just came back from meeting in the gulf i met with the king who complete was supported what we are doing. I met with all the gcc members and they sat around the table and they all articulated their support for what we are doing and they believe we are better off trying to prevent them from getting a bomb diplomatically first, provided it prevents them from getting that bomb. A whole bunch