To do that . Congressman, again, i dont know what the thought process was six or eight months ago. I do know we have a much better appreciation for the resources of isil. In august i went around to all the regions, i was in transition, to get a better sense of isil. At that time there wasnt a clear understanding of how isis i will was generating revenue. Even in the weeks subsequent to august, we started to have a much better appreciation for the source of isil revenue. We started to go after the Oil Infrastructure and the tankers because we then appreciated how much of an impact that would have. I guess in the same vein, it looked like the french targets, the first targets they hit, seemed to be targets we should have hit right off the bat. Is that all changed now, are we in a new paradigm . I got the monday morning quarterbacking analogy, but are we in a position to hit everything that makes sense from a military standpoint . I can assure you, congressman, that the answer to that question is yes. Okay. The russians are introducing significant air defense capability. What impact will that have on our operations and the ability to do what we want to do . Weve watched that development very carefully. Thats a very capable air Defense System thats been brought in. We have a memorandum of understanding to ensure safety with the russians. I spoke to my counterpart on Russian Ministry of defense on that. I assess today we have the capability to prosecute the campaign against isil, the campaign that we envision, with rush russias presence. Do our pilots have the right rules of engagement if engaged . They do, congressman. Okay. I yield back. Thank you. Ms. Duckworth. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. General dunford, i know youre no stranger to the committee, but welcome in your new capacity as chairman of the joint chiefs. I just want to point out my support for my colleagues earlier discussion on the need for congress to do our job to actually take some action on a new aumf. I understand the president did submit a draft amf earlier this year, we in fact had hearings on it, secretary carter, you mentioned that also. But i think it is vital that we get this right. And the amf is part of that. I think the men and women who deploy in harms way, some of whom may not come back, as was the case with Master Sergeant wheeler, need to know they have not only the moral support but the Legal Backing of our nation. I hope we here in congress would devote equal effort to having this debate and talking about the true costs with regard the sacrifices required. As we get into the deeper discussion of one strategy over another. So chairman, what im concerned with in my line of questions is really going to focus on the global strategy against isil. I think that we have not really discussed in this committee so far other regions why isil is established outside of the middle east, that i believe pose just as big a threat, perhaps even more. Im thinking in particular of libya. Patrick pryor, the dias top counterterrorism official, was recently quoted as saying that about isil that libya is the affiliate that we are most worried about and its the hub from which they project across all north africa. While we have a clear and present danger in sear i donyri iraq, mr. Secretary, please explain how were leveraging the different elements of american power, not just of military, and specifically as much as you can in an unclassified setting, about our efforts to combat isil and libya. Well, it is, as it must be, a global strategy. It has to be in all media, to go back to the earlier question about messaging and cyber. And while i believe we play a central and essential role, its not purely a military campaign. It involves all the other instruments. But we are absolutely necessary. Were not by ourselves sufficient. With respect to libya, we have taken action there in recognition of the fact that because of the continuing political discord in libya, which has not been resolved, obviously were in favor of a political resolution in libya which would lead to decent governance there and therefore not a Fertile Ground for the growth of isil, that has not occurred and therefore it is fertile fground for the spread f isil. Therefore we have to make military action, and i gave you an example already, striking the leader there. It is a focus of ours. Where else other than libya do you see a real threat from isil and their forces . Im concerned that i see the general nodding. Im concerned there is areas where there are failed states that isil is using as a staging base. Some of the areas that immediately come to mind, obviously egypt is one of the areas were concerned. Thats where the russian aircraft was taken down. The Boko Haram Group has sworn allegiance and been accepted as part of the isil movement in nigeria. Weve seen isil in the afghanistan pakistan isil in y. Weve seen elements in jordan. Its absolutely a global dynamic. Thank you. I would like to return to the discussion earlier about the hold force, mr. Secretary, in iraq. You know, looking at our vision for the future of iraq and syria, what political outcomes in iraq do you envision, and whats your assessment of Prime Minister abadi and whether hes making the necessary reforms, and whether those are going to be enough for this whole force . Youre saying its hard to find these folks. Even if theyre not buying into what they need politically, theyre going to abandon that role. What do we need to gain more folks to become hold forces . The political future that were supporting in iraq and that Prime Minister abadi says he supports, ive spoken to him and i believe that he supports, but its difficult to accomplish, is a multisectarian but decentralized iraqi state in which kurds, shia, and sunni can live together under one state, have a reasonable amount of Self Governance, not by isil in sunni territory, but by people who can do a civilized job of governance in sunni territory, and kurds and shia all living together under one state, reasonable decentralization and Self Governance as appropriate, but under one state in that piece. Thats what were seeking. The alternative to that is a sectarian disintegration of iraq. We know what that looks like. Were hoping that Prime Minister abadi can pursue that road, that he has enough support to do it. Were trying to help him do that. But baghdad politics, no question about it, are complicated. And his predecessor was not on that road. Im out of time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you for being here and answering questions. I guess the first thing im not going to ask is, how can you reassure this body that the same administration that left in 2010, no one had the forethought to see isis coming, nobody thought it was important to stay on the iraqi Syrian Border. When general dunford was writing and executing op orders on the Syrian Border in 2003, whats changed yes, maam why should we think that you guys, that the administration is on the right path now . Theyve had a come to jesus moment, theyve changed, and they now understand the significance of the region, and they did not before. You said you lacked the capability, humint and otherwise, since 2010, which youre now regaining, but it wouldnt have been lost in the first place if this administration didnt squander the infrastructure that we had set up in 2010. Why should we trust you, i guess thats the question. Congressman, one of the reasons that i changed the structure of our command in iraq over the last year is because i wanted precisely because i wanted us to have the strength and the insight and the presence of a single senior American Military officer in baghdad. That is Lieutenant General sean mcfarland. And he is now connected each and every day to the front, literally to the front in ramadi, to our various areas where were training Iraqi Security forces. He can talk directly to Prime Minister abadi. He can talk directly to everybody else in baghdad and has complete command over all of our forces in the fight, by the way, in iraq and syria. Ive got a bunch of questions. Im going to out of time. Whats changed . The answer is you, you have changed, and that was the dynamic thats changed this . I think the ability to have people on the ground in iraq is essential to effectiveness there and to have unity the command. We now have that again. And i think thats a good thing. And it does hearken back to another era when we once again had it, as general dunford had it in afghanistan. Its really critical. We now have that. Okay. Second question, if you were to declare not declare war, but we had an authorization of use of military force, would it be against an autonomous state, or would it be against terror worldwide, isis flavor . I kind of like the language in the aumf that president obama submitted, and ill tell you why, because as i told you, my first question, when i was asked to review that was, does it gives you what we need to defeat let me ask it in a different way. Militarily, tactically, are you fighting a state . Im not talking about a philosophy class. General dunford, are you attacking a state or are you fighting a war against terrorism . We are fighting people who are using their goals to justify terrorism. The fact that they hold territory and that there are battle lines in this war, in syria and iraq, there is a behind the enemy lines area, there are lines of departure that you would cross if you were to go fight them . Thats different than al qaeda, would you say . It is. What i was referring to was the nature and the movement. In other words, isil and al qaeda. In terms of where isil is right now, they do in fact hold ground, they have declared a caliphate. That is an aspirational goal of al qaeda. Its something that isil has done today. That does make it a bit different. The fact that they are currently Holding Ground and declared a caliphate. In terms of them actually having and Holding Ground, does that make it harder or easier in that area in iraq and syria, where they actually hold ground, does that make it easier or harder to fight them compared to an al qaeda type enemy . I think in this particular case, isil is particularly difficult because theyre actually using humans as shields in places like raqqah, mosul, and ramadi. Which is no different than al qaeda in previous wars, and iraq in afghanistan . Correct, but isils location, we know where isil is. In the case of al qaeda, they blended into the country in a much different way than isil is. Gotcha. In my last six seconds, still trying to get the jordanians drones, unable to do so because were using chinese reapers instead of ours. I think we ought to fix that if we can. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Ashford. Thank you, and thank you mr. Secretary, and thank you, general dunford. I have asked this before, and i was in the middle east in february, and we were briefed on these various topics, the intelligence mission, the generals efforts to form up a sunni force, and some of the internet issues, the forming up of an internet combative force there in baghdad, i believe, at that time. And, you know, im the home of the 55th air wing is in omaha, and has a significant role in this effort. And i too support the aumf issue, i think youre absolutely right, i think youve mentioned that before, its clear that Congress Needs to act as quickly as possible on this effort. Heres my question, because i was there and was able to talk to king abdul, and he talked about putting the flag in the ground and getting isis out of the cities and all that sort of thing. And we talked about the intelligence collaborative efforts that were ongoing. It was impressive to hear those efforts. Would you say that now, nine months later, h to summarize it, but is there a significant change today from where we were nine months ago in our readiness to achieve these goals that were enunciated nine months ago . Would that phrase be creataccur mr. Secretary . Were constantly looking for opportunities to do more and doing more. We are doing more than nine months ago. I hope nine months from now were doing yet more, because were looking for opportunities. You mentioned jordan. We were with King Abdullah and his people, working once again to identify, and we have found some people in southern syria who want to recapture their territory from isil, and were supporting and enabling them. So were looking to do more. And were looking for proposals. I look to general dunford for them, the president looks to me and general dunford for proposals for how we can do more. And we found them. And ive given you a number of indications of ways that we have accelerated the campaign over the last few months, and well continue to do that. Thank you. I dont believe, at least nine months ago, i dont know if the questions was asked on our group, but i dont believe anybody was talking about being at war in a sense, we are in a war footing, i dont think those words were used then. They are now being used. I mean, at least to me, and maybe to my constituents back in nebraska, that being on a war footing is more significant effort than not. I guess that would be my would you agree with that . I use the word in the simple sense as a reflection of the necessity and the seriousness of this business. Thanks. I would again just say, i think most everyone has said it here today, but the aumf does seem to be the right way to go. So thank you very much. Mr. Kaufman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you gentlemen for your service to our country. I think one question i had, maybe were slow to initiate it, but im very glad right now that were focused on the infrastructure of the country, whether the oil industry, i think the cement industry was mentioned, those sources of revenue that support the regime. But one of the things that was talked about was that we dont want to do this sort of catastrophic destruction of, say, the oil industry, because it would be difficult to reconstitute in the future when isis is gone. However, if i as a gulf war veteran, i sport remember what Saddam Hussein did to the oil industry in kuwait, yet they were able to reconstitute that after the war. And so could you address to me why we simply dont do that sort of catastrophic destruction of the oil industry, to completely cut off their revenue, that revenue source, mr. Secretary . Sure, ill start, and the chairman can pitch in. Theres a balance to be struck there. But the critical thing is intelligence. And there we have had gained the insight that allows us to distinguish to a very large extent that part of the Energy Infrastructure which is being directly exploited by isil from that part that is benefiting the population at large. Thats a distinction that is based upon intelligence and underlies our striking. You may remember an early period, and this does precede the time when chairman dunford took over, but we were striking parts of the Energy Infrastructure which were largely small scale. We thought isil operated refining facilities. That proved not to be very effective. But in the course of continuing to study this infrastructure, weve learned which parts directly affect them, and were striking them, and we think thats going to have an effect on their revenue stream. Let me ask chairman dunford. Congressman, i think we can have it both ways. With the right intelligence and precision munitions, we could construction destruction that will deny isil the use of this infrastructure and yet leave it in a condition that at some point in the future it can be regenerated. Okay. I want to suggest to you that part of the strength of isis is their ability to govern these territories. And part of that is their ability to sustain the economy. And so a collapse of the economy i think hurts their ability to govern and further degrades them. Let me ask a question about the syrian refugee issue. Last july, turkey and the United States agreed in general terms on a plan that would provide a safe zone along a 60mile strip i of northern sealong the turki and possibly syrian Insurgent Forces would Work Together in terms of ground security. Where are we at with this . Because it would seem to me that a lot of the Syrian Refugees would like to stay in syria. And if we could create safe zones for them, that would obviously give them the ability to do that. Mr. Secretary . Thank you, congressman. The idea of humanitarian zones, safe zones, by the way no fly zones, zones of various kinds, are concepts that we have studied over time. And ill start with some of the considerations that have gone into that and why we have judged the costs of doing so greater than the benefits. But let me start with the benefits of a safe zone. The benefit for a safe zone would be a place where people who wished to move there could move there and be protected. Now, one has to be careful but who might wish to move there, because people might want to live where they live, and also we wouldnt want to create a situation in which people were expelled from countries to which they had moved into a safe zone by countries that didnt want them. Thats an undesirable outcome. From a Military Point of view, and ill let general dunford elaborate on this, one would need to anticipate that such a zone in syria would be contested. It would certainly be contested by isil, who would want to prove that it wasnt safe. Possibly elements of the regime who would want to prove its not safe if its on syrian territory. So it ends up being a substantial military operation. The turks, we have discussed things like that with the turks. They have not offered a force of the size that would do that. So let me stop there and ask general dunford to elaborate on that. We have definitely considered those possibilities. General, if you have a brief additional comment. No. Mr. Chairman, i would like that for the record, please. Its a complex subject that would definitely take more time. Mr. Molton. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, i want to thank you for your service, your patriotism, your wisdom, and i appreciate all that you do for us, for national defense. I fe