Coordinator and making sure that people are aware and have the resources. Thats certainly not the time to be coming into the Government Office and working with us to make sure we have appropriate remedies. Another topic i raised seeing trade secrets as a form of intellectual property like copyright and trademark. We are beginning to get it. They have been actively advocating and working with european nations and they are very interested in whats happening here in the United States. You mentioned moving from first inventor to file with the systems we have now. Theres a number of changes i pr was created out of that whole process. We just need to see the implications. Just now, three or four years later, what it means. Later, what it means. Will it have positive implications or something that we may see there are issues with that. That is why, if we are going to legislate again in this area we need to be very careful about how we go about it because we are just now seeing the output of what it was back in 2011. We ought to be cautious about how we go back and wade into that water again. I agree with you. This is a big harmony with the United States. Japan is also looking at providing their trade secret law and its a problem for european countries. I think this is where the u. S. Government can work well with its counterpart. They need to try to encourage other governments to put domestic laws in place that make it easier to prostaglandins prosecute against that. Or at least prevent it from happening in the first place. There does seem to be consensus in europe and japan that there are measures you can take to reduce the problem but one of the things we are seeing now is rethinking our approach with a more assertive approach. Weve reached the end of our time. I thought this was a great panel. It was really fascinating. Was really fascinating. Michelle lee, thank you so much. You cut me off before i could think victoria and mike so thank you to them as well. [applause]. Live at 10 00 a. M. On cspan. And monday Governor Scott walker is expected to announce that is entering the president ial race. Next weekend on road to the white house, two political events from iowa. Live in cedar rapids for the Iowa Democratic hall of fame dinner. It will mark the first time that all five democratics candidates shared the same stage. Then we will be live in ames where nine leading president ial candidates are expected to speak. Road to the white house 2016 we take your. You there. On thursday they held a hearing for general dunford who is expected to be anointed by president obama to become the next joint chiefs of staff chair. They spoke on a wide array of security concerns. This is two hours 25 minutes. [inaudible] these are your standard questions for the military nomination [inaudible] [inaudible] sen. Mccain good morning. The Senate Armed Services committee joins to consider the nomination of general dunford as joint chiefs of staff. General dunford is no stranger to this committee. He was our commander in afghanistan and many posts before that. He is a warrior and a leader of the highest quality and we are grateful for his 38 years of distinguished service. Were also thankful for the sacrifices general dunfords family has made over the years and their willingness to lend him to the nation once again. We welcome you to introduced members of your family joining you this morning. I would like to take this moment to express our special thanks to your wife ellen. We know how much his service and future absence will rest on you and we honor the sacrifices you are making through your continued support to our nation, not to mention the downgrade in your residence. [laughter] that will be part of this. The next chairman will have to conduct the military to confront the most diverse and array of global crises since 2002. Isis has continued to succeed on the battlefield taking ramadi and other key terrain in iraq. The lack of a coherent strategy has resulted in the spread of isil around the world in libya egypt, nigeria and even to afghanistan where i visited last weekend. Supporting our partners in sustaining a stable and democratic future, but even as isothreatens the future isil threatens the future, the president remains committed to a reduction in troops before they are fully capable of operating without our support. This would create a security vacuum and we have seen what fills similar kinds of vacuums in syria and iraq. Given your experience in afghanistan, we be interested to hear your thoughts about the appropriate u. S. And coalition presents going forward. Meanwhile, iran continues to threaten peace and stability across the middle east and development of the missiles needed to deliver them to targets far beyond its shores. In europe, Vladimir Putins russia continues its onslaught of ukraine, but even as russian weapons and equipment execute this neocampaign, United States has refused the ukraine weapons it needs and deserves for its defense. In the asiapacific, china is continuing its efforts of behavior. Its continued military tilde designed to counter u. S. Military strengths and its blatant and undeterred Cyber Attacks against United States. Well our efforts in the asiapacific has shown some successes especially the deepening of our alliances this has not deterred china from its assertive course. While challenges grow, the Defense Department has grown more complex, but less innovative. More profession with lowtech adversaries but more vulnerable to hightech ones. And the selfinflicted wounds of the budget control act and sequestration have lowered defense spending and made all these problems worse. The air force is the oldest and smallest it has ever been. The navys fleet is shrinking to preworld war i levels. We will continue the downward spiral of military capacity and readiness that will compromise each Services Ability to execute our defense strategic guidance at a time of accumulating danger to our National Security. Budget cuts have slowed priorities comparing the nations ability to prepare its military and technological vantage. Advantage. This is just about the aircraft we hear about, but budget cuts threaten our ability to seize the future and make the vital investments in Breakthrough Technologies such as directed energy out of his vehicles and data analytics. The current general joint chiefs of staff has stated that even if the Defense Department receives the additional 38 billion above the budget cap, our military would remain at the lower ragged edge of manageable risk in our ability to execute the defense strategy. More worrisome is that everyone of our military Service Chiefs has testified that continued sequestration level defense spending puts american lives at greater risk. Less we change course limit sequestration i fear that our military will confront depleted readiness, chronic monitor to station monetization problems and deteriorating morale. No matter how many dollars we spend we will not provide the the material they need with a broken acquisition system that takes too long and costs too much. With the act, this committee has embarked on a major effort to reform this system including ways to empower our Service Leaders to manage their own programs in exchange for greater accountability. We are very interested in hearing your views about improving the defense acquisition system based on your years of service. The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is the principal military advisor to the president. More than ever we need an honest and forthright leader that offers his best and unvarnished military advice. The president will not always take your advice that it is my hope that he will always have an appreciation of the military dimensions and difficult problems our nation confronts with you at his side. Thank you for your willingness to serve once more. Thank you very much to thank the general for his Extraordinary Service to the nation. During 38 years he has served with courage and distinction and im confident hell continue to do so as the next chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. , finally, let me also recognize his family. Alan and patrick, thank you for being here today. Thank you very much for what you have done to serve the nation and the marine corps. Last week, general dempsey released the 2015 National Military strategy. In his forward he stated that the current environment is the most unpredictable he has seen during his military service and that global disorder has significantly increased while the military advantage has become begun to erode. It is confirmed if confirmed as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff you will be advising the president and the secretary of defense on these issues facing our National Interests. You will be countering the Security Threat from isil in iraq and syria. As the president said earlier this week our counsel icer counter isil campaign will employ all elements including military intelligence, diplomatic and economic. If confirmed you will be authorized on a military role including getting rid of isil safe havens with training assistance and air support from the international coalition. The success of these efforts will depend on a couple metairie effort to i look forward to hearing your views on the situation in iraq and syria and thinking in the ultimate role the military can play in supporting the diplomatic front. Regarding the ran iran the department of defense will play a key role in reassuring our shared priorities in the region. Working to did deescalate or resolve threats. If confirmed you will bring valuable experience to oversight in afghanistan where you have led the u. S. And Coalition Forces with distinction. While the Afghan Forces fought courageously come up more is to be done courageously, more needs to be done. There will be a clinical Critical Role in the size of u. S. Forces in afghanistan in 2016 and beyond. Another challenge will be deterring additional aggression toward ukraine and its european neighbors and reinforcing the minsk court. Defensive weapons to help the ukrainian people defend their sovereignty. We will be interested in your views and the security situation in the ukraine and what additional steps you recommend for assisting russias neighbors and themselves. Our men in uniform and women in uniform remain the committees top concern. Our armed forces are nothing without its people and we continue to juggle the twin goals of a high quality of life and adequate levels of training and equipping. To meet National Defense requirements. Sometimes that means making hard choices. To that end as you well know, the department of congress has for several years considered various proposals. I would be particularly interested in your views on the proposals and the impact on such changes if not enacted. This committee had a robust debate on how best to fund defense programs. I repeatedly stated that sequestration is not the approach we need to address the fiscal challenges and more pointedly it under nine undermines National Literary readiness. Military readiness. Even a oneyear increase in boko spending oko spending does not provide the certainty needed. It undermines the morale of our troops and families who want to know if their futures are planned for more than one year at a time. I hope you will share your thoughts on this topic with the community today. Thank you for your willingness to serve the nation and i look forward to discussing these issues. Sen. Mccain there are standard questions the committee always asks of military nominees and i would like to proceed with that before your testimony. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight responsibilities it is important that this committee is able other communications of come information. Do you agree when asked to give your personal views even if they differ from the administration in power. Gen. Dunford i do, chairman. Sen. Mccain have you taken any duties that would impede the competition process . Gen. Dunford i have not. Sen. Mccain do comply with the deadlines for communications and hearings . We cooperate with witnesses and briefs for congressional request . Gen. Dunford i will. Sen. Mccain will witnesses be protected from reprisals . Gen. Dunford they will. Sen. Mccain you agree to testify on request before this committee . Gen. Dunford i do. Sen. Mccain do you agree to provide documents and a timely manner when requested or to consult with the committee for any goodfaith basis for delay or denial in providing documents . Gen. Dunford yes, chairman. Sen. Mccain thank you for providing complying with that formality. Gen. Dunford thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. Going to thank the secretary of defense for their confidence in me. Joining me today is my wife ellen, and my son patrick. Ellen has been a great mother to our children and is an advocate for military families. Her sense of humor, flexibility and endurance have been tested in over 30 years as a Military Spouse and i would not be here today without her love and support. I like to thank you for your commitment to our soldiers, sailors and parades. They are the most marines. They are the most wellequipped material force in the world. This committee is also well aware of the pressing challenges we face in europe, the middle east, space and cyberspace. While doing with these and other issues we have to joint force in the face of budget challenges. If confirmed i will provide the president with my best military advice and a full range of military options. When asked i will provide congress with my best military advice. When delivering best military advice i will do so with candor. They will maintain a joint force capable of securing today and tomorrow. If confirmed, i will dedicate myself to properly leading representing and keeping the faith with the civilian men and uniform who volunteered to serve our nation. Sen. Mccain thank you very much general. The day before yesterday we received testimony that so far with 500 million committed, theres been 60 individuals who have been trained to go into syria and fight against isis. What do you know about that particular situation . Gen. Dunford chairman, what i know is we have the general who has been working at that for some months. Those numbers are less than he estimated. The feedback i received is those numbers are largely attributable to the vetting process that they think they learned things during the process of these first 60, but frankly chairman until i have an opportunity to get on the ground and speak to the commanders what i know is secondhand. Sen. Mccain do you believe we should get a pledge from these recruits that they will only fight against isis and not Bashar Al Assad . Gen. Dunford chairman, what i understand right now is we do not have the authority to take action against assads forces. Unless that policy would change, that pledge would be required. Sen. Mccain given your experience in the military, do you think its a good idea to train people and send them to be attacked and barrel bombed by another entity and not defending them . Gen. Dunford chairman, if we train those individuals and they go back into syria to fight, i think if them with enabling capability to allow them to be successful. Provide them with a full range of capability to be successful. Sen. Mccain and other words prepare them in ways that are routine now . Gen. Dunford provide them with a full range of capability to be successful. Sen. Mccain i was recently in afghanistan over the fourth of july and there was great concern with the afghani and with the abdullah and other afghans about the present proposal to have our force in afghanistan down to a embassycentric force by 2017. Meeting that we would be giving up and turning over our basis. With a force only based in the u. S. Embassy. Great concern was voiced concerning this plan, or the articulated, announced plan by the president of United States. The taliban did not respect the nonfighting season. The casualties are higher than they have ever been and we now have isis and the iranians providing taliban with weapons. Is this a wise decision on your part to have a calendarbased withdrawal rather than a conditionbased withdrawal . Given your background and experience i think you are qualified to make that judgment. Gen. Dunford i am aware of the consequences and i have a personal commitment in having spent time there. I am cant assure you if confirmed i will provide advice to the president that will allow us to meet our desired end state and i think that will be based on conditions on the the ground as articulated. Sen. Mccain rather than a calendarbased decision . Gen. Dunford sen. Mccain in ukraine, its obvious that the russians continue their military buildup. I was in Eastern Ukraine and watched the Surveillance Video that was made by the ukraineians showing the gradual buildup of Russian Forces inside ukraine. Do you believe that we should get the ukrainians a counter battery system with which to defend themselves from russian strikes and should we provide them with Mission System Missile Systems to defeat the russian tank rates . Raids. Gen. Dunford i think it is reasonable and without that support they are not going to be able to protect themselves against russian aggression. Sen. Mccain general dunford, i would like to repeat again my appreciation for your service and i am confident that you will serve with distinction and you are the principle military adviser to the president of the United States and that is a unique role as designed in the 1947 act. I hope youll keep in mind your obligation to the president , but also to the men and women who are serving that we may have to send into harms way and make sure they are provided with the best capabilities. I hope, in answer to some of these questions, that you will talk about the devastating effect of sequestration on our ability to defend the nation. Maybe you could make a brief comment on that now. Gen. Dunford i have dealt with the issue of sequestration and quite frankly if we go into sequestration, we will be unable to support the current strategy we have to protect our nation and the readiness and modernization of the joint force will suffer catastrophic consequences. Sen. Mccain i thank you general dunford. Sen;. Reed following a bit on senator mccains final question about sequestration, the administration and secretary carter made this clear has adopted an antiisil campaign with nine lines of effort. To be principally controlled by the department of defense. Are you comfortable with that approach . Gen. Dunford i am comfortable with that overall approach. Sen. Reed the other lines of effort are controlled by the government, state Department Homeland security, et cetera. And senator mccains questions on effects of sequestration on department of defense, are you concerned that partners in these efforts could be hamstrung just as much as you would the be . Gen. Dunford absolutely. Not only do we just represent two of the nine lines of effort, but we cannot be successful in you were in afghanistan. We had a significant military effort. But we also had a significant civilian agency effort. State department f. B. I. , Drug Enforcement administration. All these agencies. I would assume you considered them to be integral and essential parts of your effort. And without them or without their ability to provide resources, you couldnt have accomplished what you did. Is that fair . Sir, i think its absolutely fair. And although we have challenges remaining i think we have accomplished quite a bit. And from my perspective thats because we have been able to int grate the capabilities of those organizations. In particular, the relationship we have with the state department in afghanistan was critical to our success. One of the most difficult issues you face is building the capacity of the Iraqi Security forces. And this has been an endeavor, frankly, that weve tried for a long time. Do you have any sort of sense at this juncture of what we can or should be doing differently . How do we do this . Weve heard colleagues come before the committee, your colleagues, and suggest that theres scaffs of leadership at the upper levels. Your perspectives on the length of time and efforts we have to undertake to get a credible iraqi force in the field which ultimately will secure the country. Sir, with the caveat that ive been away for 11 months, will certainly confirm. The areas of most concern were intelligence logistics special operation capability and aviation capability. More broadly the ministerial capacity. Our ubsing was that was a longterm endeavor. It would take years. What were not trying to do is develop the capability that we have in this country but the ability of ministerial level to support tactical level organizations. So i think continuing to stay the course and the plan that general cam billion has and recognizing that will take resources is the way for us to be successful. Focus for a moment. I know your practical experience is in afghanistan and other places. But in iraq, the same capability problems. Is your analysis apply there also in terms of the longterm need to build up the Iraqi Security forces . It does. In some way the situation is the same. Also some vast differences. I think one of the Biggest Challenges is when Prime Minister maliki was there he eliminated many of the capable quality leaders. So at the tactical level its fair to say the Afghan Forces have solid leaders. Weve seen them. Weve developed them. Theyve gone to our schools. I think we have some work to do to rebuild the Iraqi Security forces frankly to get them back to perhaps where they were a few years ago. One other aspect theres many aspects. But one is this tension sectarian and geographic tensions in the country. But our policy and is that to support a unified government in baghdad and work with them so that they are able to integrate their ethnic communities. Is that the unified government you think makes sense . That is approach that going to be very difficult to do. But at this point i believe thats the best prospects for longterm success is a unified multisectarian government in iraq. Frankly, if confirmed, if at any point i no longer believe thats possible then my advice to the president would be adjusted accordingly. Thank you very much and for your service. In responding to one of the chairmans questions you talked about didnt have the authority to go after assad. Isnt that what you said . That you do not have the authority to go after assad . Senator, my understanding is that we dont have the Legal Authority at this time to go after the assad regime. And its also the policy of the administration not to go after the assad regime militarily. Well, i think for the record i would like to have you expand a little bit on that. Because as to whether or not it would be desireable for you to have that authority. Weve been talking it would be desireable for you to have that authority. For a long time and with you also at these hearings about the amount of risk that were at right now. You were quoted as saying our Combatant Commanders face increasing risk. We talk about the risk out there. Risk equals lives. We talk about this at all these hearings. But how do you define too much risk . Are we there yet . Senator, lives. We i believe today we are capable of providing Adequate Security to protect our National Interests. I also believe were at the razors edge. Thats been a subject of testimony several times before this committee is that our Readiness Level is at the point right now were if we were to go below we would have to adjust the ends. We would no longer be able to support our strategy. Its similar, general ornarrow, they are very much concerned that weve never had to accept in the past. In the ukraine particularly sensitive to that. I happened to be there when we had the election that resulted for the first time in 96 years no communist serving nir their parliament. Weve talked about what they really should be having there. Are there obstacles to keep if you were to make that determination as to giving them more to defend themselves the things that we agree that they should have . Is there an obstacle that we could help with . Do you think you have that authority now . Senator, from a military perspective, additional capability to the ukrainians would help them to deal with the separatist and russian threat in the ukraine. There are some policy issues associated with that that dont fall into the d. O. D. I understand that. And i appreciate that answer. Kind of the same thing with the kurds. Now, they have a need for i guess antiarmor, m raps and a lot of these things. I get two conflicting stories. One from some of the top people in charge say that by sending through baghdad you have a problem in getting it up there to the fight. And yet i heard just yesterday from someone who is in charge that that problem has been resolved now. Is that resolved . And do we have a problem getting the equipment that they need up there, the fighters, to effectively fight . Senator, i watched carefully the hearing on tuesday and in the exchange that took place on this particular issue. Ive been briefed that in fact the issues have been resolved and support is getting to the kurds right away. But this would be one of those issues that if confirmed again the iraq afghan and places i would be the first places i would go to visit in this issue would be one issue i would look into personally. I appreciate that. In this mornings the hill, general petraeus had a couple quotes in there. He said we can schedule an end to our row and that nation, talking about afghanistan, in that nations conflict. But we cannot schedule an end to the war there or an end to the threat from al qaeda the islamic state, or other extremist elements of the global jihad. Going to a zero option next year would be playing roulet with afghanistans future. Is petraeus right . Senator, i think hes absolutely right with regard to the war would continue whether or not were there or not. And i think you can assume the war would get worse were our presence not to be there. Again, my assessment is that our presence ought to be based on the conditions on the ground. And i will certainly go over there and check those as soon as and if confirmed. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. General, isis with regard to iraq and syria. Would you generally ascribe to the fact that in iraq it is going to require the iraqis to have the will to fight to meet isis in iraq and be successful . Chairman senator our Current Campaign is depend nt on the capabilities of the iraqi forces. To deal with isil. Go over to syria. Now, thats a hodgepodge. How much do you think that the assad regime staying in power would complicate the issue of us being able to take down isis in syria . Senator, my assessment is it plays a significant role. I think assads brutality to his people is certainly the primary factor giving rise to isis. And i ascribe to that particular assessment. I think his remaining in power has certainly continued to inflame people and gives isis the recruits and support they need to operate inside of syria. I agree with that. And then the question is when do we really press to have some kind of political settlement for assad to exit . Do you have any thoughts on that . Senator, i dont. Im not involved in a dialogue today in that regard. The political resolution is one of the lines of effort that is part of our overall strategy and while i dont know i would assume today that issue is being asdressed. And certainly if confirmed i would expect to be a part of those conversations and know bait more than today. Someone of your stature is going to be comforting to us to have the confidence to know that those very tough decisions that will be made with regard to limiting the effectiveness and ultimately defeating isis will be made with you sitting there at the table giving counsel. If you just look at a map of who is in control of syria in the different geographicle areas of syria it is a mess. And how you bring order thank you senator mccaskle has shown this is syria and the different colors representing the different entities that in fact are in control and that geographic area. So it is comforting to know that you are going to be there giving your wise counsel. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator sessions. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. General, with regard to the budget control act which includes the sequester, the budget committee, the Armed Services committee with a bipartisan strong vote has voted out legislation that will add 23 billion above last years spending for the Defense Department. I believe the Appropriations Committee has already voted out that same spending level and it is on the floor. The problem is that the commander in chief, the president of the United States, is insisting on blocking that bill encouraging democrats to filibuster it until theres an agreement to spend an equal amount on nondefense. And i just believe that the fact that we have a crisis internationally and we need to spend more on defense does not require that this nation spend more on nondefense. So that is the difficulty we face. You will be seeing more of that i guess as time goes by. General, with regard to iraq and this isis situation, isnt it true that the threat in iraq is not just a threat to iraq but it implicates the National Security interests of the United States and that we have a National Security interest in seeing blocking a takeover of iraq by this Extremist Group isis who chops off heads and does other extreme things . Senator i would agree that the issue of isis has both regional issues and creating regional instability. We have interest in a stable iraq that is not a sanctuary for extremist. I think it is a mistake to say we are going to sit back and say were going to wait on the iraqi army to get its act together. We have trained the iraqi army for over a decade. They have battalions and companies and organizations. Theyre not well led. And their morale is not good. But they have an army. The question is can we help encourage them to be more effective in fighting back against isis . Would you not agree . I do agree with that senator. And i would just say despite the challenges we have had as you know some thousands of men and women from the United States Central Command that have been in iraq and conducting strikes in syria over the last year. And despite the challenges in pretty difficult conditions i think they have had some accomplishments over the past year that we can be proud of. Clearly, were going to do more. I think secretary carter made that clear on tuesday that clearly we need to do more to assist the iraqis in moving forward. And i think thats the plan. The president s press conference two days ago did not encourage me and did not clarify in my mind that we have a good strategy for iraq. And frankly, i think general dempsey and secretary carter following up on that were not very persuasive, either, in convincing me or the American People that we have a good plan. Now, based on your experience, isnt it a fact that if we had a limited number, just a five, special forces embedded with an iraqi battalion of 600, that that can make give confidence to that battalion, help improve their morale, and help them be more effective on the battlefield . Senator, its been my experience that when u. S. Forces have accompanied iraqis or for that matter my experience in afghanistan that those units are more effective. Well, general dempsey said he has not yet recommended that we embed a limited number a very small number of such forces in the iraqi army. But he would do so if he thought it was appropriate. Dont you think its time for us to maybe move from being in bagged dad in Head Quarters and actually move out to help provide this kind of confidence, the air cover, the direction of munitions giving confidence of resupply and american commitment . Isnt it time for us to move forward in that direction . Senator without appearing to be evasive, what i really would like to do if confirmed is have the opportunity to get on the ground speak to the commanders and provide more comprehensive recommendation to how to move the campaign forward without focusing on one or other of the factors. I hope you will do that quickly. Senator mccain warned yesterday that we could be facing the same situation that he warned about iraq in 2011 when we pulled out prematurely. Now were going to be facing this decision in afghanistan. I hope that you will be clear and firm in your recommendation to the president if you believe this plan we have today, date specific withdrawal is an error. I hope you will do that. Will you do so if you think it is in error . I will do that, senator. Thank you. I have my good friend and colleague senator session and i have worked together on matters of fiscal accountability but i have a different take on where we are in terms of the military budget. I cant figure out any reason why we would be putting the 40 billion increase into the war fund instead of into the base budget. I cant think of any reason to do that other than one of misleading the American People about whether or not were balancing something. Because thats the only place they can put the money and not have to pay for it. So they put it there so it didnt have to be paid for. And completely short changed National Security for our country in the form of Cyber Security port security, airport security, f. B. I. , c. I. A. , all of which i know you would acknowledge is a very important part of the role of keeping america safe. Would you agree with that . Senator, i would absolutely agree that all those organizations play a role in keeping us safe. Lets make very clear if in fact we go down this path of pretending were balancing something by putting it in a fund that we dont have to pay for will in fact the oako funds or the war fund as i like to call them will they do anything to avoid the force structure scuths that are looming across our nation if we do not get off of this path of misleading the American People about what were balancing . I think all of the Service Chiefs that have to balance the budgets, including me, would prefer that money to be in the base budget. That provides a degree of predictability to get after what we need to deal with, modernization of force and get the Readiness Level back to what we need. The cuts that we have seen this week are a drop in the bucket as to whats coming if we continue on this bizarre idea of putting all of this money in the war fund as opposed in the base budget where force strength belongs. Correct . If the budget level goes below whats been requested in the president s budget 16 there will be additional cuts made. Thank you. You know how hard we have all worked on the problem of Sexual Assault in the military. I am pleased that the incidents are down. I am pleased that reporting is up. I am pleased that the efforts that are being made to measure Victim Satisfaction with command look good. I think its too early to tell declare success obviously. We have a lot more work to do. But the thorny problem that remains, is retaliation. And i know that there have been some nirktivers the culture issue and that means from the top. Im disappointed that we havent had more prosecutions of retaliation as a crime. I know its new. I know people might be very reluctant to bring somebody up on those charges because of what that mean in their unit. But thats where you guys come in. And i would like a commitment from you today that you would be willing to put a plan in writing that we could follow. You of course were not found to be a problem in this. The investigation found no problem and in reality there was a huge problem that somebody signed off on a building for 64 36 million that will never be used and we have to make sure we avoid that. My final question is if you dont have time to do it now, im just about out of time. I want to make sure we get your take on isis in afghanistan. What is i know theyre trying to move everywhere obviously this is a shiasunni issue. And that is something prevalent throughout the region. And with your experience in afghanistan are you comfortable that we have a handle on what isis is trying to do in afghanistan . Senator, what i know from general campbells reports and the intelligence is we have seen a number of taliban rebrand themselves as isis. But beyond that i dont have a good feel at this time for the depth of the problem. But certainly would be one of the issues i would look into if confirmed. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. General i think youre the man for the job but you have a lot of crises to preside over. I would ask you, during the course of your term in office, tell us what you need. Come back to us and be honest. Tell us what our men and women in uniform need to succeed and get the job done. I dont think were quite there. I was privileged to lead a bipartisan delegation of house and Senate Members over the past week to ukraine. We met with the president in i was kiev and he is grateful for the 300 million that this government provided in military assistance during the past year. He also mentioned the need for ant tank missiles. I think your testimony earlier today that that is a reasonable request on the part of the president of ukraine and it will be necessary for him to get those in order for him to defend his country was that your testimony . It was. From a military perspective those kinds of capabilities in ni judgment would be necessary for him to deal with both russian aggression and separatism issue that he is dealing in ukraine. Separatists backed by the russian hierarchy. Would you also agree its unacceptable that this months transfer of 100 armored humvees to ukraine took over a year to process due to bureaucratic days at d. O. D. And state . Senator, if it took a year to do that it would be unacceptable. Im not personally aware of that issue. Look into that for us. I also led the delegation to he will sinkie for the parliamentary assembly. Before the delegation left, before the russian delegation left enmass because of a dispute over five delegates being on the u. E. e. U. Sanctions list, the head of the delegation said that russians neighbors russias neighbors have no reason to be threat pped by russia. Now, of course russia has under mr. Putins leadership russia has twice invaded neighbors, georgia in 2008, ukraine last year. And we see now that theres a russian official investigating the legality of mr. Cruise chaves transfer of crimea back in the day saying that this perhaps wasnt an invasion because crimea was never legally transferred to ukraine by the Russian Federation. It concerns me that this same official is now investigating whether the transfer of the battlic states whether the giving of independence to the battlic states latvia, lithuania, estonia, was also legal. There are small jurisdictions within latvia that have a majority of russian speakers. Small jurisdictions within estonia that have a majority of russian speakers. And pleb sites, a pretevk text is created at that point. I realize this is hypothetical. But in light of pronouncement of officials, i think its something to be concerned about. Brazz inski spoke earlier and said we need to create a trip wire in the battlic and that this trip wire should communicate clearly to russia that nato will not tolerate violations of the territorial integrity of our allies. What do you think of this idea . And can you highlight to this committee the steps d. O. D. Needs to take under your leadership to send a credible message that this sort of pretext by the Russian Federation would absolutely not be tolerated by the United States and our nato allies . Senator, i think our experience in ukraine and in the other examples you used highlights the fact that we need to update our deterrence and response model to deal with the kind of threat that we have today which is described as a hybrid threat. Quite frankly, that needs to be a priority. Youre asking what should the department do. We frankly need an effective deterrent model for the 21st century to deal with the kind of threats that were now seeing in russia. That kind of threat is one that we will continue to see in the future and certainly in the european context. Without an incursion of Russian Troops or russianbacked separatist troops in small jurisdictions of russianspeaking majorities, latvia and estonia would that be completely unacceptable to this government . From a policy perspective, senator. I cant answer that. From a personal per jective it certainly looks like a violation of sovereignty to me. In my view it would be absolutely unacceptable and we need to make it clear this Administration Needs to make it clear this Congress Needs to make it clear that we will do what is necessary to prevent this sort of idea from ever being considered in the first place. Senator, i agree with that. And this also applies to the cyber threat as well. The idea of deterrence in response to a changing threat in the 21st century. And i think we need to update our models for both. Thank you, sir. Senator manch. Thank you for your service to our great country and your familys dedication and the sacrifices they have made with you over the years. Im sure you had the opportunity to form an opinion on what our threats have been and what our threats are today. What would you consider the greatest threat to our National Security . My assessment today, senator, is russia presents the greatest threat to our National Security. Would you want to elaborate on that . Senator in russia we have a nuclear power. We have one that not only has the keachability to violate the sovereignty and to do things that are inconsistent with our National Interest but they are in the process of doing so. So if you want to talk about a nation that could pose an existential threat to the United States. I would have when you have basically and i have been very much concerned about the same issue i think we talked about it before. I have been told by major scholars that the cold war is colder than the day it was declared because of the lack of communication, the lack of interparty affiliations. Have you found that to be true, and can you change that course in your new position . Gen. Dunford certainly the relationship with russia a few years ago, we were including them in nato meetings and those kind of exchanges have stopped. My perspective would be even with the difficulties we face right now i think it is important to maintain a military to military relationship with our russian counterparts to the extent possible to mitigate the risk of miscalculation, and began to turn that trend in the other direction in terms of trust. Going back to iraq, and it is been spoken about previously, could you find yourself at some time recommending to the president for a three state solution in iraq versus staying the course of the united Iraqi Government . Gen. Dunford for my perspective, i can imagine two states in iraq. I have difficulty imagining a third separate state, given the lack of resources that would be available to the sunni. And frankly i think without the federal government, i think we would have some difficulty, the same difficulty we have today exacerbated by the fact there is not a central government. You are acknowledging that the kurds are strong, repaired, ready to go if given that opportunity . Gen. Dunford it is probably out of my lane to talk about what the organization of iraq might be in the future, but the shia and kurds are certainly much more equipped to set up separate states than the sunni would be at this time. I know it is been spoken about also, the mistake of us leaving iraq, pulling our troops out when we did. Did we have an option to stay . Gen. Dunford senator, i was not involved in the discussion at that time. The assessment of the administration was we did not have an option to stay. Basically those of us who believe there could have been some forces left there, or basically that he was not doing his job, once we went down the path of democracy we did not have the option to go back and stay there. Gen. Dunford the iraqis were not meeting our demands. I am not sure we had an option to stay. Have spoken many times about lack of an audit on the government. The marines have made an effort, i will say, more of an effort than any branch of the military to do that but it has not been fulfilled. What would it serve for us to have an audit, especially to know about our contractors, how much money we spend, how many forces we have doing the job that i believe our national job could be supporting in that effort . Gen. Dunford we cannot be effective as a war fighting organization and we certainly cannot be efficient with the taxpayers dollars without an effective audit. With the marine corps i worked as an assistant commandant and as a commandant. We did make a significant amount of progress. We were able to audit all the resources under the direct cognizance of the marine corps. I can assure you that if confirmed, you will have my commitment to continue to press hard in that direction and make sure we can come to you with a clean audit. I again want to thank you. You have my support and i think the confidence of the American People, definitely the west virginians. General i just want to thank you for all that you have done for the country, and i think that you will do a tremendous job as the joint cheer of the chairman as the chairman of the joint chief of staff. I also wanted to add my support to what enemy castle said about the issue of retaliation. I think this is a very what senator mccaskill said about the issue of retaliation. To support victims and hold the perpetrations all the perpetrators accountable so i look forward to seeing that proposal from you. I wanted to ask about the situation, as we look at iran and their support for regional terrorism, how would you assess their current activities and where are they engaging in support, either direct the or through proxies for efforts that are undermining the region . Gen. Dunford iran is clearly a malign influence in one of the most destabilizing influences in the middle east. They are providing support to the houthis. Hezbollah is a clear malign influence. Certainly they are involved in trying to expand their influence into iraq. They are exacerbating at least the sunni kiev sunni shia sectarianism. I want to followup that they were engaged in efforts to support the taliban. Gen. Dunford i have seen the same reports and from my perspective, what have seen what i have seen is they have provided support to to the taliban to counter isil. I know you commanded troops in iraq, but certainly iran has the blood of american soldiers on its hands for what he ask plosive for what the explosive materials they applied they provided to the shia militia. So do you think as we look at the situation in iraq and what is happening with the shia militias you referred to, how could they be a malign influence in the longterm solution custome . Gen. Dunford i believe we should not supply any force any support to those forces unless they are directly under the support of the Iraqi Government. I wanted to also ask you about the situation on cyber because we have received briefings on the opm breach but the fbi director says he believes this is an enormous brief. Millions and millions of individuals who provided Background Information have been breached and director clapper has said they believe it is the chinese who have done this breach. What do you think, when we look at the threats facing our nation, how grave you think the cyber threat is . How would you assess our current posture with the chinese and how we should be addressing the situation . Gen. Dunford i would agree with you, the cyber threat is clearly very significant. Every week we learn a little bit more about the opm breach. My concern is for the data and the wellbeing of the men and women whose data that is have not been compromised. One of the challenges attribution. From my perspective my role will be to provide the president with a full range of options to deal with Cyber Attacks, which is what the opm breach was. Caller i know that i know that the senator had asked think our gravest national Security Threat is, and you identified russia. Certainly we have seen this aggression type in russia, invading other countries essentially. What is it, as you look at the National Security situation, do you think about immediate threats to the country, what keeps you up at night the most . Gen. Dunford what keeps me up at night the most is our ability to respond to the uncertain. Im very confident in the joint force today and our capabilities and capacities to deal with the challenges we have today. We need some improvement in cyber and other capabilities but on balance the force that we have is able to deal with the challenges that we know. This has been discussed many times before this committee. It is the readiness to respond to the uncertain frankly that keeps me up at night as a service chief and where i conferred confirmed as the chairman it would keep me up at night. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and ranking member. Thank you, general dunford, for your service. I am grateful for your family being here with you. I know i want to continue along the lines with iran. We are expecting a potential Nuclear Agreement as early as today. Are you concerned that lifting sanctions might allow them to invest more money in terrorist activities in the middle east, and what do we do to address those concerns . Gen. Dunford there is no question that the signing of an agreement will change the dynamic in the middle east. If confirmed, i know i would have the responsibility to develop options for the president regarding the changing dynamic. Regarding resources for malign activity, i think it is reasonable to assume if sanctions were lifted they would have more money available for malign interests. My expectation is that iran will continue the malign activity across the middle east that we have seen over the past couple of years. I also want to continue the line by senator mccaskill about retaliation. She was correct when she said it was something we are all concerned about. She mentioned unit commanders, and i want to be specific about this issue. 53 was the are to peer retaliation peer to peer retaliation, and 11 was punishment for an infraction. You have to recognize some of this retaliation is being perceived by survivors to be done by unit commanders or someone with in the chain of command, because administrative retaliation or perceived administrative retaliation is serious. There is still a climate issue that the chain of command is responsible for, particularly unit commanders and lowerlevel commanders, that is not getting the right message. In fact, the recent survey said that 60 of women who said they experienced sexual discrimination or some kind of negative behavior came from their commanders, their unit commanders. You have to recognize there is a climate issue that is not being adequately addressed. When you do your report for this committee i would like you to look at that issue as well. You also have the challenge that in the reported cases, one in seven of the perpetrators who were alleged to have committed rape, Sexual Assault, or unwanted sexual contact, is also in the chain of command. You have a problem with lowerlevel commanders that i would like to report to cover as well. I want to talk about combat integration. I strongly believe that we should have standards that meet the needs of each position and then allow anyone in who meets those standards to compete. You have not been very vocal on this issue but if confirmed, you will be one of those individuals advising the secretary of defense about whether the services should receive any exceptions to policy. Do you expect the services especially the marines, to ask for exceptions . Gen. Dunford senator, im not able to answer that question. I can explain the process in the marine corps, that we have looked at this issue pretty hard. We have put together a task force that will stand down this week. I expect the data that we connect collected in the past 18 months to be a valid to be to be available to me soon. What do you think will you be looking across the services to see if one asks for exceptions in a position whose equivalent another service does not ask for exception for . Gen. Dunford my understanding of the way it will work now, if i confirmed, i will have a responsibility to look at each request on its own merits and make a request make a recommendation to the secretary of defense. I want to address cyber. We are constantly being confronted with our need for a capable cyber force. There is still work to be done. How do you envision the force and what do use either role of the reserve component . Gen. Dunford i envision the force, as you mentioned, it is certainly going to grow, and i would support the efforts of admiral rogers. I think he is on the right path as far as growing the capacity of the cyber force. In many cases, some of the skill sets that are unique to cyber ark available to us in reserve force and we need to figure out a way to maximize and leverage those capabilities. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, general dunford, for your many years of service to this country. I would like to also thank your family, your wife, your son, and your niece who is here as well. I was pleased to see that you listed modernizing the Nuclear Enterprise among the top challenges that you do expect to face in your response to the committees advanced questions. Also described our Nuclear Deterrent as the nations top military priority. Do you believe it is critical that we maintain the full triad of our delivery vehicles . Gen. Dunford given the nature of the threat i do believe. Do you support a bomber leg of the triad armed with both gravity bombs and cruise missiles . Gen. Dunford i do. And the gravity bombs and cruise missiles are entirely different capabilities so one does not make the other redundant, is that correctt . Gen. Dunford it is, and it adds a degree of complexity to the threat. As you know, modernization has been delayed and deferred for some time, and we are now at a point where the life of the Delivery System cannot be extended any further. As deputy secretary work is the choice modernizing or losing the capability in the 1920s and 1930s, some have argued that these bills are too large and we cannot afford to retain our Nuclear Deterrent. According to the departments calculation at its peak, the Nuclear Mission would be about 7 of the nuclear budget. I think it is a little confusing when we hear about our deterrent described as unaffordable. To me the alternative of letting that deterrent aged out, that has the unaffordable cost. Do you have any thoughts on that . Gen. Dunford i would pose the question, some people ask whether we can afford it. I say we think we need to think about how we will find it. That is the number one capability that we need to have to protect the nation, and Nuclear Weapons certainly create an existential threat. It is a question more of how do we move forward to fund this as opposed to can we afford it . At 7 of the budget at its peak and being the number one priority, shouldnt that be what we find first . Gen. Dunford it is more complicated than that, and i have some experience. When i look at the ohio class replacement in the department of the navy and what that would press to build the ship building while it is clear that that is the priority, it is not an issue of exclusivity. Balance capability is what the joint force needs and i think we need to approach it from that perspective. I also appreciate the connection you made between the modernization and that reductions to the hedge of our nondeployed weapons. I think that this linkage is often overlooked, and i think it is based on simple logic. If you have a modern stockpile and you have a responsive infrastructure, you do not need to keep as many spares. And i think you are more insulated as well from what is happening in the world. You are more insulated from those surprises and also from technical failure. But to be clear, do you believe that it would be premature to make any significant changes to the hedge before we have a modern stock file and before stockpile, and before we have a responsive infrastructure . Gen. Dunford my understanding at this time is that would be the most prudent course for us to take. With respect to further nuclear arms reductions, do you believe that any reduction below the new start force levels must be achieved through a negotiated treaty and also be verifiable question . Gen. Dunford i do, i do not believe we should take unilateral action in that regard. Do you agree that any arms control negotiations must take into account russias current the havey or, especially as behavior, especially its compliance record . You said you believe russia is our greatest threat. Gen. Dunford i do, senator. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman, and i would also like to thank general dempsey and everything they have done for the country. General dunford, thank you very much for stepping up to the plate. As you know, and we have discussed in the past, i believe one of the greatest threats to our troops is when they find themselves in a personal place where they start to think about Something Like suicide. We lost over 400 young men and women in the past year. I know you have worked very hard in this area. You have done rigorous screening in the marine corps. Will you have that same screening used across the branches when you look at recruits early on in their careers . Gen. Dunford one of the thoughts i had as a service chief is to make sure once we identified a better way to identify people at risk, we would share that as best practices across the services. The other question i wanted to ask you is, a lot of times in talking to the parents there has been a stigma for the young men and women to seek help. I know that you are committed to removing that stigma. Are we going to make sure that everybody knows, it is a sign of strength to try to get some help as opposed to any weakness . Gen. Dunford absolutely, and this is one of these areas you are never complacent, never satisfied. I really believe over the past five or seven years the issue of stigma as it associates with suicide has changed dramatically. Even how we deal with families in the wake of suicide, and i do think the command climate is much more receptive to somebody today seeking help than it was in the past, and making sure that help is accessible and appropriate. Im not suggesting we are satisfied with where we are but i do believe we have made a lot of progress in that particular regard. Last week i was on a trip led by senator kaine in iraq and we met with a number of our forces there. One of the greatest concerns was the iraqi troops, when you look to them when you look at the isis fighters compared to iraqi troops, it was a very sparse number of isis fighters but they won anyway because the iraqi troops turned and left. It would have to be a focus of the iraqi forces. Are we going to send a message that the only way through ramadi is through ramadi, there is no back door in these kind of efforts . Gen. Dunford you have been on the ground more recently than i have, and i know you have talked to the commanders. I listened to general austin the other day and i think they have made it very clear that the Iraqi Security forces, how important the money is. They have been working how important ramadi is. They have been working to set the conditions. It is a tactical action to go back in ramadi but there is no question in my mind from an Information Operations perspective is a strategic action. One of the other groups we met with, and i know the marines have shed so much blood in amber province over the past years. We met with a lot of the sunni tribal leaders and they say, we are still united with you but we need to know that you are in this, that you care. And i mentioned this the other day to secretary carter and general dempsey. One of the Council Members said we have people eating grass in our town now. These are people that work with the United States. There is no milk for our children. We need you to help in this humanitarian crisis. I think we not only have to win the battles, we have to require the hearts and minds of the people there. They say if you do, we will move these folks out. Gen. Dunford i agree, and i think with regard to embarq, anbar, i could not agree with you more that their confidence in our commitment, their trust in our commitment absolutely have an impact on the success of our campaign, not only from the military perspective but from the perspective of them willing to support us. The last thing i want to mention is syria. It appears the plan we have right now is really no plan. We have talked about buffer zones when we were in saudi arabia. Chairman mccain with a group of us, and we talked about creating nofly zones there. We seem to be in search of a plan. My fear is that assad is going to fall and we are hearing that from a lot of folks in the area that he is on very shaky ground. Do we then look up the next day and see a race between isis and all nusra to take over the country . You stepping into a real challenging position, but i think one of the very front on the lens is, syria is going to change and change quickly. We had best be prepared for that change and be ahead of it, or else we will look up and an entire country will be gone. Thank you. General dunford, inc. You for being here today. Mrs. Dunford, thank you for your years of service. General, you said earlier you believe russia is the gravest threat the United States faces. I take it because that is the only country with a Nuclear Capability to destroy the United States . Gen. Dunford that is one of the reasons, combined with their recent behavior. Given that russia is currently an ongoing violation of the intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty, do you believe the United States should consider withdrawing from that treaty . Gen. Dunford i would like to take that for the record. We would like to hear a response to that for the record because it currently stands, russia and the United States are the only parties to the treaty and russia is violating it. The United States is the only country prohibited from developing range missiles with the range of 5000 kilometers. The president currently has a proposal to preposition some equipment in our easter nato allies countries eastern nato allies countries. On that proposal, somewhat underwhelming although a step in the right direction. Are there barriers to stationing troops in those countries, even up to the brigade level . Gen. Dunford i think that proposal is part of a wide range of activities, to have infrastructure to support deployments and have equipment so we can rapidly move forces in. The other piece is Rotational Forces so i think they are envisioned as part of the whole package that secretary carter announced. I would like to move now to iran. As far as i know there has not been an announced Nuclear Agreement but under any such agreement, they will probably get a signing bonus. How do you expect they will use that signing bonus . Gen. Dunford from the outside looking in, they have two challenges, their economy and the disinfection of the iranian people as a result of that economy. And that they use Resources Available to support activity across the region. You believe part of that information part of that will go to the malign forces they support . Gen. Dunford i think it is reasonable to assume that. Does the United States have the military capability to destroy Irans Nuclear plan question . Gen. Dunford my understanding is that i do. When you served in iraq and afghanistan, do you know how many were killed by iranian activities . Gen. Dunford i know the total number of sailors, sale , and the recent number has been quoted at 500. We have not always been able to attribute the casualties to iranian activity although several times we suspected although we did not have the forensics to support that. 500 confirmed that many more suspected and many more wounded in action. You have a reputation for being particularly thoughtful when you deal with the families of fallen servicemembers. What would you say to family members of a soldier, sailor airman, or marine that was killed by iranian activity if we make an agreement with them before they change their behavior . Gen. Dunford i would say that my expectation is that regardless of there being an agreement or not, they will continue to be a malign force and influence. If confirmed as the chairman, i will make sure that our leadership has a full range of options to deal with iranian activity. It has been reported that your nickname is fighting joe. Is that correct . Gen. Dunford it is not one i use. But it has been given to you . Gen. Dunford perhaps by my wife. Do you care to tell us the origin of that nickname . Gen. Dunford i would prefer to talk about that in private if you do not mind. I have heard it reported because it was as a commander in the early days of the iraq war as an infantry officer. Whatever budget agreement we reach, it will probably be inadequate. Whether it is the long rides Strike Bomber longrange Strike Bomber. Are you worried about the next generation of infantrymen that we are going to be taking money from our Ground Troops to put in major Capital Investments which are needed . Gen. Dunford i am concerned and i think it is broader than just infantry piece. Experience tells us we need a balanced capability and joint force to be successful. When i answered a question earlier, i talked about the need to respond to the uncertain. What concerns me are people who think they know what the future will look like because our experience tells us we do not. Having a full range of capabilities that includes effective marines and soldiers from my perspective is the prudent ring to do. In your long experience, i think we have put troops in afghanistan, iraq, the baltic, and theres no doubt we may be called on again in the future. I hope in your tenure that even if you do not want to be called fighting joe that you will be on the lookout to have them ready to serve again. Gen. Dunford i will do that. The committee will not review have a senator from arkansas got his nicknames here in the senate. Senator kaine. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, general dunford. With the president s recent announcement about 500 more advisors going into the antiisil mission, we are now up to 3500 troops serving abroad in that battle. Serving as advisors, as trainers, special forces or knitting air campaigns conducting air campaigns. Two days ago general dempsey testified he believed in a mission of this complexity it was likely to be a multiyear effort that would require a sustained commitment by the United States to defeat isil. Do you think it would be received positively that the troops who we are asking to deploy far from home and risk their lives, if congress were to have debate and authorize and firm the u. S. Mission affirm the u. S. Mission against isis . Gen. Dunford i think it would be positive. One, from the reason you mentioned, i think our young men and women need is a sense that what they are doing has purpose and meaning and support of the American People. I also think that there is a second benefit from such a debate, and that is to send a clear and unmistakable message to our adversaries and allies that we are committed to this endeavor. With respect to the antiisoeffort, i want to pick up on something senator reid is talking about earlier. It has sort of nine lines of effort and supporting Effective Governance, denying isil safe havens, building karner capacity, enhancing intelligence collection, disrupting isofinances, exposing isils s true nature, those nine lines are purely dod, denying isil safe haven. The dod has a piece of some of the others but they are generally nondod. You have testified you think the effective sequester on the dod mission could be catastrophic. Given that seven of these line items are nondod, would you agree that the not the allowance of sequester to come back in october 1 would also hurt the other seven lines of effort that are critical in defeating iso . Isil . Gen. Dunford from my perspective, dose the effort that we have the two lines of effort that we have are really buying times in space time and space for those other lines to work. I do not see how we can have an enduring success unless those other seven lines are addressed and they are in the more final analysis more important. For those other seven lines of effort to be put into effect but i certainly cannot see us being successful without all of them being properly resourced. When we talk about threat finance, using foreign fighters, and the state departments efforts to develop Effective Governance of iraq and syria those are going to be very important actions to be taken for us to have enduring stability so we can deal with this issue once and for all. There has been some question that if we fix sequester for defense that is all we need to do, even for important defense priorities, the connection between nondefense investments and defense investments in defeating isois really important isil is very important. Supporting the numbers that sequester should be fixed for defense and nondefense accounts. With respect to training and equipping opposition in the isobattle isil battle, senator mccain raised in a hearing the question of if we train folks to fight isil in syria and they get attacked by assad regime will we protect them . He still has not gotten an answer. So from september 2 now, nine months without a clear answer. We were told last week that the current rules of engagement still would prohibit u. S. To support u. S. Trained antiisofighters in syria antiisil fighters in syria. I would like to know if that is in fact the policy if dod intends to change the policy, when they will change the policy, and if not, what do we need to do to send to change the policy . I do not think we would should be sending United States forces in. Gen. Dunford thank you, mr. Chairman. General and missed dunford, and mrs. Dunford, thank you for your responsibility. Marines take great pride in the fact that you are only the second marine ever nominated for this post. I know your career has exemplified on her and commitment that are the values of the marine corps, and i certainly plan on voting for you with enthusiasm and encourage my colleagues to do so as well. I look forward to seeing you tomorrow night at the parade. I wanted to ask a few questions about the military and relationship with congress. Your role is going to be principal advisor to the president. First in the area of force posture, this Committee Weighs in through the nda on force posh you issues, basing of troops, aircraft like the a10. When this happens, how important is it that the military follow the defense guidance of the senate or congress . Gen. Dunford i think it is very important, given how explicit it is in the constitution with the responsibilities of congress. Lets say there was an amendment from the chairman and it was about the number of aircraft carriers passed unanimously through the committee, votes on the senate floor. Do you think the cnl should say the chairman does not know that much about the navy, we are going to blow that advice and the nda off . Gen. Dunford if Congress Passes a law, it would not be appropriate to ignore it. How about an amendment that says if it is sent to congress in support of the president s rebalance of the asiapacific trade, is it appropriate to ignore that or even significantly decrease forces . Our response should be if that is happening. Gen. Dunford the sense that congress ought to inform only actions there is a recent amendment that says exactly that. Let me provide a second area, and we have talked about a little bit in terms of emerging threats. Sometimes the department of defense civilian and military officials miss certain threats. Let me provide an example of one that everybody seems to be focused on, with the exception of the department of defense. Newsweek had a cover story on the arctic, and what they call, in the race to control the arctic the u. S. Lags behind. They have talked about this is the worlds newest great game. To dominate earths remote and strategic places, talks about how the russians are aggressively moving military forces into the arctic, serious military exercises, and whether it is the coast guard or secretary of defense saying this new geopolitical cold war the u. S. Is in danger of losing, we are not even in the same league as the russians. We are not even playing this game at all. So i think it is safe to say the department of defense has been asleep at the switch on this. Congress has been more attuned to this issue and there is a section that requires the department of defense to provide congress with a military strategy given the new threat levels, and an old plan for the arctic given the increase in interest and threats. Does it make sense to cut any of Americas Limited number of cold weather trained forces in the arctic before this confession congressionally mandated effort is completed . Gen. Dunford i guess im not sure which forces you are alluding to be cut. There is only certain forces in the arctic and the are all in alaska. Gen. Dunford i would like to take that for the record. I am not aware of the full range of decisions being made right now and what the applications are. I think it is important to recognize, it is hard to figure out appropriate force levels and capabilities in the arctic without having a plan. We have mandated the desire and need for a plan, and i think were getting a little bit of the cart the for the horst cutting forces cart before the horse, cutting forces before we know what our threat are. Im hoping the dod will recognize that. Gen. Dunford i know i have had some conversations with the current chief of naval obligations naval operations. I know we wont in fact develop we will in fact develop an appropriate role for the military in the arctic. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman and general dunford, mrs. Dunford and your family. I just wanted to pick up very briefly on the issue of Sexual Conduct in the military and retaliation. I think you had noted that would determine the root causes and continue to ensure that the culture does not support retaliation. I would ask you to have a sense of urgency as you respond to this committee on how youre going to address and resolve the issue of retaliation. Because even as we downsize our military, it is even more important that our troops morale remains strong and there is cohesion. There could not be strong morale or cohesion is some of your troops are encountering Sexual Assault, harassment, and retaliation. Could you share very briefly your views on the rebalance to the asiapacific . Gen. Dunford it is absolutely critical that we do that, given both the demographics in asia and our Economic Future so there is no question about it, that will require us to modernize our alliances and i think we have seen progress. Our relationship with south korea, japan, the philippines india, australia have all been adjusted in recent months. I think we had an unprecedented level of exercises and engagement in the pacific to assert our influence and provide a stabilizing presence. The most important thing, it provides a security infrastructure with which we could advance our National Interest. That is what i think the rebalance of the pacific is designed to modernize that security so just as we protect our National Interest over the past decades, we can do that in the future. I just got details on the cuts that will happen to pay, as a result of the budget necessities. The cuts were with regard to the importance of a rebalance and therefore, we want to make sure, and this is something i know that senator sullivan shares with me, that the rebalance to the asiapacific remains a very strong commitment on our part. You mentioned that russia is the greatest threat to our security. Where would i saw korea isil, north korea, and china fall . Gen. Dunford i would have russia as number one, chinas number two. Russia because of their Nuclear Capability and their aggression. China, because of their growing military capability and their growing interest in the pacific. It is an as someone in uniform, i get paid to look at someones intent and capability. We look at chinese capabilities, i would have to consider china an area of concern as distinct from a threat. Clearly north korea with Ballistic Missile capability and the potential to reach the United States and attack the homeland is high on that list and then i sold. I saw. Sil. I do not view that meaning we can attack those issues in sequence, or that a prioritization of one at the expense of the other is necessarily something we would have to do at this particular time. All of their Security Issues require the department to look at them. That is why we live in very complicated times. I would like to focus on our lay down in the pacific. As specific to japan, i am aware of the concerns of the open now in population and their leadership okinawan population and their relationship their leadership here. It is very much a part of the rebalance we are committed to. Gen. Dunford i recently did visit japan. I was encouraged by my visit. I met with a number of their senior leaders, including the minister of defense. I received their full commitment to continue with the replacement plan. My sense is that the japanese government is committed to that, recognize that is important to us to continue with the preferred lay down. My sense right now is that our relationship with the japanese we are in a pretty good place with regard to the replacement facility. Do you view the open our situation as me ok now a situation as one that should be dealt with throughout the japan japan and the government . Gen. Dunford we ought to set the relationship as positive with the people. The issue of a replacement facility, from my perspective is an internal japanese political issue that has to be worked at the japanese government. Thank you, thank you mr. Chairman. General dunford welcome to you and your family. In your written testimony you state as senator fischer pointed out, that our Nuclear Deterrent is the nations top priority. That leads me to a specific question related to how we plan for that priority. The health of our nations whole Nuclear Weapons complex is critical to our Nuclear Deterrent. One of the things in your written testimony is that we must recruit and train our next generation of workforce capable of requiring acquiring stockpile influence. Can you share with me your thought specifically on ldrd, or Laboratory Directed research and development . And their role in achieving recruitment and retention of the next Generation Nuclear workforce . Gen. Dunford i frankly has not have not developed any expertise and i would like to take that for the record. That would be fine, and i look forward to engaging you on that in the future. It is important for us to view some of the particulars of how we manage the labs and particularly, the things that bring people into the pipeline at the front and with the greatest amount of expertise. And then they stay in those positions, rise up through the labs, and provide continuity that it will take to make sure we have the kind of modern deterrent that we need. I want to focus my next question on some of the challenges here at home. In my view, Defense Innovation is moving to bank slowly too slowly, oftentimes in cycles that last years wall commercial innovation can be measured and cycles of months. Half of nda a authorize funding to accelerate in addition to directed energy, things like lowcost, high speed munitions autonomous systems, undersea warfare, and Intelligence Data and analytics. What role do you think the development of these new technologies will play in our National Security posture . What steps should we take to develop and deliver operational use systems more quickly . Gen. Dunford in my capacity as the chairman if i in confirmed i view the future of the joint forces being one of my critical responsibilities, and he keep a key piece of that is making sure we stay uptodate with technology. Maintain our competitive advantage. I think what you are outlining is certainly an area of concern for me. I would tell you that over the past decade, our efforts in innovation were probably at a lower priority than they ought to be. Over the past year have tried to energize that and i would bring the same focus to that if i was confirmed. One other challenge at home is that the air force is remotely air forces remotely piloted aircraft field is largely strained due to insufficient personnel policy actions to improve manning levels, and just the basic reality that the air force is losing more remotely piloted aircraft eyelids than it is training pilots than it is training. We have heard from secretary james and general welsh, who have affirmed assured this committee they are dedicated to resolve this issue. If confirmed, i ask that you make that a priority. Gen. Dunford maybe just, and quickly, those men and women in that field represent a core capability in the joint force. Their effectiveness, their morale, their willingness to continue to serve is absolutely important, and i will certainly reinforce. I have spoken to general welch about this but i will certainly reinforce the efforts to make sure that those individuals appreciate are appreciated and have a climate in which they want to remain airmen. I appreciate that deeply. I think it is an area where we are seeing some severe strains and where folks need our support. Thank you. Good morning, general dunford. Thank you for your service and for your familys long time serving our nation. I leaned over to senator sullivan during some of your comments, and also thoroughly appreciate your concise answers to questions. It is refreshing to get that. I would like to go back a question, or build on a question that senator sessions asked having to do with the plus up of spending and the use of oak oh as a way. We know that that is not the best way to do what you need to do, i merely for the purposes that you pointed out, it still does not give you longterm certainty. Have you given thought to how you could potentially use this funding, although it is not a longterm commitment, to take the edge off sequestration and any ideas on how you would . Gen. Dunford we started to look at that and it would really require a change in the rules for using oko for us to be able to do that. If you gave us oko given the current rules we would not be able to use it in places where it is most needed. In addition to the bca level in the president s budget for 2016, it was focused on modernization. We have looked at it but there are some very practical limitations in our ability to apply it to some of the areas that we need to. Will you be making specific recommendations for things that we need to look at to make sure you get the most activity out of it . Gen. Dunford i will certainly do that through the secretary of defense as he works this issue. Thank you. I wanted to go back to questions about afghanistan and iraq. I visited both countries and spoke with a number of people while we were there. It seems like in afghanistan we have the right mix, we have them in the right roles, and the afghanis have proved they can fight successfully. In iraq, i know what you set about some of the political decisions of the past administration have caused a problem, and those have to be addressed. But have you given any thought to, assuming that you get to the point to where you have the right command infrastructure among the iraqis, what we may need to actually create a credible trained, effective fighting force for the iraqis beyond the 3000 currently present troops . Gen. Dunford i can address that conceptually in terms of their ability to combine arms and develop institutional training, and develop the capacity to administer a level two support tactical level forces. It has been a few years since i have been on the ground in iraq. I would like to take the opportunity to visit iraq and develop a comprehensive recommendation that would help us move the campaign forward. On the flipside, i know the afghanis made a lot of progress but they rely on us heavily for a train and assist role. I know that i have heard you say we cannot have a calendarbased approach toward reduction in forces. But the sense that i got when i was in kabul is that those who are very much in touch with the situation on ground think it would be a bad idea to substantially reduce our current presence over the nearterm. I assume that is because theyre looking ahead to 12 months, 18 months from now and saying we will still not be at a place were the afghanis can be completely independent. Do you share that view . Gen. Dunford the assumptions that we made in a recommendation delivered in september 2013, 19 months ago, and some of the assumptions affected the timeline. We certainly did not expected to be as much of a delay in the elections process in 2014 as it was, and that was a great distraction. When i was on the ground it was difficult to get my counterparts to focus on the practice the practical side when they were involved in a real issue of providing security for the elections. We made some assumptions about things that could be done within a certain. Of time that we actually did not in the event get done during that window of time. From a distance now, if confirmed, immediately from a distance, it certainly makes sense that the timeline we originally identified is being possible, has probably been affected by the political events and other events associated with the enemy. Thank you, general dunford. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for your service general, and thank you to your family who are here for their service as well. I want to begin with what you assessed as the primary threat from russia and china, and talk about a weapons system that has not been raised today, submarine force. I recognize it is not immediately part of your background but obviously a great responsibility if you are confirmed. And i am certainly going to strongly support your confirmation. The Ohio Replacement Program is critical to our nuclear deterrence, and the cost of that program has been estimated in the range of 100 billion. They have said it cannot pay for it out of its navy budget. I am wondering whether you will consider and support looking at the Defense Departments budget as a whole to fund the Ohio Replacement Program, which i am assuming you agree is critical to our nuclear deterrence. Gen. Dunford i do agree it is critical, it is the most survivable part of the triad. A critical area for us to modernize. I am familiar with the budgetary and limitations of the i o replacement program, and what i can ohio replacement were to fund the ohio class replacement, it would have an adverse effect. Again, were not anywhere near where we need to be right now. So, i do think a broader mechanism for the ohio class replacement makes sense. Otherwise, we will have some pretty adverse effects on the navy. As i mentioned a couple times and testimony, one of my perspectives coming into this role would be we need to have some balance. As important as the ohio class replacement is, the United States navy in terms of war fighting capability, has many other capabilities. It would be difficult to balance those were the ohio class to be paid for between the current navys resources. Thank you thatfor that answer. Im hoping that you agree with equal surety that the continuum the continuing program should continue as planned right now. Gen. Dunford senator, here is where i defer to my partner. I trust his judgment in that regard. And i know of your very passionate and admirable commitment to the men and women who are our greatest asset in the United States armed forces their wellbeing and their welfare, and i hope that you. Can commit that you will continue the effort to coordinate better with the Veterans Administration for men and women who are leaving active duty on everything from transfer of medical records to drug formularies to a range of issues. I do not need to expound on them but i hope that you will focus and continue those efforts. Gen. Dunford absolutely. I view keeping faith with our men and women in uniform as one of the primary spots ability of leadership. We have an expression and the marine corps that once a marine always a marine. What you have served our country, the service and support you get in return as part of the bargain we make a something that a sacred. I have so we will continue to support the efforts to make sure the Health Care Transition that our young men and women make in uniform to the Veterans Administration is as seamless as possible. I think we go them that. One less question, general dempsey has stated repeatedly we have the capability to use a military option if the iranians choose to stray off the diplomatic path, end quote. My question to you is are you satisfied our nation has done enough to prepare militarily for the option in the president has said that all option should be on the table if necessary to use the military option. As much as may wish the negotiations should succeed. Gen. Dunford my understanding today is that we have the plans in place and the capability to deal with a wide range of things in iran. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and general. Congratulations on your nomination and. Thank you for your 38 years of distinguished service and your leadership. Our nation is fortunate to have a military leader such as you serving at a time in great peril. I want to ask a question. That is the same question i asked her predecessor general dempsey. If the objective were to destroy isis, not to weaken them, not to degrade them but to audibly destroy them, within 90 days what would be required militarily to accomplish that objective . Gen. Dunford my assessment is that it would not be possible to destroy isil within 90 days and i do not believe that we can develop a solution simply with military force against isil but i do think the military aspect is critical. If the timeframe i suggested is not what timeframe is necessary, specifically if that were the objective, what would be required to accomplish it militarily . Gen. Dunford if i am confirmed i will continue to look at this issue. It is an order of years and not months to defeat and destroy isil. What would be required to do that and whatever time period is necessary . Gen. Dunford the two things isil sanctuary, and it would deny isil sanctuary, and it would require us to build local forces that would be the real defeat mechanism for isil in respective countries senator, i you would have to have Effective Governance where crisis could not get traction in the future. What have to address the foreign financing, is where as the as well as for economic assets. We would have to address the movement of foreign fighters back and forth and as importantly, the one thing we need to do is undermine the narrative of faisal and discredit undermine the narrative of isil. Are you concerned about the rules of engagement for our current use of air power . Gen. Dunford im not. One of the reasons is that when we go to war, we go to war with our values and we conduct the execution and the we dont have civilian casualties and i think that frankly supports our narrative, and it gives us the credibility that we need to be senior kurdish leader who to be successful longterm. In recent day, the administration has informed congress that we are arming the kurds. I spoke this week with a senior kurdish leader who reported that the commanders on the ground of the peshmerga are not confirming that. What can you tell this committee. Gen. Dunford first i would agree with you the most Effective Ground forces in syria and iraq are the kurds. My understanding is that my the issues have been addressed and they are getting the support the material the mature support they need and if i am confirmed as a matter of priority let me ask, concerning and make sure im able to make my personal assessment. Will you commit to providing this committee with specific details in terms of what is being done to arm the kyurds . Gen. Dunford i will do that, senator. If iran were to acquire Nuclear Weapons what is the National Risk in your judgment to the United States of that occurrence . Gen. Dunford senator, i think it is significant. Particularly if accompanying that is missile technology, its significant threat to our nation. It is also a destabilizing effort action in the middle east, and i think we can expect a proliferation of nuclear arms as a result of the nuclear dramatically undermining our my final question. Im concerned about morale and the military. We discussed how the world is getting more and more dangerous, and yet at the same time we are genetically undermining our readiness, our ability to defend this nation. The military times did a survey where in 2009 they asked soldiers whether the overall the quality of life is good or excellent. 91 said yes. In 2014 that number had chopped from 91 to 56 . Likewise, they asked whether the Senior Military Leadership has my best interest at heart hurt in 2009, 53 agreed. In 2014, that had dropped in half to 27 . Do you share the concerns about declining morale in the military, and if so, what do you see as the causes of it and the proper approach to fix it . Gen. Dunford first of all, with regard to the morale of our force, it is one of the things that distinguishes us. I was able to say that we have the most Capable Military force today, and its not something that i would be comeplacent about. I do have concerns about how hard we have been. We had a plan where we wanted to have a one to three deployment ratio. That means our forces would be deployed seven months, home for 21 months. It allowed the marines to be sustained. Many of our units inside the marine corps or at or below at one to two rate. They will be deployed for seven months, home for 14 months and act out again. It has an effect on the families. And our ability to train across the range of military operations. If im confirmed, i will focus on this. I have a responsibility to represent them. That means to articulate her leadership on the hill as well as the executive branch what material support, what leadership, what resources they need to remain the finest fighting force in the neighborhood. It bothers me greatly if our young men and women do not have confidence in their senior leadership. Every day i wake up with that would be a priority for me. That is what i would seek to do is gain the trust and confidence of our young and women and make sure that they are properly represented. That we recognize we are asking them to do a lot. They do not ask much more in return. I will commit to you that that is exactly what i will do. Thank you, general. Hasnt sequestration bread uncertainty which has contributed to this drop in row . Gen. Dunford i should have mentioned that when i talked about how busy the forces are. Theres a tremendous amount of angst across the force and that is driven by the uncertainty, so i think sequestration is a factor factor. So i do think sequestration is a factor. There was a followup question. Thank you, mr. Chairman. General, i want to get back to the issue of the militarys role in relationship with congress. We think it is an Important Role that we have to make sure that our services dont replicate missions and Core Competencies . Gen. Dunford i do. Let me provide a quick example. I believe one of the core that Core Competencies that the army can deploy in moments and do you think thats one of their Core Competencies . Gen. Dunford i do. A few months ago, shipping for, quote, expedition maneuvers throughout. The pacific. What service core competency would you associate that with . Gen. Dunford i would associate that with the marine corps. I have seen that description in the open source. Do you think that costly new army mission to the marine corpss msission . Gen. Dunford senator, given the short fall off amphibious lift i am speaking of a service chief. I think the priority ought to go to the United States marine such redundancies to make sure that military funding goes to Core Competencies like the brigades in the pacific and the arctic as opposed to redundant activities like troops on naval shipping . Gen. Dunford thank you, mr. Chairman. I apologize for getting back so late. I was in an appropriations markup. General, thank you very much to you and your family for your service in the past and for your willingness to continue to serve. I have to say after watching you before the crowd. Of New Hampshire business folks in hearing from them how impressed they were, i look forward to the impression youre going to make as the new chairman of the joint chiefs. I wanted to followup on senator wickers questions about europe and the concerns because i recently returned from a visit to poland and latvia where i saw the nato exercises. And heard extreme concern about the potential for putin to engage in a symmetric instigation in the blatics in the baltics. Im concerned about the failure to date of europe to commit to the 2 of their gdp for defense spending. And wonder if you have thoughts about what more we might be able to do to encourage them to ante up. Gen. Dunford senator, i do think it is important that our nato partners bear their share of the burden. That is an issue that i know that secretary carter and his predecessors addressed, and they want them to meet the 2 , and given the short fall in europe defensive Cyber Capabilities and so forth,. I think it is going to be critical for our partners to develop those capabilities and capacities. I would also add that ive seen firsthand in my previous assignment in afghanistan when our nato partners are probably resources they do have capacities that can be integrated to great effect. I do think the alliance can be a very effective force for stability on in europe as well as for other preparations. I agree. And hopefully we will see that commitment followed through on because clearly the threat from russia continues. And our Eastern European allies are very concerned about that. I want to ask you about you talked about the deployment pressures on our military. I wonder if you could. Give me your perspective on the appropriate active to reserve ratio and the importance of the National Guard and reserve inc. Entering the military mission that we have in this country. Gen. Dunford one of the things we have to do when we talk about using the reserve and the guard is balance the concerns of employers and families with a willingness and desire for the guard and reserve to continue to serve in a more strategic sense. There was in the past the sense that the guard and reserve would be something in the case of a major war we would mobilize the guard and reserve. We found today with the size of our force, that they are useful and necessary on a daytoday basis. My senses as a service chief and i will look at the implications across the other services if i am confirmed, is about once every four years is a reasonable time to, for major deployment. In many cases, depending on whether employment is, individuals can be available on a much more routine basis. But for whole units, probably one to four years. One year deployment mobilization and four years back focus on their families and employees seems to be sustainable. Again, if confirmed, i will consult with the appropriate leadership to make sure ive a full appreciation for their challenges. Thank you. We have seen in New Hampshire the significant contribution of the guard and the integration with the air refueling of active duty and guard. And providing that mission. So i think its very important. Let me ask you if you would commit to two things. One is in 2013 the department announced the elimination. Of the direct combat exclusion policy and announced plans to fully integrate more women into all occupational fields. I hope you will continue that effort and see it through as we know women are making up a greater percentage of our military these days and making sure that they have the ability compete in all areas i think is significant. The toother question, i notice this week the Navy Announced they have tripled the Maternity Leave policy for women serving in the navy. And i would urge you can to can consider that across all branches of the military. As women are making up more of our troops. I think it is important to address the issues that the family issues they have and certainly maternally leave is a big part of that. So i hope you will do that. Gen. Dunford i will look at both of those issues. Thank you. General, i think youre an outstanding choice. President could not have chosen a better person for the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Congratulations to you and your family for a lot of great service. When it comes to stopping isil thats the stated goal is to degrade and destroy, and if we fail. What can america expect . Gen. Dunford if we were to fail and stopping isil, i think you will see an expansion of isil outside the middle east. We have seen elements of isis all over to afghanistan. They are in expanding power as we speak . Gen. Dunford in terms of geographic location. I have not concluded they are expanded incapability. You said if we do not stop these guys, we can expect more. Gen. Dunford right. That is exactly what i said. At the end of the day, we will have to stop these guys. Is it fair to say iraq and syria need to be viewed as one battle space when it comes to isil . It would be hard to stop them in iraq if you dont address their presence in syria . Gen. Dunford the enemy doesnt respect the. Boundaries we see on a map. Can you envision a scenario where we have a Regional Army made up of arabs and maybe turkey that would go into syria and fight isil alone leaving assad off the table, would they join up for such a fight . Gen. Dunford its hard for me watching the politics on the outside right now. To see that degree of integration. But i concerned me see where that would be an effective way to deal of this is to have an army willing to deal with isil. My question is if you did not put assads removal on the table it would. Hard to get them to join up, because they worried about siri becoming about siri becoming a puppet of iran . Would you agree with me that assads presence is a magnet for sunni extremist . Gen. Dunford if not the proximate cause of the isil movement, one of the primary drivers was the abuses of that regime. If we go down to 1000 kabul forces and 27, do we lose our Counterterrorism Mission . Gen. Dunford wed have a degradation of our Terrorism Mission in afghanistan. Would we lose our eyes and ears along the afghan pakistan border that we enjoy today . Gen. Dunford we would, senator. That would create a lot of risk to the gains weve achieved over the past decade if we dead not have those eyes and ears and Counterterrorism Forces . Gen. Dunford senator, no question it would create risk. Okay. When it comes to 60 Free Syrian Army troops being trained under the current regime, would you agree its going to be hard to recruit people to go into syria if you dont promise them protection from. Assad because if they get any capability at all in fighting isil assad would assume that cap ability would be turned on him one day and he is not going to sit on the sidelines and watch a force developed without hitting them. Does that make sense to . Gen. Dunford i agree with that assessment. The most logical consequence of training a forced to train in syria is assad will see them as a threat and most likely attack. Gen. Dunford i agree. It would be immoral to put someone in a position knowing that is coming their way without some capability to defend themselves. Make sense to you . Gen. Dunford if we train moderate Syrian Forces and syrian army, then we ought to provide them with the wherewithal to be successful. If this war in syria continues the way its going for another year, do you worry about stability in jordan . Gen. Dunford i do senator. Do you worry about stability in lebanon . Gen. Dunford i do, senator. So the consequences of going into syria with a Regional Force and all the problems associated with it have to be balanced against the consequences of isil surviving and thriving . Gen. Dunford i agree with that senator
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.