Since i became the secretary of defense last month, ive had the opportunity to meet with many of you inside the pentagon and during my travels. Im especially pleased that the chairman and i can spend time with you all here today in the briefing room. The United States military has a proud history and a great story to tell. It is my commitment to the American People, who entrust us with their sons and daughters to keep them informed of the work that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and department deskfense civilian the defense defense civilians do everyday to keep our nation safe. Affairs andpublic he represented if the joint staff will be holding regular press briefings. My aim is to give you an overview of my first 30 days in office and to talk about my priorities for the department. It has been a busy first month for the team. I am encouraged by the progress we are making. Our direction remains fixed. We are committed to the National Defense strategy and its three lines of effort. Building a more lethal force, strengthening our alliances and partnerships, and third, reforming the department for Better Business practices. In deadline and i added a line of effort for me. Taking care of a servicemembers and their families. Strategic competitors such as china and russia are deliberately building up and modernizing their military forces to challenge the United States and enable their geopolitical aspirations. At the same time, regional adversaries like iran and north korea, continue to promote instability. The central challenge is to balance current requirements with the needs of the future. Both require our time and resources. To get this balance right, beans this balance right, we need to make tough decisions. To enable this decisionmaking, we have modified our battle rhythm. Every monday, all of the senior leaders, uniform and civilians, are now meeting twice in separate sessions as a leadership team, to ensure our priorities are aligned and to measure progress toward implanting the National Defense strategy. Our policy team has been integrated into our planning processes, and is leading the nds reviews, and exercising control over those efforts. The ideas take a hard look at our activities so everything we do drives toward our strategic objectives, which are designed to achieve our policy aims. If something does not, we ask ourselves, why are we doing it, and what should we be doing instead . We have also begun a defense wide review process. The goal of the review is to identify time, money, and manpower that can be reallocated to highest priorities in support of the nds. The deputy secretary norquest serves as my appointment for this effort. We begun this process with a focus on state and will eventually address other parts enterprise. Tments earlier, i traveled to the Indo Pacific Region on my first overseas trip. Many of you traveled with me. That region is our priority theater, it was important for me demonstrate command to allies and partners there and hear firsthand from my foreign and heads of state. Together, we are committed to defending our shared values and upholding Core Principles such as respect for all nations of sovereignty, adherence to International Rules and norms, and our mutual secured. It is clear that china is engaging in a deliberate strategy to undermine the stability of the region. It is clear the values and behaviors of the Chinese Communist party do not align with the vast majority of states. Throughout my conversations with foreign leaders, time and again , they emphasized the need for the United States to continue to show leadership throughout the indo pacific in order to preserve the freedoms we all enjoy. We will continue to expand our Defense Activities throughout the region in close cooperation with our allies and partners, while pressing for equitable burden sharing from them as well. Next week, i will travel to europe to meet with nato allies to discuss the u. S. Posture in europe and our ongoing efforts to deter russian aggression. I had the opportunity to attend the nato ministerial this june. We discussed a broad range of issues to include the inf treaty, the state of nato readiness, the future of afghanistan, and how to address continued maligned behavior by iran. I am pleased to inform you that operation sentinel is up and australia,h u. K. , and bahrain joining us. The purpose is to provide freedom of navigation for shipping that is so vital for economic trade and to deter provocations and avoid conflict in the region. We remain in discussion with many nations who have a stake in this region. Im also excited for tomorrows activation for the Space Command. That is exactly what Space Command will do. As a unified combatant command, the Space Command is the next crucial step towards the creation of an independent space force. Additionally, we are making steady progress with Senate Confirmations as we have five nominees who will have their hearings in the next couple weeks. Finally, as a personal priority onmine, we remain focused Service Members and families. We are also continuing to work closely with our private housing contractors throughout military installations to ensure families are living in safe and secure housing that they deserve. I met with the Service Secretaries the other day to discuss this issue. We are proud the u. S. Military remains the most trusted institution in america. This is vital to our success in defending the nation. Im committed to preserving this trust by ensuring we recommit to our poor values. I reinforce this by setting out an ethics note to the entire force and talked about yesterday at the Naval War College. Our relationship with the American People in congress remain strong. We are thankful for the twoyear budget deal shall give us the predict ability needed to advance the nds and protect this great country. It is vital, however, that Congress Passes the nda and defense appropriations bill on time for the coming year. As ive expressed to members of congress on many occasions, to include yesterday, continuing resolutions harm our military readiness and stifle modernization efforts. As such, i urge congress to Work Together in a bipartisan manner to ensure the defense bills are passed by passed by october 1. With that, i look forward to taking your questions. But first i welcome gen. Joseph dunford for his remarks. Gen. Dunford the secretary spoke about his priorities and the lines of effort that are outlined in the National Defense strategy. I want to address how we have aligned to the nds and adapted. These four characteristics of there are four characteristics todays strategic landscape that are driving across the joint force. Return of Great Power Competition that is addressed in the nds changes the character of war leaders. The department has been speaking about that for some time. The capacity of the force relative to our operational commitments has increased in an unprecedented pace of change in virtually every aspect of our profession. In response, we are adapting how we plan, how we support the secretary to make decisions, how we prioritize and allocate resources, and how we are developing tomorrows capabilities. I will briefly touch on each one of these areas. First, we shifted from a traditional focus on operational plans for specific contingencies, to plans that are globally oriented on each of the challenges addressed in the nds, china, russia, iran, north korea, and violence and extremism. We scheduled a series of globally integrated exercises with participation from across the u. S. Government interagency to refine our plans and assisted the secretary in making decisions. Importantly, we have changed the way we prioritize and allocate resources across combatant commands to better align with the National Defense strategy. Given the pace of operations over the past 18 years, we pay particular attention to establishing a more sustainable operational tempo. This allows us to do what the secretary has identified as the fourth line of effort. It allows us to better take care of our people, it also allows us to increase readiness. Finally, to ensure we have the military we need for the future, we have planned a series of exercises and wargames to better inform how we adapt the force we have today and define the force we need tomorrow. Once again, aligned with the nds, it is important to highlight that we fully integrated our allies and partners into the initiatives i have described. With that brief update, the secretary and i will be glad to take your questions. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, it is good to hear youre going to resume regular press briefings. It will be appreciated. A question for each of you. You mentioned iran and operation sentinel, mr. Secretary. It has not been that long ago that the u. S. Almost went to war with iran in the sense that there was an attack that was called off the last minute. In recent weeks, it seems to have been relatively quiet. Im wondering, has the crisis passed . And may i ask a question of general dunford on afghanistan . You are close to retirement and have spent a good part of your recent career focused on afghanistan. At this stage, when negotiators are talking about getting close to a deal that would call for the United States to withdraw its forces from afghanistan, im wondering how you feel about essentially walking away from afghanistan with no Counterterrorism Forces on the ground, as opposed to over the horizon or another form. Is that a wise course in your view . Ill go first. I would admonish you do not mention the r word again. Hes not going anywhere yet. [laughter] hes got a few more weeks. Question, we are not seeking conflict with iran. We want to engage with them diplomatically. You sell over the weekend some , reporting the president is more than willing to meet with irans leaders to resolve this diplomatically. That has been the purpose of operation sentinel, to avoid a situation that would get us off of that track and onto a different one. To fit to the degree that has been successful, that is good. Im not sure im ready to call the crisis over yet, but so far, so good. We hope that trim lines continue that way. We help the parties, the iranians, agree to meet and talk and resolve these issues. Gen. Dunford when i think about afghanistan, i think about two things. We do not want afghanistan to be a sanctuary from which the homeland can be threatened, from which the American People and our allies can be threatened. The other thing is we want peace and stability in afghanistan for the people. Any of us who have served their d there know that what is required is a negotiated peace settlement, interafghan dialogue leading to that peace settlement. When i hear you say were going to withdraw, i do not think about it as we are going to withdraw. I think about it as we are going to initiate interafghan dialogue, ideally leading to peace and stability for the afghan people. Ideally, afghanistan not being a sanctuary from which we can be attacked. The president and secretary have been clear to me that as this progresses, we are going to ensure that our counterterrorism objectives are addressed. I think it is premature. I am not using the withdraw word right now. We are going to make sure that afghanistan is not a sanctuary. Were going to try to have an effort to bring peace and quickly, in your view, will it be possible to achieve thatpresenting afghanistan from becoming a sanctuary again without u. S. Forces on the ground . I would not have been standing here as long as i am if i was not a Glass Half Full person. Gen. Dunford i believe what is needed is that some type of disruption to the status quo. An agreement that can initiate interafghan dialogue, potentially leading to a reduction of Violence Associated with the insurgency is something worth trying. Particularly is important to emphasize that an agreement we have moving forward, the president has been clear, is going to be conditions based. Those conditions make me confident that it is worth trying. Planning for . Gen. Dunford i honestly think it is premature to talk about what our counterterrorism presence in afghanistan may or may not be, without a better appreciation for what will the conditions be. We have tailored our counterterrorism presence in afghanistan to reflect the operational environment. The operational environment would clearly change in the wake of a negotiation. We would have to make assessments. I would then make recommendations to the secretary. And have a conversation with the president. General dunford, i wanted to ask you to reflect on the environment you have been operating in over the last two years. Im sure you saw today sir that secretary mattis wrote, quote, we are dividing into hostile tribes cheering against each other, fueled by emotion and the mutual disdain. Because you are the president s key advisor on threats to democracy, democracy of this country, you agree with secretary mattis, whom you have known so many years. Do you believe that there is now tribalism in this country that essentially threatens democracy . And to ask you as best you can, on how you see President Trump changing over the last couple of years and his role as commanderinchief. We well know that you do not like to talk about the president. But this may be our last opportunity to ask you. Gen. Dunford barbara, as you know, i have worked hard to remain apolitical and not make up local judgments. Your first question is not in my lane. I have worked hard to provide military vice to the secretary, military vice to the president , other members of the National Security council, and make sure that our men and women in uniform have the wherewithal to do their job. Im going to stay in that lane. I guess to the second part of your question, which is i will not now, nor will i when i take off the uniform, make judgments about the president of United States or the commander in chief. I just will not do it. How do you view, because you are the advisor on military matters, we have now seen troops in uniform, active duty, wearing political hats, we have seen the president come into this building, and make speeches discussing the democrat leadership. Do you worry at all that way have partisan politics brought into the military . That would get question for the secretary as well. Do something need to be done about this . Or do you think it is ok, just to let it go on. What are your concerns about the emergence of partisan politics into the ranks . Sec. Esper as the answer to congress during my nomination hearing. Ive said this to some of you before as well. My commitment is to keep this department a plot ago. I believe the best way to do that begins with the chairman and i behaving in an apolitical way. And from there, the leadership that we demonstrate, the values we emulate, work their way throughout the force. To me, that is the best way to do it. Of course, we have rules and regulations throughout the services that say you cannot wearyou cannot wear political items on the uniform, et cetera and we will continue to enforce that. To follow up on afghanistan. Are the taliban wrong for saying that in 24 months all u. S. Troops will be out of afghanistan . Can you rule that out . Im not going to make any comments in regard to the diplomat of relations. Then i will answer your questions on the agreement, if it whines at being an agreement. Gen. Dunford i will emphasize, and the secretary and i have talked about this many times. Some of you may not hear this if you hear bits and pieces that may be speculation. One thing clear is that any agreement will be conditions based. The president has been clear about afghanistan and not being a sanctuary from which we can be attacked. This will be done with afghan leadership. Youre the commander there and you to deal with the Afghan Government. The Afghan Government feel they have been left out of these talks. Do they have legitimate concerns . Gen. Dunford i would leave the state department to characterize the relationship we have with the Afghan Government. I recently visited and met with the secretary and the ambassador and engage with the afghan leadership and top kabul virtually every day, to make sure theres transparency in any negotiation. I would view any agreement pending as something we are doing with and not to the afghan people. Mr. Secretary, as israel expands is targeting inside iraq and lebanon, can you help us understand the level of your concern about the political blowback for u. S. Troops and the iraqi political environment as a result of the strikes . And mr. Chairman, the military has long been concerned about, quietly concerned about the impact these strikes could have on the security of u. S. Forces in the region. Can you speak to that, please . To the first part i will say obviously we are in iraq at the invitation of the iraqi government. We are there and focused on one thing, air forces working with and through the iraqi forces to execute the d isis campaign. That is where we are focused. Obviously we are concerned about anything that may impact our mission, a relationship or our forces. [] from dod the other day made a point of distancing the u. S. From these operations. [] put a finer point on that [] u. S. Wants to stay away from we remain focused on iraq and supporting our forces in iraq to go after isis. All of these are consistentall our operations in conjunction with the Iraqi Security forces focus on isis. We assessed force protection across the region virtually every day. General mckenzie is in constant dialogue with the secretary and i about the needs for force protection. He makes adjustments based on tensions and the region. So yes, are we concerned about it, we are not complacent about force protection. We look at it every day. And we are very attentive to the operational environment, when we make adjustments in force protection. Im going to try one more time in afghanistan. Still in negotiation with the taliban. He expects assurances from the taliban that it will not be used in any way i al qaedaother terrorist organizations again. The pentagon last month said we need a robust counterterror capability. So just be clear, do you need both the assurances and the capability . Even though we do not know whether capability at this point would look like . You both could address that . Im not sure which report youre referring to that came out of the department. I will say again, this is the state has the lead on this, the ambassador and his team have done great work. We have people involved with him, as is general miller on the ground. I will defer to him to comment on what he wants to comment. We are not going to get involved and commenting on the diplomatic process. That is not my point. My point is, do you need a counterterror cap ability in afghanistan . I think your answer to that already. Im not trying to be evasive. I think you answered that already. We have an during security interests in the region, diplomatic interest in the region. The form of our presence will change over time. To advance those interests. Any discussion about capability will be benchmarked against the threat. As importantly against the capacity of our partners in afghanistan to deal with that threat. Could we talk conceptually about a time in the future when the afghan Security Forces can deal with security in the country by themselves. You can. But we are not prepared to talk about what capability would be associated with what operating environment. We will need our interests addressed. I appreciate it. North korea has been launching salvos recently. I know the white house has downplayed them. Strategically, are they a concern for you that they are developing what they called to be new weapons, and do you think they are just pushing the limits of that agreement . And it just a followup, about this new summary missile. I talked about this on my trip to the indo take,. I had conversations with my counterparts in japan and korea about these tests. We are concerned about their Short Range Ballistic Missile tests. We want to understand what theyre doing, why theyre doing it in on the other hand, we are not going to overreact. We want to take a measured response, and make sure we do not close the door to diplomacy. At the end of the day we will get to an air reversible, verifiable, complete denuclearization of the peninsula. The best way to do that is through a political agreement. We do not want to close the door by overreacting to their tests and what theyre doing. Just on, new submarine ballistic missile, we know they have been developing this capability for a while. Are they on the verge of something that can be a game changer. That potentially could be an icbm launched. I do not have anything to add to what has already been reported in the open press. Thank you, with mcclatchy. I want to get back to what youre saying about taking care of people. Over the last few decades of war, number servicemen have come in contact with things that are potentially cancercausing. The air they breathe, the burning, a lot of the aviation. They are dealing with the pfa asked. Are you concerned about pfas. What youre dealing with. Are you concerned with cancer and military community. And are you looking at making easier for those servicemembers as they age of a potentially 10 years down the road, if they develop the type of cancer related to the air they breathed or the vehicles therein. This goes back to my days in after my tour in the gulf, we had gulf war syndrome still many folks suffer from it. The v. A. Has the lead on this. I have not talked to the v. A. Secretary wilkie. He had i go back many years. He is completely committed to our Service Members, and the veterans. We want to assist soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines as they transition out and into the v. A. System, and make sure we tackle some of the things oure talking about. I had not talked to v. A. Secretary wilkie in a while, he and i go back many years. Hes completely committed to our Service Members and veterans. This is one of the areas where i want to improve and make sure we are doing everything we can to assist solars, sailors, airmen, and reads as they transition into the v. A. System. And to make sure that we tackle some of the things we talk about. Two quick followups, to toms question, when you said there might be time in the future where the afghan partners have the ability to be the counterterror force in afghanistan, arent they capable of that now . Are you ready to say that afghan Security Forces could secure that country . In the current environment today, with the insurgency, i think we and the afghans agree that some degree of support is necessary. Thats why we have forces on the ground inside afghanistan today. When i ake sure spoke about afghanistan securing itself in the future i was just answering the question and not affixing a timeline. Its our judgment of the afghans need support to deal with the level of Violence Associated with the insurgency today. If an agreement happens in the future, the security environment changes, then our osture may adjust. And this is the level of support we are providing today. One thing i am sure of, based on my time in afghanistan. Many of you recall that we have we had 140,000 Coalition Forces in iraq and about 15,000 or 22,000, i think, total in coalition and u. S. Forces today. It is significantly different. In the future, our posture will adjust. Eporter to followup, in north korea, since shortrange missiles have been a response to computerbased exercises, what does this say bout larger scale military exercises between the u. S. And south korea . Will we get back to the point where there is a large scale 10,000 suit of troops weeks long military exercises . The keys to preserve readiness. I have had this discussion several times with general abrams and the chairman may want to comment. Two weeks ago when i was in seoul, we talked about it. He filled the training and exercise plan we have is sufficient to maintain our readiness with our allies. That may or may not mean going back to whatever it was. I trust the commanders ssessment. Our exercises were designed to do two things, to deter north korea, and enhance the eadiness of our collective forces. We made an adjustment to the posture of our exercise, the visibility of it in support of the diplomatic effort to enuclearize the peninsula. Hen we made that adjustment, e found other ways to maintain a high level of readiness. We spoke a great deal with eneral abrams, and now the secretary. We are confident that the exercise and Training Program we have in place now will allow us to maintain the requisite evel of readiness. I wanted to ask about turkey, there has been mixed not my book. I have been clear in my Public Comments and privately with my turkish counterpart. Its either the f35 or the s 400. Its not both, park one in the garage and let the other one ut, its one of the other. We are whereits incredible, turkey has been a longstanding partner e are. And ally and i would hope that they would move back in our direction and really live up to what nato agreed to many years ago, to begin divesting soviet era equipment and they are moving in a different direction. If they said we were walking this back and they made a mistake, would you be open to it . They would have to get rid of the s100 program, and then we could consider that. You have been one of the most outspoken with turkey, what is the relationship between the u. S. Government and the turkish government right now . This is what i tell my counterpart almost every time we meet. When i look at turkey in the United States, its clear to me that we have many more areas of convergence and divergence. In these areas of divergence are often nearterm issues, they are difficult, no question. But they are issues we can work through. So we try to focus and say look, we are allies today, turkey is an important part of the Nato Alliance and our bilateral relationship is important. So we try to find ways to enhance the relationship, and focus on the future which, in my view, if you look at turkish and u. S. Natural interest, look at whats more closely aligned . I am want to follow up with a quick question. Going back to the question about partisan politics, is it your judgment that some of the events that were referenced, the maga hats, and using military funds for the border wall, do you believe ose things have damaged the or jeopardize the militarys apolitical position . And the question on yemen, the war has continued far longer than anyone has expected it to, civilians are dying and we have a Significant Development in the saudi and emerites coalition seems to have , is it time to rethink our support with saudi arabia . The support as it relates against the war against notwithstanding any specific incidents, when i look back over the last few years, im ncredibly proud of the professionalism of our men and women in uniform. With few exceptions, they have conducted themselves in a we take every one of these issues seriously. The address it when it occurs. By and large these issues are addressed by those on the scene. And sometimes it arrives to the level of the chairman. To answer your question specifically, i would not want any of these specific incidents to characterize men and women in uniform. They have by and large done what we have asked. It has been a politically turbulent period of time and yet 80 of the American People still have trust in the United States military as an institution. We take that seriously. When i spoke to the students at the Naval War College i spoke to them about maintaining ethics and values because we are regarded as perhaps the highest institution in america. But its a fragile thing and we have to safeguard it by practicing on a daily basis are professional values and ethics. Reporter and then on yemen and saudi arabia. I almost forgot the uestion. Is a time to rethink ilitary support for the war in yemen against the houthis, giving the war has not got apparently closer to a conclusion . Our support has been very limited, and limited to helping them on the defense for their defensive purposes. So, you know, youve outlined some things. Well see where it goes. You know, i think with most of these conflicts, the best and they they end to a political agreement. Well see if theyre ready to ove to that stage. Our support has been limited to helping them for defensive purposes. You have outlined some things, we will see where it goes. With most of these conflicts they often end in a political agreement and we will see if the parties are ready to move to that stage. Mr. Secretary, you were in the pacific region. As were you. Exactly. You are confident that you would get some kind of resolution to south korea and japan. We saw south korea pull out of that agreement and im wondering what you see the path Going Forward do you see a possibility of resolving this with little impact in the military operations . In general, are you seeing any impact military operations due to getting out of that fact . I was and remain disappointed that both parties are engaged in this. I expressed that to my counterparts as i met with them in tokyo and seoul and urged them to work it out. I am a glass halffull person, i hope to get beyond this, i have articulated and then that we have common threats, north korea and china, and bigger threats. We are stronger when we Work Together. Again, when you look at the ledger, we share more interests and values than not and i want to build on that, and hopefully move forward and get back on the important track we need, which is really thinking about north korea in the near term and hina in the long term. How do we broaden our partnerships and strengthen our lives. I have not seen an intact and military operations right now but i share the secretarys disappointment in this what i view as a setback in the relationship between south korea and japan. Important is an relationship. I worked on it i have worked on this every day, and i have a Good Relationship with the chairman. I think its in our collective interest for us to have an effective relationship and we will continue to try to work and get back in a positive direction. And you have contingency plans to deal with that . We have other ways of sharing information, not as effective as a bilateral sharing agreement between the two countries but there are other mechanisms allowing us to deal with this. President trump has said repeatedly that the u. S. Could win the war in afghanistan at the the cost of million of afghan lives. Does the United States retain the rights to use Nuclear Weapons against the taliban . We reserve the right to keep all options on the table, but look, clearly we have a plan Going Forward. The key to resolve this conference is conflict is a political agreement. We are on that path now and we are hoping that we can reach a conclusion that would result in the political agreement that will get us on the right rajectory. Does it help the ongoing egotiations when the president repeatedly says that the united it could kill millions of afghans in the war . This administration is committed to finding a path forward that achieves a few things. One being that afghanistan is no longer a safe haven for terrorists who attack the United States. And one that results in an intraafghan agreement that allows all the stakeholders in the country to move forward on a different trajectory than what they are on. Thank you, mr. Secretary. You have had conversations with the defense minister, could you tell us what sort of relationship you want to have with india . I dont like to talk about private conversations i have had with folks, its a good rule of thumb i have lived by. But we have had good conversations, we talked about mutual Strategic Interests and next steps by which we can Work Together closely. Reporter thank you, mr. Secretary, mr. Chairman. Question for you, mr. Chairman, on turkey and syria and then for you on the border wall. The u. S. Backed forces in syria say they have begin withdrawing safe zone. This safe zone. Could you explain what exactly the United States military agreed to . Will there be joint controls to the system . Thank you. To put in context, there were two things were trying to do, to maintain continuity in our campaign against isis in syria, and to address what are the legitimate concerns by the turkish government for the border between turkey and syria. E are trying to balance those, as many of you know, we have been having with all parties for 2. 5 years, working our way through this. We have set up a Coordination Center, there is now a Coordination Center and we have made agreements to address the threats along the border between turkey and syria, the removal of heavy weapons and those kinds of things. With regard to your specific with regard to your specific questions, those are being worked out in the Coordination Center. We have agreed on the threats, the broad approach, we spoken to our counterparts to address that area between turkey and syria, but every day we are going to grow the capacity. The whole purpose of setting up the Coordination Center is to drive down to the appropriate tactical level between commanders, the specific actions we will take daily to eliminate the threats. Do we have a date . No. And on the border wall, why did you agree to build an additional 20 miles order wall, can you elaborate on your ecision . And how much has this cost . I dont have the total number in terms of costs but we can get that for you. On the first part, the reason why we are able to do 20 miles is because the corps of engineers were successfully negotiating lower prices so we could free up money to do more miles, if im not mistaken, onathan will keep it jonathan will keep it up afterwards. My question is for both of you, have you seen any evidence that irans military capabilities or readiness has een diminished or weakened because of the military buildup in the region and because of the u. S. Sanctions on tehran . I dont talk about intelligence matters. First of all. To state its fair our present and the presence of our allies and partners, i think, so far, provocative behavior has been deterred and thats a good thing. As we can reach out, we want to talk with iran. And talk about a diplomatic path forward. And i wouldnt today draw a correlation between the forces we put in the region and degrading iranian capability. The forces in the region that the secretary proved are to deter aggression and to provide the president with options in the event that deterrence fails. It hadnt had a material effect on the actual capacity of the iranian forces. Or their proxies. Mr. Secretary, are there plans to send more troops to the Border Mission or to withdraw any of the ones still there . And is there a possibility that this wall might end up building built piecemeal with d. O. D. Funds and under d. O. D. Supervision . I dont know the second part. That would be speculative. On the first part, our response in terms of providing more resources, more troops, depends on d. H. S. Needs. We do it on a casebycase basis. Maybe im missing something. We flex that force based on d. H. S. s needs at the border and, of course, their needs at the border eb and flow based on what they see at the border, trying to handle folks and what not. Ok, thanks, everyone. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit on cspan at 10 00 a. M. , the american political aside Political ScienceAssociation Takes a look at the recent term and what to expect when the next term begins in october. That is followed by a discussion on the Trump Administration and the state of american democracy. On cspan2, the u. S. China Business Council presents the results of a survey concerning the Business Climate in china and the impact of trade tensions with the u. S. At 3 00 p. M. , the center for strategic and International Studies outlines a report on irregular migration, including refugees and migrant smuggling. On washington journal, challenges with the u. S. Health care system and how the issue comes up on