Transcripts For CSPAN2 Reagan National Defense Forum - Panel On Military Readiness 20180105

The Reagan Library in simi valley, california. Thank you and welcome to panel six, assessing the rebuild, will we have the strategy and resources to rebuild the military in fiscal year 19 . On this panel we will evaluate president trumps desire to rebuild the military, and we will look at the problems they see as. Like to introduce our distinguished panel. Honorable eric adelman at the income for secretary of defense for policy from 20052009. Independent gun, a former ambassador to turkey and finland. Ms. Marillyn hewson, chairman, president and ceo of Lockheed Martin. She joined lockheed 30 years ago as an engineer and rose all the way to the top. In 2016 Fortune Magazine for can magazine identified her as 50 of the most powerful women in business runs will dr. Kathleen hicks, director of International Security program for csis. She was appointed to the National Commission on the future of the army by the president pictures a former principal undersecretary of policy at the pentagon. And then we have general robert neller, the 37th commandant of u. S. Marine corps. He was commissioned in 1975, went to uva but i just learned routes for michigan state. He saw east lansing. He served Deputy Commanding general of the First Marine Expeditionary force during Operation Iraqi freedom. And senator Jeanne Shaheen of the great state of new hampshire. She is the first woman in u. S. History to be elected both governor and u. S. Tended to. Shes been innocent since 2009 on the Armed Service committee, Foreign Relations committee, and foreign appropriations and she just flew in from a very important vote in congress. Shes, you have a particular interest of course in new hampshires Portsmouth Naval shipyard and peace the National Guard base. With that id like to start by reading a few quotes about the current state of the u. S. Military that got my attention, and then there are a few statistics that if think you all will find somewhat alarming. Senator john mccain said recently, perhaps the greatest harm to our National Security and our military is selfinflicted. I repeat, selfinflicted. We are killing more of her own people in training that our enemies are in combat. Secretary mattis said recently, no inning in the field has done more to harm the combat readiness of our military and sequestration. Referring to the budget cuts that been in place since 2013. If you listen to the vice chief of staff of the army, general general daniel allyn said recently his armies out range, outgoing and outdated. The army has only five out of 58 brigade combat teams that ready to fight tonight. Over the past eight years weve reduced the size of the army by as much as 90,000 soldiers and eliminated 17 brigade combat teams. There are 180,000 troops currently deployed in 40 countries. The navy is said to be treading water in an effort to keep up with the operational deployment. In fact, the recent collision of uss mccain and fitzgerald were found to be unavoidable. They were finding that sailors were working 100 hour weeks, less than half of the navys aircraft right now can fly. The marines of course are not, the navy is not alone. The marines have aviation issues. We found of the f18s, only half of those can fly now. They are taking part of the Museum Aircraft in order to get some of those planes airborne. 80 of marine corps aviation units lack the number of aviation ready aircraft. Then the air force. Heather wilson, the sector the air force said recently where stretching the forced to the limit. We need to start turning the corner on readiness. In 1991 the air force had 134 squadrons, now there are just 55. The u. S. Does not have enough Missile Defense interceptors according to heather wilson. And she has said recently that we are running out of bombs. There were 20,000 bombs dropped on isis in iraq and syria in the last year. So with that i i would like to start at the end with ambassador edelman and go down the line, just, id like to ask you, hearing those numbers and have military has been so stretched, is this a crisis . And what do you see as the biggest readiness issue . Its great to be again at the Reagan National defense forum, it is really an incredible privilege to be on this panel with one of the great leaders a Defense Industry, marillyn hewson. My former colleague, Kathleen Hicks is no mcculloch again on the National Defense Strategy Commission that congress avoided and the commandant and, of course, senator shaheen whom ive had the privilege of testifying in front of multiple times at the [laughing] it was all good. [laughing] it was a privilege and even though he is not here, George Scholz who is an artery tonight and is in attendance, i served as a special assistant for 1982 198284, and theres an old saying that no man is a hero to his valet. And in here to tell you that that is not true. George scholz is still my hero, and he is living proof that a secretary of state with deep convictions, confidence of the president , and a commitment to the president National Security policy can draw the very out of the United States Foreign Service to accomplish great ends for the country. Along the lines that general mcmaster just outlined in his speech. He comes this is a fifth time been here in five years, told some of last im beginning to feel like cato the elder who ended all of his speeches before the roman senate by saying car karthik odell and ask, carthage must be destroyed. And thats what i feel like year. Year. Every i can and say the bca must be repealed. And the sequestered must be ended. So here i am fifthyear and of saying it again saw just get that out of the way. I think its important, kind of puts this in a larger context, all of the statistics that you described and all of the shortfalls that you outlined were foreseeable and, in fact, we have foreseen this coming. Back in 2010 the congress appointed an independent panel to review the qtr, and we said then, and this was before the bca, that given the cost, the growing cost of keeping soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines in the field, given the budget trajectory that we foresaw and also the looming outlines of the worsening security environment that were already visible in 2010, that we saw train wreck coming. Those with the use those with a words we use. In 2014 we said the train wreck is here and the train wreck is bca and its a strategic misstep, and it has to be repealed. And then just on thursday, dave testified before the senate Armed Service Committee Testimony that i commend to everybody to read. It is incredibly sobering and its based on lots of classified work but it was in an unclassified setting, and he raised the potential that were we to find ourselves in a high end conflict with russia or china, we could lose. And i think theres been a tendency to think that the United States, for all the reasons that people have said earlier today, we remain a very powerful military, our folks are terrific, and if the issue is going out finding, fixing and killing terrorists, theres nobody better in the world than we are at that, but in these high insights we havent been training people. We have been procuring the systems we need, and we have been taking i think in the last decade 22 out of the Defense Budget. The biggest postwar drawdown since the end of world war ii certainly since korea. And what we find ourselves in because of the modernization that our potential adversaries have engaged in, we find a sales potentially in situations where, although we have global match against them, we have to fight a variety of away games under circumstances that are going to be very, very stressful for the u. S. Military. And i worry that the american public, which is used to very short military engagements, as set for people of said ring the course of the day, not a fair fight, or not prepared for the level of violence in the amount of casualties and the amount of time it may take if we find her cells, just for instance, in a conflict on the korean peninsula. Theres been a tendency for people to thank this is the problem thats maybe 15 years out or ten years out for five years out. I think it is a today problem. So let me just stop there. Marillyn, isnt this a crisis, from your point of view . First off, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. Its a very distinguished panel, and as i think about, like you, ive been to each year and were often talking that budget cuts and sequestration every time we get up on these stages. Im going to start there as well. I want to just lay it out for you from an industry perspectie because you will hear from some of the folks here about what the impact, and you said some very important statistics, very compelling statistics of the impact on our men and women in uniform. As we look at the industry today, it is probably more fragile and less flexible than ive seen it, as you said, ive been in this industry for many, many years. The reason is because of the budget cuts. I look at what has happened to our supply chain. We just saw a study that was commissioned by csis that came out that said 20 of the small and mediumsize businesses have left the industry because of the environment that we are in today. Because of the budget cuts. What happened is we always have this challenge of balancing cost versus technical performance versus speed to the war fighter, the industry and the department of defense has to deal with. The department of defense, because of the budget cuts, have had to move where the focus is on cost, lowestcost, at the expense in my view of innovation and investment that we need so much from the Defense Industry, that we need from a healthy Defense Industry. Its because of the vibrant that they were faced with making very, very tough decisions. What weve seen in industry, i give an example, Lockheed Martin, at the outset with budget cuts we were at about 126,000 employees. Today we are at 97,000 employees. Our footprint has shrunk dramatically. We see our small and mediumsize businesses, critical components we need, maybe one or two suppliers in that field where there were many more before. We are seeing a constrained environment for suppliers. Theres a lot of pressure on the supply chain. They are not able to make some investments they want to make in the future because everything is about a cost shootout. Unfortunately, that drives behaviors in your industry that are not healthy. Its really a matter of balance and choice. Its not a fault and i dont believe from the Defense Department standpoint, but if this bill is going to talk about rebuilding, then rebuilding has to be about getting the balance back in place, where we had an incentive to invest, where there is an incentive to get a return for the risk that is being taken to support the capabilities we wont provide. The secretary of defense has been very clear that he wants to increase lethality and increase speed at getting the capabilities to the men and women in uniform. To do that youve got to have the incentive for industry to invest. Youve got, we want to align with what the priorities are of the department of defense. But to do that it cant all be about just cost. We recognize, we all need to be as efficient as we can but if everything comes down to, everybody is leveled out in terms of technical and everybody gets even doubt and all the cost shootout will not have health industry. I encouraged by the administration move towards reducing regulation, the progrowth Tax Reform Initiative that focus on advocating for American Business around the world to help us with our export. That helps the health of the Defense Industry, and the department of defense for the leadership in the Defense Department. We have heard clearly from our leadership that they want to streamline the bureaucracy, look at ways that they will help to get speed and relevance to the war fighter. But there are elements like intellectual Property Rights that we hear from nontraditional businesses as well as traditional defense firms that are challenging us, and so theres a lot of policies and things that need to be taken into account if were going to rebuild and you have healthy Defense Industry to support that we dont. What do you see as the biggest problem right now . Well, do think it to start on the budget side. I do want to just agree with everyone that we do clearly have a crisis underway. Those of us to work in defense know that when we see problems in readiness, when they are visible or well into the issue, its a lagging indicator. The fact we are seeing those now means were in the prices, not on the verge of crisis. Our crisis i think it become apparent in the two prior discussants point is that its not just readiness. We have what i call the Iron Triangle painful tradeoffs are with issues with structure, how large a force need to cover the demands of the environment. We have written redness challef keeping that force able and equipped to move quickly and to be decisive in action. And we have a modernization crisis, and investment crisis. Thats longerterm, has nearterm implications but the biggest part is longerterm. If you think of readiness in a much broader sense, i think if you think of it as all pieces of that triangle we are looking at heart tradeoffs to the United States. If were not go to change our level of ambition, and were not going increase our resources, weve got to have more innovative ways of doing things. We can talk about what some of those could be. I think we need to think about that gap between what we say it is we want the United States military to be able to do, the degree to which we resourced them to do that and the degree to which with any other tools of power that were creating and resourcing and investing in to help take off some of the burden from the Defense Department. I dont see much happening there right now. If you ask me what i think the greatest crisis is, i do think quite frankly its writing is because you have to deal with today. Thats always the rational choice is to manage the problems you have today. But we can be smart about how we invest in readiness so were not completely cutting off our ability to invest in these other areas. The other thing thats really important to the Defense Community is to not stop, use to ourselves, we are all in wild agreement about the amount of money needing to be invested in defense but we have to move beyond that to make it clear to the political establishment of this country on the left and the right and the center, that coming to a fundamental decision and approach, strategy that is stable about revenue and spending and debt is vital to the Defense Community being able to establish what it needs to do for the longterm. Without that Bigger Picture i think we will continue on the track we are on of having our means and our instate being quite disconnected for sometime. General neller, what is your point of view . Is this a crisis for your marine corps . You expect your marines to be the nations force avenges, and i can assure you that the forces that a Forward Deployed are trained and equipped. But weve been at war for 17 years. The High School Students were going to recruit next where one year old when this started. It just didnt happen overnight. When it started, if i told you where china, where russia, where iran and north korea would be today, if i told you about facebook and smart phones and iphones, you wouldve thought i was out of my mind. The world has changed. The world has changed and were still fighting a terrorist threat, and those potential adversaries have enhanced their capability. In the middle of that we had a financial crisis and weve had bca. We that all these other things, and yet our military, im not going to speak for the chairman or the chief of staff of the army or the air force or cno, we said to maintain our current for deployed status pick without a recapitalize our legacy equipment and were trying to modernize because weve seen this coming. Weve been watching and we have adjusted our training. Were not sitting here with our heads in the sand. But at the same time you can consume readiness in your daytoday deployments. We recognize the capability of these other nations and we recognize that it may not require, probably not going to require more redgate combat teams or infantry battalions. Its going to require different set of capabilities, whether it be the ability to protect the network or denied adversary there to protect the gps constellation to operate saving space and everything in your command and control. With got to worry about an adversary who has an air force and has missiles. We need ballistic Missile Defense. Then you add to the artificial intelligence, robotics, autonomy, neuroscience. I could go on and on and on. Were looking at all that but in the meantime you have to fund for the readiness to do the current fight. So i agree with dr. Hicks. We are looking at a strategy would have to make trades. We have to make trades, and thats what why its importantt we have allies and that we work hard to maintain our alliances and we maintain our commitments, that we work as much as we can with them, that we work interoperability with them, but this is not going, it didnt happen overnight. Its not going to get fixed overnight. I think were in a good place. Listen to most people talk about money, at the end of the day, the United States is going to get the military that they want to pay for. And we will go fight. We will go and do the very, very best we can. But we dont want a fair fight. And people ask me how much money do you want and what your top light and all this. My view is look, what i want is a budget. I wanted to your budget. I would really like a for your budget. I just want to know what the number is so we can figure out what we going to get out of going to move. And i will tell you and everybody up your nose at this, the force is watching us. We havent all volunteer force. Actual isnt all recruited force. And we dont just recruit new members. We recruit and retain our career force. And they are watching. Particularly the ones have been doing this for 17 years. They want to know if the nation is going to make a commitment the ability for the great young men and women and we all should be proud. Thats the one thing that were still able to do. There are a lot of technologies and things that Companies Like Lockheed Martin and others are providing, are going to get us back to that unfair advantage. We dont want a fair fight. But its expensive. So whatever that number is, the most important thing to me is its got to be some reliability on the number and we got together to plan and operate and then would make the trades we need to make to figure out whats the best for the nation. Senator shaheen, whats causing this crisis and what do we do to fix it . Well, as a boy here has said, we need to repeal the budget control act and repealed sequestration. Thats really the elephant in the room, and i think you talk to most members of congress, republican and democrat, they would all agree. But whats been missing is a commitment to do that. Its also the certainty concern. That was at the end of my eighth year with operating on continuing resolutions virtually for almost all of that time. Were doing it again. We are going into another year where we are two months into the First Quarter and were operating on a continuing resolution and probably will through january. I think that probably is not going to change unless theres a change in the makeup of congress, sadly, because right now because there isnt Even Division on the senate side, and i can speak for somebody who voted for the budget control act, im not sure i would do it again if i had that opportunity, but the understanding was that we would all be honest in looking at the budget and we would try and come up with a solution on both the domestic and the defense side of the budget. And so far theres not really been an effort to do that. I think that continues to be a challenge. Now, having said that, i dont think we can all assume that just providing more resources will solve the answer to what we need to do going forward. With the military. Ambassador edelman talked about figuring we had in the Armed Services committee this week with what other people testifying was david osmotic, and he made a couple of points of a reinforced by virtually everyone at the hearing. They were talk about the National Defense strategy and what that should do. And he said a strategy is about making choices. Its about saying we can do some things that we can do other things. We have to prioritize what we do. I think thats one of the things that weve got to look harder at as a look to the future. And finally we really do need to recognize as general neller says, that times have changed and that were looking at different general mcmaster said this in his remarks at lunch how we define war and conflict has changed. Were probably not looking at a desert storm kind of conflict. For most of what were going to be looking at, at least in the foreseeable future. We always still are dealing with china and russia and a great power i dont want to say tradeoff, but the need to, you understand, i had a very short night last thought, so forgive me. But they need to blunt china and russia and the great power conflict that we looking at again. Weve also got to plan for the fact that we looking at hybrid war, and at Information Warfare and at cyber, and understand thats got to be part of what we plan in the future as well. One of the things i remember as we were talking about this issue with the general breedlove, he was about the fact that when the russians shut down the dutch aircraft over ukraine, he said it took us two years to correct the story that this was not the ukrainian rebels but it was the russians. And were still trying to get that story out. Until we can do a better job that, were going to be challenged as we try and rebuild our military technologically and in terms of fussing up the person power that we need. Great. With that i like to remind our Live Audience that you could submit questions to the rndf, webmac rndf 2017. Org. Or twitter at hashtag rndf. We will take questions at the end of our panel. General neller, the agree with general mcmaster that north korea is the greatest threat right now, National Security threat . I think because of their provocations and the things theyre doing that the potential for more on the peninsula is probably as high as its ever been. If its only made a miscalculat, do i think that kim jongun is a foolish, irrational actor . I do not. I think he is trying, his goal is very simple, his regime survival. And i think he believes if he has this capability that that will help guarantee that. So i would agree with him, yes, because they are as they continue to develop their capabilities, they are more than just a threat to regional stability in asia but also potential and exessential threat to the United States. How do you feel about the possibility of possible military action there when 70 of the f18 submarine f18s cant fly right now . You have a serious aviation crisis. There are airmen who are getting parts of the museum planes. Are you able to take on north korea with your aviation in such a state . Are. Actually the f18s are not the aviation airplane that we have the biggest deficiency with for the plan so we have modeled this is the army has an air force. It would be all in. We would be all in. It would take everything that we had to meet the force requirements, swimming the fight went down the way the plate pls which im not so sure that it would. They never tend to go the way that you plan them out. But you got to have played because yet to figure out how youre going to get there. Weve looked at this and we are making progress. Im not going to smooth over the fact that last year in aviation we had a horrible safety year, the worst year in probably ten years. This year were doing a little bit better but i dont want to talk about to jinx us. Over the course of the last year because a lot of it, most of the actions had nothing do with the material condition of the airplane. It had to do with the fact that we are not getting enough hours and the aircrews. I talked to many people. Our issue is writing this, the biggest readiness the grade is part. You got to have a source of supply, and network. Our vendors will not have that network if the money is on, off, on, off. People go do Something Else because they have to pay their bills and raise their family. We are making progress. Weve got a plan but the plan is based on consistent, reliable funding over time, whatever that number is, and we work through that. Writing this, you talk about the cost of new equipment and modernization. You also have to pay for readiness. Theres a cost. Just like when you buy a car theres a cost. You have to maintain the car, you have to buy tires, put oil in it. Theres an additional cost. If you dont find for that and put in the budget which weve not done to the degree we should have in the past five, ten years, then you find yourself in a situation like this. We are in the budget what we received last year in the spring when we had an approach aviation appropriation pass, we saw signing the increase in our readiness. Obviously there is always concern your never as rude as you want to be, like you said at the beginning, we are going to go and we will fight. And i think north korea, of all the challenges, probably is the most, as tough as it could be, and depending upon some of the things it is probably closer in more of the conventional fight than were used to than the other three adversaries. Marillyn, id like to ask about the shortage of parts we hear about. Why are airmen having to go to bone yards to find the scrapheap in the desert to find parts . Lockheed martin and others must make these parts. Why is the supply off . Generally, it starts with budgets. You basically have to budget for spares and the things you need to maintain aircraft. We line up with contracts related to budgets that we get. I want to go back to my earlier comment. Even if they get a stable budget, we have to look at our buying practices, you know, a way that our system is set up. If we have needs and we understand the needs, whether its readiness and the need for spare parts and maintaining that or modernization and additional equipment we need, weve got to look at what do we reward, how do we go about with an acquisition system and what is the buying behavior . If theres a disconnect, industry is confused. Industry gets mixed signals. They say we get the input, going fast, make sure you have the right modernization, the investment. We are an engine of innovation across the Defense Industry. Theres no doubt thats the lifeblood of the industry and all the way through to the small supplier, will bring that to the table. What if the buying behaviors are all about just get the lowest cost and squeeze everything out and dont report for investment, then youre not going to get there. The same thing applies of parts and things of that nature. If you dont budget for them then they will not be there at the time she needed. Things take time. The acquisition process takes time and that cycle time drives the ability to meet the readiness needs. Its a collective opportunity for us to Work Together on making sure that understanding what the priorities are that we have, readiness, monetization, things on that line along that might and the setting up the acquisition system and the incentive to achieve those priorities. Isnt it also some of these lines have been closed because these plates are supposed be flying that long . Some of these planes are framed with seven years old and theyvy been waiting for the f35 which Lockheed Martin, which will be a state of the art fifthgeneration plane, but its taken longer to get the f35 airborne. So the services having to rely on old airframes. I would say the f35 is, we delivered over 250 now. The program is ramping up so theyre coming online very quickly. The program is in good shape as we move forward. Kath, how will we know when this is a hollow army or a hollow military . As i said before unfortunately if were going to know that we will know it made. I think were definitely at risk. I completely agree with general neller by the way that we are very fine and capable forces ready to go for our contingencies. Its endurance and against i would say spread meaning multiple contingencies challenge that and, of course, the daytoday challenge to make sure we are protecting the lives and safety of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. But i think we are at risk. I dont want to keep waiting to find out and i also think what marillyn highlight is so important that sometimes we get in these very really falls debates about resources for reform. Youre not going to probably innovate your weight and height out of not needing more resources and you probably be able to spend their way out of not needing to innovate. We need to do both. We have the wherewithal to do it, in terms of knowledge and the basics of our demography, our innovation, the nations reliance and trust in the military. What we need is a political communion, if you will, to get us there, which is do we have the willpower both to resource a properly but also to allow the Defense Sector to innovate in ways, and signifies that in ways that require an ability to let it fail at times and to move faster. Thats a real change culturally, and we will have to do both. Can i pick up on what kathleen said . Absolutely. Edwin agrees if you look at the problems that were facing that theres a bit of an and ways means mismatch or misalignment. The question is what can you do about it . Traditionally three ways. One is you can retrench. You can scale down your ambitions and your objectives somehow. Second is you can say we will assume more risk in certain areas. Or third, you can say were going to add more resources. Different administrations historically done this different ways. President eisenhower when facing a global conflict with the soviet union but fearful that the cost of matching the soviets man for man conventionally would break the bank decided to assume a risk by relying on Nuclear Weapons, which were relatively speaking cheaper. This is what, in deference to secretary work was two years ago talk about that the offset, this was the first offset strategy. Or you could do some combination of those three things. When you start to think about what objectives are going to scale back, it becomes a prety hard problem. Were going to defend ourselves against the nuclear north korea, and if god for that iran becomes a Nuclear Weapon state we will defend ourselves against them, too. Were going to keep fighting terrorists unfortunately, and we got here and asia traditionally, as congressman gallagher was saying this morning, areas we have not wanted to see dominated by another hostile power, and will continue to do that i think are everyones candidate for this that we will scale back our ambitions, will be the middle east. And god knows, id love for the region to return to the obscurity it so richly deserves, but thats just not going to happen. Its quite a continue to impose itself on us. I think were talking really about risk and or resources. When we talk about resources, i think everyone automatically goes to the issue of okay, the budget, topline can how do we increase it . It also is intellectual resources. How do we think about fighting these potential conflicts in the future differently . And i think chairman mccain and chairman thornberry deserve a lot of credit first of all for trying to get the resources of your quick got to get the resources of. But as others have said on the spam and i agree with them, and more to the point senator mccain agrees because he has written a letter to disaffected secretary mattis, even if we get the resources of we will not be able to spend our way out of this. We will have to think our way out of it as well and thats going to be the really painful part trying to think about how we face these conflicts differently. Several people have talked on this panel about gray zone, hybrid war Information Warfare, senator shaheen was talking about the dutch, you know, or assimilation aircraft from the netherlands. We have to figure out how to do with this information challenge because the russians are using it very effectively, and the chinese will not far behind, and others will be there as well. Thats the question. Were talking about a 56 billion increase dollars increase in the Defense Budget. It will be a 709 budget, if pastor isnt going to be enough . Realistically, theres so much money in the pot. Will 702 was enough . Will we realistically get a 7 billion Defense Budget . Not unless we do some things differently. One of the things we heard at this hearing this week was if we looked at what do we want to plusup over the next ten years in addition to the budget that weve had, its going to cost about a trillion dollars. Thats a challenge. It was made even worse i think a lot of us when we look at the cost of the tax package that we just passed, which is going to be a trillion dollars. So there is a child in terms of where to get the money. Thats why we got to think about increasing the budget. As i said i think all of us would support that, but what else can we do . General neller talked about the importance of our allies, working with our allies. That is very important we need to make sure that those alliances are strong, that we are coordinating nato clearly is one of the institutions thats helping to pick up the slack in some of these areas and we need to make sure we continue to support nato. The other thing is diplomacy. We are not going talk about hollowing out our military. Were talking hollowing out our Defense Department, our department of state as well. Theres real concern about what that means if we begin to lose more, with ari lost a lot of the experienced diplomats, but if we look at how do we build a successful Defense Strategy for the future and look at whats been successful in the past . It hasnt just been the military. They have clued up in very important we been in conflict. But they fattest diplomatic corps that is helped that is gone in some areas to prevent conflict, thats helped as were looking at how do we deal with situations like the one in nice year. So we got to make sure also that we are building a Strong Partnership between our diplomatic effort and our military effort. And right now that its really been fading. And i think that because of any issues with secretary mattis or the military, hes been very clear about saying if you dont find these diplomatic efforts the need to find my budget at a greater expense. But sadly we are not seen that kind of commitment from this administration because to support the diplomatic efforts. And marillyn, if you get the budget, if the Defense Department gets the budgets that it would like, how quickly can industry ramped up and actually build planes, replacement planes as well as get the parts in the supply chain . How quickly can you turn this around . There is a a late time, wher its building aircraft or satellites or weapons system. We are already doing some of that in terms of stepping up from munitions and things of that nature to the extent we have the capacity to do it. Beyond the ability to put in place the capacity to increase your capacity, you also have the acquisition cycle that comes to play. My earlier comments about how it has to be a partnership with the department on streamlining the process so you get the contract earlier, that youre drunk the supply chain earlier so that they can invest in the tooling or the capacity to step it up. But it will vary by system. An aircraft from the time you place the order to delivery is probably somewhere around three years, for just an aircraft. Satellite maybe a little longer. New technology and things can help streamline the summit but its a collectively working together with streamlining first getting the order and then getting the product or capability out the door. Kath, you wanted to say something. I wanted to build on senator shaheen point. Which is, the Defense Department isnt come important. The defense Defense Budget is very important. But our National Security approach is what really we should be talking about. Thats a combination of our intelligence community, which by the weight we spend a lot of money on, our Homeland Security approaches, our publicprivate partnerships, our state department and diplomacy and to the extent that we just keep honing this tool we will keep using this tool, and it has to get better across a broader and broader range of skills because that is what we as a country keep turning to. That in turn exacerbates that writing this crisis for the military. So were making a series of very bad strategic choices that are entirely within our control as a country. To the extent we think more broadly about National Security, what is we want to achieve and what the tools are that we have and we want to leverage, for instance, in the middle east, it can relieve some pressure. Wont make it magically disappear but it will relieve some pressure on the military to have two character to it the every time alltime at ultimate levels of writers. Ambassador, did this crisis begin with sequestration of the budget control act of 2013, or does it predate that . Are there certain things the services did that may be has kicked the can down the road . I think when historians look back they will see roots that go deeper. Some of it has to do with what general neller was talking about, which is weve been at war for very long time. The roots of this to some degree probably go back into the 90s and the post cold war when we decided were going to cash in and take a peace dividend because the cold war was over and we took that peace dividend just at the point where operational tempo started to increase. Really since the 90s and the deployments into the balkans and to some degree somalia and haiti and other places, we started to use up equipment in ways that, and you referred to this earlier in your question, we have been using up equipment and flying things for hours way beyond what they were originally intended, and weve never recapitalize because we been, for 15, 16 years, been fighting the counterinsurgency stabilization fight and in the me got hit wie Great Recession in 2007, 2008, 2000 nayarit again to convince ourselves that the tide of war was receipt of these wars can we could ramped down the budget again and i think was premature to have done that. The roots go back a long way. There are lots of people who are responsible. We are better off not pointing fingers at one another about how that happened and get on with fixing the problem. General neller, i want to o back to this uptick in aviation crashes and pilots, pilots deaths. You think, you were explaining that they are they getting the number of hours in the air. Why . I saw statistic that pilots use to get 25 hours hours of flying time a month. That was the requirement and now theyre getting four hours a month. Obviously that is not enough. Explain to us how this flying time training, why are they not having time to train . I would say we are not, the differential is what you just described or i could show where averaging about, what were looking for is about 16 hours a month. Were just underneath that now. Its taken us a couple years to get there. But if you dont have enough airplanes, you have all the airplanes, youre flying a smaller number of airplanes. You fly airplanes that break more frequently than if you cant get the parts, then you have a smaller number of airplanes. So youre not getting the hours in the maintainers are required to work harder and longer. So you get into the cycle. I think were coming out of that. That. Its not good happen overnight, but then you get into the hey, i join the army, the navy, the marine corps, the air force to fly. Im not flying. Right now were in the middle of a huge commercial airlines hiring time because a lot of pilots are retiring because they hire in groups and their reaching mandatory retirement. Once you fulfill your commitment to fly an airplane, now we have to compete with that. I can get a new plan, i can get parts but i cant replace a major whos got 12, 14 years of experience flying an airplane is going to potentially be a squadron co. The p. M. Part of this you always end up going back to that. Let me just make one comment about, and im sure a lot of people are checking the phone to make sure that auburn is to beating george and all that, but because thats the way we like attention as americans. We want the game to start. We want there be a clock. We want there to be lines on the field. We want there to be referees to call penalties for bad things, and at the end want to say we won or lost. Nobody else in the world place like that. We had simon talk to secure the day. This is a game theory thing, i found interesting. We think every game is fine at the war we are in, they are playing an infinite game. Thats what i think the strategy in south asia right now is good because we havent put a timeline on it. There will be a commitment there and were having success, but to go back to what dr. Hicks said, senator shaheen, the military will only do so much. We will set the conditions for secured by the mobile not going to help somebody be a mayor or run a town or turn a founder summary else has got to do that. But i think we all have to open our eyes up to the fact that those that we are potentially competing with, right now below the level of conflict, they are not worried about the clock. They are not worried about time. President xi just gave his big speech picky set in 2049, the 100th anniversary of this government, thats when we are going to be ready to go. 2049. So if they are clearly taking a long view. As i said earlier we didnt you do overnight. I think we need to take a longer view to get out of this. Although i dont know how much time we have, but if we continue to make slow, steady progress i think we, as opposed to the two steps forward, one step back, we need to have an incremental approach. Because provide for the common defense is the number one requirement of government and i think it working people have great confidence and i think if its articulated that way, do understand what they have to do to resource this. What will it mean to you if there is a cr in the budget . Business as usual. I mean, i dont mean to be cynical. But, i mean, i mean, we are more used to operating under cr then we are under full appropriation appropriations. Theres a number of things you can do, cant do. You cant do certain above threshold reprogramming. You cant do new starts. You cant do this, but were going to fly. Were going to drive, train. I dont want people to come away from this thinking that we are not out there. I was just at twentynine palms, 3000 marines in the field and we have National Guard out there, and army out there. We had navy out there. We are training hard and were changing the way we train because we realize the potential adversary we face is difficult when not going, we dont want to lose our counterinsurgency stability training but okay, well put that aside for now. Were going to fight somebody who looks more like us or even has capabilities that we dont. Weve got to get ready for that. And so we are working hard. Were not sitting, nobody is sitting in the barracks crying in their beer or whining about this. So were going to be fit, disciplined, well be able to operate our weapon systems and assume the networks will be challenged. We are out there working to get our planes up in the to do what we have to do and out there Forward Deployed whenever there are thousands of americans out there in the air, on the sea, on the land that would be out there that you be very proud of. Much talk about the budget control act. As you said republicans, democrats all want to get rid of sequestration. Why havent they, why cant they . Well i alluded to this a little bit earlier. I think when we passed that it was, or at least i i can you i thought about it, when i voted for it. I assumed we would act in good faith to come up with rational approaches to deal with some of our budget issues. And that we would all work to do that. That we would be honest about looking at both the domestic and the defense side of the budgets. I think there are some people who saw that as an opportunity to cut federal spending. And that was their goal and they have continued with that goal. They feel like they have been a success. They have to some extent. And it has been very hard then to get people to go back and revisit in an honest way how we really deal with this. And i think that is is the challenge that we got. I dont think that will change anytime soon unless we change some Members Congress and as long as were evenly divided in the senate. There will be pulls on both sides of the budget to take a look at the battle were having right now, around plussing up the defense side of the budget which i support, is that well, if were going to do that then we have to plus up the domestic side of the budget. That was part of the deal. That was part of the original deal with the budget control act. We have people who wont do that. Saying all well support is defense spending. Were an impasse. That will not change until we begin to have some different approaches to how we negotiate. Do you think that the repeal of sequester is being held up by some who would like to hold it hostage to get concessions on the daca issue . Well, i think, i think that may be in the short term one of the issues right now but that wasnt a problem, you know, two years ago when, three years ago, when it first kicked in. That was about, i believe, it was about people thinking, wow, this is a great way to cut the federal budget. Well reduce spending. That is what we want to do. And again, that really wasnt part of the original deal. The original deal we would Work Together to figure out how to come to some agreement dealing with spending and budget issues no ambassador edelman, you were in the pentagon for number of years. If you were to do one thing now and you were back in the pentagon, what one thing would it be to fix this problem . As a signatory to all four of the never trump letters, my odds being back in the pentagon are vanishingly close to zero. If you could whisper into the pentagon, what would you say . My, from afar, my view is that there has been a bit of an unbalance inside of the building between the civilian and military side. I dont mean this to be a criticism of secretary mattis because he recently retired military there is a reason why the law about the secretary of the defense was drawn up the way it was but a combination of events, some vacancies at the end of obama administration, the slow pace of political appointment in the trump administration, has led to a bit of imbalance in particular, spare general miller here but really my concern is the joint staff rather than the services, against the civilians in osd. I think that is a little out of kilter and a little out of balance. And i think some, some thought and effort need to go into trying to make sure that is more balanced. Edward corwin, the constitutional expert wrote that the constitution was an invitation to the executive and ledge branches to struggle over the control of Foreign Policy in defense policy the National Security act of 1947 is invitation to civilians and military officers to control, struggle a little bit over control of defense policy it is good to have the struggle. It is good to have the tension but it has to be balanced and i think it is a little out of kilter right now. Marilyn, in terms of the budget environment and planning purposes are you seeing good, Innovative Companies not wanting to do business with the pentagon because there is this budget uncertainty . We havent seen that yet. I cite ad stud by where we lost a number of companies out of the Defense Industry just simply because the incentives are not there for them to stay in the Defense Industry. They, they go to commercial because that is where the opportunities are. They get rewarded for their investments there. Is growth. That is a challenge. I would argue why there is a diux. Why were working with nontraditional industries. It is not just to go after commercial technology, but trying to figure out how to get that technology into the defense capabilities and make it easier to do that. It is, you know, at the end of the day, if you dont provide the incentives for innovation, then, if you just go down to a common level and everybody gets just basic cost level, lowest cost technically acceptable, youre not going to get the level of innovation that you need. Yes, i think there are companies that have left the industry because of that. If i could add to that the budget uncertainty is a challenge. You mentioned that, everybody on the panel has mentioned that. We have fairly sizable Defense Industry in new hampshire. When there is a period of budget uncertainty the Bigger Companies can survive that but the subcontractors, they cant survive that. You know, they have to either go someplace else to look for business or they are going to go out of business. It is a combination of things but it is all around, how do we provide some certainty to make sure industry knows that theyre going to keep working . General miller, what are your marines telling you their biggest concern about the future is . Remember now, 64 of the marine corps is 25 years old or young irso that is my blessing and my curse. [laughter]. They want to know where theyre going to go. They didnt, the majority, we turn over about 35,000 marines every year. And they joined the marine corps for a variety of reasons but most of them want to serve their country and they want to go somewhere to be tested. Most of the questions are, hey, are we going to korea are we going here . Look, youre going somewhere and what you need to be focused on, if i call you tonight and didnt tell you where you were going to go, are you ready to go . When youre 18, 19 years old, it is hard to process that our goal is to take the advantage of youth mature it as fast as we can. There is some concern about, you know, they will work hard and long. They will work all night long, but they cant do that, they want to know, when will we get the new stuff . When will we get the parts. What about trucks older than i am . So, it is coming. It is coming. We got a plan. But it is not going to happen overnight. So you always are, any military, you are always at some point of modernization and recapitalization. Were in the Reagan Library in the 80s, being a fairly motley group of people with pretty, not so good gear. In a short period of time, everything was new. A lot of that gear were still operating with today. I mean, you mentioned the, f18, we made a decision not to go the enf and so were starting out with the f35. M 1 tank. Lav, amphibian vehicle, humvee, it is has been around a while. Some of it has been replaced. Some of it is refurbished. But there is a whole set of kid out there, whether it be ground or aviation were witting which i think will enhance our capability and i think, you know, people want to operate, good, new equipment and i think, that is part of the retention with the volunteer force. You mentioned the decision to go for the f35. Do you regret that decision . Doesnt matter now. Im not going, i cant, you know, f35 is like any other system. It has incredible capabilities and it has got some things were learning about, probably have to be mitigated but i think in the overall it will change the way we operate but, right now, i, were flying old planes and weir getting new planes and were working. I would rather fly the new plane than have to fix the old one. There have been a lot of reports of hypoxia issues but not just with the f35 but with many platforms. Why are we hearing about this hypoxia issue, lack of oxygen for the pilots . Its a pressurization. I am infantry officer. Bear with me. I should get carlisle up here to let him explain it but every aircraft has always had some sort of issues with pressurization. Hypoxia with change in oxygen level. A lot of new airplanes, like certain f18 dont have on board oxygen generator. There was an issue with the f22. We figured it was not the obogs, pressurization of suit. Had to change the way you flew it. Some of it is because of age of age of aircraft. Were trying to figure out the same obogs on one airplane has no problems and obogs on other one, same question with the aircraft on harrier. Very seldom do you have hypoxia issue on harrier, why do we individual on this plane . We worked our way through it, put mitigating measure. There are some with f35 as. We havent figured out many with the bs of the that is what the airplane does. Mitigation you fly with a bottle of oxygen. If you feel like youre hypoxic or you have tores things that tell you that, you pull the pure oxygen, you fly. Well work with you there that. We will listen to the pilots. They will tell us what we have to do to get through that. It will never be zero. Were concerned where we were. We have taken measures to fix it. Well continue to watch it. I want to take a moment, we have 11 minutes left and go to some questions that were sent in. Some cover territory weve covered. I will read them, whoever would like to take them. Whoo type of increase for the fiscal year 19 to repair, rebuild, recap, grow the military for future threats . What happens if we dont see this bending jut terri growth soon . Who would like to take that . Well i will just say, people on the panel have said it well, already. It is hard to just pinpoint a number, you know. I think it is all about what is the strategy that this administration wants to pursue. General mcmaster indicated well see a National Security strategy in the future. There is a National Defense strategy coming out. Eric and i are on a commission appointed by congress to independently review that well see what they say they want to do. What we heard today indicated a lot of continuity. Which means we need, military is pretty darn capable across a broad range of areas. And that is going to require a significant both increase in investment, if were going to do it. I dont think well get the level i think the level of investment for 19 is lower than what we probably need to have because i dont think to the point senator shaheen was making earlier i dont think you can get it at a scale given all the other challenges that the United States has to weigh its invests in, including the debt. Then i think you have to innovate. You have to be innovating. Eric, i will answer the question you asked eric, if i pick one area i think spend Significant Energy right now in this coming up at the end of the first year of an administration to institutionalize the voice of the future joint war fighter to spend energy, for instance in the joint staff, less on these olympics games who does strategy but more about operational art for the joint war fighter an scale up from great ideas like the iuf, and Strategic Capabilities Office to real changes in regulation and incentive structure that allow for us to start getting ourselves out of this Iron Triangle of painful tradeoffs a little bit, building on asymmetries and in new years and reforming the process to get us there. Senator shaheen have a question for you has to deal with the sequester. A amendment to repeal the defense and nondefense. It was blocked from consideration. Why was it blocked . Would you have voted for sequester repeal had it come to the floor . If had genuinely the both domestic and defense side of spending absolutely. The amendment that was offered would not do that. General miller, are you as a member of the joint chiefs encouraged to speak openly an candidly about the militarys challenges . If not, isnt it important for the citizens to know the true situation so they can communicate with congress . I dont feel that im restricted in any way, shape or form from providing my best advice. Im a member of joint chiefs of staff. General dunford speaks for us. If i disagree with him, my prerogative to speak with the secretary of defense or president of the United States if i didnt agree with the advice being offered. So i dont feel that im being watched. You know, i would say, you know, secretary mattis made some comments about, comments, we talk about readiness. Readiness when we talk about it within our own organization or even within the joint chiefs, the status of our forces is restricted information it is classified. I would never if i have campus for the for campus never want to give comfort to our enemies where our status is. I have to be able to talk it members of congress with a frank discussion, readinesses as far as number of planes, tanks, artillery, the readiness of the people, our ability to recruit, impact of any budget. To get it your question, no, i dont, i dont feel that ive been restricted or held back or in any way, shape or form are unable to speak my mind on, as a senior officer in the marine corps and a member of the joint chiefs. Ambassador edelman brought up a point about the Civil Military balance. First time we have had a marinas defense secretary and you have quite a number of marines in the senior positions in the pentagon as well as the National Security advisors. Do you think that the civilmilitary balance is out of whack at the pentagon, general miller . Youre asking me that question . [laughter] yes, sir. Can we go back to the last question again . [laughter]. I mean, secretary mattis was confirmed by the senate to be the secretary of the defense. And john kelly was confirmed to be the director of Homeland Security and then the president chose him to be the chief of staff. People ask me all the time, hey, isnt great that the chairman and secretary and chief of staff are all marines . [laughter] absolutely. [laughter]. [applause] did i answer the question . I think we got the answer. Senator shaheen you forgot the secretary of the navy also. There you go. Im the player to be named later, fifth round choice. Well, military balance out of whack at the pentagon . I think some of the issues that ambassador edelman raised are very real. Those are important and we need to look at those, about, weve got a number of positions still unfilled. We need to fill those positions. We need to get in people with expertise. I do think as general miller said, all of these people were confirmed by the congress and i think, i have heard from my constituents. I feel this way. I have a lot of faith in, i voted for all of those people at a member of the senate. I have a lot of faith in them. Marilyn, we have just a few minutes left. As a voice from the industry what do you think this group needs to know . There are many industry people here but members of congress, pentagon officials. What do they need to hear from your point of view as a representative of industry about what you need to Work Together, be successful to make sure our military has what it needs . I would say from a perspective we stand to support our members in the uniform and leaders and what they need. We need not to get mixed signals. If what you need for us to have investment in new, innovation and the ability to bring speed and to bring the best capability as quickly as we can, then, we need, we need that feedback, but that is what youre going to do, buy best value. It will not just be a cost shootout. Not to just drive lowest cost. We have done both. Weve been on a path of recent years of buying behavior, what we want is the lowest cost. We just want affordability. You absolutely need affordability. If youre not going to incent for investing in research and development, well not get the endgame we want, which is higher lethality and ability to modernize and have the best capability coming from industry. So thats the message i would have. We will do either. We want to have consistency we can align with those priorities. No ambassador edelman, can i ask you to close out our panel, what do you think are the key themes we hit on and what needs to be done . What needs to be fixed right away . Well i will end where i started. Bca and sequester must be repealed. [applause] senator shaheen, is that likely . Well, weve had a lot of people in the room who have an interest in what happens here. I would encourage you to talk to members of congress about your concerns. But in the context of recognizing that it has got to be across the budget. And it has not to deal not just with defense spending but also with the domestic side of the budget. Until we do, it is not going to get done. I think it can get done. I will keep working for that. But im, we need a a lost he t of help. You folks are in a good position to help us as we address this. What would you like us to take away from this forum . I think, absolutely beginning on the bca issue. I think linking the issue related to a broader, national, nondefenseled, National Conversation about where we want our country to go, what the fiscal path is to get there. And defense will follow to general millers point. We can build. We have the, talent, the skillset, with sufficient resources we can build the best military in the world well into the future and blow past the chinese if you will in 2049. But we need to think long term, have stability to get there. General miller, i will give you the final word. You should be proud of the force and you know, i have served with secretary mattis and joe dunford and john kelly and all of the joint chiefs. We know each other. Weve beening doing this for a while. So that is a huge advantage that we have. The one thing we dont have i think im concerned about is how much time. I cant, you cant buy time and so, there is a certain sense of urgency, we feel, that weve got to adjust and adapt and be more innovative. Well do whatever, well do that with whatever resources we get. But, military is ready to go. Theyre populated with your sons and daughters and your children and you should be very proud of what they do and i think the nation is willing, if told, what the facts are, i think theyre willing to step up to say yeah, we need to make sure the defense of the United States is a priority. Were willing to pay for it. Panel, i want to thank you for joining us. Thank you for your, for being with us today. [applause] congressman has been meeting with Wounded Warriors in his district in california the house members are back in the home districts until next week. Illinois congressman Brad Schneider discussed ways to improve the Veterans Department with lake county and illinois veterans. The house begins, 115th congress this monday. Senate was in session this week. Senator tim kaine is back home. They are hitting the senate trail to visit communities across rural begin were, to talk health care, jobs, infrastructure, education and so much more. Stop one he says is farmville. He is staying warm thanks to a vintage jean jacket he got for christmas. History professors and authors participate in the annual meeting of the american historical association. Live coverage at 1 30 and 3 30 p. M. Eastern here on cspan2. Online, cspan. Org and on the free cspan radio app. Tonight on a special presentation of booktv in prime time on cspan2, books from 2017 that focused on the u. S. Military. Authors include former president george w. Bush and his book, portraits of courage. Andrew carroll writes about general john pershing. Retired admiral james stavridis. Mark moyar chronicles the rise of special forces. Booktv tonight at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. This weekend, cspan cities tour brings you to springfield, missouri. Were working with mediacom and the birthplace of route 66 in southwestern missouri, saturday at noon eastern on booktv. Author jeremy neely talks about the conflict occurring along the kansasmissouri border, in the struggle over slavery in the border between them. In 1858 john brown left kansas come back to the territory, begin a series of raids in western missouri which his men will liberate enslaved people from missouri and help them escape to freedom. During the course of this he kill ad number about of slaveholders. The legend of john brown really grows as part of this struggle, that people localely understand is really the beginning of the civil war. Then sunday at 2 00 p. M. On American History tv, we visit the nra National Sporting arms museum. Theodore roosevelt was probably our shootingist president. He was a very, very avid hunter. First thing he did when he left office was organize and go on a very large hunting is a is safari to africa. It has a president ial enengrade on the breach. President roosevelt is famous for the bull moose party. There is a bull moose engraved on the side of this gun. Cspan cities tour on springfield, missouri. On book tv. Sunday at 2 00 p. M. On American History tv on cspan3, working with our cable affiliates as we explore america. Deputy defense secretary Patrick Shanahan delivered keynote remarks at the Reagan National defense forum. He discussed National Security threats, Defense Innovation and military readiness. Following remarks, mr. Shanahan was interviewed by cnn pentagon correspondent barbara starr. This is a half hour. [applause] how are you . Good. I say those 30 years were a good warmup act. John, thank you, and im going to make sure to get a copy of your book on the way out of town here. So thank you for that warm introduction. Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,gu in todays