Transcripts For CSPAN Armed Services Chairman Expresses Frustration Over Lack Of Afghanistan... 20170618

This past week, secretary of defense James Madison and Joseph Dunford testified on the 2018 budget request for the pentagon. U. S. Were also asked about strategy in afghanistan. Well, good morning. The Senate Armed Services Committee Meets to receive testimony on the department of defenses fullyear 20 budget request. We welcome secretary matus, general dunford, thank you for your leadership of our minimum and in uniform. Before we begin, we all want to acknowledge the service and sacrifice of Sergeant Eric howe, Sergeant William baze, and corporal dylan aldrich. These three soldiers were killed this weekend in afghanistan. But thoughts and prayers of this committee are with their loved ones. The sacrifice of these heroes is a painful reminder that america is still a nation at war. That is true afghanistan or after 15 years of war. We face a stalemate and urgently need a change in strategy and an increase in resources if we are to change this situation around. We also remain committed to a campaign to defeat isis in libya, yemen, iraq, in syria where u. S. Troops are helping to destroy isis and reclaim muscle and rocked up. Meanwhile, threats around the world continue to grow more complex and severe. North korea is closing in on the development of an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile that can target our homeland, and iran continues to destabilize the middle east. Havee same time, we competition. Russia and china are modernizing their military. Those of us charged with the responsibility of providing for the common defense must ask ourselves if we are doing Everything Possible to support our brave men and women in uniform to meet the challenges of an increasingly dangerous in theirsucceed mission question mark i am sad to say that they are not and in response to rising threats, asking the military to do more and give more, but we have given less and less to them. Openingesses statements are a harsh indictment of this failure, but they are right. I implore my colleagues to listen carefully to their testimony and he did their admonition to us. Since 2011, spending caps mandated by the budget control cut in thed to a 23 Defense Budget. These reductions compounded by growing fiscal uncertainty in continuing resolutions have left our military forces with shrinking readiness. It has put the lives of our men and women in uniform at greater risk. The administrations fiscal year ,018 budget request, if enacted could arrest the decline in our military readiness, but ultimately, and unfortunately, it falls short of the president s commitment to rebuild our military. The proposed Defense Budget of 603 billion is both arbitrary and inadequate. Arbitrary because it tops what was written in the budget control act six years ago, in inadequate because it represents is the 3 increase over president obamas defense plan. It is hardly surprising then that the committee has received the list of unfunded requirements from military services totaling over 31 billion, all of which secretary matus testified last night in the house Armed Services committee that he supports. Military Service Leaders have testified to this committee this budget stops the bleeding, but we owe our men and women in uniform more than that. It has been said that this object request focuses on readiness and it is true that the requested funding would make the current force more ready for the next year, but ultimately, readiness is more than training hours and time of the ranges. Real readiness requires sufficient capacity to enable our troops simultaneously to conduct operations, prepare for deployment, rest and refit, and focus on the challenges of tomorrow. Growthdget delivers no in capacity, which means the tont force will continue increase readiness as quickly as produced. True readiness is also modernization. Capabilityage future for present commitments, we will have achieved little, especially at a time when our adversaries are moving at an alarming rate to her road americas military andnological advantage question our ability to project power. Here, too, unfortunately this proposes the old faults choice between readiness and modernization. The fact is 603 billion is not enough to pay for both priorities, which is why the unfunded requirements are heavy additionaland requirements desperately needed. All of this presents this committee and this congress with a significant choice. The administrations budget request is just that. Ultimately, it is our independent responsibility to authorize funding for our military at levels that we believe are sufficient to provide for the common defense. I believe this budget request is a start, but we can and must do better. Possible,not be however, as long as the budget control act remains the law of the land. This Defense Budget request, and the additional funding that our military needs is literally illegal under the budget control act. Damagew has done severe to our military. It has harmed the departments ability to plan and execute budgets effectively and efficiently. Brought our budget appropriation processes to a halt. And worst and worse, we have four more years of bca caps to go. We cannot go on like this. And women in uniform deserve better. It is time to restore capabilities, rebalance our joint force, and renew americas advantage. To do so, we must revise or repeal the budget control act. We must give our troops what they need to succeed today and in the future. The question all of us must answer is, longer will we send our sons and daughters into harms way im prepared before we get over our politics and do our jobs . Thank you, mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. I want to welcome our distinguished witnesses this morning. Chairman join with the to theng our thanks serve the serviceman who lost their lives and their families. Fiscal year 2018 Trump Administration budget seeks 574 billion in base and contingency operations. As we all know, the budget control act, the bca of 2011, and the sequester are still the and this exceeds the spending cap by 52 billion. Rather than negotiate with , it proposes an increase in defense spending with a 52 billion cut in nondefense spending. It will prevail to prevent leavinghe board cuts, dod in a worse position. We have already had many hearings this year with the military has repeatedly urged us to end the bca caps and in and sequestration. Like chairman mccain, i believe it is time to end sequestration. It has not made our country safer. Neither are these caps what our military needs or the kind of domestic investment we need to keep america strong. Reducingopposed to defense spending. But it is the duty of this committee to carefully review the Budget Proposal to make sure our fighting men and women have what they need to complete their mission and return home safely. Our military personnel have a vision of america and it is our duty to protect that. This robs from peter to pay paul. 17 70 billion from the state departments everest prevent wars, which is the very kind of spending that secretary mattis says is so crucial to our efforts. Includes funding to prevent epidemics like ebola before they reach the u. S. Needsnly our military and two, atesources the same time to turkey on foot with near peer competitors, but we should not do so at the expense of americans. And we have not had the courage to pay forvenues these wars as this nation has historically done. The bca should be defense and nondefense spending has the unfortunate effect of pitting spending categories against each other. It would be better if we consider the needs of our nation has this illicitly. Also, we should look at the Overall National security strategy. Such a strategy has not clearly emerged as we enter the sixth month of this administration. We seem to careen from one Foreign Policy crisis from a not from one Foreign Policy crisis to another, many of which are of the administrations own making. Secretary matus and general dunford, you have been consummate professionals at a tumultuous time, but we face decisions. Uous i look forward to working with you and my colleague as we address important issues. Working withd to the chairman to come to a reasonable agreement this year. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Secretarycain mattis, welcome back. Secretary mattis thank you, chairman mccain. Excepthat the committee my written statement for the record. General dunford and david norquist. Thank you for your swift consideration and the senates confirmation of the defense every year nearly one million civilians do their duty, honoring previous generations of veterans and Civil Servants who have sacrificed for our country and it is my privilege to serve alongside them. We in the department of defense are keenly aware of the sacrifices made by the American People to fund our military. Many times in the past, we have eye, andality in the we have built the most capable world. Hting force in the we have no godgiven right to victory on the battlefield. Each generation of americans from the halls of congress to the battlefields have earned victory through commitment and sacrifice. , theet, for four Years Department of defense has been subjected to or threatened by automatic cuts from sequester, the mechanism meant to be so injurious to the military it would never go into effect, but it did go into effect, and as forecast by the then secretary of defense panetta, the damage has been severe, halloween our force. In addition, nine of the past ollowing our h force. In addition, nine of the has 10 years, we have had additional new challenges. We need more support. In the past, by failing to pass a budget on time, congress sidelined itself from its active constitutional oversight role. Resolutions blocked new programs, placing troops at greater risk. Despite the tremendous efforts of this committee, congress as a whole has met the present challenge with lassitude, not leadership. I retired from military Service Three months after sequestration took a plate took effect. I returned to the apartment and i have been shocked with what i have seen about our readiness to no enemy in the field has done more to harm the combat readiness of our military than sequestration. Stoically have shouldered a much greater burden. Growingt address the risk. It took years to get into a situation. It will require years of stable budgets to get out of it. To achievecommittee three goals. First, fully fund our request. A fiscal year 2018 budget in a timely manner to avoid another harmful continuing provide a stable budgetary planning horizon. There are four factors acting on the department at the same time. Must recognize 16 years of war. When Congress Approved the all volunteer force in 1933, our country never envisioned sending to war more than a decade without cause or conscription. America for a long war has placed a heavy burden on minute women in uniform and their families are it a second, on theent force acting department is the worsening Global Security situation the chairman spoke about. Russia in the eye. Reckless rhetoric and provocative actions continued, despite the United Nations sanctions, while iran remains the longest challenge to mideast stability. All the while, terrorists. Hreaten peace in many regions for decades, the United States enjoyed noncontested or dominant superiority in every operating domain or realm. Forces whenloy our we wanted, a symbol them when we wanted, and operate how we wanted. Today, every operating domain air, space, see, undersea, land, and cyberspace is contested. A fourth conference force is rapid technological change. Technological change is one that necessitates new investment and new Program Starts that have whend us by wall by law we have been forced to operate under the continuing resolutions. 4 moments, the rapid pace of technological change, requires stable budgets and increased funding to provide for the protection of our citizens and the survival of our freedoms. I reiterate that security and solvency are watchwords of the secretary of defense. The responsibility of our government is to defend the American People, provide for our security and we cannot defend america and help others if our nation is not both strong and solve it. The department of defense owes it to the American Public to make sure that we spent each dollar wisely. President trump has nominated individuals to bring proven skills to strengthen our departments fiscal fiscal processes to ensure we do so. This first step is underway. For fiscal year 2017 to address vital readiness shortfalls. Shipsircraft in the air, at sea. It will take a number of years to restore readiness. To strengthen the military, President Trump requested a top line for the Defense Budget for 2018. There are five priorities. First, improve fighter readiness. For thein the holes tradeoffs made for 16 years of war, nine years of continuing resolutions and budget caps. The second is preparing for future investment driven by the results from the national workingstrategy we are on now. Our fiscal year 20 budget request censures the nations Current Nuclear deterrent will be sustained and support continuation of the modernization process. The third priority is reforming how the department does business. I am devoted to getting all value for every taxpayer dollars spent on defense. We have begun implementation of a range of initiatives directed by the 2017 National Defense authorization act and we are on track to enter into a full byionwide audit as required statute. I urge congress to support the request for authority to conduct. Realignment and closure i recognize the careful deliberation members must exercise in considering this. Most nimbleof the and an efficient programs we have. It will generate 2 billion or more annually and over a fiveyear timeframe, that will more helicopters, planes, submarines. The budget request is keeping our people. Talented people are the most valuable asset but we must balance the requirements for investment and people against other investments critical to modernizing the force to ensure the military is the most capable fighting force in the world. Compensation, retirement, the family programs are essential to fielding the talent we need to sustain our Competitive Edge on the battlefield. The fiscal year 2018 president ial budget requests 64 point 6 billion, focusing on the operations in afghanistan, iraq, syria. Sustainng efforts to nato efforts to deter aggression and global counterterrorism operations. Isis and other terrorist organizations represent a clear and present danger. We will share the burden of this campaign. Moving forward, the fy 2019 nationalformed by the Defense Strategy will have to make hard choices as we shape the 20192023 program. We will work with President Trump, congress, and this committee to ensure future requests are sustainable and provide the commanderinchief with Viable Options that support american security. In summation, first i need the vca caps lifton and a budget. Not a continuing resolution passed on time. Continuing so we can provide a stable way ahead. Following,ider the for 2017 as a supplemental we asked for 30 billion in the congress provided 21 billion for our administration to shortfalls. Iness second, this fiscal year President Trump has requested 574 billion plus 29 billion in the department of Energy Budget plus 65 billion to oversee contingency operations. This is a 5 growth over what the department had for 2017. Billionuest is 52 above the budget control act defense caps. We have underway at this time a National Security strategy review and that will give us the analytical rigor to come back to for the fy 19fy 23 budget request when we will build up that theary request chairman and i have laid out and our statement. I am aware each of you understand the responsibility to ensure the military is ready to future. Day and in the i need your help to inform your fellow members of congress about the reality faced an hour military and the need for congress as a whole to pass the Defense Budget on time. Thank you members of the committee for your strong support over many years and for ensuring our troops of the resources and equipment they need to fight and win on the battlefield. I pledge to warn a closely with you in our joint effort to keep our armed forces second to none. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. Toirman dunford is going discuss the requirements. Chairman dunford thank you. It is because of the men and women in uniform that i can say with confidence that our forces remain the most competitive in the world. The advantage we of enjoyed for a long time though has eroded. 9 11, and extraordinarily hasvel of operational accelerated the wear and tear of equipment. Meanwhile, the department has been forced to operate with far less resources required. We prioritize Maritime Readiness at the expense of replacing other equipment and capability development. We also have a force that consumes readiness as soon as we build it. Ability to maintain our current requirements while maintaining full spectrum readiness. We have addressed the dynamic and the testimonies and i fully agree. We are confronted with a challenge i assessed to be more internal. We have been focused on the threat of extremism and our adversaries have developed other approaches specifically designed to limit our ability to project power. They recognize that as a critical capability necessary to defend the homeland, advance our interests, and meet commitments. Has a widena, iran maritime,yberspace air, and land capability specifically designed to employee our forces. Russia and china have a Nuclear Arsenal and north korea is trying to get a nuclear icbm that could reach the United States. We dont want to lose our competitive advantage. The consequences will be profound. It will affect our ability to respond if deterrence fails. To maintain our competitive isantage, the fy 18 budget essentiall step. It will not fix the roshan of our competitive advantage. Doing that, it requires sustained investment beyond fiscal year 2019. We know now that continued floor growth is the necessary to preserve just the competitive advantage we have today and we cannot assume our adversaries will stand still. We recognize the responsibility to maintain the trust of the american taxpayer. We take this seriously and we continue to eliminate redundancies and achieve efficiencies where possible. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. Thank you for assuring americas sons and daughters never find themselves in an unfair fight. I am prepared to take questions. Mr. Chairman, i have no separate opening remarks. Thank you. Military mattis, the added more than 31 billion. Those are from the unfunded requirements list. Military requirements it should be funded . I reviewed. Mattis the unfunded requirements. I believe it is 33 billion and forould receive more money requests if they are appropriate. It your request that we give you 30 billion more . Hereal sec. Mattis i am to defend the budget as it stands because i can defend everything there. If congress were to allocate additional funds to National Defense, i believe the unfunded list has good priorities. Sen. Mccain so you are satisfied with what is basically a 3 increase in budgetary requirements . Chairman, when it comes to defense, sir, we at this point i president ial budget is allocated appropriate to the priorities listed by the Service Chiefs as we go more deeply into the readiness challenge. What well tuned to need. I would be happy to see more money if the congress were to allocate additional funds along the lines of the unfunded maritime priority list. Sen. Mccain ive for shake your willingness to cooperate but a lot of times we depend on your recommendations for appropriation. General sec. Mattis i cannot i would any priorities put in place other than the unfunded parties list if we were given unfunded additional funding. I have to represent the president s budget since he is looking at a wider profile. Sen. Mccain would he give you confidence we are doing everything we can to make sure our men and women serving our adequately equipped, trained, and ready to fight. Mattis it took a good many years to get into the whole we are in and that would not be enough to take is where we are going. It will be a campaign as i laid out. It started with our request for an additional 30 billion this year, the growth in the 2018 budget and when i get done with the Defense Strategy and review that we will be coming back to you for more, probably along the lines of 3 5 growth for 20192023. It will not take us all the way but it is in the right direction. In midjune, the Congress Passed a budget at a number that should embarrass every member of the senate and house. The senate is drafting appropriation bills because there is no resolution on the top line. Bipartisan budget deal. They have refused to begin such work. If we dont begin negotiating today it is very likely the military once again will begin the fiscal year on a continuing resolution. Be the impact of continuing resolution at the budget control act if it is 52 billion dollars less than your request . Onlyal sec. Mattis it can worsen the readiness situation we face now which has been laid out starkly by Service Chiefs if we go into continuing resolution. The firstcain conversation we had was about afghanistan. We are now into six months of the administration and we still dont have a strategy for afghanistan. It makes is hard for us to support you when you dont have a strategy. We know what the strategy was for the last eight years. It has not worked. As mentioned in my Opening Statement. We just lost three brave americans. When can we expect the congress of the United States to get a strategy for afghanistan that is a departure from the last eight years which is, dont lose. General sec. Mattis i believe my next year we will be able to brief you. There are actions being taken to make sure we do not a price for the delay and we recognize the need for urgency. Your criticism is understood. Sen. Mccain i am a great mr. Secretary, and so are the men and women who have had the honor of serving under you but we can keep going like this. You cannot expect us to fulfill the three requirements you gave if you do not give us a strategy. I hope you understand that i am not criticizing you, but there are problems within this administration. I was confident within the first 3060 days we would have a strategy from which to start working. So all i can tell you is that unless we get a strategy from you, you are going to get a strategy from us and i appreciate our wisdom and knowledge and information and all of the great things with the exception of some to my left here, but the fact is it is not our job. It is not our job. It is yours. And, i have to tell you the frustration that i feel is isiously palpable because it hard for us to act when you do not give us a strategy which then leads to policy, which then leads to authorization which is our job. I hope you understand we need to start getting more vocal in our this is for not having a strategy for afghanistan. To agree we are not winning in afghanistan . General sec. Mattis i understand the urgency. We are not winning in afghanistan right now and we will correct this as soon as possible. I believe that three things were asking stand on their own merit right now as we look more broadly at the country but in no way does that relieve me of the need to deliver that strategy to you, sir. Sen. Mccain i thank you and i understand very well as do members of this committee that some of this is beyond her control but at some point we have to say, look the congress and the American People rather, congress owes the American People a strategy that will lead to success and afghanistan. I am sure the three names i just mentioned in my opening andement, their parents their wives and their husbands, family members are very aware that we have no strategy. Ask these families withoutfice any further a strategy which we can then take and implement. I am fighting as hard as i can to increase defense spending. It is hard when we have no strategy to pursue so i hope you understand the dilemma you are enting to us will stop presenting to us. Sec. Mattis i do, sir. It even if you get the additional 52 billion, with sequestration in place, you would essentially have to turn around and forfeit that in acrosstheboard cuts. Do you understand . Sec. Mattis yes, sir. That would be more disruptive than anything i could see because there would be no prioritization. Taking from the most sensitive programs, may be leaving money and programs that do not even need of. Is that correct . Sec. Mattis yes. It would be injurious and it would prevent us from making wise decisions. Sen. Reed did you make that point to the president in his role as commanderinchief . Sec. Mattis i assure you President Trump is keenly aware of this position. Sen. Reed what is his position . Sec. Mattis the bottom line is the administration believes the congress has to repeal the budget control act and the sequestration that follows. He essentialmen it that it were incorporated into the president s budget because the implications of sequestration are clearly paid out played out in every area of the budget. Leaving a lot of people wondering, what is his real position or does he even understand what is going on. Sec. Mattis senator reed, we are part of the executive branch and the restitution gives you that authority to deal with that very situation. So i think we all know what needs to be done. Ive heard it from republicans and the credits this committee for a long time. Sen. Reed but the interesting thing is i have not heard a clarion call from the president or a practical response and solution is to have we not only undo the vca but how do you then allocate resources between defense spending, the mystic spending. Without that, it goes in the same trajectory of no strategy. There is no budgetary strategy here either. I think the chairmans point is that we are very late in the game and the ability for us astitutionally, if we write budget to reallocate resources between defense and nondefense defense spending without any guideline or framework and the administration is if not impossible, very difficult. Do you sense that . Sec. Mattis senator reed, we submitted a budget for the department of defense. We believe that is guidance. We submitted the unfunded priority list in accordance with the will of congress. We believe that is guidance for what we need. Sen. Reed a final point. The budget that is submitted will not work. , the 52g is done billion we give you we will take in a more powerful fashion that if we did not give it you. If we did not, at least you could prioritize. Let me change gears. Have you received a direction, you injure or security agencies, from the president to begin intense preparation for what a renewal of Cyber Attacks against the United States, particularly in the context of the elections cap you received any guidance . Sec. Mattis we are in Constant Contact with the National Security staff on this and we are engaged not just an disgusting discussing the guidance but in offensive measures, sir. Sen. Reed and that is clearly laid out in some kind of authoritarian way the mission to protect the country or is it something just collateral to discussions . Sec. Mattis senator, i am under no confusion whatsoever in my responsibilities in the organizations i have, National Security agency and cyber crime. We are taking active steps right now that i can brief you on in a closed hearing. Janitor dunford i think you had testified previously that russia poses the most significant threat not only in the new aerial denial systems you alluded to but also in cyber operations. Is that still your position . Gen. Dunford it is. And i included nuclear. Believe that russia and the others you mentioned are the most significant threat to the United States, mr. Secretary . Him would prefer to let speak for himself on that. Intelligencent, agencies, all of that is available in briefs to the president. We are recognizing the strategic threat russia is providing riots misbehavior. Sen. Reed you recognize it, the question is, does he recognize it. Supporttis i have full for the Reassurance Initiative where we are sending more troops to europe. They are not being sent there for any reason other than to temper russians designs. To give our full support to address russias choices. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your service. Let me say this about sequestration. When i think about the failure at this congress and this government to deal with this, i look in the mirror and i take my share of the responsibility. One thing that has not been said is that the reason we got to sequestration to start with is that there are two thirds of onrican spending that is autopilot. Very popular programs, entitlement programs, medicare, mccain, social security. Meant to focusas on that twothirds of the budget we do not deal with every year. We have been unwilling politically to do that on both sides of the aisle and until we do that we are not going to be able to get back to the problem tot got us to sequestration start with. But let me talk about something secretary mattis, that might save us a good deal of money and that is multiyear procurement authority. Which is assumed in your budget destroyers,r submarines, and aircraft. It is my understanding the cost assessment evaluation office, that the navy and omb agree savings would be significant if we go with multiyear procurement authority. But we lack at this point a preliminary determination to this. To implement a final determination can come later but we need the preliminary determination. So, are you aware of this situation secretary mattis . That the assumption in your budget is correct and that this will save money . Can you help us on this . Doubtattis i have no that things that take a lot of steel, a lot of equipment to build, the economies of scale a low for enormous savings. We would have to have a repeal of the bca act in order to get the confidence to the industry that they can buy that stuff and it wont sit in the shipyard when funding dries up the next year. We come right back around to the very thing the chairman and Ranking Member have been vcaussing about what the does. It removes the chance for wise investment in the money you give us, sir. But at this point the immediate situation is i need you to commit to this committee that you will give us the per preliminary determination to move forward. We do not need to repeal vca to get that done. Will you help is on that . Sec. Mattis we will help you. Wicker i appreciate what has been said about winning in afghanistan. Daysice over the last few a group of my colleagues have advocated, it has been too long. We need to look at the timetable. We just need to pull out and let afghanistan take care of itself. What is your and let me just say, i think that would be a which wouldake affect security of americans. I hope you agree with that. So if you could comment on that but also define for us what winning in afghanistan means. If we are successful there and have a followon force that is not involved in combat, much as we have had for 70 years in europe and a long, long time in south korea, that would be certainly something i could live with. Sec. Mattis you are correct that to walk away from this we have already seen what can come out of these kind of spaces. These ungoverned spaces. The problems that originate there do not stay there. They come out and threaten all of us. They threaten the world order. They threatened the economy. As far as what does winning the Afghan Government with International Help will be able to handle the violence. Drive it down to a level that local Security Forces can handle maintainour forces to the highend capability so the threats, should they mature, we can take them down and keep this at a level threat that the local government and Security Forces can handle. It is going to be and air of frequent skirmishing and will require a change in our approach to get it to that position. Do the people of us give us and want us there . Sec. Mattis yes. The reason they use mom is because they cannot win at the ballot box. They know that. They do want us there. That is based on an outcome of a of local,ge assembly provincial, National Leaders and is based on polls not run by the United States but by other organizations and i have no doubt they want us there. Not all of them, but the ones who do not are the ones who are not looking forward to afghanistans future as we think it ought to look. We and the afghan people. Thank you sir. Thank you mr. Chairman i want to continue the line of chairman questioning started by the Ranking Member. I am concerned about the russian warfare influence in the 2016 elections in the United States as well as its efforts to destabilize democracy across the globe. How is his Department Working with other agencies to counter Information Warfare in the United States and the hacking of our electoral systems. How were we working to fight these efforts . Secretary matters . Sec. Mattis first of all, maam, there is constant inflammation flow. Finding the problem is critical because they try to do it in a deniable manner. Try to work within law enforcement, fbi, and the other Police Organization that gets information. It has mostly been fbi. Our intelligence agencies Work Together. Good sharing of information and we also work with our allies sharing information back and forth. Some of it will be released, you can see it in the newspaper. Bloombergrning, reported that russia managed to hack 39 states and at to alter data even though it was not successful. Lester, a leak Department Said russia, attacked eight states including new york and they stole information and targeted 122 local Election Officials just 12 days before the election. This highlights the urgent need to protect our election system process. Ratic during the last election, several National Guard assessed. Do you think it there is a role to secureal bird local election systems . Sec. Mattis there may be, maam. We are still adapting to the new domain. New things. O that is why we dont want to adopt new resolutions. I assume what you just outlined is not the whole problem. Do you think we should consider a 9 11 commission to do ourep dive on where our vulnerabilities, what do we need to do to be fed by cyber attack in the huge are. In the same with the 9 11 made a commission that thwarted terrorist attacks of the last decade because those recommendations stood have impact on how to protect against future terrorism. Sec. Mattis i would have to look at, what is the problem we trying to solve . The reorganization of Cyber Command and nsa along the line has been proposed by congress and i think that also as part of defining the problem and defining the defensive measures we need to take. I would not be against that. I would have to look at the specific problem. What i would have to do. Recommendations to prevent a cyber attack. Just the way the 9 11 commission did it. Wee up with the 10 things need to do. Sec. Mattis we have efforts underway to do these sort of things right now but i am not against what you are proposing. I want to talk a little bit about the world order. President trumps decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement was one of the several signals to the world that the United States is repositioning the United States not as a global leader, but in focusing on its own interest. With asident embarked clear eyed outlook that the world is not a Global Community but a region where nongovernmental actors compete for advantage. Our Defense Strategy has been predicated on working what weies and yet this suggests would only work with allies and partners when it suits us. Is it redrawing its new Defense Strategy around this paradigm . Sec. Mattis we work with allies. We have all alliances, bilateral agreements. Alongl continue to work others. Greatest since you generation came home from world war ii and said, like it or not we are part of the world. That guides our Foreign Policy as well as our domestic policy. Jim jones just wrote an opinion piece on the topic and you said something similar several years ago about, the less we invest in diplomacy, the more we invest in bullets. Do you still agree with that. Sec. Mattis yes. Absolutely. Thank you mr. Chairman and good morning gentlemen. Take you for your service and form being here. I would like to let you know my appreciation for this budgets strong support for modernization and the strong comment you made i know mr. Secretary you alluded to that in your Opening Statement. I was pleased to see the departments request reflect the necessary prioritization for that Nuclear Modernization so thank you for that. General, in your Opening Statement you said that you assess that within five years we will lose our ability to project power. Can you put that in context . What is eating unable to to our power due ability to protect our nation . Article five under nato, for example . Sec. Mattis from my perspective, since the 1990s, china, russia, other countries up studied our capabilities in our ability to project power. We call it our center of gravity. To meet our alliance commitments. It plays an Important Role in assuring our allies we can meet our commitments. In specific areas antiship lipstick missiles, war capabilities, cyber bullies, all focused to prevent us from rejecting power when and where power where necessary. This is the case and ally with regard to our nato alliances, china, in the pacific, they want to keep us on deploying forces in the area and operating freely in the area. Repetitive advantage, and my judgment the problem where trenches office to continue to do what we have been historically able to do which is when and wherer necessary. I mentioned the role of our allies and commitments, we also believe that plays an Important Role in deterring potential adversaries from initiating provocation or conflict. Senator gillibrand do you believe it is in doubt now . Weretary dunford specifically had the ability to do that but it is eroding. Our competitive advantages eroding. We would be challenged to project power today. Looking function by function at ourcurrent capabilities, adversaries capabilities, the path we are on, the path our adversaries are on, what weve seen as an erosion is the last in the last 10 years. We could suffer significant casualties and time delays in five years. Senator gillibrand in five years. Do you think right now regardless of our intent we dont have the capability to act unless we change the path we are on . Senator, i dont think unless we change it senator fischer ned is pretty consequential, isnt it . Affects the it confidence of our allies. It makes it more dangerous in the world because the deterrence would be affected. Are enabled to meet the force we have now, if they are incapable or not ready, do you believe any leader would send that orson to battle . Sec. Mattis i think it would be difficult for a leader if the military indicates there is a risk. I think we have a competitive advantage over any potential adversary today and what i am doing now is projecting into the future based on the trendline we have seen over the last decade of where we will be if we do not turn it around. In the last three weeks, the United States has conducted strikes against soldiers in syria. Allwe going to take any and measures necessary to protect our forces and that area . Tor fischer sec. Mattis absolutely. Senator fischer during her confirmation hearing you talked about how russia was trying to become a power and you said you had to recognize reality of what russia was up to and there was a decreasing number of areas where we can gauge cooperatively and an increasingly number of areas where we have to confront russia. Do you believe this is still an explanation of their behavior . Sec. Mattis yes until they change their behavior. Fischer thank you secretary mattis. I want to associate myself with the views of 16 former military leaders who submitted a letter today in support of foreign assistance and specifically they made the following point, proactive Prevention Strategies are far less expensive and terms of. Esources and lives expended this is signed by a number of folks we will all recognize from general breedlove to general breedlove to general petronius to general mcchrystal. We should keep that in mind as we review the president ial budget which i believe is shortsighted with regard to foreign assistance. I want to move to secretary mattis, something you said at your confirmation hearing in january. I asked you for your assessment of the key threats to vital interest and what irony level and you said the principal threat started with russia. You still view russia as a significant threat to the United States . Sec. Mattis yes i do. Can you walk me through how the budget initiatives this year can help counter those threats posed by russian . I think the Reassurance Initiative alone is designed with one target in mind, to dissuade russia from thinking this is the time when they want to test nato or the americans. Terms also point out in of technology we are looking at specific technology that addresses some of the maturing threats they have here. Space, underwater, that sort of thing. I think, too, that the investment in prepositioned in equipment that allows us to move wars is quickly into an area would cause a change in their strategic calculus as well as the risk from their perspective. It would go up. Theres also a paramount of grand mediation and airfield going on. I think those are all very important investments. One of my concerns is that russias employee a set of hostile, highly asymmetrical last during our Election Year and for the cost of a single ship cost of a fraction of a single ship they were able to use hackers, trolls, social media bots to penetrate our election structure. Do we have an overall strategy to meet that threat . Either in ciber, or as a whole of government approach . Sec. Mattis we have vulnerability assessments going to shift our us filtering of information and shift our focus or Intelligent Services to define problems to a level where we can figure out what to do with them. Overallhere an strategy . We are working on a broader strategy that this would be part of but right now we have enough definition that we do not have to delay taking steps at this and intelwise defenseswise against the russian threat. Should there be consequences when russia does this kind of thing . Sec. Mattis that is a decision that has to be taken by the commanderinchief and certainly with the congresses support and involvement. I think this sort of this behavior has got to face consequences and not just by the United States bookmark broadly. Not just by the United States, it more broadly. You know my interest and directed Energy Systems that potential to be a game changer. To change asymmetry in the past for our war fighters. Sectionast year 16 from last year has the pentagon have principal responsibility for directed Energy Weapon systems. As of today, it is my understanding this position remains unfilled. Commitment today that you will fill this . Sec. Mattis thank you for bringing it up. I did not know that was my responsibility, i learned that today. It will be done. Right now, i tell you i have been briefed in directed energy, rn g, i know people are working but if we have not filled that line item number of assignment, i will get on it. Very much. Iated thank you mr. Jim. I want to associate myself with remarks about our budget picture. I agree with chairman mccain that i think the president ial budget is in adequate to the threats we face but the more fundamental problem is the budget control act and the simple solution is to repeal the budget control act. From senator fischer all the way down to my right, senator donnelly, down to senator peters, not a single one of us was here in the summer of 2011 and voted for that bill. The 112th congress was not in a constitutional convention. We should repeal it. Some people say it will increase the deficit that it is not going to go into effect. We know that. We know what will happen. We will have a continuing resolution in september. 2018,l have an omnibus in 2017, and we will do it again in 2019. Lets simply repeal the budget control act and take our responsibility and own up for cycle. I would urge all the democrats and republicans to do so and do so in the senate itself. Skies treaty of allows for open surveillance of military. Russia has not been playing ball. They are denying the United States overflights of certain parts of their territory. We had a soft resolution with russia. Those have come up empty. The u. S. Believes russia is in violation of the treaty. Issue. Meeting on this i have been briefed on it. We will meet with state department and National Security staff in the near future. There appears to be violations you know, i have got to go into the meeting and figure out that i have got all of the information. Would you care to elaborate manner on thefied nature of those classifications . Are there areas we have been prevented from overflying . Sec. Mattis i would prefer to talk privately with you but that is one of the clear violations to me. Can we get your commitment to submit classified or unclassified items on that once you have had the confrontations. Sec. Mattis i would prefer to do it even before. I can tell you what we do right now, what we believe right now and we will update you later. Gen. Dunford russian treaty violations, general step raffi testified that russia has repeatedly violated the agreement including the National Forces and treaty on conventional forces in europe. Do you believe it is in violation . I do. If he wanted to, he could [indiscernible] or we activate ace to Technical Response by acting with longrange bombers or enter continental missiles. Is that the situation we face right now . Craigs are, that is a good idea we have argued to modernize our Nuclear Enterprise and make sure we have effective response. One of the priorities is the Missile Launch issue. General salma said, a decade from now he will not be able to penetrate russian air defenses so there is an urgency to their development. Do you agree it is an urgent priority . Sec. Mattis we are going through a review right now. The third leg of the triad, the bomber, needs to be able to penetrate and achieve effects. That is the attention we should have on it going through the nuclear parts review. Someone pointed out a few thego that over 90 situation we face is the inf treaty gives america advantage. Russia is a north the treaty in europe. We have no response to either threat and even if we did it will be illegal because were worldly country in the that does not develop intermediate crews missiles. I think what is important there is what we discussed earlier, the large number of a threat. Present it seems critical that we face this. I know you gentlemen are working to address it. We will do Everything Possible to help you. Thank you. We started a wide range of capability areas where we requested resource is designed specifically for those charges you articulate. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you witnesses for being here today. I want to us about what is happening between cutter and its and itsetween qatar neighbors. They cut ties with the rain, yemen with bahrain, yemen. This crisis again in part because it was believed the gave a speechr criticizing iran and other parts of the nation and as it turned out that was fake news and there was no such speech. The fbi believe it was actually the russians implanted the story. I want to ask a question that depends on classified information so let me ask this instead. Is the news if the news reports are accurate, what motive with the russians have Something Like that . Mr. Secretary might you be able to answer . Distraction of the International Order is some thing they think works to their benefit. I think it does not but i cannot speak for them. I think when you are seeing here is continued the continued prevalence of threats not just to our own country. They are trying to break any allianceultilateral as a stabilizing influence in the world. In terms of is good your search. I hope it will be up to get to the bottom of this. Our Health Agencies told us the russians conducted a successful cyber attack against our elections. Three months later they tried to do it and france. It appears theyre trying to do it at a high new level. I would like to ask for your help to clarify the u. S. Policy on this current dispute. After saudis cut off economic and diplomatic ties, the president automatically tweeted his support saying so good to see saudi arabia visit with the king and 50 countries already paying off. Him toy say they called that country to ease the qatar blockade. Then, in testimony to this committee, the airport secretary contra sect did secretary contradicted sector he tillerson and said it was not affecting air operations. Secretary mattis can you please clarify what is the policy of the nine the sates government towards current dispute among golf countries in the middle east . Sec. Mattis he was referring to region. Airbase in the she was correct in what you saying about that. Secretary tillerson was also cracked as he looked more broadly at the situation, where we have to work with golf cooperation consul states. We have friends in the region, senator, who have problems. One of the issues that came up visitedident trump saudi arabia was there effort to turn off the spread of rabid ideologies that intercut stable of the and the ocean in which the terrorist swim. We have friends with two work with. Our policy is to try to reduce the problem but at the same time with got to make certain we are working together and there is no funding, whether it be from a state or individuals in the state. You can get away with it with the lack of oversight and law. There are a lot of passion that play now. I understand cutter has to do more to fight terrorism in the field. I want to make sure i clarify the point and understood it correctly. Gen. The other dunford is it affecting you . Thank you. D weve had cooperation to know we can move act and forth where we know we have an american airbase. I just want to say this cyber threat appears to be getting bigger and bigger, more and more dangerous, i think it is important and i will ask you ther for an update on status of trying to implement. Ur Cyber Command this is something we have to fight back and against. We are finding some and working through. Thank you mr. Chairman. You mr. Chairman. Again, thank you for your service to our country. General mattis, secretary mattis, do you see any way the current budget could be operational with the budget control act still in existence. Congress will have to move the budget control act. But would it fair to say that a would it be fair to say a continuing resolution has never saved money with regard to any defense programs . Retary tillerson sir, i secretary mattis sir, i guarantee you they cost us more money for less availability. Last week, they reiterated the importance that the program stay on time and budget. The program rims up next year from 1. 3 billion to 2 billion for 2018 ramps up next year. That funding could jeopardize the fielding of this critical component of our future National Security. General dunford, you mentioned we absolutely have to have a longrange strike armor as regards to our plans for delivering weapons against the our peer threats of competitors. Would you argue for the continuation on a timely basis for the development of the be 21 . Ineral dunford senator, cannot comment on the timing. Sincee done three reviews 2010. All have evaluate the need for a triad. So, completely supportive of that. I know that my colleagues have tested testified and i assure the committee their leadership will the decisive in that program. Thank you. We have talkeds, a directive directive that the administration deliver a policy or a proposed policy back to congress by december of this year and i believe since this is coming through the nda, it will fall under your purview to be sure that it gets done. This is not necessarily an act of war, but these acts of would impact our country. Study orow if that that planning is ongoing at this time or if there is specific direction for individuals in the administration to comply with that director . Secretary mattis sir, i want to get back with you with a detailed question on that one. Thats a question i am not prepared to answer right now. I know we have an awful lot going on. But the specific answers your question i dont have right now. But i will get back to you. Thank you, sir. General dunford the need for sometimesiority land, andabout air, that, sometimes we forget they are all connected. Can you talk about our need to attribute the attacks, not just to defend against them, what to respond . And to be able to survive the attack in such a fashion that we actually can respond afterwards . Senator, thank you. As we have analyzed todays conflicts in future conflicts, i would agree with you completely. We used to talk about multidomain. All demand. To see, land, space, cyberspace. We expect cyberspace to be part of any campaign we conduct in the future. The requirements start with making sure the network is protected. We talked about our Nuclear Command and control systems. We can provide the president with a Viable Options a response. One thing we emphasize, is because the enemy chooses to fight in cyberspace is not mean our response has to be limited to cyberspace. In other words, we may , butience a cyber attack use our ability to respond. Thank you, mr. Chairman. In march, you testified before the Senate Subcommittee for appropriations on a topic i care deeply about, the ongoing use of force against isis. Secretary mattis, you said, i would take no issue of Congress Stepping forward with a uamf. I have thought these same thing for the last several years and i congressbeen sure why has not come forward with this because i believe isis is a clear and present danger we face. Gerald and for, you said, i agree with the secretary. I think it would not only be a sign of the American Peoples letting but it would be them know that they are fully supportive of what they do every day as they put their lives in harms way . Is that still an accurate reflection of your views . General dunford yes, it is, senator, for me. Secretary mattis yes, senator. Senator kaine senator flake and i are trying to square some difficult circles when it comes to these nonstate actors, al qaeda, isis, trying to appropriately exercise congressional oversight without micromanaging punches for the commanderinchief and his staff. I would appreciate those of you, that the administration generally, trying to work with us senator corker has indicated the desire to move on this and we would hope to work with you to get this to a place that would express the and rational you discussed in this testimony. Secretary mattis im happy to work in concert with you, sir. Senator kaine great. ,eneral dunford absolutely senator. Senator kaine i dont have any further questions. Think you, mr. Chair. I want to clear one things up. Respect fortmost you. There is zero chance 0 there is zero chance he budget process is going to work. The best we can hope for there are 43 working days left before the end of this fiscal year. We are headed for another cr unless we have an omnibus. The best thing we can hope for todays an omnibus. He budget process is broken. It is why we are at a historic low spending on our military and we will not fix is longterm. We can argue about 20, 30, 50 billion. I will tell you in a second i think the numbers much bigger than that. Help us with an audit. Youve got my full support. We will try to get the money for you, but weve got to have an audit. Second, we need a bottomup analysis of missionbased need. We can hypothesize about them at you need. You have answered questions about it. I was evil is true today. In my lifetime, we have just invested in the military three times. I want to give a little history today. Spent the low point was the of our budget on military in 2000. Prior to 9 11, prior to isis, prior to the things that changed our lives. We recapped one time, in the 1980s. We called ourselves recapping in the 2000s, but we chewed that up in 16 years of war. In harry we are, where most of our major platforms are touring at the exact same time we have to rebuild entry cap. That 70 of the Russian Military will be new technology. Thatve an estimate here based on an historical average , the differences 200 billion. We will have a needbased requirement out. Billionmate is 130 more than what we have. The last when i will give you is this. General, you said our mission is to make sure our sons and daughters never country with ae biggest economy china has reached us, their economy is the same size as ours. There is every reason to believe they will continue to outpace us with a population that is four times our size. Theres no reason to believe that will not continue to happen. Spend this year, will 126 billion. Thats if we get everything you want. Already, they are spending more in equivalent terms, significantly more. When i trying to like this, this is this year 130 billion to 200 billion and that does not count the recap. In by the way, gates did that before isis, crimea, ukraine, a lot of the things we know today. I know you are a historian. How do we make sure that when we are spending every dime on the we arey, 25 of what spending, we borrowed 35 of oft we are spending and 30 what we owe is going to spend. In that environment, how do we strategiclongterm plan that helps us achieve what the mission is question mark i agree with that mission, by the way. We need to have a Strategic Dialogue with the congress. At that point, we will adapt and protect the country. Respect, it due will take some time for that to come together. There is a strategy review underway, sir. General dunford sir, there are is really two pieces to this. We have been involved last 18 months doing a comprehensive analysis of what we are using as benchmarks for the joint force. We looked carefully at china, russia, north korea, iran. Predictive, but if we withmark our capabilities those challenges, we will have the right for us. Have gone through an analysis we will share with the committee at the topsecret level that basically told says take a look at our relative competitive disadvantage and in the aggregate, the effect of those to engagee abilities in a conflict. What we intend to do is provide the secretary with very clear you asked for a bottomup, needsbased prioritization. I believe we are in a position to provide bottomup, needsbased requirements. We have taken all of the analytic work and dissected it so we can make clear recommendations. We have identified where we need to be and what specific programs will help us get there. Review thatinue to constantly, but i feel like the first time in many years, as a result of that emphasis over the last 18 months, we will be in goodosition to be in a position with the congress and we will be able to outline our requirements and more importantly, the specific impact of not meeting those requirements against those states we are using as a benchmark. When can we expect that . General dunford it is available now. We are informed by some detail work that has been done. The work is reflected in this years budget reflections. This has allowed me to come forward with confidence with what we are asking for. This is where i got the background, the rigor to understand. Mr. Chair. Chairman corker let me senator mccain let me point out again, mr. Secretary, and i am not without simply unless we have a strategy, it is hard to implement a policy and it is now six months. Of this committee, particularly senator reed and i, but others, we want a strategy. Thats not a lot to ask. I know there are problems within the administration, but honestly what you just said is fine. But what is the strategy . And i dont think that the last eight years are exactly what we have in mind. Some right now we have a dont lose strategy which is not winning. And general dunford, i appreciate very much what you are doing. Remember two years ago at the pentagon, you were telling me about the study is going on. That is fine. Where is it . That one of the problems in the administration is in the administration itself, but please dont tell us we have a strategy when we dont. Chairman, wetis have entered a strategy free time. Were scrabbling to put together to put it together. Anyone who think this strategy can be done rapidly is probably someone has not dealt with it. According to dr. Kissinger, it is the most complex series of threats he is ever seen in his lifetime, and he is a master of dealing with these kinds of issues. We are working at, as far as the. At its for afghanistan coming very shortly. We are broader strategies we are building on having to do with nato and our allies in the civic. People as with those we make certain we are drawing strength from allies, too. We are not putting this all on the back of the american taxpayer, the american military, but it takes a lot to lock into the level of Strategic Thinking that we found to find something that is sustainable. Shaheen. Ccain senator thank you, mr. chairman. Secretary, general dunford, undersecretary norquist for being here. I would like to pursue the question of strategy. About then is strategy in syria. Has at that everybody their place and we put on the board is a map produced by the Washington Institute for near east policy. This weekend, it was announced that proregime forces have reached the iraqi border. To raise questions about our strategy to clear isis along the Euphrates River valley. My question is, were we expecting the russians to come down and make the move that they did to encircle our troops . And what is our next move because of that . Senator, asttis you know, we are in syria in a defeat isis Campaign Based on our presents discussion a month ago, we have decided to arm the Syrian Democratic forces. We have taken out the area where the attacks on brussels and his temple and paris originated. Temple and paris originated. The next move is against wrapped up. We shifted the operational art to first surround the locations where the enemy is located so foreign fighters cannot get home to Southeast Asia. They crossed the line of departure a little more than a week ago. That fight is now deep inside the city. The situation is another operating area that we had. They wouldnticipate be there. I did not anticipate it at that time. Ouras not ascribed to intelligence people. Valleyhrates river russians, flexing muscle, feeling more optimistic about his strategic situation, and certainly they are moving to break through. Senator shaheen i appreciate that. I guessed the question is how does that affect our strategy for clearing isis from the Euphrates River valley. Can i ask you, general dunford, if you would talk about the confliction aside, how we are or are not working with the russians in syria . General dunford again, senator, without splitting it slingers, the media reports of us being encircled are not accurate. We still have freedom of movement. I talked, as the secretary does, our commander of the United States central command, if not daily, multiple times each day. There are not large numbers of proregime forces out there. Restricted our movement. To that point, our d confliction is still allowing us to prosecute the campaign. I guess i wasn asking not about the deconfli ction, but other ways we are or arent working with the russians. General dunford the only thing we are doing, senator, with the russians, is communicating with them to ensure the safety of our aircrews, meanwhile, secretary tillerson is leading an effort dealing with the foreign minister of russia to look at what might be done to address syria as a whole. Today on a daytoday basis, we have three main mechanisms. We have direct operations, we channel, andstory i speak routinely to the minister of defense. I have spoken to him twice over the past week to ensure that we prosecute the campaign against isis. That is a political dialogue led by secretary tillerson, but now we are completely informed by that restrictse cooperation with the russians. We are compliant with the law at this time and if there is a need to do more than that, my can waiveing is we the requirement and do more in the interests of syria. Thank you. Heen can i ask a followup question, mr. Chairman question mark thank you. Mr. Chairman . Thank you. There have been reports about the political effort secretary tomerson is taking through shannon to go to st. Petersburg, and the news reports have suggested that could involve of thens, the removal facilities we seized back in december in the u. S. , have youtary mattis been consulted and are you troubled we will do these exchanges without having any proof that russia is changing their behavior . Secretary mattis i have not talked to secretary tillerson about that. We have extensive talks, mostly every week, every day. That has not been one of the issues he brought up with me. I stay more on the military factors like how your map lays out, that sort of thing. Thank you. Heen thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im sure it did not go unnoticed, people coming and leaving. We have three hearings going on at the same time, so i will be very brief. I was here for the Opening Statement. You said you came back out of and you were shocked at what you saw. You have been very up front. You made the statement that for decades, america has been uncontested. Times are different now. I do think it is great, very effective for the uniforms to be talking about this. I cant do that. Those of us up here do not have the credibility you have when you are speaking from your vast experience. We are facing, in my opinion, the greatest threat this country has ever faced. That ande talk about we look at the attention that our military has been getting ofo back to 1965 when 52 federal spending was on defense and that slowly degraded to today where it is 15 . It, it gets right down to is a lot of this the fact that we have not prioritize the military budget . We are faced with something, the threat is great and when you have people coming out and at the army hearing, he said we are out ranged, outgunned. We are being very honest with the American People. Are we not giving the proper priorities to defending america . Secretary mattis senator, i know there were a lot of contributing factors, but i dont know how we can restore the strength that we all know we need if we dont start with the repeal of the bca and at least open the door to effective action by the congress with oversight and funny. Right now it is like we have tied ourselves up in a not. D you agree with that, general . General dunford sir, i do. We have to benchmark our National Capabilities and we have a disconnect. Where thea trend military capabilities and capacities we have are insufficient to meet our national interests. As secretary mattis said, secretary kissinger used this discussion many times this is the most volatile and complex environment since world war ii and i could not agree more with that assessment. If you single out strengths, those looking at a chart you may have in front of you, i dont know. You take up the reserve and the National Guard. Active, air army force active, navy active, marine active. And you have made statements or the Administration Made statements. The army active needs to be at about 540,000, and yet this budget is coming up with a steady figure from the last fiscal year, 17. The same thing is true of the air force. We talked about the necessity at three toit is 25. , we are talking about how adequate the budget is. Do you really think it is adequate . We are not meeting the goals that apparently you were in on the decision, both of you were somewhat in on the decision as to where we should be in strength alone. What am i overlooking here . Secretary mattis senator, i believe what we are facing is we are asking you to bust the bca cap i 24 billion. We are trying to be reinforced by the reality, but we are not being shy and telling you where we really are at in terms of what we need. I think we need to Work Together and come up with a solution here because i dont know how i would bring something to you that laid out a budget for what you pointed out here when the bca i would have to completely ignore this, and im ignoring already the chartered 50 billion well, the president is, with the budget he submitted, and it seems to me weve got to have a discussion ath senator purdue and get grip on reality here. Its like we are all Walking Around as though we are victims. You are right. I appreciate the answer. We have to do all we can. Go backthink we have to to priorities and a lot of people in the real world agree. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me justin point out again, secretary 3 increase over the obama proposed budget is not enough. Bcahether we do away with or not, thats our problem. Our problem with you is, its just a 3 increase over the obama administration. Everybody agrees that is not everyone agrees that is not enough. Why dont we busted to where we need bust it to where we need instead of complaining about the eca where what you are asking for is not sufficient . At least that is the view of the military commanders i have talked to. Senator donnelly . Donnelly thank you mr. Chairman. As leaders you both made a strong commitment to improving the Mental Health and resiliency of our Service Members and families. I appreciate your leadership on this issue. As discussed in section 701 of congress ndaa, requires every Service Member active guard or reserve receive a robust Mental Health assessment every year. The department has said in the past this requirement would be fully implemented across all services by october 2017. Secretary matus, will this be fully implemented by october 2017 . Sec. Mattis i dont know right now. I will get back to you with the best estimate i can give you. As you are no doubt aware, that is a significant requirement. It is a very labor intensive requirement. A number of Mental Health professionals would be needed to do that. Let me get back to you on that date. Sen. Donnelly that would be great. It is critically important. We discussed one time the challenges with a proper transition. General corelli has worked on this extensively on the handle from active duty hand off from active duty in regards to making sure that it is a smooth transition. V. A. He department and the working closely on this . What happens sometimes, not to get to off script too off script a lot of activeduty vets, medicines they are dependent upon are not available when they are handed to the v. A. , which causes significant problems. I want to make sure that the transition is being done to get this done properly. Sec. Mattis committees will be briefed very soon. We have made significant progress on the health records. That is one of the contributing factors to how we do this right, and right now we have people involved with this for many years. We have never had a closer relationship between dod and v. A. Targeted at this transition , the records and the format. I want to ask about afghanistan followup. You have both done extraordinary work over the years. Some years ago i was with the ,arines in the upper province trying to figure out a strategy. They were doing an extraordinary , seems like everyplace was down. Does look at this, what success i know we are waiting for the plan, but what does success look like one year from now in your view . What in your mind makes the situation better . Sec. Mattis sir, i believe the violence will be reduced significantly, including Population Centers where most of the people live that the afghan , government has got a degree of integrity in what it is contributing to its people, the government services. The corruption has been driven down, but most of all the taliban no longer has the freedom of movement we have seen now. It is rolled back. Mitigationd and the of afghan casualties has been a great concern. A great number have experienced them. One way to get off of that is effectively assisting in operations and delivery not combined arms, most specifically aviation capabilities in support in providing them support. That will be a key piece of mitigating casualties. Sen. Donnelly do you think we are in better shape now than we were last year at this time, or do you think we have gone backwards . Gen. Dunford i dont assess that we are in better shape than than we were last year. Sec. Mattis general mattis sen. Donnelly general mattis. Sec. Mattis i think the television had a good year last year and are trying to have a good one this year. We may be able to, by a change in some of our concepts of operations, help them with hair air support and fire support. Right now i believe the enemy is searching right now surging right now. Sen. Donnelly i look forward to the report. I would still like to talk to one of you or both of you or your team about raqqa and some of the that will some of the situation about the indiana folks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We appreciate your service to this committee. Secretary matus, open authorization invitation to come anytime. The worlds problems this morning, we need to fill in the gaps. You are welcome at any point. I counter isis strategy in Southeast Asia is something i have continued to push for, which is why i was excited to hear u. S. Special Operations Forces were assisting the government of the philippines in taking back the isisheld town. Until 2014, we used to have a Counter Terror measure in the philippines. We have known about this for a long time, and unfortunately we have not returned to that area in order to counter some of isis bad deeds. So general dunford, as we target a terrorist enemy that wishes to strike our homeland, how does our counterterrorism commitment in the region also help ward off other adversaries like china and russia . Gen. Dunford senator you want , me to hit those two separately . First of all with Southeast Asia in regards to the republic in addition to our presence in the philippines with counterterrorism the congress , funded the maritime awareness initiative. And that helps countries specifically in indonesia and the philippines to have a common understanding of maritime domain particularly to the flow of foreign fighters and criminals and those kinds of thingss. The other thing we have done is we have incorporated Southeast Asian nations into what we call operation galant phoenix. That is our information sharing architecture, which allows us to take a trans regional approach to violent extremism. Separately our foreign presence concludes theic fielding of our most modern capabilities and our routine pacific presence options designed to deter conventional conflict and specifically conflict with china and north korea. Sen. Ernst do you see that as being effective also in the areas of malaysia and indonesia . Gen. Dunford in terms of deterring conventional conflict . I do. And i vew the most dangerous threats in malaysia and indonesia to be violent extremism. Sen. Ernst ok, so crisis, isis oriented. Sec. Mattis we have talked about the lack of strategy earlier. In 2014, we canceled the named operation we had there, perhaps a premature view that we were gaining success. Without that, we lost some of the funding lines that we would otherwise have been able to offer. What the chairman has brought up is completely correct, but it again it shows the lack of strategy that working closely we inherited. We are working closely with the philippines with both manned and Unmanned Aircraft as they try to backout just right take their town. This is an ongoing issue. I think this would be larger if we were having this hearing a couple of months from now, so we need to get this get back under control and support malaysia and the philippines. Sen. Ernst yes, and thank you for bringing up the shangrila dialogue, mr. Secretary. While you were there the other , countries participating in that dialogue what type of support are they looking at from the United States . Sec. Mattis much of it is along the lines of what the chairman just mentioned with operation gallant phoenix. It is getting the intelligence, sharing the information, where everything from interpol to secret services of various nations Work Together so that transnational threats are , when they go from one region to another, is critical. Galant phoenix is critical. Other intelligence would help. I would add that is where our strategy of working with Allies Health take a load off us. For example, singapore has offered isr Surveillance Aircraft to the philippines. That is the way we need to get everybody working together out there against this threat and not carrying the full load ourselves. Sen. Ernst thank you. I am just very briefly, because i nearly out of time, our special operators have a time of about onetoone ratio. This was mentioned by the general and one of our conversations recently. What can we do . I will tell you it is because they want that. They will not say no when they are given a mission. I think that is incredibly important that they stand up to their obligations. But what can we do to increase their dwell time beyond expanding their forces . Is there a way we can push their talents out to the conventional forces . Sec. Mattis some of these missions, due to our conventional forces capability today compared to 2001, we now cap army infantry, army brigades, marine battalions that can pick up some of these missions take the load off of , the special operators. That sort of thing. Where you want relationships, we still want to use special Operations Forces. Chairman. Gen. Dunford the secretary directed meet several weeks ago to do an analysis of all of our special operations requirements and look for opportunities to substitute with conventional forces for exactly the reason you are talking about. We are concerned about the dwell to deployment ratio. It is not only a factor from a human perspective and families, it prevents them from training for the full range of missions that we may require them for. We dont want them, you know, to be singularly focused for the current fight, but to be prepared to support us across the spectrum. Sen. Ernst absolutely, thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Thank you both for your Extraordinary Service to our nation and all the men and women under your command, and thank you for being so forthright and helpful in your answers today to our questions. I want to ask about the f35s, which are on the unfunded list. I believe there are 24 of them. Would you get additional funds from the congress . Sec. Mattis you mean the support that goes with the aircraft to make them fully capable . Sen. Blumenthal correct. And the additional aircraft as well. Sec. Mattis yes, sir. Sen. Blumenthal thank you. And as to helicopters, i have written a letter, bipartisan letter with a number of my colleagues to the appropriators , asking for an additional 327 million to fully fund the 60 helicopters that are necessary to reach the state of readiness for our National Guard that they have to be. Would you support that as well, assuming that the congress provides the funding . Sec. Mattis i would have to look at the priorities we place more broadly. But i mean it sounds reasonable. I would have to look at it in particular. Sen. Blumenthal thank you. Sec. Mattis yes, sir. Sen. Blumenthal a number of our military leaders past and present have characterized the greatest threat to this nation as being cyber warfare. And there was a report in the Washington Post just yesterday as a matter of fact that hackers, allied with the russian government you may have seen the report have devised a cyber weapon that has the potential to disrupt our electronic grid completely, cause chaos in our electric systems that are going on in this country. I know an alarming report. , have you seen it, and do you agree that it is accurate . Sec. Mattis i have seen it. I believe that this threat is real, and none of us are ignoring this threat at all. There was a lot lot more going , on in this regard, sir, than i can discuss in a private setting. Sen. Blumenthal i would appreciate that opportunity. Would you agree that cyber is one of thehers greatest, perhaps the greatest threat in terms of warfare today . Sec. Mattis it is certainly one of the top because it cuts across all domains air, surface, it impacts our Nuclear Command and control, but certainly are very institutions, whether they be democratic or banking, are vulnerable to this sort of attack. Sen. Blumenthal would you agree that the russian hacking and cyber attack on our systems during the last election was an act of war . Sec. Mattis i believe i know it was a hostile act. Whether or not it crosses the threshold for war, sir i am not , a lawyer, but there was no doubt it was a hostile act directed against our country. Sen. Blumenthal do you agree with me that we need a better itinition and a policy may involve lawyers. I am not sure lawyers are the best to define it, but would you not agree we need a better policy defining an act of war in the cyber domain . Sec. Mattis i think clarity in this regard would help in terms of deterrence and response, absolutely. Sen. Blumenthal i want to, in my remaining time, focus on an area that is extraordinarily important to our nation, even though it is not the kind of glamorous, shiny toy area that attracts most attention. President trumps budget cuts the department of labors worker training budget by 36 . At a time when we are working to modernize our military with particular emphasis on the nuclear triad, the department of defense will be relying on the Industrial Base to recruit and hire and train thousands of workers across the country. In my own state of connecticut at Pratt Whitney thousands of , workers needed to build engines. Electric boat thousands of , workers needed to build submarines that are sold. They are so essential to our National Security, and yet we are cutting the funding necessary for training those workers. The welders, pipefitters, engineers, designers, people with real skills that are essential to our National Defense. Would you agree with me that our National Security requires that funding be restored . Sec. Mattis sir, i believe there is a need for the kind of people you are referring to. There is an Apprenticeship Program i know that the department of labor is starting. I dont know the details of it. But it is directed exactly at the skills you have been citing. I cannot tell you more about it other than that would be the best place to get information about what is in the president s budget to address this. Sen. Blumenthal i know the labor departments budget is out of your jurisdiction, but it affects our military capability. My time has expired, but this subject is intensely important to the future of our nation, and i hope that you will support efforts to increase the funding necessary for apprenticeship and training and other such Skill Enhancement programs. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Secretary mattis, you famously said as a marine Corps Commander that if you cut the state department budget, you need to buy me more ammo. Do you still stand by that idea . Sec. Mattis that was probably a rather simplistic way to point out that we have to engage in the whole of government. You say that soft power is an essential ingredient to winning the war on terror . Sec. Mattis think the fundamental powers are the power of inspiration and intimidation. You have to Work Together. The state department represents inspiration overseas. Senator graham do you agree with that, general dunford . Gen. Dunford i do, sir. Sen. Perdue a reference to the audit. Sen. Graham i will give you a question, but you have to be quick. Where where where will tricare costs be within the next decade . Sec. Mattis what . Sen. Graham tricare. Sec. Mattis i think the overall is 51 million for health costs. Sen. Graham look at it, he because i think you will find it in coaching on the Defense Budget. Sec. Mattis Health Care Costs have gone up significantly here after year. Sen. Graham thank you. General dunford, when we liberate mosul, would you recommend a residual force to stay behind . Gen. Dunford i do believe the iraqis will need support at mosul. I would also point out that the end of mosul is not the end of combat operations in iraq. Sen. Graham absolutely. So the day that we get to and combat operations and then the chairman of joint chiefs say that we need to leave a residual force to prevent isis and others coming back . Gen. Dunford my assessment would be strategically important to the United States. Sen. Graham to the United States . Sen. Graham yes or. Yes, sir. Sen. Graham do you agree, mr. Secretary . Sec. Mattis i do. Sen. Graham do you agree that the outcome in and in in afghanistan matters . Do you believe that every soldier serving as an insurance policy against another 9 11 . Coming from afghanistan . Sec. Mattis absolutely. Sen. Graham do you agree with that . Gen. Dunford i do. I do. Sen. Graham if anybody fall falls in the service of their country in afghanistan, they died to protect the homeland. Gen. Dunford i dont think there is any question, and i also point out the pressure we have put on terrorist groups in afghanistan the last 15 years is the reason we have not seen another 9 11. Sen. Graham do you agree that it is a good place to be in terms of countering International Terrorism . It is a good place to be . In terms of countering International Terrorism. Sec. Mattis International Terrorism and the number of groups there, we have got to confront them. Sen. Graham thank you very much. Saudi arabia. Do both of you support the arms deal negotiated by President Trump . Sec. Mattis i do, sir. Sen. Graham do you, general dunford . Gen. Dunford that is really a policy decision. I will defer to the secretary. Sen. Graham militarily do you think it would be wise for us to have saudi arabia . Gen. Dunford the only military judgment consideration is how it fits into the qualitative military edge for the israelis. It is not a challenge. Sen. Graham of get back to this right quick, sinister matters secretary moniz. Mattis. If Congress Rejects this arms deal, what message are you sending to iran . Sec. Mattis i believe iran would be appreciative of us not selling those weapons to saudi arabia. Sen. Graham and the type of weapons we are talking about selling would make saudi arabia more effective on the battlefield in places like yemen, not less, because of the precision of the weapons . Sec. Mattis with proper training, it can have that effect. Yes, sir. Sen. Graham north korea, is it the policy of the Trump Administration to deny north korea the capability of building an icbm that can hit the country with a Nuclear Weapon on top . Is that the policy . Sec. Mattis that is the policy. Sen. Graham and that policy has to have all options in the table to be meaningful, including the military option would be including the military option . Sec. Mattis that is correct, sir. Sen. Graham the military option would be devastating for the world at large. You would have to balance the interest of Homeland Security against regional stability. Do you think china gets it this time we are serious about stopping north korea . Sec. Mattis i have no doubt that china thinks we are serious about stopping north korea, sir. And it is principally a diplomatic lead effort. Denuclearize the peninsula. Sen. Graham last question what signal will you be sending to russia if Congress Fails to act for punishing them, if Congress Fails to push back for their interference in our election . We gave russia a pass. What message would that send to putin . What message with that send to our allies, and would you support more sanctions . Sec. Mattis sir, i believe we have got to make very clear what behavior we want to see in the International Community and what behavior we will not stand for. And we need to make that clear in the congress and the executive branch and in our alliances. Sen. Graham do you agree with that general dunford . , gen. Dunford i do. I have not spoken with secretary tillerson. I hope anything we do with regard to russia would be done in conjunction with the state department. And meanwhile i assure you we are preparing for the military dimension of the problem. Sen. Mccain with a 3 increase over the obama administrations defense appropriations, you are going to take care of all of those things. Is that right, general . Gen. Dunford chairman, i was responding to the russia challenge. I think the fy 2018 budget has given us some significant resources to deal with the russia challenge. Sen. Mccain so 3 sufficient in your view . Gen. Dunford chairman, all i can tell you is the prioritization we have been given is the right prioritization. As i indicated earlier, i believe the requirements provided over and above the budget are legitimate requirements. Sen. Mccain so 3 is enough, huh . Gen. Dunford chairman, i also stipulated that i believe we need a minimum of 3 just to maintain the level of competitive we have right now. The secretary and i subscribed we need five more years before we can be competitive. Sen. Mccain senator nelson. Senator nelson mr. Chairman senator king has to go to a , funeral. So i dont want to he asked for two minutes of my time. If i may give that to him. Sen. Mccain senator king. Senator king thank you, mr. Chairman. Just a couple points. I hate to be bringing more bad news. In thinking about the budget future, the looming threat that i see is Interest Rates. For every an easy way to think of this, one point of increase in the increase on our National Debt equals the air force. The entire air force budget encompassed in a 1 increase in Interest Rates. 3 would encompass the entire Defense Budget. 5 would encompass the entire discretionary budget. And i dont think there is any doubt that Interest Rates are headed up. So that is an additional factor that we have to think about in terms of development of the budget. Calldly there is what i the modernization bulge coming, cbo said cop oh would come the b21, the columbia , submarine, and the ohio replacement. So that is another problem we have to deal with, and still maintain current budget levels. I think the situation is even more grim than what we have talked about this morning because of those additional factors that arent generally discussed in terms of this. I just, and we have talked a lot about unconventional threats we are facing, cyber and the attack on our electoral system. Clearly attacked. We havent talked about hybrid war. And i worry that crimea is a precursor of a way for example, to attack the Baltic States without tanks rumbling across the border. And finally, mr. Norquist, i hope you will take seriously the necessity for the audit which we have been hearing about for years. And i think as i recall 2017 was , supposed to be the year that the department of defense was ready. So my folks in maine say, how can they possibly do this without an audit . And i hope that we can have a report back. Perhaps we could have a hearing just on that. Those are the points i wanted to make. I want to thank you gentlemen for your testimony today. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator. Thank you for your public service. I want to follow up on the quote that senator graham quoted you with regard to the state department. Are we giving up options that were previously available to us to exercise before we reach an Armed Conflict by a budget that is substantially cutting the state department and other agencies of soft power such as usaid . Sec. Mattis senator nelson i , have not looked in detail at the state department. But i can tell you what is actually being cut and what is being retained. I would have to direct that to secretary tillerson. I am not confident to answer it. Sen. Nelson well i would , suggest that you look at it, because if you are supporting a budget that whacks the state department and usaid, you will know your not only a warrior, you are a diplomat. As a commander who utilizes all of those other agencies of government in projecting your soft power. This is a budget that substantially decreases the state department and usaid. So i understand the sensitivity. You dont want to answer that. But that is going to be something you are going to have to face. Let me ask you something about. Are you satisfied in your statements with regard to the u. S. Support of article v in the nato treaty . Are you satisfied that you have assured our allies that america supports article v . Sec. Mattis i have, sir, and i believe the president has just recently done so from the white house. Was it in his speech and he took it out when he was over there . Sec. Mattis i think he believed was being there, that those actions spoke louder than any words, but he has put it in his speech since then, as you know, in the last couple of days. Sen. Nelson all right, let me ask you about, do you think that the existing sanctions are enough to deter further russian aggression in ukraine and syria . The sanctions against russia. Sec. Mattis sir, it is hard to tell what influences putin. I would think that he is not acting in the best interest of the russian people, and as such, i think that whatever the congress does, as long as it leaves some flexibility to our secretary of state and president as we try to negotiate to get out of this spiral that is going downhill make the point about , where you stand, but leave some flexibility in execution so to those who have to diplomatically engage and try to reverse this. Sen. Nelson would additional economic sanctions against russia help in your opinion . Sec. Mattis i think if they were conditioned on failure of the diplomats to gain some kind of common approach to get out of a jam that russia is putting everyone in. Sen. Nelson thank you. Mr. Chairman. On behalf of senator mccain, senator sullivan, please. Senators sullivan thank you for your service. There has been a lot of discussion today about the budget and the continuing resolution. One of the issues that seems to be forgotten here last year, the , Appropriations Committee voted out of committee almost unanimously on a Defense Budget. Fortunately, it came to the and unfortunately it came to the floor last summer around this time, and it was filibustered. So if we do that again, secretary mattis would that be , helpful to have a Defense Budget that we voted on and then be filibustered . Sec. Mattis i think it would be horrible for our country as well as our troops, sir. Sen. Sullivan i really appreciate your focus on the asiapacific. I know that was your first trip as secretary. Your recent visit to singapore, with the shangrila dialogue i also think was important for a whole host of reasons. Sorry i could not have joined you. I had an event that was even more important than the dialogue which was a High School Graduation of one of my daughters, otherwise i would have been with you. I read your speech and the q a afterwards. I thought it was outstanding. Could use is simply could you singly state policy as it relates to the South China Sea and other areas so our allies and adversaries are aware of it . Sec. Mattis we operate freely in international waters. And we dont accept unilateral inhibitions on the International Waterways and their use or , airways. Sen. Sullivan will we continue to do that on a regular basis with our allies it possible . Sec. Mattis we will with our allies, yes. Sen. Sullivan the uss dewey conducted an ops within 12 nautical miles and a military type operation. According to the press reports, the chinese protested that. What was our response in response to their protest . Sec. Mattis to reiterate that we operate in national waters. Sen. Sullivan i also appreciated your focus on the importance of our allies. You have highlighted that quite well in your shangrila dialogue speech. Can you touch on that again for the committees benefit and the benefit of the American People just how important our allies are not only in the asiapacific but globally in terms of us securing our National Security objectives . Sec. Mattis there is an awful lot of talk about asymmetric advantages and competitive advantages and disadvantages. I would put our allies and alliances from native to the pacific bilateral and multilateral as our asymmetric advantage, especially if you put a list of our allies alongside a list of chinas allies or russias alliances. You can see the proof coming through from history that nations with allies thrive and those without them do not. Sen. Sullivan we are an ally rich nation . And potential adversaries are alliedpoor . Sec. Mattis that is a good way to look at it. Sen. Sullivan we should be working to deepen those alliances, correct . Sec. Mattis absolutely. Sen. Sullivan do you think everyone and the administration gets that and is doing that . Sec. Mattis secretary tillerson and i Work Together exactly on these lines. He leads Foreign Policy. I provide military factors. And buttress his efforts. I also know in terms of Homeland Security, secretary of Homeland Security kelly is working with our closer allies around the hemisphere, but also further out to try to protect the country. I see it being a theme that is being carried forward. Sen. Sullivan maybe a follow up on a couple of questions senator graham asked about north korea. I actually very much appreciated what the president and Vice President did when they invited 100 u. S. Senators to the white house to get a briefing with the president , Vice President and h. R. Mcmaster and all of you. I thought that was very useful, very important. One element i thought was very important was you were trying to get the congress to be supportive of this new strategy. I think as you know, our country , is at its most powerful when the executive branch, legislative branch working together on difficult issues when democrats and republicans , are working closely together on difficult issues. Which is what i thought with the president did that day, bringing everybody over to hear about the strategy firsthand from you and others and general dunford was so important. Is a nuclear icbm armed north korea the most significant threat we face right now as a nation . Sec. Mattis it is certainly in the hands of potential rogue state that we have to consider. Sen. Sullivan the threat is increasing . Sec. Mattis they are learning from it. Sen. Sullivan we need more missiledefense capabilities . Sec. Mattis i believe we can protect the nation but as we look to the future, absolutely. Sen. Sullivan thank you, mr. Chairman. I might have a few followups if there is time. Sen. Peters, please. Sen. Peters i appreciate this very interesting and informative testimony. Secretary mattis, you described rapid technological change as an important force acting on the department. In fact, i believe you highlighted it as one of the four major forces that we have to confront. You and i have had the opportunity in my office to talk about how robotics and autonomous systems, Artificial Intelligence and these systems will fundamentally change warfare in the next 10 years, perhaps much sooner than that. The private sector is leading in many of these developments. For example ford motor company, General Motors both will likely have a production of self driving automobiles in the next four to five years in the marketplace which is sooner than most people realized. Secretary mattis, you stated in your testimony that the fact that much of this technological change will come from the commercial sector may expose it to state competitors and nonstate actors. Im concerned that in recent years china has strategically weaponize investment in joint ventures in the United States as a method of improving its capabilities and obtaining advanced u. S. Technology. The committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is the u. S. Government entity responsible for vetting for an Foreign Investment in the u. S. For National Security risks. Im concerned it is both outdated and overburdened and may not be really up to the challenges we are facing today. Admiral rogers testified last month before this committee that our adversaries understand our structure and its limitations, and some nationstates have actually changed their investment methodology to get around the process we have. My question is to both of you, is there a National Security benefit to taking a tougher line against certain types of investment from nations that pose a clear threat to our National Security like china . Sec. Mattis absolutely, there is. I completely agree with your view that it is outdated and needs to be updated to deal with todays situations. Gen. Dunford i could not agree more, senator. I think the many challenges we look at very carefully, the theft of intellectual property, particularly as it pertains to defense programs is a great concern. If we go through some reforms which im in the process of , working with senator cornyn to do that, are there any specific recommendations you have for us in changing the process . Sec. Mattis let me send you a note that outlines it. I will tell you upfront there is a lack of restrictions on investment in certain types of technology that we must have put in place. I can give you a more inclusive list of where our thinking is at on this, if you give me a couple of days. Sen. Peters thank you so much. That would be very helpful. In closing, given the fact this is one of our major threats we have to face, which is rapid technological change, and the list you put in your opening testimony, are there any particular technologies you are most concerned about and ones we need to be investing more in our own capabilities . This is to both secretary mattis and general dunford. Sec. Mattis let me come back to you again in private. I would prefer these are areas that are very sensitive. I dont want to let our adversaries know which ones we are looking at. We will be explained explaining exactly what we are looking at. Sen. Peters i understand. General, same position . Gen. Dunford absolutely. Sen. Peters i look forward to working with both of you. Thank you. Sen. Mccaskill i know the chairman has mentioned this several times but i think repetition matters in terms of getting this message out to the American People. The president said he was going to have historic increases in defense spending. At one point, the president said he was going to expand the army from 480,000 to 540,000. It is my understanding as the chairman has mentioned that the president s request in military was exactly 3 higher than president obamas. And furthermore, i assume you all agree that it calls for zero additional soldiers, correct . Sec. Mattis that is correct right now. Sen. Mccaskill does he not know that this is not a historic request . Does he not know what i worry about is the American People are being told over and over again we are going to have a really big we are going to fund our military. Our military has a huge increase. The reality is so different than the rhetoric coming out of the white house, mr. Secretary, and i worry the American People will not understand that we have not even begun to do what we need to do in terms of bringing our combat brigades to where they need to be. I hate to sound like a me, too a minime to you, mr. Chairman im worried that there is misrepresentation going on. Sec. Mattis senator, if you look at the 30 billion we asked for to address immediate readiness problems, and i would just call it the situation we have inherited that demands more. We are trying to put together a coherent program on the run while we are engaged overseas, while we have numerous crises unfolding, while we are still getting people through to the senate, nominated to the senate, and get the consent of the senate to get them in. There are a fair number of things going on at one time. That is not to say we should not continue to work along the lines that we are together, but i have to come to you with a coherent plan where i can confidently say the money you throw into this is going to be spent wisely. I did not say we are asking for enough money in this budget. It is a five year program. Sen. Mccaskill i know you are in a difficult position. I just think it does not help our cause in terms of adequately funding our military if the president is giving the country the impression it is. That is the point i was trying to make. In addition to the strategy for afghanistan, im awaiting the strategy on isis which was supposed to be ready 30 days after the president took office. We still do not have that. Finally i want to turn to the strategy on cyber. We spent a lot of time worrying about the russian hacking politicians. Im worried about the russians hacking our military and doing the things they are doing in terms of planting stories and gathering information. Fancy bare, who has been identified as our intelligence and all the Intelligence Experts as one of the premier agents of russia in terms of cyber warfare. The people that fancy bear has targeted outside the former soviet union, 41 of them are either current or former members of the military. According to a recent analysis. Russia hacked the twitter account of central command. We know that russia has coopted a very well known veterans site that was originally began in america. I dont want to give the name of it because it will chase people to the site. It is a russian proxy. The americans were seen in video at a meeting of the folks they are working with in damascus and the big giant oversized pictures must time them behind them were of assad and putin. This is a site asking veterans , ostensibly helping them to find jobs, helping them for cancer treatment. Veterans are getting personal information to this site. We know attractive women are going on facebook. In the old days, you would send a spy into a bar that the military frequented to gain relationships one drink at a time. As this recent article pointed out. But now, they can do it to a facebook page. Are you all hands on deck as it relates to the way military personnel and veterans i know general breedlove they went , after a general. Are you all really paying attention to the corrosive ability of russia to influence our military through direct Contact Group social media with our veterans through these proxy sites . Sec. Mattis i know training is probably the number one way to armour our people against this sort of thing. And training is perishable. It has to be ongoing. I have no complacency about this. I will see if the chairman has anything to offer, but i just point out that we have funded Cyber Command. This. We have got all sorts of things going on with nsa. They keep us posted with protections and firewalls in place. The block a number of times malicious malware being used where we were not affected. That was because we were lucky, we were throwing obstacles in the path and building firewalls as fast as we could. Since all you can do is stay ahead of these. You cannot build one and say i can go home now. Training and constant attention to the protective measures, i can guarantee you is ongoing. I am briefed weekly on this. The brief itself is pages long as i look at the various blocks and countermeasures we are putting in place and what we are finding about what various actors are up to. Anything else . Seendo believe and i have the Service Chiefs in particular had really changed the command climate with regard to cyberspace. In violations of the particles protocols with our Information Technology holding , people accountable. As the secretary said, it is about training and also about accountability. I think our culture of accountability with regard Information Technology has changed a great deal. I also think with the support of congress, are cyber capabilities, we continue to need to grow them. They have grown a bit. 133 Cyber Mission teams you all have approved, 70 are fully operational capable. I think if we had this conversation 36 months ago, we would be talking about getting out of the gate. Now 70 are fully operational. In the coming months we will have 133 of those teams and continue to identify requirements to make sure we can stay out in front of the threat. But i think the secretary used the word complacency. The fundamental question is do we get it and our changing the culture and taking effective action to deal with the threat . I think we have significantly changed the culture and none of us believe we are where we need to be. Sen. Mccaskill one of the things that worry me the most in this article i read was there was a purported story of a russian source in syria and the way he had died which was died fighting isis and it spread like wildfire to troops in various places. We have seen an uptick in the popularity, the Approval Rating of in this country. In this country. I worry they are really insidiously trying to insert combat related stories that reflect favorably on russian soldiers when they may not even be true. It is infecting our troops with maybe less than a clear eye than about what russia is and what they are trying to do. I just wanted to put this on the record. Sec. Mattis this is understood throughout nato. The german minister of defense was explaining to me how one of their soldiers deployed to lithuania was alleged to have raped a lithuanian girl. Here comes the german soldier, i completely made up story trying to undercut the cohesion of nato. Im just pointing out this is a military problem. It is accepted as a military problem and we are working it. But i think we have a long ways to go up against this rather imaginative enemy we have. Sen. Mccain i have some additional questions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I wanted to followup on the north korea discussion briefly. Mr. Secretary, general dunford, i know youre korean war history buffs. I heard you talk about the korean war. Yesterday in your house Armed Services testimony general , dunford you talked about potential conflict on the Korean Peninsula. Seoul residents would face casualties unlike anything we have seen in the key or 70 years. General millie had a similar testimony a couple weeks ago before this committee about what a conflict on the Korean Peninsula could be like. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned the rapidly developing threat that the North Koreans present in terms of an intercontinental Ballistic Nuclear missile. And a senator grahams question you stated it was the policy of , the Trump Administration to prevent them from getting that capability. I think you have strong support from most members of the committee on that. But it certainly seems those two issues are going to start colliding here relatively soon. And, i know there is a lot of ways to prevent them from getting that kind of capability. Left of launch kind of activities, but if one of those ways was a decision to take some preemptive military action, i believe that would clearly trigger Congress Article i of authority with regard to declaring war and you would need this bodys authority to take such action. Do you agree with that or has that been a discussion in the Trump Administration . It is a very big issue that i i am not sure has gotten enough attention. Sec. Mattis i have not brought that issue to the president s attention. From maralago where the president met with his counterpart, to secretary tillerson and i, who will be following up with our counterparts in two weeks in washington as we have Strategic Security dialogs. We are doing everything we can to avoid resorting to war in terms of protecting ourselves and our allies. Sen. Sullivan i think its an issue of that should be on somebodys radar screen. Not that we want that, but part of what the president has been trying to do is get the congress to be supportive of his policy, like i mentioned. That is why i thought the briefing of the white house a few months ago which was useful. But to continue to have that support, we need to be involved. I think that is something this committee needs to be caucus in cognizant of but also the , white house as well. Let me ask one final question. In the past six weeks, the russians have sent bomber missions off the coast of alaska that has been intercepted by our f22s five times in the last six weeks. What do you think the russians are up to with this kind of very persistent checking of our norad systems it is a pretty active engagement. Last time it was with fighter escorts. What do you think they are trying to do in the arctic and what are they trying to achieve and why are they so active up there . Sec. Mattis sir, im not sure what they are trying to achieve there. When you look at the combination of their Cyber Threats to democracies, when you look at what they are doing in syria, the bare bombers, as you put this these activities together, it is very concerning. We are going to have to turn this around. This cycle has got to be turned around. I think it is going in the wrong direction in terms of stability and peace. This is where miscalculations can occur. Thank you. Sen. Mccain i think the thank the witnesses for their patience and responses. I want to emphasize again, mr. Secretary, it is not your fault. It is not yours, general dunford, but we are not going to sit still while you settle these strife that is going on that is preventing the strategy from coming forward. We are moving forward with the authorization, with appropriation, and without strategy, it makes our job 10 times harder. I think we have been pretty patient with you. Were going to start putting pressure on because we need a strategy. To sit here in june 13, 2017 and say, dont worry, we will be coming forward with a strategy coming forward with a strategy. Things are happening to rapidly in the world. You have my greatest respect and admiration, but we are not doing the job for the American People that they expect us to do. So, it is what it is. I thank the witnesses and i thank you for being here. The meeting is adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [crowd noise] just a dunford speaks tomorrow about political threats in the state of the military, including the latest strategy for combating isis and other terrorist groups. That is live from the National Press club at 1 00 em eastern here on cspan. Recently on cspan new orleans mayor Mitchell Andrew on the removal of the robert e. Lee statue. To lay out the reason why the statues were corrected in the first place. Why we are taking them down and do from w we can the angel battles that have survived for so long. And because of new orleans role in the dark period of our history, we were one of the countrys largest slave markets, i felt i and other people in the city had a special responsibility to help our nation continue to move through racial discord. Risk of architect Mariska Hargatay at a task force for ending sexual violence. To hear the stories the derailed, these lives the way the lights go off track. These are not kits on a shelf. These are peoples lives sitting on a shelf, getting the real. Children getting derailed of what this life is supposed to be. I was on this track. They cant even make sense of is happening to me. We have been living perpetrators andy not testing these kits saying we dont care about this issue. Senator rand paul on the proposed arms sales to saudi arabia. We will discuss something even more important than an arms sale. We will discuss whether we should be actively involved. Should the United States the actively involved with refueling the saudi planes . With picking targets . With having advisers on the ground . Should we be at war in yemen . Cspan programs are available at cspan. Org. Right on the homepage or searching the video library. Cspan, newsmakers is next with democratic congressman tim walz of minnesota. Then former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on his new book understanding trump, an indepth look at the president s life experiences. Then later, part one of our interview with david garrow,s latest biography focuses on the early life and article career of former president barack obama. Greta this week, congressman tim walz, the top democrat on the House Veterans Affairs committee talking about the legislative agenda for veterans issues. Congressman walz is the highestranking enlisted soldier ever to serve in congress joining us this morning. In studio with us is conor obrien of politico, and Kellie Mejdrich of cq roll call. Welcome and good morning to all of you. Kellie thank you so much for being here with us