Dunford testify before the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee on military readiness in the upcoming fiscal years budget. This is one hour and 45 minutes. Cochran the subcommittee on defense appropriations to the United States senate will come to order. Today we are receiving an update on military readiness and Defense Budget matters we are pleased to welcome to the committee the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Fiscal year 2017 department of defense appropriations agreement otheren approved by the body, the house of representatives. I look forward to completing the work of that bill in the coming weeks. We are well into the fiscal year and members of the subcommittee understand that legislation as we complete our work of the 2017 appropriation agreement, we also recognize request for additional appropriations fiscal year 2017 that has been submitted to congress. We welcome comments from the panel as well as the submission for 2018. It is an honor judge the secretary of defense before us with his first appearance as secretary. I am pleased to welcome back to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff before the committee. With the forward to hearing more about your priorities to increase military readiness to strengthen the department of defense. And now i turn to the vice for any, senator durban remarks he has. Sen. Durbin i am pleased to to welcome secretary mattis in general the referred i have respect for both the outstanding leaders in give special welcome to the first testified for the subcommittee. We have been at war 16 years in the total can be measured in many ways. More than 6,900 americans have given their lives in iraq and afghanistan more than 52,000 wounded. Clinics and hospitals serving 2. 5 million veterans from these wars. Taxpayers have provided 1. 8 trillion dollars to support the men women for continue to serve. I have four concerns. First, the proposal appears to do very little to restore readiness of armed forces in the short term. Congress has already address 5 billion it requested funds in the pending defense appropriations bill. Of the remaining funding only billion is for nearterm training and maintenance. In addition we are not being told this package will accelerate the timeline for the services to recover their readiness. The 5 billion in overseas Contingency Operations funding is being requested without a strategy to support it in fact, the president s new counter isil strategy may not be presented to congress until may of this year. Secretary mattis, general dunford i hope you can provide insights on what the strategy may be. What are we getting ready for . What are the priorities . Thats not a hard question. Its an important question if we were being asked to appropriate this money. In short its a Readiness Package the Department Says readiness and a request disconnected from strategy. Third, the administrations package or poses 18 billion in cuts to nondefense programs to offset the increased military spending. The administration has provided no detail on these cuts but we all know whats on the chopping block. The white house is already proposing extremely reckless cuts to agencies like the state department for the next year which would jeopardize our nations ability to deal with crises without resorting to arms wish the white house would listen to the that then general jim mattis when he was on the state department in 2013 as the command of u. S. Central command. General mattis stated quote if you dont fund the state department fully than i need to buy more ammunition ultimately end of quote. The harm of go well beyond hurting our National Security. Some of the cuts could cut into medical research, something that many of us on the panel feel very strongly about. Education and everything in between. Our armed armed forces depend on a healthy welleducated American Workforce to sign up and serve our country. Cutting these programs will ultimately shrink the pool of americans to conserve our military making these proposals today in the longterm very shortsighted. Finally the administration does nothing about sequestration. If congress enacted this package tomorrow as it is, omb has submitted it, it would trigger an immediate acrosstheboard sequestration and military programs. Can you believe that . More money triggering a cut . Omb is asking to spend more than the law allows for defense but it didnt ask for us to change this underlying mendacious sequestration law. Omb is asking to spend more than the law allows and we need to do something about it. Previous demonstrations demonstrate freak administrations did not thisuently, but administration. President chose proposal is in complete and it really doesnt address this issue in a serious way. Mr. Secretary general dunford we recognize there are holes in our armed forces that need to be fixed and i hope you will further your testimony to explain these. Congress needs to know what you think is the spending package that needs to be passed to consider problems with this proposal cuts to domestic and diplomatic spending the life of the new counter isil strategy of funding for increased training and the lack of any fixed sequestration. Appears congress may need to consider significant changes and as i close im in the judiciary hitting on the hearing with the Supreme Court nominee and i will be on the docket in just a few minutes, so excuse me if im gone. I promise to return. Thank you senator. Welcome to the committee. Witnesses we appreciate your being here. We will now hear from the secretary of defense james mattis. Chairman cochran vice chairman durbin distinguished senators i appreciate the opportunity to testify today in support of the president s request for additional funding and any other matters of interest to the committee. Mr. Chairman i request the committee except my statement for the record. Thank you, sir. As you know the president has committed to strengthening our military. The security situation facing our country has become more challenging. The looming threats about stripped the level of resources we have been allocating to defense. We in the departments are keenly aware of the sacrifices made by the American People and the form of the additional 30 billiondollar budget requests. We take seriously the responsibility to spend wisely this money to enhance the protection of our nation against burgeoning threats. We also recognize that hesitation now to invest in defense with deep in the strategic mismatch between our future security and the military means to protect our people and freedoms. Our military must ensure that the president and the diplomats always negotiate from a position of strength. Global threats require a global response, applying the full weight of our allies power. Allies which are also increasing their defense outlays. Diplomatic solutions will remain our preferred options but we cannot deny the role of our military in setting the conditions for diplomatic progress. Military deterrence is only credible if military strength is sufficiently formidable so allies can confidently align with us and tempering adversaries designs. We must look reality in the eye. We see russia and china seeking veto power over the economic diplomatic and security decisions of nations in our periphery. Terrorist groups murder the innocent and threaten peace in many regions and target us. North koreas reckless rhetoric and provocative actions continue despite United Nations censure and sanctions. This situation calls for a department to make a safe and secure Nuclear Deterrent and a decisive conventional force that can also fight for regular enemies since our military must be able to counter all threats facing us. Im here today to request your support for the additional 30 billiondollar request for fy 17. John dunford and i will outline what this additional funding will do for our Nations Defense the reason we are appearing here cannot be considered in isolation. While some might rip prefer larger amounts several compelling factors convinced us to limit the request. It is late in this fiscal year and the 30 billion is the number we believe that we can execute responsibly. In concert with this budget request we must also have continuity of effort that is not possible under another continuing resolution. Only in fy17 appropriations bill can permit us to spend the american taxpayer money judiciously and start us on the long road back to military readiness and ensure we can fight effectively. I must know their specific readiness gaps across our forces in closed session so as not to embolden our enemies. The request before he represents the first that in a threephase multiyear effort to restore readiness. Phase one is this years budget appropriation including the 30 billiondollar request for additional appropriations for fy 2017. To get our aircraft back in the air, our ships back to see in our troops back in the field with refurbished or new equipment and proper training. We base this request on a realistic appreciation of the capacity we need to fight and win on the battlefield. Phase two starts with our fy2018 budget request to balance the defense program. This funding will allow us to acquire capabilities we do not have or cannot execute this fiscal year and will allow us to adapt to the changing character of war by providing cyber space and Electronic Warfare capabilities. Phase three looks beyond 2018 and it will work with the congress in this committee to integrate our fy2019 to 23 budget within a coherent strategy. To ensure our strategy is fit for its time we have initiated the Defense Strategy review directed by this congress to reimagine our Strategic Concepts in all areas and we will complete the review by this fall to ensure a new framework informs our longterm planning. I know we will have to make hard choices. With the help of the congress i believe we can build a force that is more lethal without placing undue burden on the american economy. This will require sustained commitment from the congress in the form of additional funding and regular ontime budgets. Thank you for your strong support for ensuring our troops have the resources and equipment they need to fight and win on the battlefield. I pledge to collaborate closely with you for the defense of our nation and to keep our armed forces in check and i will welcome your questions. Thank you general. Thank you mr. Secretary. General, Joseph Dunford chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is here today. We welcome you and ask you to make any opening statement. Senate chairman cochran Ranking Member durbin distinguished members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to join general mattis in appearing before you and chairman nye have also submitted a written statement and requested he set for the record. Tonight he will be credited to will be credited to the record. Im honored to represent human women in uniform is because of our soldiers sailors airmen and marines in your support that i can begin this morning by saying with confidence that your joint forces cant defend the homeland and our way of life and meet reliance commitment to maintain an overall competitive it ended over any potential adversary. Thats an important point to begin with an appointed shouldnt be lost on our first series are allies partners or the American People. However when we have a competitive advantage to the sustained operational commitment budget to instability and it is important we reverse that trend. Helps address our most urgent nearterm readiness concerns, addressing personnel shortfalls, resourcing training and him proving maintenance. It also allows us to fill holes in our deploying units. Yearng forward in fiscal 2018 and beyond, funding will be required to fully recover readiness, balance our inventory of capability is and maintain our competitive advantage. Thank you again for the opportunity to talk to this morning and i look forward to your questions. Thank you for your statement. Ourme ask you about timeline and what are the pressures we face in bringing this bill to the attention of all of our members of the committee and the senate. Theour judgment, what is impact, this is for both of you. What is the impact if congress additionalprove the 5. 1 billion for overseeing these Contingency Operations . Would you have the funding flexibility to conduct an accelerated counterisis height for example . Chairman, obviously we will keep the forces in the field at the top of their capability. A military only obligation, it is a moral obligation and we can continue the fight. The problem is it would eat our readiness and deepen the whole we are in, leaving us in a worse situation that will cost us more to get out of in the future. We have done this for several years where we continue to maintain the operational tempo but without the backdrop of sufficient readiness funding to keep the forces back here at home at the top of their game. It is worsening as we go on. Thingsink there are two we look to do moving forward. One is to accelerate our campaign. The other is to seize opportunities. Willaving the money restrict our ability to accelerate the campaign. We will lose flexibility. A secretary mattis said, we make sure this men and women who deploy have the wherewithal to accomplish the mission but we will not have the flexibility we need for a very dynamic enemy. Secretary, what is your assessment of the russian aggression europe and the toestments that we will need reassure our european allies of our abilities to function . Chairman, russia has decided to become a strategic competitor with us and as i mentioned in my try to statement to achieve a Veto Authority over the diplomatic economic insecurity interests of the nations along their periphery. So what weve got to do is ensure that the Nato Alliance stands united, and it stands on ambiguously 4 00 a. M. Unified response unified unambiguously response to any mischief they are causing inside elections in europe that are ongoing. If we do not have the funding to maintain the reassurance in initiative, then frankly the reassurance goes away. It is as if we are denying a reality that has been pretty revealed was over the past several years so i strongly endorse the European Initiative and i noticed the Nato Alliance has reversed its funding and overall the funding has risen for the first time this last year, so they are also online to maintain their level of commitment. Im going to recognize the distinguished member. Thank you mr. Chairman. I asked my staff to explain this to be twice because i wanted to make sure i understood it. Im to the budget control act, if we give you if we give you 25 billion more than the department of defense and the supplemental control act, the department will allow the department of defense to do a 25 across the board cut to make up for that 25 billion being sent to you. That of course makes no sense whatsoever. I cant imagine you would want to go through that exercise. My question to you is this, did you consult with omb before this supplemental request was made to congress . Senator, we consulted extensively with them on our requirements. The mechanism for how to actually address this is as you point out, complicated. And, you would take no issue with how you characterize the budget control act with an effect twos sequestration. I am aware of it. It is not something i can give you a solution for from my position that the executive branch of the department of defense but i share your assessment and i technology with how you characterize it. Thank you mr. Secretary, do not lay me for this. This is ombs job. I dont know why they are playing this game. They knew to waive the budget control act if they truly want to provide more money for the safety and security of the if they dont,nd dont know why were wasting our time at this hearing. Freezey, this hiring announced by the president affects the civilian workers of the department defense. We are under arrest we estimate there are some hundred 42,000 and stop and on january 23, 2017, President Trump ordered a hiring freeze of the federal civilian workforce at the department of defense. How has this hiring freeze impacted the departments a twoday operations . What impact does it have on the resources you have available when it comes to investments you need are necessary for National Defense . Are we hiring contractors to avoid this freeze . Senator, we are not right now hiring contractors. That would violate the spirit of the president s order, however i have been given and i have passed delegated liberal exceptions authorities, waivers, frankly, in order to keep shipyard workers, airport depot workers on the job. Everything right down to daycare workers said that our troops can drop their kids off and the on time for work. Weve had to do a rather liberal waiver policy in order to address this and it has kept us of i know that hiring freeze is a great headline. Hiring freezeto a in the department of defense at the same time were being told to give three 5 million because we need more resources to get ready to protect america, does not work. The civilian employees are an important part of our National Defense. Im glad youve been giving these exceptions. I hope you dont turn to dramatically more expensive contractors to fill in the voids. When i went to europe a month poland and ukraine, they are very worried. They were encouraged by statement she made and statements by Vice President pence in munich that seem to theirhem some relief and belief that nato was still alive and well. Talked about russian adventurism or however you characterized it, and they live it every day. They can look across the border at the planned military exercise in september of troops and see some real threats to the orders of the countries i just named to you. I want to know why in your request, there is not money also being set aside, more money being set aside for the European Reassurance Initiative . Senator, we prioritize for what we could execute this year. As you know, there are four framework nato nations in the United States, canada, germany, etc. That are actually mounting someorced combat teams to of the nations you visited. Latvia. Used on you. Take care of any further adventurism by russia. This is a time when miscalculations can occur and we want to make sure moscow does not miscalculate and we believe the right kind of firm, unified action out of vessels that allows us to send a clear, unambiguous message to the russians. Thank you very much. I know recognize the distinguished senator from alabama. Secretary, wemr. Just have a few minutes here. Sum up ourriefly strategic challenges and our challenges asymmetrically and how do we meet them . You are in the right committee and we have had a history of support in the defense and i believe we will here. I think the American People really need to know the challenges that you face as our secretary of defense. Sir i think the most important issue i deal with is how do we keep the highquality force allvolunteer force fully capable of carrying out its responsibilities. The strategic challenges i would lay them out in a couple of different packages. One is where we have great powers, russia and china, very different powers adopting different modes but challenging the International Situation such as we have put together to create an environment for peace and prosperity. You see it with both of their efforts to revoke or veto the security, the economic diplomatic interests of nations on their periphery. In russia we see it with little green men passing out passports to russian speaking people in other countries and undercutting democratic processes in the south china sea. We have seen china shredding trust as they adopt the tribune tribute nation cant approach where all other nations have to pay tribute or acquiescence to the more powerful and larger nations. We also see in the case of north korea and iran a proliferation issue, one that has been delayed in iran that we see the reckless behavior north of the dmz on the korean peninsula. Then we deal with the terrorist threat and we are going to be dealing this with this for a long time to come. That would be a thumbnail how is he the strategic challenges sir. What about the cyber challenge . Something weve got to get our hands on. Cyber cuts across all three aspects of warfighting predicts Nuclear Command and control and conventional warfighting and regular warfighting, Space OperationsCyber OperationsElectronic Warfare. These things are inherent to everything we do today. General but if we got to do to keep all of our troops and when i say all, combat ready meaning flexibility and you mentioned this earlier but you also need resources, do you not . We do senator and their new things this Budget Commission needs to get after the first of all we have to use our equipment at a higher level than we have planned so we need to maintain it and one of the other critical areas we need is ammunition. You will begin to see the services add people to reduce the stress i spoke about. We really do have many of our people that are home an equal amount of time for the time they are deployed. I visited one u. S. Navy ship last september. They were underway in the previous 12 months, 70 of the time. Thats an indicator parts of the force are running arden. The other thing senator and we have asked for this equipment in this particular situation some cases we no longer have the equipment to maintain so there are shadows. Him in addition to resources to maintain the equipment that we have and get the spare parts up to where they need to be have the ammunition we need to continue to respond we actually need to replace equipment and we see that particular in the case of the aviation enterprise where units have fewer aircraft. That creates two problems. One is they dont have what they need to go to war, the others that dont have sufficient aircraft to train so our pilots have degraded readiness as a result of not having sufficient aircraft. Is the bottom line, we cant be accountable to the American People on the cheap . We have got to pay for, do we not secretary . Well, we do, senator shelby and bottom line is the United States can afford survival. My priorities going into the department are to strengthen the American Military, strengthen our allies and the full burden is being carried by the american taxpayer the american troops and to reform the Business Practices so i can come in front of you and confidently say we are spending the money that you are giving the American People are giving us in a responsible way. We cant do it on the cheap but we also owe you an audit of the Defense Department and we also owe you some very strong internal process to make certain we are not wasting money. For your testimony today. One of the points i make about sequestration is that it does not trigger the cap but once exceeded, your ability to move money around even into oak oh could be limited. Those two factors on specified plus a giving and taking because of no attempt is made to deal with the issue sequestration does not undermine your credibility but it undermines the proposal in terms of credibility and seriousness. One of the issues that you have made very clear, you suggest that not suggested, but directed these programs to be executable in this very short window, from now until october 1. What specific benchmarks did you give in terms of executable . Sir, we had to analyze what we could get under contract and appropriately not just throw money at the problem but monitor to make sure it turned into a readiness result. We had specific benchmarks. For example i think we will double the number of Deployable Army brigades a top level of readiness. We got into that level of detail to make sure that we walk away if you supported we will deliver a readiness that helps us should we have to fight. And this question is for both the gentlemen and yourself. There are some things that stick out in terms of readiness, flying hours, parts and equipment for platforms that you already have and then new platforms . Can you give us an idea of where that line is between nearterm readiness, flying hours versus longerterm that we have to build a force up which will take a year or more to recruit. Sir, thanks. At the point now and in my judgment we have different modernization that in some ways a distinction without a disk between flat hours anew equipment. Ive asked for examples of wide we need new helicopters and f18s and how do i explain to the committee that these are directly related to readiness . What you find is a sqadron on the air station that has ten aircraft only as five readiness squadron. You cannot go to war with five of ten aircraft. But you can give the pilots the right level of training that has two effects. One of readiness affected to come over time it is a morale issue. We see the same thing with helicopters in the army. What i think were seeing now is the result of the last five or six years i have a broader different definition of readiness. What actions are necessary to make units home to allow them to be combat effective and deployable. Its a combination of not only maintaining equipment, and addressing the shortfall, but actually replacing shadows in a ramp where equipment is not physically exist in the unit at material position that allows us to deploy. Both of those actions are necessary now in 2017. I think the consequences of not addressing in 2017 as we dont realize the effect continues what were doing the last several years which is pushing to the right the readiness recovery. Some of these will not realize a notsome of these will realize a readiness benefit until 2018 or 20. If we dont take the action it will just become 2021 or 22. Thank you. I think we do all appreciate the readiness challenge after more than a decade at war and constant effort and we want to address those. We have these huge issues of whats to pay for in terms of the team billiondollar domestic spending but are we really going to pay for this. Frankly we have been at war for now 16 years and we havent devoted any revenue to pay for military performance or personnel et cetera. Which is usually complicated challenging and could end up taking as much as it gives you. Time has expired. Thank you mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary general, let me begin by thanking you both for your lifelong commitment of service to our country. It is much appreciated. The navy recently updated its of Structure Assessment goal to 355 ships which is a significant increase from the previous goal to address the increasingly complex military threat facing our nation today. In addition, there have been other independent studies by the center for strategic and budgetary assessments that have also recommended significant increases. Following up on the concerns raised by my colleagues, what the impact does the budget control act have on the ability of the department to fulfill the president s promise to build the larger fleet that the navy and these other independent studies have found to be necessary . Senator collins, i can find nothing in the budget control act that helps our National Security, and you brought up one of the direct impacts. It is all negative. I believe it also sidelights the congress. I think it puts you in a spectator role when we need you in an oversight role in the department because it is your knowledge of what were doing and understand the strategy that allows you to commit american dollars to the defense of this country. Now we are all watching this near senseless approach to budgeting. It goes on automatic pilot and mute saying there there is no way you can dignify. We are going to build more ships and have a bigger strategy in the future. Right now, it does not help us at all. It hurts us in terms of readiness and in terms of longterm capability to defend the country. Thank you, completely agree with you. It is an application of responsibility, i hope it is something that whatever the administration does our committee deals with and the congress deals with. General, maine is home to the public shipyard and its been called the Gold Standard which we are very proud of. That shipyard and all of our Public Shipyards have major infrastructure needs to prevent significant negative impacts to fleets readiness and operational availability over the next 30 years. Its my understanding the navy is developing a plan for shipyard recapitalization. Could you give us some sense of when we can expect to receive that plan . I think you know personally that we have made several trips to your state to fully appreciate this infrastructure that we spoke about that we all realize that the strength of our shipyards is going to be linked to the ability of what you spoke about which is not only to grow the fleet but to sustain the fleet that we have. I know theyre focused on doing this as soon as possible but i would like to get back to you for the record on when he expects to complete the study but weve had several conversations and i assure you but the acting secretary we are making sure our shipyards have the wherewithal to support the growth of the navy and maintenance that we have in its one priority. Thank you. General, International Partners and allies on the f35 program play a Critical Role in helping to drive down the cost of that aircraft as well as ensuring interoperability with their nato allies. Could you tell us where the Program Stands with our International Partners and can you quantify the role that you play in reducing the overall cause of the f35 for our government. Senator, i cannot quantify exactly the cost difference as a result of allies and partners. But i can state before the committee that there is a significant advantage to a Foreign Military size and driving down the cost to the United States. I can also talk to, we reviewed our National Strategy over the past year and one of the key questions we asked is what is the source of strength for the United States military. The first source of strength was a network of allies and partners that we have developed over the past 70 years. A key element is interoperability, commonality of parts and equipment so that we can when necessary have integrate our capabilities for the flight. So making sure most capable partners have access to the f35 and that we include them in Foreign Military sales is critical. Thank you mr. Chairman. The senators time has expired. I recognize the senator from new mexico. Thank you so much mr. Chairman and secretary mattis and general dunford. Thank you for your time and your service. I have submitted additional question for you for the record on some of the military basic issues in mexico and we hope that you will give us timely answer there questions that are important to me. I wanted to focus on one of the issues that senator durbin brought up in terms of the war in iraq and the war in syria. The president is asking congress for defense supplemental appropriation for fiscal year 2017 and a significant increase in 2018. I want to discuss this in the context of our current war. In the last couple of weeks American People have read public reports that additional marines and other u. S. Forces have been deployed to syria, up to 1000 troops. The American People are being told theyre there to help counter isil, to paraphrase st. Thomas aquinas, one of the first and most important requirements to wage a just war is that it must be ordered by a legitimate authority. Alexander hamilton and other founders argued strenuously to ensure the power was granted to Congress Rather the the executive to prevent the risky overseas ventures. The responsibility to make decisions on warm pieces of one of the most important powers given to congress under the constitution. When the war iraq war began we wear an invasion force that required an authorization for military force from the congress. Fourteen years later, we still have the United States forces in iraq serving in a train and assist role and they have been invited by the Iraqi Government to support its efforts to counter isil. In the 2003 invasion of iraq required in au mf specific to iraq. But in syria, the u. S. Has not been invited by the government. U. S. Military vehicles and heavy artillery have been seen in syria. Its easy to argue the United States is effectively invaded northern syria, violating the 17 of a country in the middle east which is a de facto declaration of war. Secretary mattis, are you concerned that congress has not approved and aumf specific to syria, granting the president the legal power to invade syria . Senator, i would not characterize it as an invasion. I do not want to spend time on that aspect. I think we have to play the ball where it lies right now. The clear and present danger of isis that bulldozed the in their supposedly geographic caliphate and actually remove the border between the two nations was a reality in terms of the word that we had to deal with we cannot draw that imaginary line in the midst of an enemy and say on one side hes safe and on the other side we can take them on. I think that what we have got to do is look at this changing character of the enemy threats. I would take no issue with the Congress Stepping forward within aumf. I think it would be a statement of the American Peoples resolve if you did so. I thought the same thing for the last several years. Add, ive not understood why the congress have not come forward with a debate ive dealt with the enemy for many years. Patronize them, they mean every word they say. In light of that, the elected commanderinchief, about the last administration and Current Administration have a duty to protect the American People and what we stand for from this enemy. Thank you very much. General dunford, do you have a comment on that . I do. We have been participating in several reviews of this issue. What we do assist is to have the Legal Authority to do what were doing and military force provided in the wake of 911. I agree with the secretary. Not only would it be a sign of the American Peoples resolve, but truly our men and women would benefit from an authorization of force that would let the American People know that the congress was fully supportive of what theyre doing putthere every day as tthey harms way. N thank you very much. I have additional questions on what you would recommend in terms of limitations so i will submit those for the record. Thank you senator. The distinguished senator from missouri. Thank you chairman. General dunford and secretary mattis both, i want to talk about airplanes for a minute. We talked about aircraft carriers, thats an important part of being ready. You have to have enough planes of those aircraft carriers and i see in the supplemental that the need to be addressed by being sure we have Pilot Training time and maintenance hours, but also we have to have a line of lanes coming along with that. Just a response may be on how important it is you have both the equipment and the training time that you need. Senator, the super hornet, the ones that we are requesting that they need to have in order to fight, but ultimately well have a mix of Super Hornets and so the carrier decks so this not only contributes to immediate readiness, it contributes to the longerterm readiness of keeping the carrier air wings fully capable. I think they committee has been effective for a while and making those planes available. As i have talked to you about it , if you really want them its in protest for them and not say heres what we would like to have. Were not asking for it because were sure youll get a force anyway. But seen that line stay open is important and allows the growler plane thats part of any future a bill that we had in our Defense Authorization bill last year, it will would address the needs of families when someone is being reassigned to create not just the option you might be able to get the way your family could stay longer at the post you are currently at or go a little earlier, but actually a requirement that if the person serving was willing to deal with their own amount of expense to either go early or stay that the family would have an option that they dont have. I know you believe that families are the backbone of the military. Im hoping that come if we get legislation, theres no cost, the way that bill is currently written because, again, the person serving makes the decision they can either find quarters available to a single individual, as their family moves earlier or they can find quarters similarly available if they move earlier or they simply decide its important my family be able to isy until my spouses job transitioned properly come i kids finish this year of school or the reverse of that, that they do that. , weow you in general mattis talked about that and youre encouraging of support of the kind of change. I would like you both to talk about that. We had a good talk in your office. We went back and checked on it. It is not budget neutral because of entitlements. We may need to have legislative relief, which i am fully committed to doing. So we dont have to run two different payments to the person maintaining two different households. Why we needain legislative relief and i have staff researching it now. Agreementn complete with the program. Its just how we do it in your view and budget neutral. To budgete well get neutral. Story. Dunford, a quick i was holding a breakfast two years ago when i filed this bill. Table and at a mentioned i filed this bill. Every one of them had a story when this would have made an incredible difference of the family. Having maneuvered in excess of my spouses employment and education, i do appreciate what youre trying to do. Without talking about the specific challenges of this piece of legislation, allowing the services to have the flexibility would be helpful i would have full support. Thank you chairman. The senators time is expired. I recognize the distinguish senator from vermont. Thank you mr. Chairman. Secretary mattis, the first time to play secretary not general. Nice to have you here. General, my schoolmate, we were different years but we both have degrees from Saint Michael and georgetown. I know in vermont theyre excited that you will be coming to st. Michaels next month, no, in may. I want to put my statement on the record, i note that since 2012, the sequestration law has forced congress to an budget cuts in both defense and nondefense. It will have consequences for a generation. Today, only one third of combat units are ready to be deployed. For two years in a row, the navy has faced shortfalls in excess of 700 million in maintenance which are in critical maintenance is being canceled. But sequestration has produced terrible consequences for the average american as well. And infrastructure is failing. Employment is down, Education Funding lakes behind. That impacts National Security too. Failing infrastructure in the minds of National Security and in our electric grid, we cut money and nutrition, education, and research. That hurts us. It cripples our ability to provide our Armed Services with the men and women they need in the future. Reduce funding for medical research, disease prevention makes us less safe. And slashing nondefense programs to pay for these is not a solution. It is not solving the mission of the department of defense. Prefersident says he hard power to soft power. But soft power is not week or wasteful. Cutting programs worldwide that feed millions, prevent aids, treat tuberculosis, all of the things we do worldwide, we cut that it makes the world less stable. It makes your job more difficult. Mr. Secretary, you have said that if we do not fully from the do not fully fund the state department, we should be prepared to buy more ammunition for the military. I dont think that is a trade you want to make, not a trade i want to make. Let me ask this, we know that not not all National Security comes from pod. From dod. We have to have Strong Economy and a healthy population to be secure. Could you both speak about why Strong Economy is essential to maintaining a Strong Military . What about nonmilitary power such as diplomacy or development . What does that play interNational Security . Senator, the engine for National Security has always been our economy. A Strong Economy equates to a Strong Military in history is compelling. Nations that did not keep their fiscal house in order and their economy strong lost their military power. Im here addressing the readiness issue when i came back to the department in my current role that is severe. That is why am here today fighting for this budget edition. The addition 30 billion which goes to readiness. In my role to keep the president , secretary of state and diplomats negotiating from a position of strength is an obligation i carry. I dont take issue with the way you have characterized the budget sequestration or effective sequestration on all or the effect of sequestration on all of our spending. I would add that we are aware of the sacrifices made by the American People and the other departments in terms of providing the military budget we are getting. You a good audit and gain your confidence that your spending that money wisely. Right now i want to make sure that we have our diplomats in a position of strength to negotiate in this increasingly perilous world. Also met for the record and also asked to submit a number of questions for the record. We recognize the senator from montana. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you for your service, as a son of a marine my dad is very proud that i get to be in the same room with both of you and thank you for your leadership and service. Secretary mattis, i want to welcome you as your first hearing. I want to invite you to come to i want to invite you to come to montana to visit airf orce base. Youll see firsthand the hard work our airmen are doing to keep men free and at the ready. Many agree it has been neglected over the past eight years. Budget submissions have challenge the status quo and cause it to refocused on what matters the most and that is keeping americans safe. As you know, therefore space is home to one third of our nations icbms. Most of the missiles have been in service for almost 50 years. Airmen have diligently maintained this aging system. We must have a modern groundbased strategic deterred deterrent in order to meet 21st century strategic challenges. Some argue that modernizing is too expensive but as pointed out the entire Nuclear Triad counts for just 6 of the total ten year budget for National Defense. How value do you consider a fully mandate Nuclear Deterrent deterrent in your arsenal to keep america safe . The need for a Nuclear Deterrent to ensure those weapons are never used requires a triad. To determine what level of triad to determine what level of triad must be at, we have a Nuclear Review getting underway. I would tell you, the landbased leg of the triad, the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile is a sobering reminder of any enemy that would choose to test us. We could soak up a lot of their Nuclear Weapons in order to take out a single one of those silos. As a result, its a stabilizing influence to have the icbm force fully capable and its deterrent role. One of my favorite commander coins comes is scaring the hell out of americas enemies since 1962. Im proud of the work they do to keep the world safe. Continuing on nuclear deterrence. Im concert therefore says no o im concerned the is no closer to replacing our vietnam he weighs and it was when i met with secretary james last year. As a result they operate inadequate equipment another year. If the air force gives the increase that you requested, when might we expect to see a new and more capable helicopter deployed missile fields . I anticipate the vietnam era heelys will be gone and replaced around 2021. That is my goal now. I need to get into the budget in detail a look at what years we can get what amounts of money. I recognize the Security Forces need the proper helicopters on the force in the field needs the proper helicopters and they have done a good job but its time for to go. Thank you. I want to shift and talk about the Garden Reserve training. As we modernize the weapons we want to make sure we dont neglect the readiness of our military families. Guardsmen and reservists travel hundreds of miles to their duty locations every month. They are not reimbursed for the costs they incur and are limited to what they can claim as businessrelated expenses. I think that is flatout wrong. Service members should not be taxed on money that they used to subsidize their own training. This afternoon, i will be introducing the tax relief regarding training act. Which will allow them to deduct travel expenses including meals and lodging to ensure they are not penalized for serving their country. General dunford, can you speak to the issues that reservists face . I had the opportunity to see men and women i visit with three routinely and have unique challenges. They have to be a soldier, sailor, marine and whatever youre trying to do in your personal life and the balance of family. When they give up a week or two a month when the going deployment for year i think they do have some unique challenges. I appreciate your interest in making sure we can mitigate some of those issues. Thank you senator. Now recognize the senator from montana. Thank you mr. Chairman. Secretary mattis, good to see you. I appreciate our conversation last week. Thank you for your service and your willingness to continue to serve. I fully support ensuring the troops have everything they need to make the nation safe. The president s budget goes about it the wrong way. While cutting the budgets of other agencies critical of preventing conflict, the president s budget continues to put monetary operations on a credit card, and forces our kids and grandkids to pay for this increase. We should certainly not take with food for seniors were hungry to pay for increased military activity across the globe. Some folks equate American Military interventions with leadership. For the record, i do not. Our nation strength is only only reflected on the size and keep ability upon military. Also reflected on the strength of our schools, healthcare system, and infrastructure. Its reflected in our economic and National Security. Its time our priorities, investments and conversations reflect that reality. We pointed out that the vietnam Era Helicopters were currently using are far past their expected time of usefulness. We were told time and again on this committee that they would be replaced by 2019. I just heard you say they will probably move until 2021. I believe i went back and looked at my notes, there probably due to to be replaced mine before 2019. We worked to make sure they have housing, so we are ready for them. I checked back on what we did last budgetary cycle. We plus up the president s request for replacement on this committee. It was due to the work that senator daines and i and other members of the committee were able to do that. Is it really money, or the procurement process or Something Else that we need to fix to make sure the helicopters get there. Because, quite frankly its important. Its absolutely important for the rotation of the launch crews in the Security Forces. I cannot tell you how we got in this position. I can tell you the impacts for budget sequestration ripples through every thing we do. Not always do we maintain the process that would come up and testify on when other dynamic issues and true. When other dynamic issues intrude. We have an alarm keeping our b52s all the chaos is a ripple coming out of the budget process the house and senate has frustrated the department of Defense Military services. Solved, to have this sir. I know you guys a continuity in budgets a silly way to plan for the future, we budget around sequestration last year. We took it off the table. Well have to do it again. I want to make sure its on your radar screen. We cannot continue to fund the whole ball of wax. In your opinion, are we owed money by germany . And other nato allies for nato presence in europe . Sir, the alliance owes a full commitment i cannot take give you a and accounting for past money out because thats not the way we do that. However, we are seeing germany is committed to the 2 that is reinforced by the ministry of defense. When i spoke with her and also by the chancellor. I think they are on the right budgeto lead the 2 across the alliance. Right now, there is five nations making it. We see more nations coming online assuming their economy can hold together. Thank you senator your time has expire. The chair now recognizes the distinguish senator, mr. Moran. Thank you very much. Thank you both on behalf of kansas, both in your written testimony talk about the threats threats. One that you both mention i s is russia. We have we have formed a bilateral relationship with russia in the process of building a military facility in northwest syria. I believe this is a group that we are supporting and are efforst. Sist and train your budget request includes an additional 600 million for the counter isis train and equip fund that i believe includes funding for this organization. My question is both broad and specific, when do you see the role of russia what now relationship and consequences there with the relationship to russia. Very quickly, ypg has two different areas, one of them the person at your referring to that russia has developed a relationship with. Right now we have deconfliction and we do not correlate with russia. Senator, can confirm the specific group being supported by the russians is not a group that has received training, equipment, resources from us in the north part of syria. To the secretarys point were clear that we dont have political alignment with russia set the military level and were clear as to what is specified in regards to not been able to cooperate with russia. On the ground in syria were working hard to make sure people on the ground is safe, our aviators are safe and we can prosecute the campaign in syria, deconflicting operations with those conducted with russia. In the specific groups were providing support to we have a very detailed the vetting process used to mitigate the risk of weapons or equipment falling in the wrong hands. What about the relationship we may assist and their relationship with russia . Is that a component of the vetting process . The group that we are supporting certainly at the political level has engaged in russia. The ypg has a Political Office in moscow. But the groups that we are providing support on the ground are not being supported by Russian Military forces. Thank you. Well be expecting a report, strategy from the department of defense in regard to our efforts in syria, is that forthcoming . It is. We have the skeleton plan put together. We are flushing it out. Its an interagency report and it embraces economic and diplomatic military covert means. We should have this done in the next couple months, if that long. It may not even take us another but another month, were still putting it together. Thank you. This Budget Amendment include some military Construction Funding that we are anxious to take a look at in our subcommittee. One of the areas youre requesting funding is a military construction project at Guantanamo Bay that is designed to design a new barracks for men and women. Men, i believe in this case for the detention operations at Guantanamo Bay. Would you like to highlight the value of why those sellers are included in this request and what they mean . We had a guard unit deployed for security services, long list of officials have decried the condition of the facilities that gone tom obey. At Guantanamo Bay. Wanted to give you the opportunity to let us know why its included in that value. In last few months, i have visited our men and women at one time obey. That is as arduous and demanding work that we have going on inside the department of defense. Theyre living in facilities that are old, well past their time, and i believe for now we need to provide them with suitable living facilities a new barracks as part of that request. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator. The chair now recognize the distinguish senator from hawaii. Thank you. Secretary mattis, thank you for being here. I want to follow up on questions asked earlier. Can you walk me through what a 28 cut to the department of state would mean for the department of defense . Just off the top of my head, it would probably replicate what has been going on with the department for several years in terms of the impact on readiness and why am here in front of you right now. At 28 cut to the department of defense. The 28 cut to the state department being proposed, how that would impact your department . I cant quantify that right now. I would have to look at the specific programs being cut and translate that into impact on our operations. I have not looked at line by line to see which programs are being cut and what might be the impact. How critical is your partnership with the department of state, in terms of the ship in terms of, for instance, asiapacific . The trench . I work very closely with secretary tillerson. We get together at least once a week and are on the phone several times a week. His officers are in our building helping us craft policy. Its a team effort as we tied diplomacy and means together. When we walk into the security staff meeting state and defense are alligned. Its a Critical Team effort and we intend to keep it that way. Omb has put us on a course to substantial cuts to the coast guard. Can you talk about the partnership between the coast guard and the department of defense . My own judgment is that the coast guard is incorrectly categorized as nondefense spending one at least some portion of it and expenditures, i would like you to flesh that out for me. The coast guards efforts in maritime control along the coast beyond search and rescue, and talking about the interdiction of drugs in human trafficking, certainly in the cases like the arab and persian gulf where the coast guard vessels are deployed along center navy vessels, it is a good team. We need them for the special role they have which includes lawenforcement. As you know, we do not to those kind of things. Arrest, if we have to do that with the u. S. Navy ship we bring Law Enforcement teams from the coast guard on board our ships to maintain that redline that the u. S. Military not engage in that activity. Its a good, strong relationship in terms of cross fertilization and looking out for americas interests. I hope that answers your question. Thank you for your first, if not one of your first overseas trips as secretary in the asiapacific region. Thank you for your clear reassurance of your alice in and your allies message to our adversaries in the region. I am wondering if you can talk about if you support the idea and how that is impacting your 2018 planning . The asiapacific region will be a priority region. We have worldwide responsibilities. We have five state senator Pacific Ocean states with coastlines there. We have interest that into in that endure in the pacific. The reason i made my first overseas trip out there was a based on cia estimates of where we face the biggest, immediate challenge. And to reassure our allies we are with them. I thought it was necessary at that point. I fully support what i read. I do not understand all the details and center mccains plan plan, but i support the things he outlines and the importance of that region. I would like your view on whether we are on track with ed, given the politics and the philippines. Your ability to maintain a relationship with the defense in the middle philippines. The time of the senator has expired. The chair recognizes the senator from alaska. Thank you mr. Chairman. Secretary general dumper, welcome and thank you for your leadership. Secretary mattis, regarding the f35s and the. [inaudible] , this is the first half 35 locations, the military has been but the f 35 have not been appropriated. Of the military construction has been appropriated, but the dylan what is the plan to budget for the procurement of the 54, f35s that are coming to alaska and do you anticipate any impediments to a timely bed down . Senator, there are f35s and this additional budget request. Going to have to get back to you on the specific airplanes that will support that unit. I do not know that now. I will get back to you. I would appreciate clarification. Im sure youre where the folks in the interior following this carefully just wanting to ensure were on track with the timing. I would like to raise a question regarding russia. Several of my colleagues have. General dumfer, during her confirmation hearings into thousand 15 you indicated that if you want to talk about a nation that can pose an exit stencil threat to the United States, you have to point to russia. At that point you characterize their behavior is nothing short of alarming. We, and alaska are watching our neighbors to the east very carefully. We have 57 miles that separate alaska from russia over the bering strait. Were concerned by what we see as military buildup in the russian far east. This morning, i ask whether not you still see russias behavior is alarming . What to make of the military activities in the arctic . And can you speak to the issue in the arctic of defense cooperation in certain areas, certainly in the areas of search and rescue. That is something that is the arctic nations are working in collaborating, we work to that as an opportunity. Again, you have attention, if you will between what we see is a military buildup as opposed to the other issues that were facing in the arctic. First on my overall assessment of russia, my assessment of their capabilities and behavior havent changed since 2015. In fact, if you look at the request in 17 and anticipating what were going to ask for the future, a good part is benchmarked against russia as appear competitor in the areas of cyber, space, Electronic Warfare and the full range of capabilities. My assessment hasnt changed. In terms of what theyre trying to do, think youre trying to do two things at the strategic level, trying to undermine the credibility of our alliances and to meet our lines commitments. When you look at their military capabilities in the arctic or europe, trying to prevent us from being able to move military power into the region for operate freely within the region. Connected to her ability to meet our lines commitment. Theyre clear about what her strength is which is our allies and partners and ability to project power when and where needed. I look at the political activity, what we call adversarial competition that has a military opposition. As they influence, gets after trying to erode our allies. Look at their military posture arctic or europe, their intent is to keep us from projecting power. I see increasing concern by arctic nations to Work Together to mitigate the russian Capability Development and behavior. The importance we place in the arctic is the fact that the department rewrote the strategy for the arctic in 2013. I anticipate the arctic will be a critical part of that. My time has expired. I would submit to question two secretary mattis, along the same lines of the interest in the arctic. The investments in the arctic in terms of equipment necessary to defend the country in this very changing and very dynamic world. Thank you senator. Now recognizing the senator from wisconsin. Thank you mr. Chairman. Welcome mr. Secretary in general dumford. You have received several questions already about the partnership between state and defense and the potential impact on the Defense Department with regards to cuts being contemplated in the state department. I want to look at that more closely start general dunford. Part of the mission of operation and here resolve is to enable hall of Coalition Government action to increase regional stability. To defeat the ideology of iso, and stem the global flow of foreign fighters. According to that mission statement, that means enabling america and Coalition Nations to counter iso with the full might of their national power. Im quoting directly, including diplomatic, informational, economic, lawenforcement and other aspects of national power. General dunford, in your judgment, would it be strategically wise to reduce funding and Staffing Levels for civilian agencies in the u. S. The usaid . As we review the budgets, can you point out any particularly important aspects of the partnership on the fight against isil to keep a close eye on in terms of fighting to restore the funding that is proposed to be cut . With regard to isis, we have nine areas that we have identified that are critical to our strategy. Although were in the process of revising the strategy, the relative district of labor will not change. The department of defense leads on two of those nine. Other elements of the government lee. You identified some areas where the state department or other elements will leave. Will lead. If you look at what must be done, we have to do with the foreign fighters and resources and undermine the credibility of the narrative. Those are three of the most important tasks. In the lead of dealing with those are other elements of government. I cannot tell you that acquit levels of funding, what i can say is in order for us to be successful against isis or any threats we face, its important for us to fully leverage the capabilities our nation has, diplomatically, economically and militarily. And in the Information Space as well. I know the policies under revision. Can you take off the two elements of defense and the other seven question. Good governance is one dealing with foreign fighters. Addressing the resources is another, dealing with the narrative is another, building the capacity of our partners on the ground is another. Denying the enemy sanctuary is another. And then the economic tools we have would be the last. Thank you. Secretary mattis, from senator udall you had a question about the lack of an isil specific authorization of use of military force. Nonetheless, you are in the process of devising or revising the elements of the operation to defeat isis. Can you give us details of how you plan to spend the 2 billion you are requesting specifically for acceleration of the defeat of isis . For example, can you give us any early detail about additional troops that youd be sending to iraq and syria with this funding . I recognize that some things need to be shared enclosed and classified settings. But i think its important if youre encouraging us to talk about public debate about military force, which by the way support and criticize the Previous Administration for not pursuing that more aggressively, so information is to be shared in an open setting in order for us to have that debate. When i leave here today, i leave for foggy bottom to talk about the issues you brought up. I would tell you we will confront the enemy with the increased number of fights in various locations so they have cascading problems to collapse them as quickly as possible the idea right now that they have operations to attack our allies to see their extra operations and is far as any additional troops have to see the specific military problem working with the allies requires partners but i am not a that point right now other than for fire support or monitoring or that sort of thing there is only what we can do with a time when we are on right now for go if they are not there permanently in maybe through the allied approach this would allow us to excel rate the operation that is referenced. Thinking mr. Secretary. Your time has expired. The chair recognizes the distinguished senator from south carolina, mr. Graham. The marine corps to get as much as we can we only have five minutes but without authorization to use military force when you suggest we limit that authorization to a specific period of time . No. I do not. What about geography quick. Senator, due to the nature of the enemies threat that would only help the enemy. And deploy those means . Senator i think it would be best if congress would say what they want us to accomplish. And inclosed session to carry that out. So my view is, if you want to destroy so, you shouldnt limit your target. Just to destroy them. Is an ingredient to win the war on care . To have to fundamental powers with the power of inspiration of how we defeat this. Its part and parcel in how we defeat this enemy. At the end of the day we are in a war of ideas that us threat is critical to your success. Youll never win that war by terrorist but the days that mosul falls and it will do support staying in iraq to make sure that isil does not come back quick. I believe it is in our National Interest in a position to keep the enemy is on the back foot. I believe it is in our interest to keep the iraqi Security Forces to keep our mutual enemies on the back foot. I agree with that. End of believe the iraqi forces will need that support for some time to come. And also to reconstruct the in our province and also most to reconstruct and barb mosul, withd those troops there we should come up with a game plan to reconstruct director have but leverage in baghdad for the iraqis quick. The secretarys meeting today does address this issue it will be an international effort. But we should be a part of that. To believe it is in the taxpayers interest in terms of reconstruction to pregame influence remain have lost in baghdad . I dont see any reason to pull out to learn the same lesson. I do agree we need to remain decisive and engaged. Should we lift the cap spending forever . No value to the bca caps in the last year. So i would not take issue. I think i can concur without hesitation. Is it fair to say the . Is it fair to say the sequestration has done damage . It has done more damage to our readiness. Not only that but also very inefficient use of resources the taxpayers have given us. And glad you did not beat around the bush. 2018 is 603 from the trump did ministration senator mccain has the Defense Budget of 640. Which is right . [laughter] i would not want to do that myself but more defense spending is needed what are the of limitations of the increase defense spending . We have to make certain what we ask for it is sustained but we need to complete the strategy review that i of doing now striking come to you with a compelling reason why the American People have to sacrifice this money out of their pocket on the budget of defense. With those potential threats to deter the wars they never have to fight. But the of one thing that we owe you is working very close with the secretary we owe you the right prior to rescission of capabilities to be given in the context. We do. Those of you think we can spend 30 billion wisely between now and september . Im confident we can. Thank you both. Thanks to the senator and the distinguished panel of witnesses and the members of the committee. We hope you will respond to any written questions following the hearing today. We would request that you would respond to such a request in a reasonable time. The defense subcommittee will reconvene wednesday march march 29 at 10 30 a. M. To receive testimony and until then the subcommittee will stand in recess. Dewyze evidence dwight evans represents pennsylvania second district. Congressman dwight evans, democrat of pennsylvania, you have been serving in Public Office since 1980. What were you doing . What have you been doing over the years