Was raised as a mother was raised, the same kind of wife and hostess. The home, the children, the entertaining with style. That was her heritage and she did it again in the white house right after her administration, during the johnson years, the whole world erupted like volcanoes. Women who went to work and got the forces and had equal rights. We had flower children, free love, free sex. It was safe for the young and i missed all that. But the whole world changed. It became a whole new concept of women and i think that today mrs. Clinton represents the new woman. As we continue our conversation on first ladies, patricia baldrige, reporters, and others closest recent president ial wives talked about the role of the first lady and how has changed around the nation, tonight at 9 00 eastern on cspan. Friday, the House Appropriations subcommittee mark and fast a bill to fund the state department in 2014, 6 billion less than the 2013 budget, fully funding the obama request for Embassy Security, with 6. 5 billion for counter terrorism, wars, and humanitarian response. The subcommittee met for about 25 minutes. Good morning. I would like to thank the Ranking Member for her dedication to the subcommittee and leadership. She and i have a strong working relationship and we are both invested in the important work of this subcommittee. I respect her very much. I want to thank all the members of the subcommittee from this side of the aisle for their contributions to this bill. Time sensitive issues like , with the illegal wildlife trafficking. As you know, the bill before us reduces funding by billions from current levels, reflecting the very real economic and financial problems that we face here at home. Given this challenge the bill for tax the most critical priority for first, spending directly related to National Security. Meaning we are not able to Fund Everything at the levels we have in previous years, including programs that i support. The many Security Priorities in this bill, first and foremost we need to keep american diplomatic staff safe while the represent the United States abroad. The terrorist attack in benghazi tragic and we hope it never happens again. We will face and fully fund the Embassy Security request at 4. 8 billion. We recognize the instability and unpredictable environment of the middle east, who continues strong support for our key allies in the region, israel and jordan. At the same time, security challenges continue much closer to home, supporting our partners in latin america to fight Drug Trafficking. The bill also focuses on democracy promotion and International Broadcasting to help to promote American Values abroad. Lifesaving hiv aids and humanitarian assistance programs are also prioritized. The bill supports efforts to address the wildlife poaching and trafficking defense. This is a National Security issue. The illegal wildlife trade is a multibilliondollar industry that threatens the stability of african countries and support criminal and terrorist networks, both of which affect the security of the United States. Supportde funding to antipoaching enforcement with enhanced Regional Cooperation in order to meet these urgent needs. In order to do this we reduce the lower priority programs. This bill also contains important policy provisions around the world in places where the u. S. Security interests cannot predict how things turn out, so we provide the administration the ability to respond and strength in conditions so that congress can oversee these funds. Everyone is closely watching the situation in egypt and the relationship between the u. S. And egypt has never been more critical. For that reason, this bill continues funding if certain conditions are met. First and foremost we see the Egyptian Military continuing to uphold security arrangements, including the peace treaty with israel, even while they address priorities. We respect their military to military relationship and expected to continue and make it clear in our conditions that we want egypt to embrace democracy, not just democratic elections. We remain hopeful for the egyptian people as they continue to go through this transition. The we support efforts to reestablish connections between israel and the palestinian people. This bill titans conditions on aid for the Palestinian Authority in this regard aidtens conditions on for the Palestinian Authority in this regard. If they pursue actions against the International Criminal court with a unity government, as a thelt the palestinians bill does not provide funding, such as to be consistent with a of a law that prohibits it. Supporting key strategic partners, israel, fully funding the memoranda of understanding, this subcommittee understands how critical it is to support israel, whether it is the ongoing threat from iran pursuing a Nuclear Weapon or the instability that continues in the region, Israeli Security faces serious threats and support from congress has never been stronger. The subcommittee understands the risk and what is at stake for both israel and the United States. The bill supports our critical partner and ally, jordan, including the requested 660 million for Economic Security assistance, their economy is under tremendous strain, dealing with the spillover from the conflict in syria. Jordan needs our support and we included the issue of funding for the cost associated win hundreds of thousands of have welcomed into the country. With the hundreds of thousands of refugees to have welcomed into the country. Mexican security has a direct impact on our National Security. We want to work with the government to address our shared concerns and build a lasting security economic relationship that benefits both countries. We commend the government of colombia on their success against Drug Trafficking and include funds to support the great work they are doing to train Security Forces from other countries, including funding in a separate overseas Contingency Operation section. This spending allows critical programs to be funded in iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, and places where terrorism and instability threaten u. S. Interests. Spending goes down 42 in this bill as missions in frontline countries are scaled back. As u. S. Forces drawdown afghanistan, we have to be sure that our state department and u. S. Aid staff are responsible, safe, and secure. There are serious concerns about house security is being handled by the government of afghanistan. This bill withholds a portion of the funding until we get a transitional plan with more details on how were going to keep our people safe on the ground. In addition this bill focuses on oversight, accountability, and the rights of women and girls, issues that were included by the chair. The bill continues conditions for the prior year for pakistan prohibiting funds unless the government of pakistan is cooperating with the United States on counterterrorism efforts and other issues. Moving to multilateral assistance, this bill supports contributions to International Financial institutions that benefit the poorest countries and imposes conditions on Multilateral Development banks to ensure transparency and accountability, increasing accountability for the money provided to the United Nations and other international organizations. Thanks to language that started in the fiscal year 2012 it changes business and how we do it with the u. N. , putting audits and reviews online for american taxpayers to see. The bill includes language ensuring that funds do not support abortions and eliminates the u. N. Population fda fund. We have clear differences on these issues, as i have said before, we have agreed to disagree. In closing this bill makes it tough funding choices and addresses many complex problems but these of the choices we have made and have had to make in this budget environment and rapidly changing world. It is said often, i want to express my sincere gratitude for the very hard work of this staff. They were given a difficult staff and did an outstanding job. The staffs loyalty and work is recognized. I would like to thank the clerk , and from mys] personal staff i would like to think johnnie [inaudible] and joe [indiscernible]. I would like to recognize steve, they worked very hard and very well together. I will now turn to rep resentative loy for her Opening Statement. Thank you, representative ranger. Granger. As the system moves through the process i know that we are both committed to making the bill and even better bill. I want to thank the staff as staff, gregjority higgins, alice hogan, susan adams, jamie win. , also want to thank my staff [lists names], n. M. Members of the subcommittee. It has been a pleasure working with all of you on both sides of the aisle. The House Majority conference to afford the bipartisan agreement on the budget resolution has placed chairman rogers and the members of this committee in a very, very difficult situation. The Discretionary Spending in the ryan budget is a completely unrealistic starting point, which led to subcommittee allocations that created winners and losers. While the chairwoman really did the best she could, the bill that we had before us today represents a greater than 20 reduction from the fiscal year 2013 presequestration level in thell that is only 1 of federal budget. As we have noted time and again, the agencies and programs funded by this bill are essential for a National Security. Economic prosperity, and global leadership. Deep cuts will not significantly reduce our deficit or help to pay down our debt, however they can leave us vulnerable to the spread of extremist ideology, substantially weakening our standing in the world, making it more difficult to achieve our goals on the global stage. The chairo appreciate womans efforts to include some of my top priorities. We considered this bill as permeating the middle east. The ongoing brutal war in syria is threatening its neighbors. The uprising in egypt has left significant questions about the countrys stability. Violence is increasing in iraq, iran continues to quest for a Nuclear Weapon. In light of the ever increasing instability throughout the region, our assistance to israel, are critical ally, a strong democracy is more important than ever. I also support the funding provided for jordan, a country whose stability is essential in this time of great upheaval. Funding for basic education is fundamental to our success and all other development efforts. We cannot build strong, stable, healthy societies if children do not have the tools to succeed. Our robust Global Health assistance saves thousands of lives each year and is a critical tool in the battle against disease. Addition to the allocation in these accounts, a number of the cut in this draft are deeply troubling, proposing a drastic retreat from our engagement with the United Nations, world bank, and other multilateral organizations. Compromising many of our overall objectives in this bill. Partnerships with many of these organizations are vital to Diplomatic Security imperatives and our efforts are strengthened by strong, multilateral investments, such as unicef, un women, the International Fund for agricultural development, completely unfounded in this bill. For example, the un office of humanitarian Affairs Board makes the work that the u. S. And others in sure for no gaps in lifesaving services for people in extreme need. Aid, feeding the future, providing additional financing to countries who have shown a commitment to homegrown Food Security plans with Police Efforts in afghanistan helping the troops withdrawal while maintaining security and the rule of law. These organizations also leverage our investments, leading to significantly greater impact than we can achieve our own. For example, every efforts in an dollar and that we provide to the asian and African Development bank leverages 20 from other donors. Moreover, these investments support the u. S. Economy. For every dollar contributed to the u. N. Peacekeeping budget, the u. S. Economy receives approximately 1. 60 in return. This bill also includes substantial cuts to our personnel programs at the state department and u. S. Aid. While i support the funding for Embassy Security and personnel projections, one has to ask if there will be anything left to protect. Our diplomats and Development Professionals are key facets of our National Security strategy. The programs that they implement protect our interests by making the world safer and more secure. These relatively small investments, which reflect outside dividends for the nation, finally this bill once again reinstates the global gag rule and the funding on u. S. Fpa while reducing support for bilateral Family Planning efforts. Dumbfounded,ntly frankly, by the majoritys insistence on advocating policies that are proven to do the exact opposite of what we all hope to achieve, fewer unwanted pregnancies, fewer abortions, this is simply not an area where we can agree to disagree, although we do agree to disagree. In my judgment, the evidence is so clear and it is unambiguous, it is unconscionable that on theseuld insist cuts, policies, writers, knowing that they lead to 8000 more maternal deaths, 40,000 additional orphans, 1. 4 million more abortions compared to the fiscal year 2012 levels. It is my sincere hope that working with the senate we will agree to a higher allocation for this bill that will allow us to fix many of the problems in this draft. From the chairwoman and myself, we have worked together in a very positive way. I know that she is committed to doing the very best sheehan. I know that she will work with all of us together in a bipartisan way to approve this bill as the process moves forward. Thank you again for your cooperation and hard work. Lowey, youu, mrs. Are a pleasure to work with, even though we have some very hard work to do. I will now yield to mr. Rogers for his Opening Statement. Thank you for yielding. I want to congratulate both she and ms. Lloyd for a good bill, bipartisan bill. It has taken a lot of work because of the situation in the world that we face, from continued instability in the middle east, economic difficulties are around the world, there is no question that this is an extremely busy subcommittee confronted with a number of critical issues. Fiscalsame time, the situation facing our country is of the most important to our national and Economic Security. The state foreign operations funding, billions of dollars, from current levels, while meeting the most critical Security Priorities. The bill recognizes the risks faced by our diplomats, fully funds Embassy Security requests, every penny the price asked for is in this bill. It fully funds the u. S. , israel memorandum of understanding and support scheme neighbors in our severe, including colombia and mexico, to fight Drug Trafficking and violent crime. We will also include 6. 5 billion in overseas Contingency Operations on terror funding. And to counter and stability in places where terrorists threaten u. S. And regional security. Focusing on oversight and management, funds are made available after tough conditions had been met. Than 20 programs resulting in around 2 billion in savings , the chairwomans emphasis on supporting National Security, reducing spending, and implementing reform, to meet it is the right approach for addressing our international interests. Think the members of the subcommittee and the ranking have done ahairman good job of putting together a difficult bill in difficult times and difficult financial circumstances. I fully support your work. I yield back. Thank you, madam chair. I want to applaud you for the work you have done under these difficult circumstances. Is vital, having visited our facilities overseas andth the tragedies commitments being maintained, that is critical. Clearly jordan need your great guidance, you and the Ranking Member, maintaining robust assistance. You are working under tough numbers in your life, and you would prefer programs like the institute of peace, stopping fights is in the interest of america and i know that as this process moves forward, we will try to restore funding where practical. I want to thank you for the work you have done. Thank you very much. I just want to thank the staff, you know, for the work they have done. Thank you. Any other members that would like to make remarks . All right. I understand that there are no amendments today. I will recognize mr. Dan for a motion. A move that it be favorably committed. Those in favor . The motion isit, agreed to. I ask you to enter consent of this staff be allowed to make technical and reporting changes to the bill without objection, so ordered. Members are reminded that the bill stays in the room and it will be severe circulated three days before full committee markup. The committee is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2013] congress is in this week. Their work includes 2014 funding bills for the federal government. Noonouse returns today at eastern for general speeches and at 4 30 p. M. For legislative work. The agenda includes the 2014 Defense Department budget with two separate environmental bills focusing on epa rules. The senate gavels back in on tuesday, 10 00 a. M. Eastern, with consideration of the bill dealing with funding for the department of transportation and urban development. You can see here on cspan the senate live on cspan 2. With the senate out today we have live coverage of cspan 2. At 12 15 eastern the alliance for Health Reform works for compliance to lower the panel for Health Care Experts including the president of the life center. Later, at 5 00 p. M. Eastern, jimmy carter will be joined by the president of finland, for in foreign minister to algeria for a discussion on the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Hosting this discussion following the news on friday, reaching a tentative agreement for stalling peace talks. Again, that is live today on c span 2. And jackie was raised as her mother was raised. She was the same kind of wife and host. Harvey home, the children, the entertaining with style, that was her heritage and she did it again in the white house, right after her administration, during the johnson years. The whole world erupted like volcanoes. Women who went to work and demanded equal rights. Flower children, free love, free sex. Boy, oh boy, it was safe for the young. I missed all that. [laughter] the whole world changed and it became a whole new concept of women. I think that mrs. Clinton today represents the new woman. As we continue our conversation on first ladies, the social secretary for jacqueline kennedy, reporters, and others closest to recent president ial wives talk about the role of the first lady tonight at 9 00 eastern on c span. Servicesnate Armed Committee on thursday heard from the joint chiefs of staff share Martin Dempsey and james winn felt as members considered their reappointment. Having oversee the drawdowns in iraq and afghanistan, the end of dont ask, dont tell, and introduction of women into combat. Last week john mccain said that he would hold up the dempsey nomination until he received more details on the u. S. Military intervention in syria. This 90 minute portion begins with questions from carl levin. Thank you. Let me ask you the standard questions which we ask of our military nominees. Yes, i have. Yes sir. You agree when asked to give your personal views, even if those differ from the party in power . Yes. Will you ensure that your staff complies with deadlines established requested communications, including questions for the record and hearings . Yes. Will those witnesses be protected for reprisal . Do you agree to provide documents, including electronic forms of medication in a timely manner, and requested by a duly constituted committee, or consult with the Committee Regarding the basis for denying such documents . Yes. Thank you. We are going to have a seven minute first round of questions. Do you support finding additional ways to increase the military pressure on assad . Senator, let me say that i well aware of the human suffering and the tragedy unfolding in syria. And the effect it is having on the region. To your question about courses of action going forward, i support a whole of government approach that applies all the instruments of national power. As for the military, we have prepared options and articulate in risks an opportunity cost to put additional pressure on the assad regime. Does the Mission Support equipping the opposition . They have a governmental approach to the increase capability of the opposition. Is that include training and equipping militarily . Not to the department of defense. Through other means . Yes. On afghanistan, on the Security Forces of afghanistan on track to be fully in charge of securing afghanistan by the december of 2014 . They are. The assessment is that they will achieve Campaign Objectives. There are some potential gaps that they will have better clarity on it this fighting season. Im not going to ask you what advice you would give to the president on the residual assuming there is agreement with the afghans after december 2014. Im not going to ask you what the advices. That is advice you give confidentially to the president. He has a right to your confidential advice. Givenstion is have you the president your device relative to the size of the residual forces . I have served. We have provided several options. As a joint chiefs, we have made a recommendation on the size and expressed our view one when that announcement would best meet the Campaign Objectives. Would you agree that Legal Protections where our troops, which will be provided for if we could reach a bilateral Security Agreement with afghanistan, are essential to any longterm presence in afghanistan . I do believe that. Any presents after december 2014 is dependent on the dthe agreement with the afghans . That is right, sir. I hope president karzai is listening to that. I have a plant office call with him. I hope you would make that clear, and i will not speak for others directly, it is not feel if they do not speak for themselves, but it is essential he understands that there has to be a Bilateral Agreement that protects our troops for there to be a residual presence. I favor a residual presence. I favor giving confidence to the afghans that there will be a continuing revelation but i do not want to be silent in the face of president karzais comments, which are unwise in terms of whether or not he wants a residual presence or not. Hesometimes acts like doesnt want a residual presence, even though it is clear to me that the Afghan People do, and so does he. He wanted on his terms. It cannot just be on his terms. Would you agree with that . I do. I would point out that our relationship, and our interest in afghanistan run deeper than just president karzai. And there is going to be an election next year. You can pass on he is not going to be a candidate in the election but therell be an election for something that the Committee Members take seriously. Those statements of his matter to us. On the guantanamo issue, do you favor let me start over. We have in our defense operas asian language that would give greater flexibility to the department of defense to transfer guantanamo detainees to the United States for detention and trial. To streamline the authority of the secretary of defense, to transfer guantanamo detainees to foreign countries, do support those provisions . Senator, what i support is that we must have an option to detain prisoners. He cannot expect young men and women on the battlefield to have a single option which would be saying thats simply to kill. Which would be simply to kill print i support anything that will assure me that those young men and women will have that option. Assuming they have that assurance, that there are places, given that condition and qualification, one which i share, do you then support the language of the bill . I would have to see the bill, but if youre asking me facility,namo, the tarnish the image of the United States globally, i think it has. I would welcome any other solution. Have Missile Defense, we had an assessment from lieutenant general, a letter providing the assessment that investing in demonstration to miscreant since there is no current military to deploy on these case, do you agree . You create additional analysis is needed to determine whether the necessary to determine in the future question are i would like in the future . We should do the analysis before make a decision on how best to make a capability. Im glad you gave me opportunity to ask. I have been looking for an opportunity. Lex thank you. Thank you. I would spend my next dollar on Missile Defense and the discrimination you describe. There is a quote, quality has a quality all its own. I think it is wise that we are doing the Environmental Impact statements, and as we watch the threat develop, we are going to have to be cognizant of that. It may become necessary to put into place a second type. We will play that as we have to. You mean before making a commitment to a site, we should complete those assessments . Were planning on doing in a relatively near term. That will begin before there is a need to make a decision. I want to say we need to be cautious and cognizant of where the trajectories are. They will be done naturally, you think they should be done . Whats they will be done. I agree with doing them. I would i just why clear answer. They should be done before the site is selected. Yes. It was an article today that south korea wants to delay the transfer of wartime operational control. I am sorry. I was looking for my car to. I forget that we are using them. I have got over my time. I apologize to my colleagues. Thank you. In my Opening Statement, i quoted each one of you. There are such strong quotes, if ever the force is too great, we will use and be immoral. The statement of general Martin Dempsey, i do not see right now, but for the first time in my career, we are asked to respond to a crisis. We will have to say we cannot. There has ever been a time in our history. Way threats are so great, and diverse as they are today. You agree with that . I do. Theres probably fewer existential threats to the nation. There are formal ways that middle wage states, and violent extremists can reach out and touch us. Waxed you agree with that do you agree with that . The horse is larger than the money we have to keep it ready. I was talking about the threats that are out there. Things were predictable back then in the cold war. Now you entities out there that are going to the weapon and a capability. That is what he is talking about. That is the threat that i think is really a scary thing. The question is, you both believe that. Have you shared this with the president . Yes. He knows this. He continues with his approach. Let me ask you a question about gitmo. You said you would welcome any other solution. I have often look at gitmo is one of the few good deals we have in this country. Yet, when you say that you welcome any other solution, what other solution is there . Is there a solution that we are not entailing bringing these people into our continental United States . The have been seeing analysis done at any number of solutions. There has not been any consensus on which one to pursue. I went to align myself with those that say we have to have a detention solution. I agree. We have coveted tension. We have something that is ready made. I understand that people in the middle east that do not like it. It has given us a better be tatian in some areas. I believe that we need to think of america first. I can recall that when the president came out talking about these alternatives that they had, they had sites inside the United States. One was in oklahoma. I went down there and talked to a young lady, she was in charge of our prison down there. She had several tourists in gitmo. Do they know that we have this, it is readymade. This is a great frustration to me. We have language that is pretty good in the bill. On the less, nonetheless, can you think of anything that would not entail incarceration or movement into the United States . Right now . I do not have an easy answer to that one. One thing i would be sure to mention, a little bit more flexibility would be useful for us previously moral obligation to take good medical care of these detainees, because we cannot move them outside of gitmo. We have to build stateofthe art medical facilities. It will be great to bring them back to deny states for medical attention. That kind of flexibility. There is not a person has not been down there more than once. One of the problems they have with the detainees is they are eating better than they have ever had in their life. They have tests run they never had even heard of before. I think that we are meeting that prayed that. We need to get somebody on the record. I have an aviation background pray i do not think its enough that to know you keep your proficiency up. I applaud the decision to get back in and start retraining. In my Opening Statement, i was going to conduct a study as to how much more cost is to go through the retraining were going to have to go through right now, that if we had never made the decision in april 9. Have you already done that . Do you have any information in terms of how much more it is going to cost now that if we had not done it to start with . It is a good question. Thean get that for you for record in terms of cost prayed by can tell you is if you take these quadrants, it will take months for skills to increase. I think of in terms of time. There is a cost to mention. Time equals risk. Outad some that came right of school, they are going to have to go back and start from the beginning. We do not have the capability of taking care of the needs as they come up. I believe that that translates into a risk. Im not willing to take it if can do anything about it. 10 i add can i add, what were saying is that we are going to end up with two problems over time if sequestration remains in effect. The immediate robin for the next several years will be readiness. We will not be able to find the money we need to achieve the level of sequestration cuts without dramatically impacting our readiness. As the force becomes smaller, you can restore readiness because you are dealing with the smaller force. A ghost too far, too fast. I understand that. The proficiency of a smaller number of units can be greater. You are still dealing the smaller number of units. This is the diverse that we have right now. That is not very good idea. Not that you can do anything about it. Right now that is the problem. My question is, my time is up, i appreciate the fact that you use the word immoral. Giving the path of readiness of our armed forces, when will the commanderinchief be at a point of making a moral decisions . I do not think i use the term immoral. I think that we are keeping the white house closely informed as to the outcome of the strategic choices. That includes both capability and readiness of the force. They are aware of those results. Their factor that in decisionmaking. Hopefully we will be able to find a good resolution that will allow us to go forward to plan for what the future is. I appreciate both of you. We have to let the people know we have a serious problem here. Ourink this hearing is opportunity to do that. I apologize if you begin a quote to you that wasnt you. Let me assure you that if the nation is threatened, we will go. That is the point. We will go, and we may not be ready to go. It will depend on the nature of the conflict in which we were asked to go. If it is an x essential threat and we send them, there is no immorality in that. If this were some other contingency, and we were asking them to go not ready, and me had a choice to do that, that is right. I appreciate that. Senator blumenthal. Thank you. I join in thanking both of you for your service over many years. General dempsey, you and i have discussed briefly the purchase of helicopters for the afghan armed services. The purchase of russian in my 17s and a country that is still harboring and providing refuge to edward snowden. We discussed the reasons for that sale. Very graciously, you suggested you would look into the possibility of either ending that sale, which will result in helicopters sitting on the runways of of canada stand because they lack pilots to fly them, and they lack people trying to maintain a repair them, but i wonder whether there is something we can do to stop those sales, subsidized by american taxpayers, provided by american taxpayers to an outline that does not have a Status Agreement with us that will enable us to continue providing for each of them. In connection with that question, what additional kinds of resources we should consider stopping if there is no status of forces agreement. On the mi 17s, that will require us to stay committed to the fleet. There is no way we can transition at this point and put them in anything other and that airframe. What i suggested is that if we can achieve a lasting and during relationship with that, and that lives up to the end of the deal, we will be investing in them through Foreign Military sales for some time. There was a likely point where we could transition them to u. S. Built aircraft. In the interim, we cannot it would be my recommendation that we stay the course with the existing program. Is that interest sufficient to justify the National Security waiver under the legislation that is currently included . I do sir. What would have to change for those helicopters to be purchased from an american manufacturer, such as any of the others that are more than capable of providing better aircraft to the afghans . We have experience in making the transition in iraq, where we have made them outfitted with our craft. It starts with training. That effort is unlikely to begin until we establish a bilateral Security Agreement. I was at a briefing that you gave on threats to our navy and. I wonder if you could comment the extent that you are able on the importance of the ohio class replacement in terms of nuclear deterrence, and the importance of continuing with that program, and any possible jeopardy that might be impacted as a result of sequester. We are committed to the tried. I believe that is the right approach. It is the most survivable element that we have. It is very reliable. There very committed to next class of coming down the line. We have delayed as far as we can. We need to now get into the requirements and design of this missile carrying summering. Were just committed to the program. We are going to try to control the cost. We are going to make this like all the programs we are working on, a successful program. You would agree that the program really has to be spared any impasse as a result of sequester. I would agree with that. I wonder if i could move to a personnel issue that i know. The Electronic Medical records system, which still is incompatible with the department of defense medical record system with the va. Despite questions that i and others have asked repeatedly, under the secretary of defense and the previous one, i remain concerned with the fact that it is a goal, not a reality. I wonder if you could comment on what can be done to increase the pace of making those systems compatible. I had thought they would be one system. 1 billion has and spent on making them one system. I ask you to comment on that. I share your concern. I can show you that secretary hegel has taken the decision to move the responsibility into atl, which will be that are managed. We have done other things. We relieve the burden of them having to do Continual Research to find at the record is complete. That is what the path that is the path were on. Your oversight will be an important part of of achieving that. Thank you. My time is expired. I want to thank you both for your extraordinary service, and to reiterate, i remain unhappy with our current posture. Im not going to let the issue go with all due respect. I understand your position re think you for for being so forthright in your answer. Thank you. Senator mccain. Thank you. I must tell both of the witnesses im concerned about the role you played over the last two years, the view of role as the chief advisers nationalesident on security, and the state of the world over the last two years since you have been holding the office you hold. General dempsey, do you believe the continued cost and risk of our inaction in syria are now worse for our National Security interests . As a discussed, i would like to know an answer and a nice filibuster. I assure you, this is a regional issue. I would say that the issue in syria is at greater risk because of the emergence of violent extremist. Youre not answering the question. You believe that the continued cost and risks of our inaction in syria are now worse for our National Security interests and the costs associated with limited military action . With all due respect, youre asking me to agree that we have been in active. We have not been in active. We have not . That is correct. Tothis again gives validity my concern. Obviously, we may have not been in active, but any observer knows that assad is prevailing on the battlefield. Hezbollah is there. The russians are there. The situation is much more dire than it was two years ago when you and the admiral came to office. Your answer is that we have not been active. It is correct. We have not been in active inactive. Do believe we should take military action, or continued limited action, or significant action, such as the establishment of a nofly zone, and arming being rebels with weapons they need, which thereve not been getting. Perhaps better than you. I have been there. Which is a greater cost . The action that we are taking now, which is having not paid the battlefield equation, or doing nothing. Senator, i am in favor of building a moderate opposition and supporting it. It is a decision for our elected officials, not for the senior military leaders. That goes back to my concern about your role as chairman of the joint chiefs. I understand. You are the sole military advisor. You testified this february that you had advised the president to armed units of the Syrian Opposition. You testified you no longer supported the position. Now we read that the administration has decided to arm the Syrian Opposition units. How do we account for those are lets question mark i would r whats . I would not accept the term appear whats. I would accept that we adapted our terms based on what we know on the opposition. At the beginning of the year, there was a time where it was evident that extremist groups were prevailing inside the opposition. I have not been wavering is your position that extremist groups are prevailing inside the opposition . Me that ind february. In february, i had that concern. That is your answer to why in february, the Vice President armed them and in april you said we shouldnt and that now, obviously we are arming the rebels. Policy . Upport that i support the building of a moderate opposition and including militant building its military capability. Here is an example of my concern you told cnn on july 8 the war in syria is not a simple matter of stopping the fight by the introduction of. Ny particular u. S. Capability it seems to me we need to understand what the piece will look like before we start the war. Withar has been going on over 100,000 people killed. We did not start the war and we would not be starting the war. We would be trying to stop the massacre that is going on. We would try to stop has below where thousands of troops are in, we would try to stop the fact that russians continue to supply heavily bashar alassads arces, and what would be great triumph for a ran in the entire region. But you say for iran and the entire region. But you say we need to know what the piece will look like before we can stop the war. Would you agree we have recent experience where until we understood how the country would continue to have been and institutions of government institutions of governance wouldnt fail that situations can be made worse by the introduction of military force. Actually, enrolled mc, you and i went through this in 2006, when i said it wasnt succeeding and we had to have this urge and only a surge could succeed in reversing the tide of title, and you disagreed with me that in, way back then. I think history shows those of us who supported the surge were right and people like you did not think we needed a surge were wrong. So i guess my question to you a goodit in any way outcome for this situation on the battlefield to continue as it is with obviously bashar assad of elite prevailing and a great victory for iran and continued slaughter of thousands and thousands of destabilization of jordan, the disdainful is a in of lebanon, and what is clearly erupting into a regional conflict. Is that your answer . Somewhere, you have me portrayed as the one who is holding back from our use of military force inside im not saying that. Im saying what your advice and counsel as to the president of the United States and your views are very important are very important because that is your job. It is. And ive given those views to the president. Ive given them options and members of this committee have been briefed in a classified setting. The decision on whether to use force is the decision of our the officials. Chairman just asked if you would give your personal commit personal opinion to the committee if asked. Im asking for your opinion. About the use of connect strikes . That issue is under deliberation inside are agencies of government and it would be wrong of me to try to influence that with it and with rendering an opinion in public as to what kind of we should use. Your answer to the chairmans question about giving a personal byw is circumscribed decisions that are still being made western mark . I will let this committee know what my answers are at the appropriate time. Yes, sir. When might that be . Governmenthen the decides to use military force, we have provided a variety of options and you know that three if it is your position that you do not provide your personal views to the committee when asked, only under certain circumstances, then you have just contradicted what i have known this committee to operate under for the last 30 years. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator mccain. Senator donnelly. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you general, thank you admiral. I want to get back to serious and a second, but i want to ask you, general dempsey, in regards to Mental Health service Mental Health for our Service Members, one of the things it has recently happened is that camp lejeune has been reduced by the appointments per month because of sequestration. I was wondering if you know there has been any increase in suicide or suicide attempts since sequestration took effect . I dont have that data readily available. It is a good question. We are aware of some of the reduction in services and i can take that for the record. Great. I follow up on that would be are their efforts in place right now to try to minimize the effect on Mental Health is as such a dramatic effect on our Service Members . There are any number of and it has the attention of not only the department but the joint chiefs, admiral when a filled winifeld serves. Although we have prioritized soldiers, how that is implemented in the field can sometimes be missed. So we are alert to it. I was in afghanistan a few months ago and met with our commanders. At the time we were on all of our metrics. We were right where we wanted to be as we head toward the end of 2014. To the admiral and to the general, are we still meeting the plan we had laid out . Are we still being able to hold the towns we have started to hold . Are we able to turn the taliban back . Is the plan moving along on schedule . Is it going faster or lesser . Are we meeting the numbers we were hoping to meet as we head into 2014 . Besides speaking with general dunford on a weekly basis and visiting with him quarterly, i reach out to as many other people as i can possibly reach out to who can give us other views. Yesterday, we had a woman from the Congressional Research service who spent the last five months traveling around afghanistan, visiting with civilian and military leaders, mostly afghans. A report aligned with general dunfords assessment, that we can achieve our Campaign Objectives on the timeline that is currently established. I appreciate the update we are able to stay on the program, the Afghan Forces have a chance to make this work. Whatt back to syria and senator mccain was talking about, if conditions do not change, does it look to you, as it looks to many that in the , it could fall to the Assad Government . Apologize there are many people concerned. I met with king abdulla from jordan and i will be visiting him and his leaders as well. Weve got military Contingency Planning on going. We are concerned, but the conflict tends to ebb and flow. That kind of conflict will always ebb and flow. We are watching and making sure that we would have options to to the National Command authority if necessary. What steps short of a nofly zone could have an effect that could slow down the assad forces . Pass that to the vice because he did significant work on this were the preparation on his hearing on tuesday. Senator, there are a whole range of options out there the reason i ask is because i know there is a whole range of options. But as you look at everything, the rebel forces are being moved from almost everywhere. We have options, but the ball seems to be heading the other i would not want to get into any Intelligence Community judgments, but it is known where the opposition is most on the run right now is in the central and western part of , around homes, which is very difficult situation, and thats the most important place other than damascus for the Syrian Regime to regain control is that represents the pathway from damascus into their traditional homeland, so they really want that back. I believe personally, and it is only my personal judgment, that if the regime is successful in that area, they will next move north to the to aleppo. We have to watch and maintain vigilance and discern iether it is aleppo know there are contingencies, but to not take action is to take action and is determinative of what happened. Determinative of what happens. How long does this go on before the momentum becomes a reversible . We are ready to act if called upon to act. The current track being pursued by the administration as a diplomatic track. All manner of other options have been discussed and are continuing under discussion and i would not want to get out in front of the president or anyone else on what choices in effect, you are waiting to hear . As we should be. We are ready, providing every possible option in case we are called upon to exercise the use of force, which we believe is a political decision. In regards to the forces, we do youconcerned how do you see this moving on a daytoday basis . There was a time back in april, as senator mccain there are hundreds of different groups that shift allegiances and alliances and it makes it very challenging to determine what we are really looking at. The Intel Community is hard at it. We are hard at it with our regional partners. There was a time when i was fearful that the extremist element, the jihadist side of the opposition was gaining considerable strength. Of late, through some efforts we have made to convince our allies to avoid creating a problem by empowering some of these groups, we have had some success at that. We have had some success at identifying more clearly a part of the opposition that could be built and trained not only militarily this is the point i want to make. This opposition has to not only be prepared militarily, but it has to be prepared if it achieves a position of governance inside of syria, otherwise the situation will deteriorate further. Thank you. Thank you very much. Before i call on senator wicker, senator in off as a comment. I was told by my staff when i came back that i might have been misunderstood. The strongest supporter of using gitmo, not just for incarceration, but for trials. The language that is in the bill, i know mr. Chairman, i appreciate your good faith efforts in the language that was in there, but i am against the language. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to state that. Thank you. , mr. Chairman. General dempsey, welcome back. Lets talk about the situation in egypt. There has been disagreement in washington about the wisdom of continuing to provide assistance. I dont see many jeffersonian democrats in egypt, but i believe the Egyptian Military has acted with great professionalism and restraint throughout the three years of difficult transis 2011 ouster of hosni mubarak. I believe one of the primary reasons or hasnt been more bloodshed and suffering during this time of transition is the support the United States has provided to egypt through Foreign Military sales and military to military cooperation. In light of recent events, some have called for the end of these programs. Let me tell you how i feel about this and our commitments under the camp david accords and let you respond. First, we must maintain the strength of this relationship to enable us to assist and influence egypts lee terry leaders. Second, the United States would be shortsighted to overlook the return on the debts that we get from the Egyptian Military, like suez canal access, counterterrorism cooperation on these are examples of the benefits we have derived from these relationships. Third, the Egyptian Military has played a stabilizing role during egypts transition. Our commitments under the camp david accords have yielded sustainable peace between israel and egypt. We must acknowledge israeli Prime Minister netanyahus statement this weekend on face the nation that the camp david accords have been the cornerstone of peace between us and our neighbors and it has been the cornerstone of stability in the middle east. With me regarding the importance of military to military relationships as enablers of u. S. Foreign policy . I do, senator. Do you agree with me we should continue to maintain and foster the strength of u. S. Egyptian military relationships . I do. Theyr government decides have to take some action based on existing legal frameworks and restrictions, i would recommend we find a way to restore those as quickly as possible, even if it meant conditioning in some way. But i strongly believe we have to maintain our contact with the Egyptian Armed forces. Do you have any reason to believe as some have feared, and as some fear now is that weapons and equipment we provide to the egyptians or we have provided in the past have been used or will be used or would he used in ways that might eventually endanger the United States military or civilian personnel or United States interest . There is no indication that would be a concern. In your opinion, was the elected government of Mohamed Morsi moving toward a dictatorship . I would like to use this opportunity to express my conversations with my counterpart. I can tell you that they very strongly believed that. Let me ask you before i move i made some pretty emphatic statements. Would you like to elaborate . You an like to give opportunity to elaborate on what you said about the relationship we have had assistance and sales we have had with the Egyptian Military. Thank you. Own personal experience goes back to when i commanded centcom in 2008. They are a very Strong Partner of the United States. We enjoy preferential passage in the suez, dynamic overplay, they have committed to the camp israelicords, the military considers the Egyptian Military a Strong Partner, and so in my personal experience, which goes back about five years, they are worth the investment. With regard to syria, the chairman talked in his Opening Statement about a postassad solution. A negotiated solution. That unless the momentum shifts, i and i think senator donnelly was concerned about this, unless the momentum shifts back toward the rebels, there is hardly any chance for that sort of solution that the chairman seeks and is hoping for. I agree. , he momentum absent flows as the momentum atoms and flows, each side feels compelled to seek a negotiated settlement, sure. If i can, i think you answered a question from the chairman about ways in which military support could be gotten to the rebels, and i think he asked about enabling other governments to support the military efforts if we are unable politically or unwilling to do so. Do you remember that question . I do. Can you elaborate at all or is that something you dont feel comfortable talking about . Im comfortable talking about the commitment to improve the capabilities of the opposition. There are any number of ways to do it. Heard me say its not just about improving more and enhancing the military. I understand that, but that is what my question is about. Other nations as well. There is a significant diplomatic effort to bundle our efforts together into something that will increase the pace at which their capability could be increased. As to whoou elaborate these allies might be . I would rather do that in a classifieds adding, senator. In a classified setting, senator. Thank you very much. Thank you, senator wicker. Senator reid is going to yield momentarily to another senator who is next in line, senator joe brand. Gilibrand. Thank you for your Public Service and dedication in all you do for our nation. I would like to continue the conversation on syria. I have grave concerns over the broader regional concern over the broader regional security, particularly when we see has bola fighters in syria. I want to talk about what this means for syrias neighbors. Has bola and lebanon and iran have been able to have influence that israels order. The same be able to do with syria in your estimation and what can we do to prevent both ag hottie haven as well as a stronghold for iran for hezbollah and syria . To prevent both a jihad he haven as well as a stronghold for iran. You are exactly right to think of this as a regional issue. Iran is notthat just a challenge to the United States in its nuclear aspirations, but also through its surrogates and proxies, its arms sales and so they are trying to foment a sectarian calm sectarian conflict that runs from a root to domestic to damascus to baghdad. Strategy that would under 10 our efforts would be regional, which means we need to increase our support of Lebanese Armed forces on one side and Iraqi Armed Forces on the other and jordanian and turkish partners on the northern and southern flank. With regard to the broader question on iran, i have heard both cautious optimism and grave concern about the elections as the new president. What is your assessment on the impact of the election . Do you expect the election to change the policies . What is your initial assessment . First of all, i reflect on secretary gates, ruhanni has a reputation for being moderate. He has made moderate statements but he is not in office yet. We think he will struggle against the conservative leadership that may prevent him from becoming a moderate. The watchword here is prudence. It makes sense to reach out to him, but not to do so naively. I think we are in a good position here. It is an Interesting Development and nobody expected him to be elected. The lives of iranian moderates. We need to make it the elusive iranian moderate. We need to make it clear they cant develop Nuclear Weaponry. What do you see as a growing threat and a serious concern for our National Security and economy . We have been working on the Cyber Warrior act. Center blunt is in charge on the republican side. To create a National Guard unit solely for the Cyber Security of our nation. To get people from the private sector that are dedicated to the military. They can be more costefficient as well. Can i have your opinion on what the impact would be with a dual status, and if that would be better for our defense and growing this talent and out there is a commitment to the various roles. The Service Chiefs are taking a look at it. With the advice of the commander. The resurgence see to this, there really would be no role. It is really title 10, but go ahead. It is really part of our force thats going to grow. Principally, to help us defend our own networks. The cyber attacks, obviously. We ought to play our role in assisting them. We end up finding ourselves in a war. We are short of money and it will cost a lot to develop this capability. It is not bear all the time. There is expertise out there that we want. We want to look very closely at if this makes sense financially. We have been spending time on Sexual Assault in the military. One of the things i want to get your thoughts on, the military has had a change of position on article 60 that we can take it outside the chain of command. Why do you think removing it would be different in any way . I imagine it would not have a different impact of removing article 60. We had put in place other mechanisms for prosecutors and an appeal process that allowed us to consider changing the authorities of the convening authority. It is different than it seems to us, taking the offense out. The important thing to me is to make sure there is an active deterrent out there. Someone knows they will because and prosecuted. It is the same thing that worked in the drug world for us. The commander is responsible for that. Keeping a number of articles, you are still fundamentally responsible for command climate good order and discipline. The commander is responsible, you have to set the climate. Or they cannot be retaliated against. The only difference is the legal judgment with what the army has talked about, there are 35 cases were a civilian District Attorney refused to take the case. The chain of command insisted that the case be taken inside the military chain of command. There are 14 that are not yet resolved. Of the remainder of the 25 im sorry, there are 39. That is a conviction rate. Of those that were convicted, 25 or 24 got punitive discharges. They are doing prison time. ,f the army had not taken that those people would be walking the street. The victims would not have had the resolution they deserve in this case. This was done inside the chain of command, the chain of command insisting it be pursued successfully. I worry if we turn this over, whether its a civilian da, that they will make the same kinds of decisions those civilian prosecutors made. I worry we will have fewer prosecutions we want prosecutions that will result in guilty verdicts. Weighing these kinds of evidence, its difficult to be trained to know if it can be so important. You may help a handful of victims, but we are still having 23,000 victims who dont feel the system is strong enough, objective enough and transparent enough to report. If we are going to address the 22,000 cases as opposed to the handful where the judgment of the commander might have helped, you need to change the system. But my time has expired. I hope you know that we embrace this discussion. Service you for your and thoughtfulness. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for being here and your families for distinguished service to our country. Thank you for your recent visit to new hampshire. It meant a lot to our men and women in uniform. That itd to me after said so much about your leadership and our civilian workforce deeply appreciated it. I wanted to ask you yesterday, i was deeply troubled by report. Hat came out about the pow mia the leadership weaknesses and fragmented organizational ucture is undermining including 49 from new hampshire, vietnam and korea, i believe we have a moral obligation to those we have left behind. This follows up a recent report that found an internal study,his effort was so inapt mismanaged and wasteful that it descending into total failure and there were allegations that the internal. Tudy had been suppressed i would like to ask you what we are going to do about it and how are we going to make sure we fill our responsibility to those who have served our country and have been left behind so they understand they are not forgotten. Thank you for the hospitality last week. Get so much out of the visits at of the to the soldiers and sailors. I can tell you the secretary of defense, while on travel, called me up to make sure i had been , he wants to it get to the bottom of it. It is so new and so discouraging and moving rapidly toward his graceful. I assure you we will get added. We have a new commander and i can tell you he is seized with this as well. I hope we can have, whether in the committee, a full hearing on this because i believe its that important to get the issues that have been raised by this report. , theld like to ask you chairman and Ranking Member of this committee wrote to secretary hegel and we have heard testimony both in the readiness subcommittee and every subcommittee within this committee about the impact of sequestration. In that letter, the chairman a package ofreduce reductions for fiscal year 2014 Defense Budget that would be the most workable approach for meeting the 52 billion in reduction required by sequestration under the budget control act. We did receive a response from secretary hegel, but it doesnt answer our question on the specific how do you put together a contingency plan for the 52 billion required by sequestration in the year 14 . Having received their physical guidance about two be a ago, it will contingency that addresses the president budget submission and sequestration. Can you give me a commitment as to when this will be produced to us so that we can understand the impacts of sequestration and understand what it really means in terms of the readiness of our forces . That is a very fair question. The answer that came back is the first condors of what the execution would look like under those conditions. It is important to keep in mind that there are about five things the budget planners are having to go through right now. They are going through what 14 is going to look like, they are finalizing what the execution would look like under the president s budget. They are also having to develop these people are full one day a week, so it is tough to produce fine detail that quickly, but the services have been giving the have been given that task and you will have it. We need it sooner and let me just say you can do all the planning you want, but it is high in the sky right now. The law is the sequestration and until the American People understand and everyone here understands what the real impact is, that is what im hoping you will make the priority. I know i dont have that much time, but i want to ask you, i sawan, about russia and a recent report russia is in violation of the intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty. Is that true . We cannot something address in a classified hearing. The point being we have good verification methods in place, we watch this very closely. In compliances is of the start treaty. Im not asking about the start treating. Im asking this because heres where we are with russia. A survey with the human rights activist they have not ruled out granting asylum to edward snowden, and today, there was a report that one of letter putin us chief opponents, a candidate for the mayor of moscow was convicted and it reeks of using the judicial system for putin to punish his opponents. One thing that concerns me is theirsture with russia, violation of treaty obligations is an important issue. The president recently announced he would be considering further reductions to our nuclear optional nuclear arsenal. Do you believe we should do that unilaterally . Goodbyes we have given is we not do that unilaterally. That we do it as part of a package of reduction. If there were unilateral reductions, would you oppose those reductions . I would not give that advice. You would advise against unilateral reduction question were we already have. Preserve the triad and modernize i think given the behavior of russia, it is at best naive to think we are going to be able to negotiate any kind of further reductions, which i would up rose. And light of what i just described, we cant just discuss it in this setting, but if they are in violation of other treaty obligations coupled with their other behavior, i dont see how we can expect good faith negotiations from the russians at the moment. , thank you very much chairman. Thank you for your service to the nation. You cant do this alone. General dempsey, one of your duties is to provide your military advice on the strategic and military activities needed to address that environment through the chairmans Risk Assessment. Given the current world environment which seems to be justing minute by minute, detail what has happened the what changes would you make to your Risk Assessment that you made in april . First, we change the one we submitted in april, which is an accumulation of Combatant Commander requirements. Since i have been chairman over the past two years, the requirements that the Combatant Commanders have submitted has actually increased and taken on in centcom and africa on noticeably. We hesitate in trying to align what we are doing with National Security interests because thats not our responsibility to prioritize. We made an estimate of what we are doing across the globe that is being placed at risk. We looked inside the services at how the health of the force is evolving. This document did not account for sequestration and once that became a reality, i would have to revise my Risk Assessment. I would have to do so to align myself with what senator i just described. Ayotte hastor ascribed. I would like to point out that despite years of efforts, we have a sexual abuse problem in the military. As you both indicated, we have two not rhetorically, but fundamentally respond to this. One aspect we focus on is that the judicial system my experience suggests there are other levers that are critical to the climate, command structure and performance of the military. They include the evaluation, promotion and retention. If we dont focus on those areas, we will never have that kind of force we need and the trust we need among men and women who serve in that force. Can you comment on that . Colleaguesand your have taken on a leadership role on this issue. How do we make this so that every day someone thinks about their responsibilities there is a judicial process, but this is what is expected of me, to stay in the force, succeed in the force and have the force succeed. There are an enormous number of aspects to that answer and i will touch on a few. The most important thing is that the command climate, we hold commanders responsible for , that makes the likelihood of a Sexual Assault drop down to hopefully zero. It is about teaching people what a heinous crime this is, about reporting it if you see it, about intervening. Its not a whole host of measures commanders must take to establish a claimant. That is one of the issues the surveys will be seen by the next echelon up in the chain of command. Protectsext echelon up the problem the climate is not where it needs to be, then canon can be taken and it be entered into the valuation as a sort of down strike. Keeping with the prevention and advocacy and assessment pieces of what we are trying to to take on this pernicious issue, it is absolutely vital that the climate come to the forefront and we hold commanders responsible for that. Thank you. Can youdempsey, comment on the current level of cooperation between the government of kabul and the nato command . Every day seems to be another example of friction rather than harmony. , notably theonship president of afghanistan is scratchy. Thats probably as good a word as i can describe it. What hedressing describes as issues of sovereignty and we are trying to close the gap on what an enduring presence and commitment might look like. Thank you. In terms of the recent contraband discovered coming out of cuba to north korea, do you have a rough assessment at this that humanss it trying to rehabilitate their equipment or are they trying to equipment the Intelligence Community is still evaluating that grade it would be easy to come to the conclusion that under the guise of returning it to north korea for a pair that these are jet engines going to north korea to defend their stocks. It exposes north koreas willing to finance of the community and the United Nations resolutions and the like. We are glad the panamanians discovered this so that we can once more exposed to the world the cynical behavior of the north korean regime. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you both for your service. The russianpsey, president said a couple days ago that if he thought hurting u. S. Relationships would be a consequence of granting snowden asylum, he would not do it. What would your advice be to the russian president about granting snowden asylum . I think there would be consequences across all of our relationships grade it would be damaging . I think it would be, sir. Thank you. The Prime Minister of israel was on face the nation was quoted on sunday and said the following things about you ran. Ande is a new president his strategy is to be a wolf in sheeps clothing, smile and build a bomb. Do you agree with that analysis . I would certainly agree is there any doubt in your mind this guy is actually a moderate . We are looking for the elusive irani and a moderate. This determine how i vote for you. Do you believe the current president of iran is a moderate . He does not have a history of being a moderate trade i will take that as a no. The United States should ratchet up sanctions and make it clear to iran that they wont get away with it. If sanctions dont work, they have to know that we will take military action. Thats the only thing that will get their attention. Do you agree with the israeli Prime Minister about the threat of military force against the Iranian Nuclear program, that it may be the only thing to get their attention . That has been our approach all along. We are on the same sheet of paper there. Were going to hit them and they are going to move. Here is what he said about all the problems in the middle east all the problems that we have will be dwarfed by this apocalyptic extreme regime that would have an atomic bomb. It would make a terrible, catastrophic change for the world and United States. Do you agree with his assessment of how important it is to not allow the irani and get a Nuclear Weapon . I do. As to afghanistan a 12,000 member force, not counting American Special forces soft capability would be a reasonable number to leave behind in terms of fallen force. Is he in the ballpark . He is and we have said so at nato and various sessions. Is very encouraging. Do you agree would be a wise investment to keep the army at 352,000 rather than draw them down to 232 . I do. Is assad winning . Currently, the tide seems to have shifted in his favor. Do you agree . I would say the tide has shifted to his favor in the central and western part of the country. It is fragile in the north. Is he winning overall . If i had to pick who is winning, it would be the regime, but not my much. The regime is winning but not much. Could they be winning without russias help . I think the most important help they are getting is iranian and hezbollah. I dont know whether russians whether russias opus vital, but it is certainly helping. General dempsey, how would you evaluating significance of russias help to assad . They are arming lets put it this way if the russians said we want you gone tomorrow, would it matter to assad . It would be a game changer, wouldnt it . Assad is going to fight to the death. Do you agree with me that if russia said to assad we no longer support you, it would be the ultimate game changer . It would be a very important game changer. Do you see russia doing that . No, sir. What is the most catastrophic outcome . If he wins over time and doesnt leave versus having to do you with the fact that we kick senate we kick him out because we say he has to go. What is worse, him say and staying or going . Said it is the nations policy that he must go. Is worse for him to stay and we dont achieve our policy. Do you agree . Yes. He be in power next year if nothing changes . If we keep where we are at, do all helpingey are assad . I do. Do you agree hezbollah is helping assad . Yes. If nothing changes. If we dont change our game, will he be in power one year from now . I think so. What will that mean for the king of jordan . Will he be in power one year from now . Thee is concerned of demographics in his nation. You are right. Bedoes not think he will here in another year because there are a million Syrian Refugees destabilizing jordan. What would that mean for the region and us if the king of jordan is gone one year from now . Is that a good thing or a bad thing . It would be a bad thing. It would be a horrible thing. If he is still empower one year from now, what effect would that have on iraq . Lex it is already destabilizing western iraq. Arrack would begin to fall apart at a faster rate. That would be a possible scenario. The likelihood of hezbollah getting russianmade advanced weapons if he still in power one year from now, does that go up or down . From the israeli standpoint, up three from israels standpoint, one of the worst nightmares short of an iranian Nuclear Weapon would be hezbollah getting advanced by russiald to assad and that likelihood would go up if you still empower one year from now . Yes. We will talk the second roundabout sequestration. Thank you for your answers. Could finish the first round by noon, there will be a brief second round, that is my current intention which i shared with the Ranking Member. Just when i think we have made progress on wartime contracting, something happens and i realize we have still miles to go before we have a handle on this. The latest incident that has come to my attention is the 34 million base in leatherneck in afghanistan, when the marines on the ground found out this was going to be billed, they sent the word up that they dont need it, dont want, and that was in may of 2010. In february of 2011, contracts were issued and the building was built. Now we know its never going to be occupied, probably going to be demolished because it was done according to u. S. Wiring standard. For the Afghanistan Army to take it would be quite an investment for them to convert the building for their use. I understand an investigation is ongoing. I need to hear from you, general dempsey, that you are committed to getting to the bottom of this because if we dont fix accountability in this instance im a whoever pulled the trigger on that expenditure really needs to be disciplined. My opinion is they should be fired. We have to start sending the signal that when people are saying dont build this, its a waste of money, then it doesnt get out. Are you aware of this situation . My commitmentve we will get to the bottom of it. I could share just a bit of good was not caught, but we have the obligated about 1. 3 billion in contracting for u. S. Forces in afghanistan in a similar amount ill probably twice that amount for the afghan Security Forces. That is good. I appreciate that very much. There has been discussion around military Sexual Assault that our allies have gone to a different system. The reason this was talked about within the context that canada and europe had gone to a different system in order to provide more protection for victims, we got a chance to take a close look at those countries and what happened, and it is my understanding the changes in that system resulted from a concern there was not adequate due process of protection for arbitrators. Is that correct . That is correct. Based on our last hearing, weve done a lot of research into why our allies went that path. Just because they wanted to protect the accused, but they are mandated to do it by human rights courts in the european union. The other argument being made about leaving this in the hands of just prosecutorss, civilian and or jagged prosecutors, is that this would increase reporting. Ive had an opportunity to look at the numbers in canada and we have 176 in 2007, 166 and 2008, 166 in 2009, 176 in 2010. In the uk, their numbers have gone down over the last several years in terms of reports. Rom 54 to 40 240 in australia. They have been stable at 82, 80 6, 84 over the last several years in israel. There had been a fact about reporting going up when they changed part of their system when it was related to lesser sexual offenses. There was testimony about reporting going up 80 . These are sexual related defense sexual related offenses total. If you understand the enormity of the challenge here and what they are looking at in israel 2726 in 2009, 14 and 2011, and 2012. There is an 80 increase when they change this between 11 and 12 grade but they only got back to the numbers they had a few years rigorously before the change was made. In the all Aware Research you have done that changing the system has resulted in an increase reporting anywhere in the world . No anecdotal evidence that has increased reporting. My counterparts, it has slowed the system down. We are going to leave this hearing now. You can see it in its entirety at cspan. Org. Ofre going to the house representatives live. You are watching live coverage on cspan. The speaker pro tempore the house will be in order. The chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. The clerk the speakers room, washington, d. C. , july 22, 2013. I hereby appoint the honorable steve womack to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. Signed, john a. Boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. The speaker pro tempore pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority er