Could build for the cost of one of our carriers. Its an interesting statistic, but those missiles are kind of useless without satellite constellations, without isr ground isr status, without an extensive networking system connecting these nodes, without operation centers. There is a certain amount of cost that goes into the delivering of that weapon that gets forgotten about when we do that math. First class hannah nobel. This is a question for dr. Hendricks. You spoke about a submerged arsenal, but if the carriers were to be mixed, what do you propose would replace them, and how would their mission be fulfilled in their absence . So were getting ready to try to field the ohio class replacement. Its coming in with with an estimate of about 6. 6 billion a copy with some estimates up around 7. 2. The original or the four ssgns we have are actually the first four of the original ohio class. Due to treaty limitations, we had to repurpose, so we took them out of service as submarines and we had them carry up to 150 tomahawks apiece. I would suggest that where were at in the 30year bill program, if the navy made a decision to cease construction of the ford class after the ford, then we would convert or build in ssgns, and with the ssbn bill so that we could create submarines that could carry precision strike weapons, conventional precision strike weapons with volume to be able to fill out the arsenal in that manner. Third class daugherty. I understand this comes with political elements as well, but i wish to avoid those. If the United States wished to replicate its 1966 actions of sailing carriers between taiwan and china whats the confidence that the United States would have the same effectiveness of doing so within the next decade . Well, i think there is two questions. There is the capability of doing it . Heck, yeah, we could do that. The question though would it be a smart, geopolitical move to make . One of the reasons in my view that the pla navy has built itself into the force that it is was that 1996 Taiwan Strait issue. I think it was a wakeup call to the pln that we could operate with impunity in their front yard. Could we do it . Yes. Would it be wise . Probably not. There is also another point that you make there which is the time element. Its more likely that we would do it now than in 10 years. Two reasons. One, were going to be in a different place geostrategically at that point in time and physically at that point in time. Theyll also be at a different place at that point in time. Some analysts believe that the problem point of maximum i wont use the word maximum danger because it harkens too much back to the cold war, but china is at a point where they have to get great before they get old. That critical juncture point with them is around the 2025 time point, so if they havent established themselves as a great power in control of their spirit of influence by that time, theyre not going to. It also calls into question the stability of the communist party as the ruling party in china. And so as we get closer to that point, there is going to be a greater sensitivity to the United States operating with impunity in their backyard. As a matter of fact, i think there is an expeditious scale of reaction. Right now were in a stronger position, although theyre gaining. By that point in time theyll be desperate to demonstrate they are the strongest nation in that region and in that particular geographic spot. So that would have higher consequences as we get closer to that time frame. They dont have to the chinese dont have to build a navy thats bigger and better than ours they just have to build a navy thats bigger and better than what we can put in our front yard. Sir, for the alternative that you propose with the submarines, how does that work with the other missions that the carriers and the Carrier Strike group manages, such as the humanitarian effort . Surely our navy is not the only offensive force, which in my understanding of your proposition, thats the primary thing of the subs. So how do you propose that would work, sir . Its funny you use the humanitarian assistance and Disaster Response as pebtpect of this, because indicatorthe carrier is not the ultimate platform to carry out these missions. The ultimate carrier is the amfibs where they have a deck and they can float them into har bores and they have large helicopter fleet that has heavy lifting capability that can move things. One of the things we saw in haiti, in the initial days we could only use the helicopter aspect of the air wing because the runway was out at haiti. It had been knocked out of commission by the earthquake. In fact, the hdr mission is better served by the navys inventory. And one of the things were seeing is the entire inventory is under pressure because of the size of our shipbuilding budget and some of the assets were purchasing within that budget. There are other assets like mobile landing platforms, asfps that can also provide support for asdr missions that are coming in at a much cheaper price and probably a moreau fishl use spaish official use of aspects. Can i talk about economy sir . One of our common heroes is general president eisenhower. I think though we have a slightly different view, and ill speak for jerry for just a second because im allowed to right now. I think jerry really respects president eisenhower because of his view that he economized, that he looked at what we were spending in the military and he achieved economys more bang for the buck and i think he would like to see us do that. We would all like to see that. What i saw from eisenhower was prioritization. The u. S. Air force got 49 of its Defense Budget in 1958. 47 . He prioritized, right . Id like to see some of that prioritization go on today and thats an argument i would love to have about what capability and set of capabilities should be prioritized within the big mix. So where jerry talks a lot about economy, im going to talk about priority. Eisenhowers contribution was that he moved the needle in a direction that the country needed for its security requirements. Id like to see that happen now and i think if that debate happened in a headsup atmosphere of integrity, cpal would win. I think weve exhausted these questions, so ill open the floor up to questions from the audience. Jerry bryan great conversation there. So jerry you made some great arguments about cost. I can get this many or hire replacements for one class. Its great from a cost perspective, but what do you really think of about, okay, how many higher replacement sgns do i really need to provide the same capabilities . The Aircraft Carrier while it may be somewhat, you know, suspect, you guys say how vulnerable it is but it can deliver an immense nothing compares to the amount of ordinance it can load. The submarine, im all about undersea warfare and bringing back the sgns in the next generation, but have you really looked at not just cost but capabilities . Ill take two points here. One is about the delivery of ordinance. One of the things that shocked me when i began my analysis on this, which i did back in 2009 was how much ordinance we actually dropped. The number actually surprised me. It was around 14,000 pieces of ordinance over 14 years. At least thats based on repurchase rates on how much we were spending to buy that ordinance back into the inventory. So when we talk about dropping ordinance, and that took into account everything you know, from missiles to bombs, et cetera. The amount of ordinance that we look at may be actually lower than what you think, and were also entering an era of precision strike where were not dropping, you know 10 bombs or 20 bombs to take out a bridge. In fact, were dropping one because of our ability to get at that target. So i think thank you to sort of step back and look at what is the volume plan that you have to have have, in the war plans how many are you looking at and you go from there. As far as what you buy back is a critical question. The cno testified in front of the congress and said if we were going to fulfill all the demands of the cocoms we needed a navy that was 450 ships. 450 ships . Were at 286, 289 right now. We havent seen 400 since, oh when bush won, i think. 92 . Yeah, 92. So if we have to get going and live within our cost constraints, then we have to find tradeoffs that allow us to get platforms. Why do we need 450 ships . Most of it is naval presence. Its to show that the americans dont have resolve. You need a balanced force that has both a highend capability as well as a lowend presence capability. So when i brought up those numbers, when we talk about 24 lcs, yeah, i know everyone likes to kick around lcs, its a great red, white and blue flag and its got a gun on it. In some missions thats what i need. How do i find the assets to do that . I think, quite frankly, in my own analysis i come up with a portion of about 350 ships we need. And if we did tradeoffs right now, quite frankly we build two berks a year. If we build one berk a year and took the remainder of 1. 2 billion per year, we could make more ships at the high end. We need to make sure we preserve that in a war time capability submarines and otherwise, and we have to find a way to get us to those higher numbers in the fleet to uphold american interest. Secretary gates used to refer to thinking in the pentagon as last waritis. The discussion of how many bombs we dropped in the last 14 years is interesting, except we were bombing places in which the amount of bombs sort of exceeded the number of lucrative targets, if you will. There is not a whole lot to bombing in afghanistan. I read the papers. Great power of dynamics, great power of politics great power of conflicts. It was back in the news. I agree we entered a time with one bomb one target. Thats great. Those kinds of conflicts, mass still matters. Im concerned about our industrial bases ability to produce to that mass. Were going to have we will obviously use precision weapons but there are a lot of targets. There will we have a lot more weapons. On the ships well have to have places to store them. This is one of the great tradeoffs between an amphib a big deck amphib and an Aircraft Carrier. An Aircraft Carrier has 23 times the amount of magazine space than an lha has. 23 times. Thats a lot of bombs. And in a big war, a lot of bombs matter. So follow up on that last waritis, next waritis thing. One of the Lessons Learned to come out of this, if you look for an example of a profile you would need in an antiwaritis program, youre looking at about 10,000. You would launch, go up hit the big wing. You would go up and have to be on station when you come back. So we made a decision in the midst of this that we were going to invest in a capability that was going to increase our sorting capacity within the fleet by 33 , going from about 120 to 160 sorties a day. We paid almost twice as much for the Aircraft Carrier to get me 33 increase in sortie capability, but what did we see when we had to launch range, sort Sortie Missions of about 40 missiles a day. By the time you would launch, tank, penetrate come back the air wing is not going to fly that many missions. So why did we pay the premium for that for that high density warfare environment . I think there is some math we have to go back and look at going forward. You used the word symbology. I assume what were talking about is the utility of this asset in peacetime to reassure or just send another message of this persuasion. But im curious putting aside the utility carrier of peace time, this concept of an sngn or sngnx, what role does that have during peace time or this gray zone where it could go hot when its inherently not supposed to be seen by our allies or not be seen by our competitors . Its stealthy its underwater we dont know its there. What role could it play to the carrier in peace time or the crisis . We didnt spend the money we spent to buy a peace time asset, we bought a war time asset. In peace time i use these things, in fact, i use them a lot. In fact, im burning them out. Because were keeping them out there deployed for longer and longer periods of time. But what is the value we assigned to that . Again, ill give to you that i assigned the value of 100 to the Aircraft Carrier. When it shows up it makes a difference like nothing else out there. Everyone notices. But let me ask you, then what is a value you assigned to other assets in the fleet . Does a berk carry value . If so what is it . Stipulate what that is. If its. 2 on a scale of 1 to 100, give me that value and allow me to take that math in the peace time environment to figure out what is the most effective and efficient method to demonstrate naval presence . My daughters are constantly watching matt geo Something Like this. No one watches the History Channel in my house. So there was a thing on about the grizzly bear and the moderator made the point that the most dangerous avoided animal in the woods is the baby grizzly bear. Every other animal in the woods will avoid the baby grizzly bear. Why . Because they dont know where the mother bear is. The ssgn and the threat that it brings can be the mother bear. Right now the mother bear is seshd by served by the carrier. But we can transition that threat to other platforms and make sure everyone understands that if you harass and molest that platform, you have to deal with somebody else behind you. There are other capabilities that can be brought to bear. Whatever the way, my sense is that no other platform has as much weight across the spectrum of presence deterrence or some have great war value ssns specifically, great war value, little presence, some de deterrence. The Aircraft Carrier, a lot in all three. University of oxford, primarily a question for commander mcgrath. You, in your remarks, you mentioned you believe that complaints about or believing the problem is in the air wing obviates the carrier. But i believe we have that backward. If the air wing is the weapon of the carrier, then the shape of the air wing ought to determine the nature of the carrier. We can certainly hypothesize a radical change in the nature of the air wing with unmanned warfare and a potential to create a new kind of air wing. My question for you is can you justify a supercarrier, nuclear supercarrier, given a new kind of airway. What about from heel all the way up from the power plant to the placement of the bridge to everything that makes a supercarrier a supercarrier can you justify with this air wing and might we be radically briefing here . Thats a great question. As to the deeper aspects of Aircraft Carrier design im a history major. But i can tell you that the demonstrated ability of that platform to evolve, to accept the evolution of the air wing the design that went into ford specifically to give it the ability to bring on new generations of aircraft unmanned aircraft, heavier aircraft. I think the electromagnetic launching system is all about generating variable loads to be able to shoot a lot of different size aircraft but especially heavier aircraft. The demonstrated history of the platform i could give you the evidence that we have before us. The evidence we have before us is that the platform has accepted aircraft designed to fly off of it. If you want to design an aircraft that needs a 5,000foot runway to take off and is too brittle for a cat shot an Aircraft Carrier is not the right platform to carry it. As for the ability of that ford class platform to accept a new generation of unmanned carrierlaunched airborne strike and surveillance vehicles, irrespective of how they come out, i think the easy answer is if you design if you come into the competition with an option that cant be shot off the ford, you wont win. Youre dead on arrival. Weve got time for two more succinct questions and two more succinct answers. First im a former naval person, and im honored to count both of you debaters as friends and colleagues of mine and i congratulate both of them on superb performances tonight. I guess my questions go to jerry. Regarding the vulnerability of the supercarrier it strikes me that you discount what can be done by deception. I dont want to go there right now. But what i did want to crow about just a bit, and that is the cost issue that you raise. And it seems that rather than the carrier, you would default to a submerged strike capability. And one pays a high premium to submerge anything. And thats probably why the u. S. Navy has decided not to go forward with the replacement for the ohio ssgn because of cost, i believe. So my question to you is this. Given the cost premium that one pays to submerge anything especially something thats going to launch why would you want to do that in a submerged platform rather than a surface platform . Im not talking now about necessarily a supercarrier but there are other surface assets in which one could place strike assets and distribute those across a wide range and probably get at the vulnerability issue youre talking about. So the question is this. Why submerge if youre not going to put strike assets if youre not going to emphasize a carrier for your strike platform, why would you want to submerge it . Ill try to give you a succinct answer. I used the ssgn because its the most prominent example of strike platforms that are out there that we currently see. There is actually a range of capabilities. There are unmanned, towed, submerged capabilities, there are semisubmersibles that have been looked at that operate in neert seizure the near surface region that could be purchased because they dont have the sub costs that go into that. The reason i look into that environment is because we have a clear, specific limitations on flexibility. So how would you address that . Could you suggest some of the limitations . Hitting a moving target. The flexibility of having a pilot in the aircraft to assess to be directed by someone on the ground, the basics of tactical support in air power. So we began to do target recognition capabilities back in the 1980s that looked at both mobile and unmobile platforms. There is also offboard capabilities that can come into play. Uabs clearly do not go out and just fly themselves all waitthe way there. There is often a man in the loop. Yes, communications can be disrupted, but were looking at linkages that build those things back and forth. The fact of the matter is the United States has demonstrated in an era of renovation that it can come up with a technological solution to solve these types of problems, and theyre already at work in that industry. Well, i want to once again thank captain henderson and commander mcgrath for an enlightening performance and discussion. And to our audience for participating in what i hope to be one of many future debates. Id like to end with a final thought. I think it would be imprudent for me as a historian to predict the future and the past. What we do is use the past to explain the present. But history can be a meaningful way to understand where we are today. Anyone in the audience who is convinced that the Aircraft Carrier is either here to stay or is trending toward obsolescence might be right. Like i said, historians are not story tellers. But we require that the carrier carry context but history only complicates the issue. 200 years ago, the centerpiece of the United States navy was the constitution. They built a war at sea as a commerce raider. 100 years later the Brooklyn Navy yard laid the ship in new mexico. Powered by 2700 horsepower turbo electric weapons in a precise battle in the controlled seas. Yet within three decades essex and independent class fast carriers have become a nucleus of the campaign. It provided the president a wide array of capabilities. The navy understood the cost of these ships to the nation and has proven pretty agile to a changing threat spectrum. And thats the key. Its not the lifeless platform that determines its utility but the navys ability to adapt it to changing circumstances or to move in a new direction. The point is that the more we think about what we do and what tools we need, there is no time like the present to start reading and thinking. That perhaps the more aware well be when the waters beneath us start shifting and respond wisely to support the security needs of the nation. Thank you and have a good evening. [applause] screeria nigeria. You. We complement that coverage by showing you the most relevant Public Affairs events. On evenings c span is the home to public tv in a program that tells our story, including six unique series, american artifacts, touring museums and Historic Sites to discover what sites reveal about americas past. The presidency looking at the policies and legacies of our nations commanders in chief. Lectures in history, top College Professors delving into americas past. And the real series real america, featuring government and educational films from the 1930s to the 70s. Cspan3, funded by your local cable provider. Like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. Here on cspan3, were live now at the Atlantic Council in washington where the u. S. Strategic commander at cecil haney is set to give remarks on Global National security. Haney is expected to speak about the Strategic Deterrence about the threat of organizations, unrest in the middle east and competition for food water and energy should get under way shortly. Some news this morning the Obama Administration setting new rules to loosen the trade embargo against cuba and opening the travel will go into effect friday, reports the associated press. Theyre the next step in president obamas plan to reestablish diplomatic relations with cuba. A briefing is coming up this afternoon at. Here on cspan3 we are waiting for the next program. This is the Atlantic Council in washington where shortly u. S. Strategic commander admiral cecil haney will be talking about Global Threats to u. S. National security. It should get under way shortly. The house and senate arent in session today. House and Senate Republicans holding their retreat in hershey, pennsylvania today and tomorrow look for news conferences from that retreat on our companion network cspan. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are meeting in baltimore. They will hear from president obama later today. House democrats will hold their retreat later in the month. The senate is back tomorrow to pick up debate on the Keystone Pipeline 9 30 eastern over on cspan2. Good morning, council family. Id like to offer a very warm welcome to one and all. Were delighted to have you with us. I very much appreciate you being here with us for this commanders series event where we will hear from admiral cecil d. Haney, commander of u. S. Strategic command. He joins a roster of Atlantic Council commander series of speakers that includes general Martin Dempsey chair of the joint chiefs of staff, and general phil breedlove, commander europe. Admiral haney its great to see you again, we are hopnored and delighted to have you with us sir. Were also honored that the esteemed editor of the New York Times is here for this discussion. Tom, were honored to have you with us. This is our longstanding flagship Speaker Series for senior u. S. And allied military leaders. I want to thank north america for their strong and consistent support of this series. We have more great speakers lined up later in the year including admiral jonathan greener, chief of naval operations, and general john kelley commander of civil command and others. We hope youll be able to join us for those events as well. But today we could not be more excited to host admiral haney. Admiral haney is of course, commander of u. S. Strategic command where he is the leader, steward, advocate of our nations strategic capabilities. U. S. Stratcom encompasses the u. S. Legacy control and mission also has the responsibility for Space Missions global strike, Missile Defense along with global command Computers Intelligence surveillance and reconre reconnaisance, u. S. Cybercom and units of mass destruction. Admiral haneys top priority remains strategic attacks to protect the u. S. And its allies. In addition, he has prioritized fostering enduring partnerships to address a broad range of global challenges, building cyberspace capability and couldnt confronting uncertainty with agility and concentration. This is a particularly difficult time today as we see a surge in russia and china challenging us in capabilities of space and cyberspace as well as iraq and iran with more risks. There are risks in nonstate actors of many of these areas as well. In short Strategic Deterrence may be more challenging today than its ever been. Thats why we at the Atlantic Council have been tackling many of these issues head on including our work on russia, particularly our transatlantic Security Work as we chart a path for a europe whole and free. Likewise, weve been doing extensive programming on cybersecurity in our cyber state Craft Initiative ranging from nato Cyber Defense mission to the recent cyber attack on sony. Our asia Security Mission and middle east peace and thinking about transatlantic security in a global context, and all of this work, of course, undertaken by the center for interNational Security. In that light were very much looking forward to hearing from admiral haney today and to the discussion it will stimulate as we work to better understand the strategic challenges years, and we have jointly produced a commander series since the very start in 2008. The commander series has become an important platform for discussions, key issues and the u. S. Military affairs and defense policies. And a close connection to the transatlantic relations. Were very pleased to see that so many of you could attend today. It is an honor for me to introduce our special guest today, admiral cecil d. Haney. Admiral haney assumed command of the United States Strategic Command in november 2013 after serving as the commander of the u. S. Specific fleet. With the course of his 35yearlong service in uniform hes built a distinguished and decorated career in the navy. He has also served as a congressional appropriations Liaison Officer for the office of the secretary of defense. Admiral haney comes into this with a depth of experience and had previously seshdrved as a Deputy Commander combined with a breath of regional experience as the civil fleet commander and illus illustrative background. He has an appreciation of the problems we face as a nation as well as the resources for strategy. Admiral, were very proud and pleased to have you here today. Please join me in welcoming admiral haney to the stage. [applause] thank you so much. Good morning, governor huntsman and thank you for the kind introduction. Its fantastic to be here today to interact with so many intellectuals, professionals who have been deeply involved in our nations security and policy for decades. Thanks to the brent skullcroft center for these series and the council at large for what you do, stood up to bring Foreign Policy actors together to ensure a better Global Future a nice broad range of Security Issues the council has addressed over the years. Im honored to be here and im astonished to be at the podium by sitting in the audience listening to many of you who engaged so brilliantly in my tough mission to deter strategic attack. While i thank tom shanker in advance for moderating today, he should know that i appreciate his critical analysis of what he termed the new deterrence in his book counter strike that he coauthored with eric smith. As most of you in this audience likely know, tom details how matt kroenig who is also in the audience today and eric labelle were paramount in sparking the debate, and in particular for challenging our thinking with respect to deterring terrorism. It is that typical and type of Critical Thinking and debate that i appreciate. So while i give you some of my thoughts, know that i value different perspectives your opinions, and i look for a meaningful discussion. Look at the world today. Its important to stop and recognize just how far weve come since the end of the cold war. This month marked three years30 years that former president george h. Bush and president yeltsin signed the peace treaty. It helped in the slope of reducing the number of Nuclear Weapons. I can only imagine the exchanges that occurred during that period of our history right here. Today, after providing you a brief overview of my perspectives of the complex security we face. Strategic deterrence with emphasis on the need for a Nuclear Deterrent force. Today, as you know a strategic compliant is perhaps more so than any time in our history as state and nonstate actors challenge our Democratic Values and our security in so many ways. The nature of strategic threats, mass destruction, space, cyberspace, requires serious attention. We continue to see major capabilities to include, but not limited to, the modernization of Strategic Nuclear capabilities, cyberspace possibilities. Its just a growing list of natural disasters, academics and Disturbing Trends setting the strategic balance, giving rise to additional concern not only for me but for my fellow combat ant commanders that are my teammates and that i work very closely with. Perhaps most alarming is the trend of proliferation of those strategic capabilities challenging our ability to hold other Strategic Forces at risk, attemptsing ing attempting to limit our decision and limiting strategic ability. This is also flanked with numerous ungoverned or effectively governed areas that are breeding grounds for bad actors. We know we must continue to confront valid extremist organizations and those who enable them, who demonstrate by their barbaric actions that they understand no boundaries and lack the respect for International Norms as weve sadly seen and witnessed in recent months to include those atrocities in france australia canada, or the recent use of children for suicide bombings in nigeria. Clearly, in the time provided here, im not going to be able to cover each of these areas. But i will address a few that i think you might be interested in from my perspective. So ill start with russia. As most of you know, russia has had more than a decade of investments and modernization across their Strategic Nuclear forces. Now, this is not about a continuation of the cold war. The cold war is over. We know how that all turned out. This is about emerging capability at a time of significant concerns in russians execution of their near and abroad strategy. We continue to express the importance of working against them in every conceivable way in International Media campaigns. You also may have seen news of russians strategic bombers penetrating the u. S. And ally, air defense zones, or perhaps you saw president putin on youtube or his commanders in action both in 2013 and during the ukraine crisis in may of 2014. Russia also has amazing cyber capability. We just have to look back at georgia and ukraine. Russia is developing counterSpace Capabilities, and as general clapper stated russias leads maintain that russia has satellite weapons and conduct satellite research. Today, however, russia is not the only country that is center stage. China is also modernizing their Strategic Forces. While open news source reports the first fleet tests of their new mobile missile, theyre already making progress on a successor that is expected to be another road mobile missile icbm capable of carrying multiple multiple orbiters. They are also providing china with the first sea base nuclear deter rent. As im sure youre aware theyre also developing multidimensional Space Capabilities supporting their axis to axis environmental campaign. But with more than 60 nations operating satellites in space its extremely problematic to see china conducting missiles designed to destroy satellites as we saw back in july of this year and that event in 2007 when their antisatellite weapon created thousands of pieces of debris endangering the Space Systems of all nations. They have also made headlines associated with exploitation of computer network. Russia has conducted multiple Nuclear Tests and claim a position of miniatureized warhead capability by missile. At the same time they continue to move forward with both the development of a new road missile, thekno8 icbm and a new missile submarine. They too, are developing a defense of cyber capabilities, and there have been no shortage of headlines that point to north korea. Iran has made no secret of their desire to acquire Nuclear Weapons and preventing them from acquiring these capabilities is paramount to regional stability. So i remain hopeful that the p 5 plus 1 negotiations will have the desired effect. Like north korea, there are also public examples of their cyber cyberactivities and capabilities. So as you can see, we are of capability. We are fraught with a geographically challengeing environment i have barely scratched the surface. With that picture, i want to give you an understanding of my priorities. As commander of u. S. Strategic and i hope it makes sense my top priority is to deter strategic attack and provide our nation with a safe secure and effective Nuclear Deterrent force. With a National Debt today that is more than 18 18 trillion im mindful some of our most increasing costs are associated with modernizing our Strategic Deterrents. That means getting it right for the long term. We have sustained many current capables capableilityies much longer than planned. The missile ss fielded in the 70s will be sustained until the 2030. The ohio submarine has been extended 40 years of service. Our newest b52 models came off the Assembly Line more than 50 years ago and theres no plans to retire them before 2040. Some of our infrastructures have been around since world war ii and our stockpile is the oldest its ever been with an average age of 27 years. Our nation faces a substantial multi decade recapitalization challenge. We must continue investments toward that effect. Toward that effort. Our planned investments are significant but our commencement with the magnitude of the resource that is our strategic we must get this right. As we reduce the number of launchers and warheads under the new start treaty the value of each remaining element becomes more important while at the same time facilitating the norms set by the nonproliferation treaty. We cannot do this alone however. I work closely with my fellow Combatant Commanders. Its also working with our allies partners and friends and building enduring relationships organizations such as think tanks and ac dem academics to broad think the global challenges. This past year ive had the privilege of being able to have meetings with a number of our allies. To include Public Defense of north korea, france australia, former defense minister of japan, vice chief of defense of the United Kingdom and five partners for space sharing agreements. This past october, we conducted a command and control exercise designed to train our department of Defense Force and access assess our joint operational readiness across all our Mission Areas with a specific focus on nuclear readiness. We did this not by ourselves in conjunction with u. S. Northern command, norad, the joint staffs to include our canadian partners in exercises that were grouped together. Violent shield, positive response and determined dragon. I share this with you as i want you to have an appreciation of how i value partnerships and collaborations and how we at u. S. Strategic command aim to work across the interagency as well as with our allies and partner. As a nation, we are highly dependent on Space Capabilities more so that space is fully integrated in our joint military operations as well as civil and commercial infrastructure. Space today is contested, congested and competitive. We and the International Community at large require assured access. While smas assets continue to face this growing adversaries it continues at the speed of cyber, it cannot be ignored. In our lifetime we have benefitted from increasing computer facilities and it is reasonable as americans to say we have become very reliant on modern technology. This has opened a threat access regarding our Critical Infrastructure and information assurance. I think you can understand why addressing the challenges in space and build inging our cyber cyberspace capacity is a top priority for me. My sixth and final priority is our ability to anticipate change and confront uncertainty with agility and innovation. We cant just look at military doctrine and battle to see how our adversary thinks and what the next move will be. As a society we havent always done well at predicting potential conflicts. We were certainly surprised with the Chemical Attacks in syria ukraine crisis and more recently here, things in france and ottawa canada. It is going to require us to stretch our imagine nation in the art of deterrence to get into what i call the cognitive space, to understand the problems and work even better solutions. I cant stress enough the vitality to bring together our National Leaders to think through and visualize some of our nations most challenging issues. Last summer, we cut the ribbon at u. S. Strategic commands War Gaming Center back there at the air force base in omaha, to help enable and challenge our thinking with the ability to lock at alternative scenario, some plausible today and some unthinkable tomorrow. This is why the department of Defense Innovation Initiative Announced recently by secretary of defense heigl is also very important to me. We need to gohagel. We need to grow innovative leaders and continue Cutting Edge Technology to evolve ideas how to evolve our adversaries and potential adversaries and assure our allies. Now that i covered our pryiority priorities let me shift to the number two topic strategic defense with emphasis on the need for a deterrence force. There are multiple states around the globe who possess Nuclear Weapons or aspirations of acquiring them. In his 2009 prague speech, president obama publicly stated his goal for a world free of Nuclear Weapons. We continue to work towards that goal with the new stark treaty. The president s Nuclear Employment strategy release in june as well as multiple Nuclear Documents including the 2010 Nuclear Posture review and 2013 defense review for nuclear, make it clear the United States must maintain a strong and credible safe, secure and effective Nuclear Deterrent, that we must be prepared for the possibility teter deterrents can fail. 21st century deterrents must be details to specific adversaries an threats and manner so with can predict what deters and what prevents escalation. Given the aspiration of some and modernization of Nuclear Capabilities in the world today there is clearly a need for the United States to maintain a Nuclear Capability as part of our nuclear strategic. While it is clear our Strategic Deterrence includes a tried aad of delivery platforms it is more than that and it all must remain credible for decades to come. It includes the following robust and agile intelligence apparatus that can provide the necessary indications. A synthesis of dedicated ground sensors that provide the critical early warns of missile launchers and bomber threats. National Nuclear Command and control. The necessary infrastructure to sustain Nuclear Weapons without fully testing the warheads today. A credible Missile Defense system that extends and defends against limited attacks from rogue nations. Relevant cyberspace and Space Capabilities. Trained and ready people that conduct strategic operations and planning. Synchronized treaties policies and strategies a Campaign Plan that orients all our assigned capabilities and activities toward a common purpose, of course. This is not just capability but an oh approach that requires our attention and necessary resources. This is why i believe the nuclear preventive established by secretary hagel is theslsn balance of effort to support our nations Strategic Deterrent. In closing let me say this the strategic conference and threat are exploding couple with the proliferation of capabilities continues to threaten our Critical Infrastructure and drink way of life. Even in this era of Significant Resource constraints we must get Nuclear Deterrents right. We must make it clear to our potential adversaries or adversary, restraint is the better course and require us to work as a team as partners government, private sector, academia, to shape policy that will have a meaningful impact on our National Security. As stated by former secretary of state, George Schultz deterrence is not synonymous with nuclear or mutual assured destruction and is exercised in many different way, through nonnuclear military force through economics, through crisis volitions. Of course we could not have this credible Strategic Deterrent today if it were internet for the men and women both in uniform and in civilian clothes who conduct and contribute to our Strategic Deterrent mission day in and day out. Across all areas from under the see to geosink kronnous orbit they are making contributions to our security 24 73 365 days a year. I couldnt be more proud of them and the work they are doing. I hope you have the same sentiments. Thank you for this opportunity and i look forwardture questions to your questions. [ applause ] thank you. Very interesting comments. Thanks to chairman huntsman to fred campeon and bevel for the invitation to moderate today. I will spend a few minutes to unpack the thought provoking questions and open for questions to the audience and we have a hard stop at 10 35. One thing i didnt mention he is a son of washington d. C. And prodigy of our Public School system which means theres hope for my kids. That wasnt out loud is it . Was the mike on . As were here at the Atlantic Council i wanted to start the trip around the world talking about deterrence one you mentioned, russia, of course, as chairman huntsman correctly said deterrence is in many ways more challenging, not that we look back fondly on the horrific fears of the cold war, it seems obvious deterring a Nuclear Russia so aggressive with its conventional capabilities does indeed present you new challenges. What is your thinking about that specifically today especially because its a whole escalatory chain of capabilities russia is using from little green men and information in ways the soviet union simply didnt . I think as you look at russia today, you have to look at it as russia today, understanding its history as well as what has been stated as their goals for the future. As we work through teter rens with them first and foremost we have to have deep cranial understand g understanding of where they are, their thinking and leadership thinking and where theyre trying to go with objectives. As you said in todays world we need to look at it in an integrated fashion. It really requires time, patience and capability in dealing with that. Its very important russia remaines on our radar scope and we work this in a fashion of our capabilities and allies and partners all associated with this. What does that look like exactly . A capability with capability match. You mentioned whole government of course. Most people polled today would say the initiative remains with mr. Putin. How can we deter a very aggressive chess player who seems to be winning so far . I think winning is always looked at better post facto in history. There are a lot of pieces in motion across our various activities as a country at large. I would not want any in this room to think that the United States of america isnt taking that very very seriously. A good way to see a nation, state like ukraine having its sovereignty you have described here is obviously one piece of it similar over crimea and the business of doing this at the same time while doing the flexing what i call strategic capabilities and long range aircraft flights i mentioned earlier in the remarks to exercising of strategic capability at critical points. Theres no doubt in anyones mind russia is very interested and president putin ensuring they are recognized as an n capable state as a Nuclear Capable state. We need to be thoughtful of their endeavors particularly as they advertise broad strategy. Its more than just ukraine from my visual point. As you watch the flexing and structure a number of times president putin has brought it up, this is not about getting into some cold war race with russia its about dealing with it professionally and thoughtfully, using all our mechanisms as a deterrent. We certainly dont know what is inside putins mind right now inflammatory lots of thoughtful analysts have concerns as have leaders in the area that could be next. They like ukraine have a sizable population and it is felt there and that could be popular given article v and the demands for putin to challenge the United States and nato and to try to prove nato is a paper tiger and to move the organization. What is your role in assuring our allies in improving american resolve . My role obviously is take all the missions i have in my job and make sure were ready to execute those, first and foremost. Also with those priorities as i describe here, your Strategic Command doesnt do this alone. We work very closely with our fellow combatant commands and also interagency to be shower we are theyre looking at to be sure we are looking at alternative futures and those kinds of things and be sure were providing National Security apparatus, all the capability associated with it, while at the same time, working in Close Partnership with nato. You just had Phillip Breedlove not that long ago in terms of the work hes doing out there from his standpoint. In the work hes doing we at Strategic Commandni also provide support in that regard and many dialogues we do between us in various forms something to include exercise. You certainly own the Strategic Deterrence from the military standpoint. All the pieces you mentioned including Missile Defense, cyberspace, as well as intelligence, do you feel they are knitted together . Can you get your arms around them in one place at one time or do you feel this stovepiping that creates inefficiencies and risks for plans for Strategic Deterrence . I look at, quite frankly, as i look at that list, if you will what i consider critical in our Strategic Deterrent tool bag, if you will, all of those are important and they have to beu integrated. They have to be an integrated approach in this 21st century we are a part of. As a result, it is very advantageous to have that list of missions because that also glues together other players in incredible ways that allow us to work even more scenes in that regard. The business of being able to continue to work, Missile Defense is important. Part of that calculus i mentioned, one of those ingredients and with it, to be sure wey 6 get the right balance in an effective way and improvements in capability where we need to. Ihdgnt think anybody should right rightly use cloud vis and testseth seth rogen rogen, but i will in the interview. Be careful. You said i was a d. C. School grad. Be careful about that. I want you thinking about new applications for the adversary. I noted with great interest not in this latest go around but a while back when there was an issue with north korea one of the signs of deterrence was Strategic Command sent to south korea a multi mnlillion dollar bomber designed to be fly at night and never be seen yet it deployed over south korea low and slow during the daytime so images of the b2 could be seen throughout the region and in the north. Clearly the demonstration effect of that strategic platform was used in a different way. I thought that was very interesting. Talk a little bit about how you are looking at the north korean threat today with both new ideas and perhaps applications of platforms in new ways. You described one of our mechanisms to describe combatant geocommands around the world activity such as bomber and deterrence missions we go out on. One, it keeps our operators fresh in terms of understanding the environments they could be operating in and, two, provides us with mechanisms tollyies and partners in that respect while honing our skillset. I wont sit here and give you everything in my list quite frankly. We want that kind of capability to show up at the time and place of our choosing. Quite frankly, there is a bit of strength through ambiguity of things we do and we have to be careful as a country of too much chest thumping or demonstrations or discussions about something were going to do before we do it, in terms of things. You should know as you look at the art of deterrence, the business of being able to have survival capability matters and the business of being able to predict and follow the movements of north korea to deter that business is important. Already they had three Nuclear Tests associated with things. They are very vocal where theyre trying to head with associated capability, very important. Key allies not just republic of korea korea, its very important we work with those countries with the Combatant Commander that is in charge of that as we work with the u. S. Strategic command various mechanisms including that. The various business make suring we have a safe and effective Strategic Deterrent, very important when the chief of defense of the republic of korea came through the u. S. Strategic command last year he was very interested understanding our capabilities. We had frank discussions in that regard to why the capability we had in providing assurance for the republic of korea. You talk about capabilities id like to get your idea of your competence level you need and secretary hagel stopped at one of your commands and clearly endorsed the future bomber a very expensive proposition something i imagine you need. What type of platform cape adequates, be it capabilities, be it 61 bomber buster if you can deal with the sequester a matter for the executive and legislative branch. What is important we have a safe and credible Strategic Deterrent now and into the future. Its about sustaining what we have according to the plan we have but not short changing the fact we do need to modernize the capability. You look at that list i gave from sensing capability, Communications Capability and platform that should have a lot of discussion and you think about the b52 bombers you think how long ago the last b52 rolled off the Assembly Line and that were continuing to use both in a conventional and strategic capability day in and day out we ought to be proud of the fact we made those critical investments and able to get the length and legs out of that capability. No doubt we ought to be able to do the same for the future bomber. You look at expense of platforms and look at over the number of years the things like the b52 hotel i just gave an example of its very important to put that into the calculus of the costs because its very important we build our capability so its durable, flexible, it can be survivable in harms way and do it not just for today but many decades to come. To your list of things, i think ive already given that list in the earlier discussion, in terms of things but we can ill afford to take and our strategic capabilities without Something Else to replace it with. Strategy drives the budget, when you say enure. We dont have the budget we had in the 70s. We have shrunk that day and we are under a vector to get to the new start treaty by february 18th. You look at the submarine fleet versus what we had over the years versus still going down the number of 12 for the future to be able to have that survivable Strategic Deterrent capability. I like to put that in perspective in terms of things because i am a big believer as a taxpayer et cetera we have to guard our resources thoughtfully and carefully and have the requisite debates to make sure we have the right balance of things as we go forward in this very complex environment. The other things that might keep you up at night. You mentioned nonstate actors and terrorists. Given the events of recent weeks in paris and elsewhere and also in your role as coordinating the effort to combat weapons of mass destruction, could you describe some of the thinking under way now about Strategic Deterrence against tackytical terrorist actions that have strategic impact and threaten our nation. The whole business of threats to our nation all require a full whole approach, if you will to the problem. You cant just look at it in splinter fashion. Its very important at this point in time we look at countering terrorist capability we keep our new thinking and new approaches and continue to validate old approaches also working, to keep this business going in the right direction for us. As has been stated by many, this is a long journey associated by addressing the violent extremist organizations and that requires a thrust of cranial thinking as well as tactical capability as we go forward to 21st deterrent. Are you concerned at all the 9 11 type event, very well planned. Obvious strategic impact to our nation is being replaced, if not by selfradicalized but tactically less sophisticated attacks, like an ak47 attack in paris, which as far as world impact was almost equal to the shock and horror of a far more complex attack. How does this whole of government try to deter that and prevent that . I think when theres a recognition, as we go forward, you will have problems. This business that has occurred hasnt been something our nations have not been working towards and thinking about et cetera. But preparing ourselves and engaging as we have been, from afar, while at the same time working with our various countries itself people that are in it to ensure the bar of understanding of this particular threat and being able to do that is as important from 9 11 to what weve had and since then in france. Im not going to go into a comparison of one versus the other but we have seen what each one has done over time in economies in terms of 9 11 and what have you and approaches we have to do. Thats what we get paid to do critical approaches thoughtful pragmatic, and prepare ourselves for a long journey and not instantaneous fix to the problem. A marathon and not a sprint. Before i invite audience questions i have a last one. My friend, bob burns of ap has done terrific work examining some gaps in the performance of your personnel. As the commander of what are truly the president s own weapons, what would you say to this audience and American People to give them assurances that the safety and security and professionalism of your force will be sustained in years ahead . I would say as weve gone through my tenure here asht command commander of u. S. Strategic command, its been a good journey in terms of forums and discussions we have had associated with support for this critical capability for our country, to include its people. As weve gone through this journey, the first piece required we expect thugt our entire military our military folks to operate with integrity and great character. When we find those kind of problems no matter where it is we pluck it out of our system, while at the same time get through some root cause analysis to figure out what are all the things we should be doing associated with that particular problem, this being no different. I would say with the checks and balances associated with our capability. You look at 90 of our team comes to work everyday to do the right thing passionate over the mission, et cetera. In any organization you have to continue to work on that other percentage of folks that may not come with the same kind of background et cetera. In this case, im very happy we found the problem, eradicated the problem from our system and went to work with this Nuclear Enterprise review business to work on those problems that we needed to do in support of this mission. So through 2014 as announced by deputy heyagel and worth not that long ago this has culminated in a variety of different actions some requiring resources and some better leadership. All those things are in motion right now. As we continue to go through this journey all those folks out there doing the mission day in and day out, even as we win u missions we talk even more about, this is a critical capability for our country and we have great americans. I have spent 2014 traveling throughout meeting with all of these warriors doing our Strategic Deterrent mission, whether that mission is under the water or in an icbm Launch Control center or whether that mission is associated with the bomber and space assets or what have you or some of our Early Morning radar teammates. I can say unequivocally, those folks are fired up and charged about the mission. I thinkv5 support them in how we talk about it and associate it with te plans we have now in support of resources and other things we need to resource in that regard. Thank you. I am proud of working with them. Thank you, sir. I look forward to hearing questions, if you would wait for a microphone please identify yourself because theres anr limited time and lots of people please keep your questions concise. Sir. Sir. Admiral im harlan or land and a recovered sovietologist many years ago and ive remained on the board since ike was a saint. My question relates to russias new military doctrine announced in late december. I wondered what your reaction was to it and anything that may have been different that struck you. Second, in the context of russia, it seems to me the one area they have a very very large numerical advantage over us is in short range a theater of Nuclear Weapons. In fact, its dominant and we only have a handful of theater weapons in russia, as you well know. How do you deal not only with deterrence but coping with thatw3 imbalance at the theater and short range level. First of all, thank you for your Remarkable Service and your work youve done over time. I sometimes worry in todays environment we dont have enough folks that really have deep roots into working the russian part of our business. We continue to work to inspire young folks to continue to become knowledgeable as you are. But the first piece here associated with president putin putting out his doctrine, i think, is a good thing for us. Id rather see him be vocal in understanding what hes thinking out in front versus guessing or trying to integrate the jigsaw puzzle parts of the business. So, to me while we were watching very closely trends and predicting and what have you, as he came out with his doctrine, from my standpoint i wasnt a bit surprise associated because he had demonstrated a lot of these things associated with his actions. What has been part of the piece that i had been a bit focused on is to be sure to take note of all the parts not just this particular speech but also the culmination of things that we have observed over time and not not not ignore or low ball that but to continue to confront those and continue to work our cranial power associated with dealing with it in a holistic way associated with things. It will be interesting as we go forward and see additional reactions, as we look at how russia does with their economy these days as well as their ambitions to maintain strategic capabilities in multiple dimensions, not just nuclear. As we also look at their other endeavors but making sure were prepared in thinking ahead and working in conjunction as i said before with ouro[ allies and partners in looking at this globally. Back on the aisle, this gentleman here yes, sir. Thank you very much admiral. My name is i was with the agency in hong kong. It was reported that china recently conducted a fly test of a new long range missile, df41 which can enrichreach any city in the United States. Do you have a comment on that . Secondly, how is the u. S. China Nuclear Dialogue going on, and do you have any Exchange Program for this year between the u. S. Strategic command and the sekdcond of poa . Thank you. Thank you for your question. A series there. Obviously, we look at strategic capabilities of every country thats out there and develop original modernizing their associated capability. You mentioned the df41. As i mentioned in my speech, theres a plethora of different strategic capabilities china is also growing associated with things. As far as us having a dialogue from your Strategic Command to equivalent organizations in china china, there is no Strategic Command i can go to. Most off my work in that regard is working through the pacific command. They are the combatant command in that region. Sam locklear leads that group and a variety of other forms we associate with. To date i do not have a forum that i work with a corresponding individual from or team from china on. Whether that matures itself and comes out in the future, time will tell. Were doing a lot of things middle to middle right now with china. I know not that long ago there was a pacific exercise conducted with chinese participation. Those kind of things are good in that regard. From a strategic picture, as you pointed out the piece that concerns us and we work hard at is china is not transparent in terms of its intentions and in terms of its development programs, what have you. That that is an area we have to work towards and continue to be mindful of as we go into the future. When we look at countries like our relationship with russia being able to have this transparency through new s. T. A. R. T. Treaty very important to both our nations. Thats why its important we continue that kind of business, even through ukraine and crimea, we have continued to inspect each other per plan associated with that treaty for example. When we look at china, we havent been invited to come explore what they have associated with things in their nation. Thank you. Question here front row. Thanks. Defense news. Sir, as the steward of the Nuclear Arsenal and all the personnel that basically go with it to make sure the force has proficiency. At what point does the paucity of investment in the entire nuclear infrastructure, at what point does that gap in capability begin to affect the operational capabilities of the force. Its been two decades since we developed a new nuclear weapon. Theit b61 program maintains and an important part of the arsenal. At what point do we need some type of National Arsenal . Theres a discussion on the Ohio Replacement Program being so expensive the navy itself cant take it out of its own budget. Do we need to have a different fundamental strategic approach we recapitalize this massive which some very good newspapers have profiled and the capabilities and problems associated with it. Very good, good question as i would expect from your experience. Good having you here. The whole business of infrastructure is a very key component, as i mentioned earlier, that i consider part of our Strategic Deterrent. I visited all the laboratories here over the last year that do that work for us. San diego national labs, livermore, los alamos and were very close to the nsa under the department of energy. We have a Nuclear Weapons council, dodd to doe associated with that piece and were in regular conversations in that regard. The piece we work as a team to really evaluate very critically is not just lets go out and build something new. co quite frankly, i think weve been very thoughtful as a nation in our approach of doing life Extension Programs and those kind of things modernizing electronics and those pieces we must to be sure we have safety and Security Associated with our Nuclear Weapons. With this, having visited and seeing the professionals that work there, youre right. They have to work hard to keep the inflow of professionals to come in, to work that super dupe duper Nuclear Physics chemistry meta metalurchic, all those kinds of things its a very vibrant work force that goes through and really does a lot not just in those life Extension Programs but in the Surveillance Programs associated with our Nuclear Warhead warheads. So i dont want to say theres not work that those organizations have to do to keep their workforce in place. The fact that we are work ging because there are some infrastructure things as far as facilities that require improving in order to sustain this for decades to come. Those are things we as a nation have to continue to work on our programs associated with that so that we dont dilute that part because thats a key part of ourt deterrence apparatus. Your second question now, ive talked so long i think ive forgotten what the second one. It was about budgeting mechanism. Mechanism. For the bombers and orp. Well, right now, from my perspective, my big ticket item is that those items need to be in the budget and funded. I will let the professionals here from the office of secretary of defense and Congress Really work on the noodle of how we need to work that perhaps more wholistically in terms of what you just said. That piece of being able to follow the money, as you know, is very important. Whether its a one bin or a bin that we pay bins that we pay close attention to, associated with things. Because when you look at that ssbn or ic brksbn is one Mission Associated with things and then you have to have that dialogue, how do you do things with dual capabilities and then whats in that bin, all the way i talked about before from outer space to under the water. Petrer sharpman. Are traditional deterrents distinguished between intelligence gathering which we tried to prevent but not deter and outright attack which webnf things. The piece goes even higher than that, i think, in terms of where do we have the International Rules of the road if you would say j that really help define that piece for us in a clear and concise and verifiable way. While theres some work going on in that in terms of policies and what have you, you think we have a way to go with the ywc t hahp Hc International associated agreement in that regard. I think as you look at cyber you call it intelligence, the piece i would say we have to be very careful with, as we have seen how we call various exploitation that occurs here and that end up not just gathering intelligence but putting advantage in the commercial sense of things that are also very problematic and you say that doesnt cross the threshold in terms of to the extent youre in an attack but it can in fact have very harming effects over the Long Run Associated with our technology and r d and research and development and things we have worked hard in and invested in and associated with things. As we look at this, we have to address this across the full spectrum of things, not just a fried network or what have you or fried Critical Infrastructure, but this whole spectrum, as you can just see here in the website facing the association most recently with central command, in terms of vandalism associated with those websites. We have to be careful we dont overblow some of these events to where they are attacked when they arent in that attack place. So if each one, i think they require very careful consideration and analysis in terms of what has occurred where is the attribution associated to what occurred and appropriate measures associated with those particular events. Then, as we look at it as stated in our strategy, its not just limited in cyberas as we take approaches associated with the problem. Using all our information, diplomacy information, millimeter economics et cetera. Yes, in the back. Thank you admiral. One of your associates said we allowed it to skip a class with deterrence and responded with his capabilities. Many of us in Higher Educationened that as a challenge us to as well. I was wondering what Higher Education could do to be more supportive and useful to you in your mission and personnel. Thank you. Well, thank you, jack. I think coming from an institution like George Washington washington, as i look at academia, i really count on us having a lot of dialogue associated with deterrence at large across that spectrum that i talked about from the various big areas nuclear space, cyberspace, but this business also of violent extremist organizations who would love to have in their hands weapons of mass destruction for example. And talking about the art of deterrence and what new things can we have, instead of new things in a tool bag, i like to say new approaches associated with things that should be perhaps some are not so new but to make sure they are being as we toforward. I think also our nation as a whole, to upping the education spectrum particularly in cyberspace, for example. Everybody uses it in a big way. My understanding the vulnerabilities associated with things. I go around to our military folks in forums and ill ask everybody to raise their hand that is a cyberwarrior today. In some forums at the beginning of this job, i might get three people to raise their hand. I ask them whats the rest of you doing. All of us are cyberwarriors it theres just degrees of cyberwarriors, if were touching 1s and zeros associated with our business. From an educational standpoint raising the bar and understanding these threat factors are very important to the United States of america as a whole not just how us military folks do our operations and how we fight. Its critical in terms of raising the bar of understanding in this social media and world that were in, to insure we understand those vulnerabilities all the way down to a personal level. I should also mention i dont want to overblow cyber similarly, everybody that uses an atm machine explores face and our understanding that is so far out there often doesnt get the crescendo of noise i would like. I spent a lot of time today talking about the business of the modernization and how other nations have aspirations to this Nuclear Business Nuclear Weapons business and we have to continue to work approaches to keep that contained. We have time for one last question. Before i call on that person, i want to thank the Atlantic Council for hosting yet another important dialogue today and, of course admiral for your time and wisdom. Yes. The gentleman i called on. Yes, please. Thanks admiral. Brian bradley, Nuclear Security and deterrence monitor. As you mentioned certificatessecretary hagel mentioned a deterrence enterprise Nuclear Enterprise group and the metrics of how they have been performing, according to them . Thank you for that question, brian. In terms of this Nuclear Enterprise review group established is one having a battle rhythm to where were meeting so that we are in fact having the discussions the frank discussions about how our todays readyiness is as well as how are we working toward investments that we critically need in moderncationizationmodernization. As a result, one of these was going through listening to whatever these things we need to be investing in whether that was people, security, technology et cetera and really getting through that series of reviews. As you know, secretary hagel ordered an internal and external review. Also, the air force instituted what i call a bottoms up kind of review, young folks being involved with looking hard at the problem and bringing forth what are those things needed to be donegin in a force Improvement Program and looking at those things and prioritizing them and tracking to make sure we are beginning to move forward in those areas associated with. Some of those areas were management of people in terms of how we did a personal Liability Program related to that. Theres a whole series and listing of these areas and now meeting to insure we are still making progress on those, while at the same time i have institute instituted a few things, one in particular called stake holder reviews, where i meet with my commanders as well as those other stakeholders that support the program, so that we can have an operational to a headquarters, if you will, kind of discussion, soup to nuts in a particular area, whether thats submarines, intercontinental ballistic missile, bombers. Were about to have one in january over the national Nuclear Command and control applications and to have one over sensor abilities and were doing that in a way we can have these looked at. In addition to our visits to these places a variety of Different Levels so we can really get the heart beat of those warriors doing the mission day in and day out for us and be sure were not missing something. Because weve done these reviews doesnt mean we shouldnt still continue to look for process improvements and things to make sure we continue to have, as we have today, a safe, secure and effective Strategic Nuclear arsenal. Admiral haney, thank you. Thank all of you for your participation today and thanks to the Atlantic Council. [ applause ] president obama announced today new rules to loosen cuban trade and travel restrictions. Reuters reports the u. S. Is opening up the country to telecommunications, construction and Financial Services and a slew of changes announced by the departments of commerce and treasury. The new rules effective friday are the first concrete steps to implement president obamas move last month to restore diplomatic ties with cuba and ease the long economic embargo on americas cold war enemy after more than 50 years. Well have live coverage of todays White House Briefing on our companion network cspan2 where press secretary josh earnest is expected to take questions on the new trade and travel rules expected to get under way at 1 00 eastern. President obama will address Senate Democrats today as their baltimore retreat draws to a close. House democrats are having their re retreat today in philadelphia and House Democrats are attending the first joint retreat in 10 years. Senator john thune of south dakota and representative Kathy Mcmorris rodgers of washington state. Live coverage begins at 11 00 live eastern. And at 2 30, cspan is live with smoker of representatives john boehner and Senate Representative mitch mcconnell. You can find any of this online. Here are some featured cspan networks. Cspan2 saturday night at 10 00 book tv afterwards, Brett Stephens argues our comepetitors are taking advantage of the u. S. As it focuses on domestic concerns. Steve israel on his recent novel about a salesman and top government secret Surveillance Program and on cspan3, saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern lectures and history. John turner and early mormons and their attempt to create a new zion in the American Waste in American West in the 1930s. And Academy Award win gning film about the desegization of arkansass all white high school. Let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. Call us at 2026263400. Or comments cspan. Org or send us a tweet. Like us on facebook. Follow us on twitter. The house is reviewing a funding bill that would overturn president obamas orders on immigration. They talk about the effects of the immigration orders and the fix of good morning. Thanks for that introduction and the opportunity to join you here today. I will pick up right where the doctor left us and talk about the president s announcement last month. On november 20, president obama delivered a prime time address to the nation to announce a series of executive actions on immigration policy. Among other actions, the president plans to expand childhood arrivals a temporary program for youth who arrived here as children and a new program for parents and permanent residents. As dr. Bose mentioned, along with other changes to sort of quasi legalization programs, the announcement covered a little over half of the unauthorized immigrants, the second set of actions will modify existing Immigration Enforcement programs including who the department of home land security targets for deportation and how dhs partners with local state and local Law Enforcement agencies among other enforcement programs. And a third set of actions include a variety of procedural changes to support high skill businesses and workers. A fourth set of actions will support immigration integration on a new task force on new americans. I will say a little bit more about them later but let me tell you that these executive actions together are a big deal. They are almost certainly i would say the most significant changes to u. S. Immigration policy in the last 20 years since the 1996 bill that i think dr. Bose mentioned. Even though a future president could overturn them with the stroke of a pen, they are a big deal. In announcing the changes, president obama described them as necessary steps to reform a broken immigration system given congresses inability to pass an immigration bill. So what i want to talk about is what drove the president to take such significant action outside of the legislative process. I will begin by addressing the prior question in what sense is the immigration system broken and how did it get broken and also review the history of the u. S. Immigration debate [ inaudible ] and with these topics by way of background, i will evaluate the new immigration actions. I will tell you how the new programs will immediately affect the broken immigration system and how they influence prospects for a future legislation on comprehensive Immigration Reform for a more fundamental fix in congress. Finally, i will say just a little bit about what the president s actions mean sort of for the broader u. S. Political system and u. S. Political debate. So to begin, in what sense is the u. S. Immigration system broken . One answer is that the answer has a badly designed immigrant admission system. The u. S. Promises citizens and per permanent residents can bring in their families but the numbers dont add up. The numerical limits dont add up to nearly the numbers needed for all of the people wanting to bring their family numbers. There are 4 million family members that have been approved for a visa. Wait times are six to 12 years are for people seeking to bring people in to the u. S. To be reunified and over 20 years for families for countries like mexico or the philippines. The laws designed to permit u. S. Employers who cant find a qualified u. S. Worker to hire a foreign worker. This is a longstanding goal of u. S. Immigration policy and of all wealthy countries because allowing businesses to bring in, you know, qualified workers, generally helps the u. S. Economy and helps all americans by supporting Economic Growth and investment. But due to num erical limits, people who want to bring in high skilled workers because they cant find a u. S. Worker have to wait at least two years. If they want to bring in a chinese or indian worker, the waits are five to 10 years. Those arent realistic time lines for how businesses hire people or seek jobs so it conflicts the goal of facilitating of recruitment of the best and brightest workers. More importantly in some ways because strict criteria of protecting u. S. Workers from too much competition, most employers of low or middle skilled workers cant hire a low skilled worker at all for most kinds of jobs. There are some exceptions. So these comply and demand mismatches are the biggest driver for the sense in which the system is broken for the 11. 4 million unauthorized immigrants. I want to pause and let the numbers sink in. They dont really mean a lot to us. But 11. 4 is more people than all of metro chicago. Metro chicago, the Third Largest city in the country with all of its suburbs have 9. 4 million. So thats a lot. If 11. 4 unauthorized immigrants all lived in one state, they would be the eighth largest state in the country. Just a little bit smaller than ohio with 11. 5 million and bigger than georgia with 10 million. If they all lived in their country, unauthorized landia would be the 75th Biggest Country in the world. This is a big deal. The sheer scope of that many unauthorized immigrants is really a huge challenge when it comes to crafting any kind of policy solution. Just setting aside the politics. The policy challenges become that much more difficult when youre dealing with that many people to craft a solution that sort of weighs, you know, the humanitarian issues versus the rule of law, all of this becomes much more difficult when youre talking about such a large number of people. In a third sense in which the system is broken is that we have that extraordinarily large, unauthorized population despite the fact that the federal government spends 18 billion a year on Immigration Enforcement, more than we spend on all other federal Law Enforcement priorities combined. So immigration policy is like the most of what federal Law Enforcement efforts do and yet we still have 11. 4 million unauthorized immigrants. How did we get into this mess . Whats important to understand that unauthorized immigration is a function of policy choices are a bad match to push and pull forces that have been amplified over time. Prior to the 1970s. The United States had almost no unauthorized immigrants and those few who were in the country were circular migrants who returned home every year. The modern immigration really began with the 1965 amendments and with earlier legislative action in 1964. Congress allowed in 1964 the legal Guest Worker Program that allowed 450,000 mexicans to come to the u. S. Every year to work temporarily expired in 1964. Then in 1965 with the amendments to the immigration and national act that dr. Bose mentioned, the United States eliminated the National Origin system and in doing that Congress Imposed for the first time strict limits on permanent migration from latin america and mexico. Those shut the door to most if not all Legal Immigration from mexico and latin america at the same time that Global Economic restructuring greatly increased the demand for low skilled workers in the u. S. And at the same time the cost of International Travel were falling shortly. Shutting the door to legal flows right when the demand for people to come was increasing, was sort of a perfect formula for incentivizing and facilityizing illegal migration. As unauthorized flows took off, Immigration Enforcement became a high priority in the United States throughout the 1980s and 90s. For 20 years beginning in 1980, the United States took a series of steps to secure the border and easier to deport people including the 1996 ilLegal Immigration act but there were several other things. Throughout the period, most of the enforcement efforts were concentrated at the u. S. mexico border. We did pass a law to make it illegal for employers to knowingly higher unauthorized workers but for a variety of reasons, that law has never been strictly enforced or generally enforced at all. Leaving in place a key driver of illegal flows because the employment magnet remained in place and limited efforts to deport people from the u. S. The effort was really focused at the border. What emerged as a result was a stable policy regime that was a nonenforcement equilibrium. So we were able to hire illegal forces without being accountable. Immigrants were happy because once they got past of the border they were able to work in the u. S. And be with their families here and politician were happy because they were able to avoid