Transcripts For CSPAN2 Joint Chiefs Of Staff General Dunford

A morning ive asked the committee to consider 3196 pending military nominations. All these nominations have been before the committee for the reset required length of time. All in favor say i. The motion carries. The Committee Meets this morning to consider the nomination of general Joseph Dunford as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. This Committee Thanks you for your decades of service to our nation, we are grateful to your wife for the support she has provided to into all hers urination in uniform. I also want to welcome your son patrick, you look like your mother who is joining us this morning. I know your other children, joe and kathleen send their support, even as i bet they are relieved that they do not need to sit through your interrogation. To exercise the legislative responsibility its important that this committee are able to receive testimony, briefings and other communication of information. Have you here to applicable laws and regulations . I have. To agree to give your personal views even if they differ from the Administration Power . I do. Have you assumed any duties or undertake an action which would appear to presume the outcome. Ive not. Will you ensure your staff complies with deadlines including questions for the record and hearings. I will. Will you cooperate in providing briefers for responsible requests . I will will those people be protected . They will. Do you agree to testify by request with this committee. I do. Do you agree to provide documents in a timely manner when requested by a duly constituted committee or to consult with the committee for the basis. I do. In my colleagues in a eyewear that is a routine but given the political environments today especially today and certainly not in a reflection on you, but those questions need to be asked. I think you for your responses. General dunford, my colleagues and i have a lot of questions about the many challenges we face. This also offers an opportunity to reflect on broader topics that have more recently been a major focus of this committees efforts. The unique role of the chairman internationals structure. As principal and military advisor of the president the National Security council the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is the most important military duty in our nation. The chairman is the one military officer to give advice and policy makers informed by the military services and combat commands and spanning global issues of National Security. It is now more important than ever. Our country faces a multitude of challenges all of which cut across the functional organizations that divide up the department of defense. The chairman is the only officer with the perspective on all the threats we face worldwide in the interplay between them. Thats why this committee acted last year to clarify the statutory responsibility to advise civilian leaders on the global strategic initiative. Chairmans unique role lends extra gravity to what every monetary officer possess. The responsibility to provide the best of us to civilian leaders. This is not a luxury, this is a duty. A duty that officers go to the American People into the men and women under their command. Civilian policymakers rely on our military professionals to better understand the military dimensions and the challenges we face the options at our dispos disposal. The best military advice does not stop there. Military officers in the chairman of the joint chief of staff must tell their civilian superiors what action they believe is best to take and they must do so honestly, but forcefully weather civilians want to hear it or not. The best military advice must be disregarded but it must always be given. Whats more is that its not be narrowly limited to technical military matters. When the chairman offers his best military advice is not simply offering his best advice about the military but rather the best advice from the military. That extends tissue of National Security, strategy, and operation. For example, a decision to take our nation to war properly russ was civilians. The military officers should not be prohibited from voicing their advice on the matter. It is their duty to do so. If you have not seen mr. Burns series on vietnam, i suggest you Pay Attention to it and i suggest you examine the tensions that existed between the civilian superiors in the military. I believe youll come to the conclusion that the military advice is not given the weight and effect that it should have which is one of the factors leading to 50000 names on the wall in granite, not too far from here. Just as we are clear about what constitutes best military advice we must be clear about its limitations. Advice is just that, advice. The chairman is not in chain of command, and our system Operational Command rest with commanders who report by law to the secretary of defense. The chairman must advise civilian leaders on plans both within and among our combat commanders. And it is his right and responsibility to provide competing advice to policymakers when he disagrees with the commanders. The chairman is not an Operational Commander. The best military device does not mean independent advice that occurs in the context of military operations. Professor elliott has described silver Civil Military relations is an unequal dialogue. The rules are not to be dichotomized and held apart. Rather they must be brought together of a process of discussing, scrutinizing and refining military operations on plans. A process in which leaders must plan active role and make major decisions, best military advice is central to the stylet but can never replace it. Unfortunately a sense this dialogue has become strained. At times officials have disrespected military leaders disregarded their advice and Critical Military leaders and shirked accountability for their decisions. Or recently oversight and control has morphed into meddling and micromanagement of details for political purposes which has harmed military effectiveness. The last administration distinguished itself in this regard. What we must guard against especially now somebody civilian leaders are either missing or recently retired military officers in an overcorrection we cannot afford to swing from micromanagement to civilian marginalization. We need to restore balance and relations were best military advice is rendered and received but done so as part of a dialogue was civilians participate actively and have the last word on policy, strategy, operational plans. This Committee Takes the application seriously. The Civil Military dialogue that only occurs within the department of defense, it occurs between the branches of government as well. The chairman also serves as to the congress. We ask current future chairman like all military officers to provide their best personal advice to this committee a fast. To ensure members of this committee in congress can meet our independent Constitutional Responsibilities to the americans we serve. This committee in congress is not receiving the information and respect it deserves as a co equal branch of government. We do not work for the president or the executive branch. We have distinct and equal responsibilities under the constitution and the administration is to understand its obligation to the congress in this regard. Too often members are learning in the media for the first time about major National Security and military activities that we as the committee of oversight should be told about and consulted on in advance. Even now, nearly ten months into this year were told theres a new strategy for afghanistan, but members have more questions than answers. The Administration Must do better, until it does the congress and this committee will be forced to use what levers we have to show the administration we are not and will not be a rubber stamp. We will have questions for you, we look forward to your candid, forthright and best military advice. Thank you chairman. On a welcome general dunford and thank you to your outstanding service. John by your wife on his son patrick, thank you. Like to acknowledge jerilyn kathleens other children are unable to join us today. We think the entire family for their continued sacrifice and support. Ms. Agree to to us and more particularly the people of the armed forces. Under leadership of chairman mccain our committee has heard from the senior political leaders in the department, and distinguished outside experts. Time and again the United States is offered with a myriad of challenges that require military leadership. During general dunfords leadership hes demonstrated deep understanding of the threats we must address. He has made it a priority to keep this committee wellinformed in the decisions impacting our forces and to counter the risk posed by our adversaries. This committee may not always agree general dunfords fees, hes been honest and conducted himself with an targeted. I believe he should be reconfirmed. His professionalism and commitment to duty have served him well. Its not the first time in history weve had to confront multiple threats from abroad. But as a dangerous and uncertain time. The north Korean Missile Program Provides a threat and they are deep cause for concern. Russias trying to reassert its influence around the world, china continues the asiapacific region and using economic corrosion on its smaller neighbors. Iran continues its missile activities as well as other destabilizing activities. Our military has been consumed by two prolonged wars. As we grapple with the threats we must be mindful that our president continues to show a lack of indepth knowledge with nuance and public defense. It was my hope that coupled with the enormous challenge we face would encourage the president to be more judicious with his comments, unfortunately that has not been the case. Her foreignpolicy has been predicated on alienating allies, discovering the value of organizations retreating from our leadership role in the world. While the same time decisions in the defense and complicated personnel issues are promulgated by tweets. This lends more uncertainty to dangerous times and i believe the risk of miscalculation and unintended consequences have never been higher. I commend general comfort for the steady hand he has demonstrated in for the example he is set for those who wear the uniform. Thank you again for your willingness to surrender nation. Welcome. Chairman mccain, i think you for the opportunity to appear today. Im honored to be renominated. Like to begin by thanking the committee for your support for soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. This Years National Defense Authorization act as a result of your commitment to assure that address these challenges to ensure our men and women never find themselves in an unfair fight. Listen carefully to your statement, i understand my responsibilities to provide the best military advice to the president , secretary of defense of the National Security council and ill be forthright in front of this committee. I am prepared to answer question. Thank you very much general. In june you testified in i guess within five years will lose her ability to project power. We still dont have sustained funding and as you mention, im not sure we will for the foreseeable future unless Congress Steps up to do his job. We will start fiscal year 2018 on continuing resolution with no insight as to what the final funding levels will be for the year. What is the effect of the average First Lieutenant who is out there as a Company Command and they dont have sufficient funds to carry out their training regimen and the pilots are flying less hours per month and their chinese and russian counterparts . What effect does that have in our ability to defend the nation . Secondly, what does it do to the men and women of an all volunteer force . Chairman, when you say what is it due to her ability to defend the nation in my opening remarks i mention competitive advantage. Done analysis about where are the current threats and weve used russian china to benchmark those. If you go back to 1999 or 2000 we have what we should have, a nation that looks and thinks globally. We were needed to advance our interests. We are challenged today to project power in europe and the pacific. In other nations to include nonstate actors at all they have capabilities that challenge our ability to project power. With regard to lieutenants and captains, i was up platoon commander in the 70s. We did have sufficient money for training or personnel and many times the task we are asked exceeded our capability. Ill give you the example of a pilot. If you look at a pilot specifically in the past they may have had 30 hours a month to fly, now may be as low as 15 per month. On a daytoday basis you might not be able to see the difference between pilot amb. If theres an inflight emergency the pilot was 30 hours will feel more comfortable and confident in their ability to deal with their situation and control their response. We may never find out about it. Although if its 15 hours a month we may really be aware of it. Noncombat casualties and fatalities are now higher in operations than in combat. They are. Attribute that to two things. One, the material condition that affects the number of hours a pilot flies. Its also the size of the force relative to the requirement we have. Going back to my lieutenant days to look at training on a ship, planar infantry on a series of tasks, when i was a lieutenant we didnt go to two oh one until we were wellfounded in one oh one. We may have trained a standard in the past with sufficient time and resources, now that ship go to see, the pilot will go to war whether or not theyve had an opportunity to retrain in basic tasks or not. To believe its possible for the United States to achieve its National Security objectives in afghanistan as well as pakistan provide support and sanctuary to groups such as the taliban . I do not believe we can attain our objectives in afghanistan unless we materially change the behavior pakistan. Have you got thoughts on how you do that . It will require broad approach to do it, i think its unacceptable that pakistan provides sanctuary. We are to bring the full weight of the u. S. Government and our Coalition Partners on pakistan to ensure they do not provide the sanctuary that they have provided historically in the past. Are you satisfied now with the rules of engagement to which have been changed with the new administration . I am. I had a long conversation with general mickelson to ensure that he also had the same degree of confidence secretary mattis have spoken in the past week to make sure hes confident to allow him to engage any enemy that is a threat to the afghan government, Coalition Forces or u. S. Personnel. Some reminiscent of our rules of engagement of the vietnam conflict. They may have been. I assure you that we have the rules of engagement necessary to advance our objectives. Thank you. Thank you general dunford. In response to the prehearing policy question you indicated that iran is adhering to the jcpoa. But you rightfully point out there engaged in destabilizing activities in the region, missile development, activities that clap tolerated. Going back to the jcpoa, is it your idea that it was designed to limit their Nuclear Capacity and its currently achieving that objective . It was designed specifically to address one of the five major threats of iraq, the Nuclear Threat what it didnt address is the missile threat, and the cyber activity they have conducted. And theyre still pursuing those other venues very aggressively in your view . They are. We see if physical manifestation of that. We see it in iraq, lebanon and syria. In this complicated world was so much going on i will focus on north korea, if we were to step away from jcpoa, that have an effect on the ability to negotiate or come to a non kinetic situation . Are holding up agreements we have signed would have an impact on others willingness just assign agreements. In terms of a force that we all agree upon is stretched, if we reject to the jcpoa which assumed the iranians would step up their activities causing us to have forces that would be in that area and not able to prevail . Watched every day with our relationship with iran, it indicators of iranian backed militia forces would pose a threat to the force. Is that accurate . To make it absolutely is. The dimension today is in full support, the economic and diplomatic Pressure Campaign and the secretary of state is leading in north korea. One of the things that is difficult to comprehend is we do not have an ambassador to south korea. We do not. We have a attache at the time. In effect, general brooks is doing double duty. Senator, we are very proud of what general brooks is doing right now is both as he sits at the nexus of the promilitary. As you have competence in general brooks, if we are in a diplomatic we dont have an ambassador until we have an assistant secretary for the area, of the state permit. We just dont seem to have the thing in place to have in all court press portable medic solution, is that senator, i would comment on it only because i clearly urge secretary tillerson to comment on the difficulty right now doing all the things the state department has been called upon to do with some of the gaps that continue to exist. In terms of the situation on the peninsula now, can you give us your judgment of where we are today, given the statements back and forth between leaders of both countries, given our area of operations off the coast and given the response yesterday that could trigger a reaction by the North Koreans. Can you give us an assessment . Senator, again, the political spaces clearly very charged right now and we