Transcripts For CSPAN3 Army Operations And Training 20141104

Sheer, whos our assistant secretary of defense for east asia in the pacific. You know that david was had come back from hanoi to do this job. He was our u. S. Ambassador there. David is an expert on china and Southeast Asia. I think for many of us who are sort of in the trenches every day on these issues, couldnt think of a better person for the pentagon to put into this role. Next to him is one of the top Southeast Asiaenists in the United States, and he also is singapores ambassador to the United States. Aspoke. He was most recently singapores ambassador to indonesia. He was in the past has been singapores ambassador also to australia. And to quaul la lumpur and has a long history in Singapore Foreign affairs working on asiarelated affairs. And finally, a good friend and a real hero of Southeast Asia and asian policy in the senate is chris bros. He works with senator mccain in senator mccains office. Previous before that he was senior staffer in the Senate Armed Services committee. And chris came rose through the ranks intoog some pretty interesting things including writing speeches for and advising people like Collin Powell and condoleeza rice and he spends a lot of time in asia, more than most senate staffers, unfortunately. So, without further ado, what we want to talk about in this panel is architecture as it relates to security. Im going to ask my colleagues to kick it off in the order that were seated in. And then well open up the panel to some question and answer. So, david, its over to you. Thank you very much, ernie. Its great to be back at csis. And its a great honor to be joined up here with the ambassadors. Ive been in my job my new job at d. O. D. For almost exactly one month now. And i can tell you, gwynn all of his history, the secretary of defense, the deputy secretary of defense, the under secretary of defense for policy, my chain of command are deeply committed to the rebalance to east asia and weve seen that most recently in deputy secretary works travel to the region. Youll see a fleury of senior level meetings and encounters this fall including coming up security subcommittee meeting chaired on the american side by myself and east asia secretary of state danny russell. Next week well be going to seoul before we go to soak yoe. Tokyo. Youll see a defense consult tattive talks with the chinese. You will see military consultative meeting and security consultative meeting with our rok allies. Also in november, of course, president obama will be visiting beijing and defense issues will, of course, be part of his agenda in his bilateral discussions with president xi. With the president. Again, the rebalance is among the highest priorities on my agenda as well as on my senior leaderships agenda. And you will see me focusing very clearly on rebalancedrelated issues in my earliest days in my tenure. Id like to share with you some of the issues that some of the big issues i will be focusing on, i think, as assistant secretary of defense over the next months and years. The first one is modernizing our alliances and partnerships. Theres a lot on the agenda in this regard from the review of the defense guidelines with jap to the opcon issue with our rok allies to updating the defense framework with india, which we mentioned in the joint statement in Prime Minister modis most recent visit to washington. And the fpa with australia. All of sthees are foundational issuesed in strengthening of our Alliance Architecture in the western pacific. All of these will guide the way in which we shape our alliances over the next 10 to 15 years. Were going toment to finish strong on all of these agreements, successful conclusion and implementation matters. This certainly will set the stage for closer cooperation between the United States and its important allies in east asia and the pacific. Second, very important big issue well be working on is solidifying the militarytomilitary relationship with china. Secretary hagel had a very good meeting with the foreign minister the other day here in washington. The foreign minister was here to, of course, review u. S. Bilateral relations and planning for the president s trip to beijing. As you probably have seen in the strategic and economic dialogue, both sides recommitted to working on a set of confidence Building Measures and we will be working on that set in advance of the president s trip to beijing. A third set of big issues we will be working on is knitting together allied and partner cooperation. Evan medeiros spoke during his remarks of our partnership, particularly u. S. Japan u. S. japan india. Cooperation among our allies and partners in east area. Were very gratified to see increased cooperation between japan and australia, between japan and india. Were also gratified to see greater diplomatic coordination between partner and friends like vietnam, the philippines and malaysia. All of this greatly strengthens security and stability in the asiapacific. And we believe can contribute to the reduction of tensions, particularly in the south china sea. Another area i will be focusing on, of course, is strengthening u. S. asean defense ties. We have seen the establishment over the past few years of the admm plus. Weve had great progress in building Regional Defense cooperation. Secretary hagel certainly is very interested in his encounters with his counterparts during his shangrila dialogue at the admm plus and most recently also repeatedly in april in connection with the u. S. asean defense ministerial meeting in honolulu. And we hope that can be a future fixture in our defense relations with asean. Of course, as we work all of these issues with our partners, friends and others in east asia, well also want to be working with them to manage disputes and issues that generate tension. I dont need to mention how important maintaining security and stability, particularly in the south china sea, is to us. Our position on this has been made Crystal Clear on many occasions. Its going to remain a very strong focus for me and for my leadership in dod in the coming months. Why dont i stop there and let my other friends comment . Thank you, david. Ambassador . Thank you. Congratulations, again, to you and csis for putting together this conference to look at some of these bigger pictures in the asia architecture and in particular Security Architecture. How critical it is for u. S. Interests Going Forward. I wanted to look both at the big picture and at asean and as an asean ambassador here. It focus us on achltdsean centr. The main reason why the architecture is important is that the region has enjoyed a peaceful and secure and stable environment for several decades. Something that many of us in fact take for granted. And these conditions have enabled growth and prosperity, which is a key thing we want to see out of the asiapacific. The regional architecture is really designed to preserve this. But in this postcold war geopolitical environment, were starting to see fairly dramatic shift. And thats where conversations about the architecture become important. The environment is shifting. Southeast asia in particular is becoming more complicated as a region as we have to reposition ourselves in the context of washingtons and beijings search for new ee quib lib reyum. Its complex. Its more than washington and beijing. There are other major powers that continue to adjust the relationship with each other and with asean and tensions in the region have risen. And there are several potential flash points that have to be managed. That makes the architecture a very important for us to look at. Aseans role and aseans centrality have in many ways played a very crucial part in maintaining Regional Peace and security. But i dont want to overplay this role in aseans strategic weight. Those of you who know asean and know the rest of the region, you know this is aseans central role is due to the fact we are a neutral platform rather than because we carry a strategic heft. In the neutral platform, asean has offered a space for all major powers to discuss issues of concern, to build trust and to promote cooperation. What asean has done is to promote an open and inclusive approach and welcomes engagement of all major powers. Its a critical part of asean that were not just an Organization Includes dialogue partners and other major powers with us. This is characteristic in all the aseanled mechanisms that we have put in place that form a regional architecture that is open, inclusive and outward looking. In particular, we value the contribution of the u. S. To all of these aseanled forum, as well as the asean ministers meeting. For more than 60 years, the u. S. Presence has been a stabilizing influence that has underpinned asia and asean growth. There are we will hear this regularly multiple and overlapping structures of the asean regional architecture that reflect in many ways the diversity of the asiapacific region. From our view, this overlapping structure makes the framework more flexible and resilient. Let me go through briefly each one of the structures that we have in the security area. The first and the longest running has been the arf which was created in 1994 as a forum for security discussions that will engage not just the major powers but also middle and smaller regional powers to preserve their stake in the regional stability in the postcold war era. For example, the arf today is the only multilateral security consultive framework in the region in which the dpk participates. Another structure we have is the admm plus. The as aechlt n defense ministers plus which came into force in 006. Its establishment of the admm first was really the commitment of asean countries to have the military establishments to Work Together to address transnational Security Issues. We then expanded this to have the admm plus. Which comprises asean with the other partners which has become not just a channel for dialogue but also an actionoriented avenue for defense ministers from the region and beyond to come together to discuss Practical Solutions to manage. They have done exercises to pull together various militaries into these operations. The third structure is the eas, which we are looking forward to next month which the president will attend. With the expansion eas was established in 2005, expansion in 2011 to include the u. S. And asia, it has brought the powers together. The key focus now for the eas is really to focus in consolidating for the future. And while it remains a leaders led forum for strategic discussions of the future, what asean is very keen to have brought into the eas areas of function appear cooperation because these really this adds to the agenda and help to build on the architecture in order to keep the mechanism alive and healthy. It adds a certain balance and structure and ensures that the eas remains a credible forum for constructive cooperation. Various ideas in which the u. S. Can play a role in the functional cooperation areas include disaster management, education, finance, energy, which you spoke about earlier this morning. Looking ahead at all these structures, a frequent complaint and almost criticism has been all these asean centered regional architecture structures have emerged into a spaghetti bowl that people find difficult to unravel. From aseans point of view, mechanisms each play a unique role. They reinforce each other to serve the common interests of maintaining regional stability and growth. The prospective of trying to rationalization the Security Architecture into a single arrangement or to try to impose a hierarchy among them will be very difficult, if not impossible. Instead, our view is that these regional structures and architecture should be allowed to evolve, adapt bs and find a natural equilibrium at their own pace as we improve ways to get better coordination and develop synergy among the mechanisms. In this regard, we have actually welcomed dialogue partners to give ideas for the future of this architecture and taking on proposals and how to improve the existing frameworks. What is critical in all this is what we must ensure the regional architecture for all the reasons they have been successful is that asean remains very much at the core. Keeps that place as a neutral platform and continues to reflect the diversity of the region and remain open and inclusive. Indonesia, in particular from asean as proposed an indo treaty. Next week in jakarta, the eas workshop and Security Framework will meet to discuss this further. These are some of the ideas of we are looking at how we can make this better. Let me say a few words about the u. S. Engagement. As i said earlier, the u. S. Has played an integral role in the regional architecture and remakes a critical and unique component in the future. Its important for the u. S. To stay engaged. This engagement must be broadbased and multipronged. The region appreciates the u. S. s support and has come across time in again in the various comments and speeches that have been made by u. S. Leaders about how important the asean centrality is in the evolving regional architecture. Importantly asean and the u. S. Share many strategic perspectives and we should Work Together to continue to build up the existing institutions and keep the architecture open. We also welcome the u. S. Support for key principles like peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance with International Law, the right of freedom of navigation and the right of overflight. In conclusion, let me summarize the three principles that asean looks at regional architecture from our perspective. First, asean should be at its core in order to maintain asean unity and cooperation. Second, it should reflect the diversity of the region. Third, it should remain open and inclusive. As there are overlapping structures, from our point of view they make the regional architecture more resilient and stable. From our view, the architecture should follow the agenda rather than vice versa. Thank you very much. Excellent. Thank you very much. Chris . I think you want to give the ambassador a round of applause for that . I heard it coming. [ applause ] i dont want to deny that for you and it was organic and it was congress your way. Chris, over to you. Thank you. Thanks csis for having me here today. Obviously, look, im extremely flattered to be among the company that im in. Clearly, you can tell one of these things is not like the other. My first name is not ambassador. By way the making the point further, i was telling dave earlier that my signature accomplishment on asia this year has been playing some small role in the confirmation of dave shear. So you can sort of see clearly what youre getting here. Look, congress is not a participant in asias architecture. Maybe you can all be thankful for that. What i would like to try to do is give you a little bit of a sense of how the hill is looking at some of these security challenges and we can back into the asia architecture question. What i would like to try to do is sort of frame it in terms of two questions, both of which kind of appeared on the cover of the economist this year. I think these are the kind of these are the two questions that are really overhanging. And the first, this was a couple weeks back, very plainly, what does china want . This is something that as members of congress are looking at the region, theyre increasingly traveling through the region, id stress its still a small group. Its not by any means extensive to the entire body. This is a question i think members of congress are confronting. They want the United States to have and believe the United States can have and should have a very constructive relationship with china. They see all of the benefits and all of the common areas of cooperation between the countries. They recognize that, you know, theres a lot of upside there for both countries together. And yet they look at a sort of pattern of behavior that is concerning to them. The pattern of behavior is Something Like this. You know, its a series of action that are not sort of purely diplomatic. Neither are they purely military. They sort of occur in a gray area. There appears to be a strategy of incremental creation of facts on the ground or in the air or at the sea. And, you know, theres a concern, i think, that this is what we are seeing is sort of a long game, an attempt to incrementally move by move change the status quo unlaterally, never in a way that sort of fundamentally trips a wire and, you know, triggers a response on behalf of the United States or others. But nonetheless, continues to move the needle such that five to ten years from now, were all looking back and its a very different its a very different region that were looking at. And i think theres the prevailing view in the congress is, look, china thinks about its Foreign Policy. So when people say, well, you know, china surely, you know, that youre causing other countries to gang up against you, to criticize you, et cetera, youre driving them closer to the United States, you know, i think these kind of prevailing view on the hill is, well, theres intent there, even if we have to infer it from action. And, you know, that intent is perhaps unsettling, which is this to some extent does reflect conscious action. And its about more than the particular territorial claims that we can discuss today further. Its about a conscious attempt to challenge the balance of power and change it, about even changing key elements or challenging key elements of the International Order, particularly the peaceful resolution of disputes. And most fundamentally as an american is concerned, its a challenge to the american presence and sort of historical role in asia and commitments to countries that we have either formal treaty commitments or otherwise. So i think the question that i think many members of congress and the sort of prevailing view on Congress Comes back to is, again, what does china want . The second sort of security challenge that i would point out may be somewhat provocatively also appeared on the cover of the economist and it was, what would america fight for . Now, fight is not necessarily to be used literally, but i think the point is, what does america ultimately seeking to do . What are we truly committed to doing . What are our red lines, et cetera . And i think as members of congress, Congressional Staff travel through asia, particularly ones who are maybe less experienced there, theyre struck by a prevailing sense and pervasive sense of doubt and question about the United States. This isnt so much a question of questioning americas capability. Theres a lot of capability economically, military, et cetera. Although, i think increasingly people are questioning that as we see the effects of sequestration and declining budgets, et cetera. I think its more a sense and, again, this is what people sense traveling through the region. Its a question of americas resolve, commitment, judgment. You know, what its ultimately seeking to do here. And, you know, there are Different Reasons for this. Obviously, i think theres the sense of people looking at our opinion polls. Obviously, they can discern that americans arent too into Foreign Policy at the moment. That may be changing. But theres a question of sort of National Distraction to what extent americans are focused on this. Theres also sort of the question of national dysfunction. The question of, look, america cant even fix its own fiscal problems. How much are they going to help us when we need them . Theres that doubt that lingers out there. Look, i would say when it comes to asia and security policy, theres a lot of bipartisan cooperation. And it really is an area that is somewhat unique from other aspects of our Foreign Policy where i think theres broad consensus on the rebalance. That being said, i think theres a real question about whether the rebalance is sort of coming into being. That is a sense we hear as we travel throughout the region as well. Is this more rhetoric than reality . And i think part of this, too, is its a question about the u. S. Response to asia. I mean, i heard most of evans speech and most of it i would agree with. I think the question is not is america doing something . Clearly, america is. The question is, is what america is doing adding up to a set of actions, you know, unlaterally, bilaterally, multilaterally, that is fundamentally impacting chinas calculus as it presses out in the East China Sea, south china sea, et cetera . Theres the other piece, which overhangs it, is that this isnt just about asia. Our sense something that many members of congress have been struck about, how much in their conversations on Security Issues with asian partners, the topic comes back to ukraine and how whats happening there and how the u. S. Is responding. Or last year the response to syria. The sort of crossing of the purported red line and the lack of followthrough. And many people in asia asking, what are the implications of this for us . Maybe thats an unfair question. Maybe its out of bounds, but its real. Thats something that i think, again, many members of congress are very sensitive to. So i would just say in conclusion, the architectural issues we are discussing here are very important. There is a lot of potential for them to resolve these challenges, to clarify views and thinking. But, you know, ageold problem, you know, geopolitics really determines the capacity and ability of architecture to function. And i think when it comes to the geopolitics right now, the two questions that i try to lay out today are really concerning. There are questions that i think here in this town were still sort of seeking answer on and trying to come up with better answers on. And its still going to overhang, you know, our diplomacy and what were seeing as the region comes together in november for these summits. Thank you very much for those remarks, chris. Thank you for the panel, for your excellent insights. I would like to start with a question ask then open the floor. And the question is, many have argued that the foundation of longterm security in asia is economics. I didnt hear any of you talking about that. I wonder, would you agree or do you think its sort of a separate channel that security thinking is linked to, but its not related to . How do you think about it . I snuck in one word that said economic. And can chris talked about the economist throughout. You know how the whole thing. But, you know, they go together. Because we have the morning discussion on the economic architecture. I didnt want to get into all of that. The key thing that obviously is there is tpp. Its top of the mind of every asiapacific leader, whether or not they are in tpp. Because even those who are out, wonder what it means for them and how can they get into it. And those who are in, obviously, in the throes of very difficult negotiations to get it done. And in particular, for the u. S. , the constant conversation that comes up in all meetings is, when are we going to get this thing done . It really is that key, not just about the Economic Future of u. S. Interests, but also the key of the Strategic Engagement of the u. S. In the region. Its becoming in many ways a test of how people see the u. S. Engagement in the region. And i think that looking ahead, thats what we want to see get done. There are other elements, obviously, the economic bits as well, the entire trade structures, we have rcep that does not include the u. S. , the Asean Economic Community comes into force next year. All of these things happening. But i think for the u. S. Getting the tpp done is a critical thing. I want to address your question from a slightly different angle by drawing on my experiences as ambassador to vietnam. Some people said the rebalance is primarily a military strategy. And i want to try and counter that impression. In vietnam the rebalance and throughout the region actually certainly brings all of the tools of state graph together to pursue our interests in the region. In vietnam, we were pursuing, we were using the diplomatic tool by increasing our core diplomatic coordination with vietnamese, particularly on regional issues within the multilateral context. On the economic side we are, of course, negotiating with vietnam as a member of as a tpp partner. And both americans and vietnamese, i believe, recognize that tpp is not just an will not just benefit us economically, but its also strategic in many ways. Finally, we very strongly promoted defense cooperation with vietnam. And we see the fruition of our efforts in that regard with the partial lifting of the ban on Lethal Weapon sales to vietnam just yesterday. So our implementation of the rebalance in vietnam certainly was multipronged. And, again, it relied on all the tools of state craft to pursue our interests. Thats what were doing throughout the region. And if theres uncertainty in the region, it shouldnt be uncertainty about the u. S. Commitment to continued peace, security and prosperity there. Thank you. Just a very brief point. I agree completely with what both dave and the ambassador said. Tpp is critical to get done. Without it, it will be a real problem the u. S. Faces. And totally agree that the rebalance cannot be onedimensional. I think that the challenge is that if you look at the sort of Economic Trend in the region, it is toward greater integration. Its a very positive trend. I think the concern is that the security trend may be heading, if not in the opposite direction, not exactly in the same direction. Maybe not fragmentation but certainly rising tension. You know, this is something that evan and bob manning have point out. Can you continue to have, you know, economic integration when you have rising security tensions and strategic challenges . Is that something that is sustainable or not . Thank you. The floor is open. Lets start here. Gentleman in the front. Again, just please tell us your name and your affiliation, if you have one. Thank you. Thank you very much. My name is jason jong, im reporter with south korean news agency. I have a question for secretary shear. You mentioned apcom is one of the issues related to the modernization of the alliances. As you know, United States and korea plan to announce an agreement on delaying the transfer when they hold the annual defensive ministers meeting later this month. Can you tell us about how close the two countries are to agreement at this point . Thank you. We agree with you that that remains daisht deadline for our discussions on opcon were discussing a conditionsbased approach to opcon with our rok counterparts. This is an issue i will focus on during my presence next week in seoul. Okay. Youre getting good at this defense. Right here, gentleman in the front. Thank you. Great presentation. My name is ema skodin. Im retired Foreign Service officer and formally ambassador to brunei. I would like the other two panelists to answer, to the extent they can, the questions that chris posed. Ambassador, in your opinion, what does china want . And ambassador shear, what would america fight for . Well, unlike members of congress, asean ambassadors dont know what china wants. You have to ask the chinese that. But china is a very important presence in Southeast Asia. Theyre a growing economic presence. They have become the number one trading partner, i think, for all asean countries. And we value the relationship that is being built economically. Tourist traffic, trade, investment, proposals and ideas for how to link the region closer together. The ideas of connectivity. So, from where they sit, as the economy grows, i think that Southeast Asia will benefit from their prosperity. And then the question that keeps coming up, obviously, and chris has tied this link, can you have this economic integration when you do have ongoing security tensions . And that is something that Southeast Asia discusses extensively with the chinese. Were talking about the code of conduct in the south china sea, moving that forward, because what we want to do is, again, to use the asean platform to try to manage these tensions. Tensions do arise. And how can achltd asean Work Together as a group in the maritimes security space. Not all of us are claimants. To work with china, work on the framework where there are certain rules that we all respect and move forward towards. I strongly agree with the ambassador on this. Its clear that i think so one of chinas highest priorities is to maintain an atmosphere and a situation in east asia that allows them to continue growing economically. And i think thats probably among their highest priorities. Of course, the chinese want to defend sovereignty and territorial integrity. Thats always been among the highest priorities of the peoples republic of china. The question is, is how you do it. And that takes us to the second part of your question. I think among our highest highest priorities in the region is to maintain is to increase respect for the rule of International Law. And this has been an issue in the south china sea. And an issue in the East China Sea as well. And we will look to our partners and we will look to china to work with us to strengthen the rule of International Law in our interactions with the chinese throughout the rest of the year and in the future. Gentlemen here. Thank you. I have a question for mr. Brose. You have just made an interesting comparison between the Eastern Europe and east asia. So, im wondering would the u. S. Adopt Something Like the dabo standard attitude maybe to regional emergency happening in these two differents. And or america will adopt the same standard when facing regional risk, the international tense or the urge for american to intervene or at least to watch carefully. And if there is is there variation that did exist, is that decided by the Public Opinion or public concern in American Society or is by or is it decided by any other factors . Thank you. I could just the question is, is there a double standard thats being applied to u. S. Policy in Eastern Europe and u. S. Policy toward asia . Look, from where i sit, no. I think that the policy that the u. S. Is trying to follow in both places is consistent in the sense that were objecting to what russia is doing in ukraine because theyre violating the sovereignty of an independent country. You know, theyre clearly not trying to resolve disputes peacefully. And i think in both parts of the world, you know, the goal here is to uphold a rulesbased International Order that the u. S. Has played a significant role in for the past 70 years. And i think we see both as obviously very different challenges. But in some sense, similar. Gentleman right here. Thank you. Im with shanghai media group. I have a question to mr. Assistant secretary. You just mentioned president obama would visit china. What will be on his agenda when he visits china in terms of strengthening the militarytoto military relationship with china . And also the u. S. Just lifted the longtime ban providing Lethal Weapons to vietnam yesterday. So, how do you think about that . And will that create more stability or more unstability in the region . Thank you. Thank you very much. As i mentioned in my remarks, we want to create a strong, stable militarytomilitary relationship between the United States and china. At the suni land summit in 2013, president xi proposed that we explore establishing a set of confidenceBuilding Measures between our two militaries. And we reaffirmed our interest in doing that at the strategic and economic dialogue. Were looking at two different kinds of confidenceBuilding Measures right now. One of them is a notification of Major Military activities effort. The other is on rules of the road, rules of behavior for air and m acharitime encounters. Were discussing both of these and we hope to have something positive to say in this regard during president obamas stay in beijing. On your second question, we established a comprehensive partnership with vietnam in 2013 when president song visited washington. That comprehensive were in the process of implementing that comprehensive partnership in all areas of the relationship. And we thought it was only appropriate as part of implementing the comprehensive partnership that we look at lifting the ban on Lethal Weapon sales to vietnam, which we think is its about time that we did that, given the growth of our relationship with vietnam. We believe that this will help vietnam contribute to Regional Peace and stability. It will help vietnam in Disaster Relief and humanitarian assistance, for example. And it was time. The reason we did it partially, because we want to see further progress in human rights on the vietnamese part. But we thought that the current progress was sufficient for us to partially lift the pan relating to items relating to maritime security. I just wanted to follow up on that and ask chris, you guys worked on that the vietnam issue on the hill. Was there bipartisan support for that move . Yeah, there absolutely was. This is something that we had been working on previous to the decision. This was the lethal arms embargo is maintained under executive authority. It its maintained in law or statute so it didnt require an act of congress to ease it. But the administration, i think rightly, wanted there to be Political Support for this. You know, wanted the congresss reaction to be favorable. And i think what we were able to do, senator mccain introduced a resolution back, i guess, two weeks ago. And had on it, as cosponsors senator pat leahy, ben cardin, senator corker, so you know, very key leaders of the senate when it comes to asian issues asia policy issues. So, yes, there was a very, very degree of bipartisan support for it. Its just a question of now kind of building further upon that. The young lady here. Hi. My name is nadia cho with the liberty times. First of all, i would like to ask mr. David shear. Taiwan is asking for the u. S. To build submarines. I would like to ask, has any decision been made from the d. O. D. s point of view . Also, do you think this will contribute to the stability or the security of this region . Thank you. Of course, the u. S. Remains committed under the taiwan relations act to providing taiwan with the defense articles it needs to maintain its security. I have been strongly committed to this throughout my career. Particularly during my stint as the director as the Deputy Assistant secretary of state for Chinese Affairs when i was in the state department. I continue to be strongly committed to that. And the question of submarines is under discussion. No decisions have been made yet. But as part of our overall interactions with the region, well, of course, be staying in close touch with our counterparts from taiwan on this and a range of defenserelated issues. Thank you. Im david carl, a business consultant. Id like to get back to the question of what does china want. That question presumes china is a unified actor and capable of giving presenting or acting in a deliberative, rational way. Another way to look at this is, is that chinas Foreign Policy actions are actually reflective of factional struggles within the leadership, robust bureaucratic actors that are resistant to party leadership. I have a colleague in beijing whos sent me a message last week that hes heard rumors of an assassination attempt against president xi. Im wondering if instead of thinking of china as a strong state capable of these Foreign Policy assertive Foreign Policy behavior, that what were seeing is actually reflective of internal weaknesses . I have no doubt the domestic Political Considerations contribute to the chinese Foreign Policy decisionmaking. I have no doubt that strong bureaucratic interests also contend for influence within the chinese governmental firmament, just as they do here, just as they do everywhere. Part of our challenge is the fact that the chinese arent transparent about their decisionmaking, particularly in defense relations. Part of our effort at engaging the chinese in this area is to help them increase their transparency. In the defense area. And that will be part of our goal in establishing in pursuing these confidenceBuilding Measures. Im the chief representative in vietnam for the intrastate travelers company. This is a wonderful panel. But my question is, the wonderful speaker from the president s executive office, dr. Evan medeiros, is it . He was wonderful. But he sounded very strong and positive about our ability to get tpp done. I wish i felt as confident as he does. So, my question is, question is prognosis . Probability, 60 , 70 , 40 . Whats the prognosis . And what are the biggest obstacles to getting it done . Protectionism in japan or domestic policy here in the United States . No country is more in the game on trade than singapore. Ambassad ambassador, can i ask you to take a swing at this one . I heard that a tpp will be done by november. They never specified the year. We have been hearing this every november, every time we come together for a meeting. I wouldnt hazard a guess of when were going to get it, how long its going to take. But i want to give you a sense of how difficult it is to get it done. Singapore already has a bilateral Free Trade Agreement with the u. S. And very different type of economies, one very large, the Worlds Largest economy, and singapore is a small island state. It took us a long time to get a bilateral Free Trade Agreement just between two countries. Can you imagine the complexity of 12 countries, including the worlds Third Largest economy, including countries like vietnam that have to make fairly significant economic changes, canada, mexico, covering 40 of the world gdp and not just trying to get an agreement among 12 but also Bilateral Agreements between each one as well. You look at the complexity of that and you can understand why its taking us some time to make sure that we get a good agreement. When you want to have a 21st century agreement, as that is what the expectation is, then we may have to take time to make sure that what we get is something that is useful for everybody, that makes sense. But you need to give the negotiators a bit of room rather than putting deadline after deadline, november after november. I think theyre working at their best to try and get it done. The leaders, obviously, have given direction of what they would like to see done. Were hopeful that as soon as its ready theres no reason to keep it away. But just try and understand and appreciate the complexity that goes into putting this thing together. As i look at the process, im sympathetic to them that given what theyre trying to achieve. I can say a word on domestic politics piece. I think part of the challenge is that its incredibly regrettable that the senate did not give the administration trade promotion authority. That ultimately came down to a decision by the Senate Majority leader. I think an added challenge to the complex negotiation thats ongoing is that if you are a trading partner of the United States, are you going to put your best offer on the table if you are suspicious you might not have to negotiate with the congress afterward . I still think that this can get done. I think its too big to fail. When it gets done, not clear what i would say is i think politically speaking, you know, whether this happens this year, maybe not. But theres certainly a window of time to do this in beginning of next year, possibly the First Six Months of next year, if theres the will to do it, if theres an agreement to do it. Once you slip past that, the challenges you get into american domestic politics where you get into the primary cycle for president ial politics, that tends to play to the extremes. So i think the what you dont want to see happen is this thing drag so far into next year that it begins to get wound up into american political cycle spinning up again. Im matt field with nhk japan broadcasting. This is for mr. Shear. I was hoping you would share details and if you could touch upon collective selfdefense in japan. That would be great. Thank you. We welcomed the japanese cabinets decision to review the collective selfdefense issue. We welcome any opportunity to strengthen the alliance and for japan to play a stronger role in the alliance. I will go to tokyo with assistant secretary danny russell. We will hold a session we will chair to the u. S. Side a session of the ssc as well as the sdc. And its our expectation that we will release the interim report on guidelines, not the revised guidelines but an interim report on the guidelines which will help us map the way forward for the ultimate revision of the 1996 guidelines. For those that dont know those acronyms, ssc and sdc . Ssc is security subcommittee. Sdc is the Security Defense committee. I didnt mean to put you thats not fair. You should see the book he got when he went to the pentagon of acronyms. It was two enscyclopediaencyclo. The gentleman in the back. Sorry to put you on the spot. This is kind of a hard question. From your perspective, what is the most important aspect or issues in this defense review process . And secondly, how do you think what is the most important aspect or issue from the United States perspective in this whole defense review process . And secondly, how do you think this review you contribute to the Regional Security . Thank you. Sg im going to answer the second part of your question first by saying a strong u. S. Japan Foundation is a keystone for regional stability. Thats been the case for decades. I expect it will be the case for decades in the future. To keep that Alliance Strong and vibrant and up to date, we periodically review the guidelines. And that is our aim in doing so on this round. The gentleman right back here in the blue shirt. William kim, i have a questi question. The deploying of thought of selfdefense barrier into south korea now is pretty controversial. Would you clarify clear stance on this issue . Our asia pacific commander, admiral lockleer, endorsed military taking steps to threaten the u. S. And also washingtonbased ngo said earlier this week that north korea has completed a major upgrade of the main rocket site. Would you evaluate about this issue . Is this a threat, actually . Were always concerned about developments in and the expansion of a north korean threat to stability on the Korean Peninsula. And we are always discussing that very closely with our rok counterparts, including their developments in the missile area. We have made no decision on the Korean Peninsula. And we have not discussed thad deployment with our rok counterparts. We look forward to working with our rok ally to meet any potential missile threat to korea or to the region. I want to inject a question. I was involved in a couple of the meetings while Prime Minister modi was here from india. I have to say, the Energy Around that visit was incredible. We havent talked much about india. I wondered if i think a lot of us who work on these set of issues think the new sort of power shot is looking coming over the south pole over Southeast Asia and looking at both oceans, indian and pacific. What are the prospects for india to be a player now under modi in this in new emerging Security Architecture in across the endopacific . Anybody care to take a swing . I think Prime Minister modis visit was very successful. Those of who you have read the joint statement probably notice that there was very Strong Defense component in that joint statement. The two sides agreed to renew the 10yearold defense framewo framework. We will address ourselves to that we will be addressing that issue with our indian colleagues very soon. At senior levels. We held a first round of the defense trade and Technology Initiative just before Prime Minister modi arrived. This is an effort to increase our Technology Defense Technology Cooperation with the indians under secretary of defense for acquisitions and technology frank kendal is very interested in pursuing this with the indian side. I think he will be visiting india in the near term. I think this is a very important aspect of our relationship. And i think were ready to move forward on it. We also discussed the desi desireability of increasing military to military operation. I would look for a stronger u. S. india exercise in the future, perhaps with japanese participation as well. These are all very positive developments in u. S. S India Defense relations. We will look to Carry Forward on the momentum of the very successful visit here by Prime Minister modi. We have tried for a long time to keep india engaged. India is a participant in the ease asia summit. India plays a very important role. We bring them in economically, politically, strategic discussions. Even before Prime Minister modi took office, they have been there for some time. Each one structure has them as a key player. I think the general expectation is while they will play a role in the region, the Prime Minister will focus on domestic economic leaders as all leaders do. We encourage him to continue to play an active role throughout the region. Very briefly, senator mccain and i were in new delhi in july and had the opportunity to meet with Prime Minister modi just after he came into office. We were struck that theres a lot of opportunity here. Theres a lot of opportunity for the u. S. And india to sort of regain altitude in a partnership that over the past few years has lost quite a bit of it. Hopefully, the meeting here, the visit here is a good first step in that regard. I think our hope and sort of the hope thats shared in the congress is that we will be ambitious, that we will have the strategic ability to bring it back to those kinds of questions. The domestic priorities that the ambassador mentioned are important for india. The u. S. Can make a huge contribution and be a partner of choice for india. But i think when it comes to the issues were talking about here, one of the things that were also very pleased to see is the extent to which india is building its relationships with other countries in the region. The india japan relationship is the one thats got a lot of focus. We see that as hugely valuable and hope building on what evan had to say today that the u. S. , japan, india, can sort of build it and put strategic content into it and build it. That would be an enormous positive signal. Thank you. We started the day with one of the real advocates and practitioners of developing modern asian architecture, former Prime Minister kevin rudd. He talked a lot about constructive realism and a sense that the key for him in all of this discussion of regionalism and regional architecture is really the need for countries to find a common narrative that focused on public goods that you could use to build confidence. And i found throughout the day that whether were talking about economics or energy or Security Issues that the panelists in general agreed with kevin that thats where the progress is going to be made. I think i hope you will join me in thanking this panel and thanking everyone who put the program together. [ applause ] thank you all for coming. Have a good afternoon. In election news from the Washington Post today, the Justice Department has dispatched federal poll monitors to 18 states. The monitors will look for racebased discrimination and inadequate resources for bilingual voters and individuals with disabilities. Attorney general eric holder said, i want the American People to know that the Justice Department will stand vigilant, working in a fair and nonpartisan manner to ensure every voter can cast his or her ballot free of intim didation o obstruction. Here is more about the elections from this mornings washington journal. How do you take tonights activities . I think the republicans are going to have a good night or a great night. We dont know whether its good or great, because theres some very close races. At the crystal ball operation here at the university of virginia, we go ahead and ill indicate all the seats. We dont leave any tossups. We have the republicans likely to win 53 senate seats once all the recounts, runoffs and Everything Else are held. And democrats hold 47. Thats as opposed to the current lineup of 55 democrats, 45 republicans. We think republicans are going to quite well. But there are some very close seats, whether its kansas or iowa or colorado or alaska. Sometimes theyre just coin flips. So we hear a lot about paths during this process as far as the paths to watch. Do you see anything trending as far as paths to watch as to how you come to that figure . Well, essentially, we have looked at everything. We use not just the polling but all the Background Information we can gather and all the data we can gather. We have a set model that kind of presents us with the general outlines of what is likely to happen and then real events fill in the gaps on the model. I would say, if you are watching the Senate Results tonight, you obviously start by looking at New Hampshire and north carolina. Those states are held by democratic incumbents. Senator Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire and senator kay hagan, north carolina. They are the democratic fire wall. They have been a bit ahead. They were once well ahead. Now they are just a bit ahead of the republican opponents. If they can end up falling, one or both of them, then it indicates that theres more of a republican surge than expected. That will mean the number of republican senators will grow, maybe even beyond the 53 that we have outlined. If, however, they are able to hold down the fort for the democrats and able to win reelection, then i think you are talking about a more modest total still a majority but modest for the republicans. If the democrats are able to really mobilize their vote today to a greater extent than expected, i think the first signs of it would really be in georgia, for example, where you do have a close race for senate. The republican a bit ahead but possibility of a runoff. I think it might also show up in the state of kentucky where Mitch Mcconnell is running for reelection. I expect him to win. But you would have to look at the margins. So there are going to be some early signs. We will all be following them together as we move across the country. A lot of people are looking at alaska. Why is that . Well, laalaska is an interesting case. You have a democratic senator who won by just a few thousand votes six years ago against a crippled republican opponent. Its a republican state. Its a solidly republican state. They will occasionally elect a democrat. Begich has ron a Textbook Campaign with only a couple of serious errors. He has organized like mad in the bush country, the small villages, outlying villages. He has done everything you can reasonably do as an incumbent to try to win. If he doesnt win and he loses to a republican nominee, its more a case of which direction this particular election is moving in. It isnt something he did. Its the general atmosphere of 2014. When it comes to other senate races such as iowa, because we have been talking about that this morning, a lot of people saying its close, do you see same thing . What factors will favor into who supports bruce braley or joni ernst . Starting out a year ago, i think most people expected iowa to stay democratic. The senators seat, hes retiring. Iowa has been leaning democratic looking at past election returns, particularly president. Congressman braley was thought to have an excellent chance to win. He has made a number of errors on the campaign trail. I think its costing dearly. The republican nominee has run a good campaign, has projected a solid image. Her critics say shes well to the right. She has tamped down on those sides of herself. She has project a more moderate image. I think shes likely to win. But its close. The last poll out of their major poll showed her up by seven points. I dont think its seven points. I think its closer than that. Midterm level, is it rare that we have so many races, ten in all, that are so close . This is a larger than usual number of close races. I actually count nine in the senate, 11 gubernatorial that are close. It is an enormously normally, in a midterm year you have 36 gubernatorial races and easily a third will be highly competitive. Thats about what we have. Senate contests, it can be as low as five and six at this late stage of the campaign. But its a little bit higher. I wouldnt call this extraordinary. I would call it more competitive than usual. Since you mentioned it, as far as gubernatorial races are concerned, what are the ones to watch . People mentioned wisconsin and a lot have mentioned pennsylvania. Are there others to watch . I think everyone is watching florida. The battle of the republican governors, the current republican governor florida, rick scott and Charlie Crist who became an independent, now a democrat. Thats very, very close. The latest polls give an eyelash lead to Charlie Crist. But its so close that i dont think the polls can really point to the winner. That one would be right at the top of my list. Even some of the small states have fascinating contests. Look at maine, for instance. A threeway race like four years ago with a republican, a conservative Tea Party Republican who won four years ago with 38 , 39 against two liberal opponents. Well, he has two liberal opponents again. Now, the structure of the race is a little bit different. The democrat seems to have better chances this time. Its a close contest between the democrat, the congressman and the incumbent, paul lepage. A couple other things. I know its not a closely watched race but it has been mentioned today by the others. In virginia, the senate race between mark warner and ed gill he is pi, what are your thoughts . We rate every senate race all through year. We never had that as anything other than likely democratic. I cant tell you the margin by which warner will win. Maybe its just a few points. This is a competitive year and virginia is a competitive state. But i can tell you most of the republicans at the highest command level will be shocked if warner loses. I think its very unlikely. I will warner will end up winning. As far as the crystal balls history is concerned, whats your history as far as midterm elections and calling it right . We have our accuracy is higher than 98 . We call every race. Thats whats disdistinctive. We have called all 507 gubernatorial, senate and house races. Obviously, when you call all 507, you are going to be wrong. We do it because its fun and because we think thats the fun of the process. Our readership agrees with us. The director of the senate for politics at the university of virginia, also mentioning his crystal ball that takes a look at these things. If people want to find out the crystal ball information, where do they go . Senatorforpolitics. Org. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Today is election day across the country. For all of the house of representatives and some senate and governor seats. We would like to know whether you vote and why. About 1,000 of you have responded. We would like to hear what you have to say about this. Go to facebook. Com cspan. We have brought you more than 130 candidate debates from across the country, in races that will determine control of the next congress. Tonight, watch live Election Night coverage to see who wins, who loses and which party will control the house and senate. Our coverage begins at 8 00 p. M. Eastern with results and analysis. You will see candidate victory and concession speeches in some of the most closely watched senate races across the country. Throughout the night and into the morning, we want to hear from you with your calls, Facebook Comments and tweets. Campaign 2014 Election Night coverage, on cspan. Three Army Commanding generals and the acting director of the National Guard discuss force training and operations and explain the total force policy, to integrate the three components into one force so that it the regular army, reserves and National Guard operate under the same procedures. It happened last month. Thanks for being here. First i want to do a couple of quick introductions. To my right, your left, and the mirror affect, i have general talley. He is chief of the army reserve and he is also the commander of the u. S. Army reserve command, dual hatted. Answers to the secretary of the army and the chief of staff of the army and answers also in a different hat as a threestar commander. To my left, your right, is mike tucker, another one of my threestar commanders within forces command. Mike is the commander of first army. First army is the executive agent for executing the Army Total Force policy for force com. We have mr. Paul patrick down here to the right on the far end. He is assistant secretary of defense for Readiness Training and mobilization. Works in osd, pnr, retired Major General and brings a lot of expertise at the civilian leadership level for us. And then finally on the far left, my far left is judd lyons who you know. The acting director of the army National Guard. Lots of experience with him as well. Just a couple of opening remarks from me. Then i will let each of them give their pitch. I dont know how many of you were at breakfast this morning. Some of you were. I imagine some of you were not. Thats essentially my message is what i said at the total force policy breakfast. First is lets look around the world. The world is a interesting place. The United States is a global power. Theres a wide variety of hot spots out there. You dont have to have access to intelligence to figure out who it is, where it is. All you have to do is read of newspaper and watch the evening news. We have soldiers right now from all the components serving in active Ground Combat in afghanistan, working as advisers on Security Force assistance and advisory teams, working in the logistics world, aviation, intelligence and a wie havede v of other skills. We have solders in iraq. Thats a requirement we anticipate additional advisers or other capabilities as we continue to support the iraqi Security Forces. We dont know exactly how syria will unfold in the future. We cant predict necessarily what will happen in jordan or egypt or libya. We dont know necessarily what will happen in yemen. We dont know what could happen in other particular parts of the muslim world. Theres an area of the world right now that certainly has lots of peoples attention. We cannot predict you cannot predict, i cannot predict, nobody can predict the direction in which events will unfold. If you shift gears and you look at asia, the United States has made a strategic decision to make a pivot to asia. Last year or the year before in the national strategy. There are issues there. So youve got the rise of china. The increasing economic and apparently military power of china. Does that mean there will be a conflict with china . N not at all. Thats not what we are saying. Theres a rise in capabilities in china and east asia. Theres a possibility of conflict on the Korean Peninsula as an example. Is it going to happen . I dont know. You dont know. None of us can possibly know. Right now, as you see in the news, its unknown where the leader of north korea is. Whats his Health Status . Whether hes in power or not. Lots of speculation. We have a treaty with south korea. There have been issues over many, many years on the Korean Peninsula. Theres issues in northeast asia. Theres issues in Southeast Asia. Theres issues throughout the african continent. Theres issues south of our border, mexico, latin america. So there are issues throughout the globe. There are hot spots throughout the globe. The range of potential military operations goes from on the low side humanitarian assistance and Disaster Relief all the way to significant combat operations. You see one of those playing out as an meerjiemerging requiremen west africa with the ebola crisis as we begin to send u. S. Army, navy, air force, marines i guess no marines, but air force and army and navy forces to west africa to help contain control and then ultimately defeat the ebola virus. That is unfolding right now on the lower end. We have in our skillsets certain capabilities and logistics and intelligence in medical fields, command and control, engineering fields that allow us to assist in that effort. You see that unfolding. The range of military operations from an operation like that against ebola all the way to operations that you see against isis or the taliban or other potential aggressors, all the way to potentially operations to prevent conflict on the Korean Peninsula or if conflict deterrents were to fail to fight and prevail in that particular conflict. So our skill set in the United States army, in the United States military at large, but the United States army in particular, the skills, the capabilities that we have to be prepared to train to is a wide range and it is global in nature. So when chief of staff of the army talks about a globally responsive andregionally engaged army, thats what he is talking about. You can see it manifest itself where we have forces over the years. We put the forces into being so that we could Start Building muscle memory of Tactical Units as they would cycle and rotate through various commanders regions of the globe. It would allow the Combatant Commanders to engage routine engagement to build the Network Among allied and friendly nations to the United States. You see it manifest itself like that. Or you can see it manifest itself in a Contingency Operation where we have american soldiers go to something that is perhaps a little bit month dramatic like the First Infantry Division with respect to iraq. My message is the world has lots of hot spots, all over the place. The United States is a global power. If the civilian leadership of the United States decides to engage and use land power, then they are going to call in the United States army. And the United States army must maintain capabilities that are across an entire range of military operations. And we have to keep ourselves at a very high state of readiness. So the first message is, we dont know what the future holds. The second one is because we dont know, we have to be prepared for lots of different possibilities and we have to maintain ourselves in a high state of readiness. How do we do that . That then gets to the total force. At the end of the vietnam war, many analyzed vietnam and they determined that the United States military we lost the war in vietnam. One of the reasons we lost was that the will of the American People was broken. We know that war is an act of politics by violent means. And that by engaging in the act of war, you are determining one persons will or one group of peoples will over another group of peoples will. Its a political contest. In the vietnam war, the United States it was assessed by the chief of staff of the army and others that our will broke. And he said, what can i do . What can i do as chief of staff of the army to ensure that the American People are engaged in any future conflict . And he said, what i will do is i will resign the force so that the United States army can never again be committed to a Ground Combat situation, a ground war without bringing along the American People. And he decided to make sure that the National Guard and reserve component were fully integrated into the active component. So you couldnt just send the active component. If the active component were to go, it would require the reserve and National Guard to go with them. Resigned that. We are today promulgating that very concept in what they call the Army Total Force policy. In 2012, they wrote a short two or three, fourpage memorandum, a directive, to those of us in uniform directing us to make sure that we implement or execute the total force policy. He follow eed that up with an implementation document which tells us, you will implement the Army Total Force policy by doing the following, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven things. And then they followed that up with implementation guidance that was cosigned by general lyons there, my predecessor, general allen and jeff talley. That went into affect last year. Those are the strategic implementing documents. What are we doing . For a couple of key things, remember how we are getting after this. One is partnership. We are partnering the active component with the National Guard units in the reserve component units on a hopefully day to day, week to week, month to month basis. And we have tried to group them by geographic locations throughout the country. We have matched National Guard divisions with corps and brigades, so on and so forth. In order to form the connective tissue between units within a broad geographic region on the active component in the National Guard reserve. So partnership. Theres also the state Partnership Program for overseas which is a different program. The Partnership Im talking about is the active component and the reserve component partnered together. A second big Flagship Initiative that was put in place is the combat Training Centers. In the combat Training Centers not just the combat Training Centers. But also the major exercises. So you have the exportable combat Training Centers, you have war fighter exercises, you have the bullet shift exercises and other major exercises that occur within the army. What we want to do is we want to make sure that throughout forces command all of the major he haver sizes are fully integrated with active component National Guard and reserve component. The objective that i have promulgated is roughly speaking 50 of a combat Training Center rotation. So what that means is when a unit goes to louisiana or in california for national Training Center, that we will roughly speaking have about 50 active component and about 50 reserve component. There are two rotations a year in which you will be a strictly National Guard bct rotation. Thats there to get certified. We want to certify two National Guard brigades for potential deployment. Those are unique. The other retagss we want to make sure they are fully i object greated with the active component. A third is the leadership development. Leadership is fundamental. If you think of readiness as a fourpart problem where you have manning issues, make sure you have the right amount of people, the right skills, right grades. You have an equipment issue, make sure you have the right equipment. You have a training issue to make sure you are training on the right skills. But you have a leadership issue. Really, i would argue that in many ways leadership is probably most critical of our four components of readiness. So we want to up our game on leadership across the board. In the active component and in reserve combponent, we want to p the game in our leadership development. Especially in Tactical Units at the brigade and below. I think its necessary at the division and above and the generals need training as well. But where the rubber meets the road in combat operations on a variety of operations, the brigade and below, thats where the action is happening, thats where people are getting hurt, thats where you need really strong, good leadership. Thats also is the area in which relatively speaking we have less experienced leadership. We want to up our game in leadership. Then lastly, in equipping in the standards of training. In both of those other two areas of readiness, the secretary of the army has directed that we would have the same standards. So it is critical that all of our National Guard companies and battalions and brigades, divisions, and the active component units and the reserve component units are all being evaluated and looked at and graded, if you will, to the exact same standard and that there is no difference. Thats important. Thats my job. That is the job of general lyons. Thats the job of talley and really mike tucker performs an executive agent role in that. Not only a trainer, but a validater of standards. The same thing with the equipment. We want to make sure that we have similar it will never exactly be the same because every unit is designed different. But we want to have as close to same standards of equipping that we have throughout the active component and the reserve component for obvious reasons. We will be fully integrated in the operation. We want to make sure that we are completely interoperable. Those are the made elements of the Army Total Force policy. I will be happy to elaborate or not on any of those as we go forward. The last thing i would tell you is that an army, any army, doesnt matter which army, pick your army, all armies have fundamentally two functions. An armys function is either to fight in combat or prepare to fight in combat. Thats what armies do. Thats why they exist. To fight in combat and if they are not engaged in the act of fighting then they are preparing to fight. Because other ranges of military operations such as an earthquake or a virus are typically lesser included cases, we have resident capabilities in both scale and skill within the military to deal with the wide variety of other operations. But it is combat Ground Combat that armies exist for. And we should all remember that. To execute successfully execute Ground Combat for United States military requires the entire nation. That nation is represented not only in the active component. It requires the total commitment of the National Guard and reserve. Its a nation that goes to war. Its a nation that wins a war. Its not the army, the navy, the air force, marines or the National Guard or the u. S. Army reserve. Its not any of those individuals or individual organizations that win a war. The nation wins or loses wars. They win it through applying the national affects of combat power as expressed in uniform, but also the other elements of National Power as well. Within the army, our contribution to that is to bring it together at the unit level in a total force where we are integrating fully the National Guard, u. S. Army reserve and the active component in everything that we do. So with that, im going to turn it over to jeff, first. Then we will go, mike, general lyons and then we will close it out with paul. Then we will open it up for questions. Go ahead, jeff. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I want to thank everybody for being here today and attending this Important Panel and thank general milley and why this is important for us to serve and operate as a total force. For more than 13 consecutive years of war, the Army Reserve Soldiers have brought their unique skills and capabilities to contingency and Theater Security cooperation missions around the world, including operations enduring and iraqi freedom. It was during those that the need for the Army Total Force policy, which required the army to man, train and equip its active and reserve components as one total force became clear. The need to manage the reserve component as part of the Operational Force and ensure the reserve component capabilities are interoperable have become clear. We must not only ensure that the total army remains an integrated and Operational Force, all components, but the total force policy remains as part of the armys strategy and planning for meeting the needs of the nation Going Forward to include future decisions on force mix, rolls and missions, and total aerment training integration. The army reserve supports the Army Total Force policy and the chief of staff of the army through our readiness model that we call plan, prepare, provide. Regional alliance and forward positioning of army reserve positions to support commands as they seek to shape the Global Environment to prevent conflict, thats the plan part. In fact, the army reserve, the only component of the army thats a single command, is integrated into every asec and cocom around the world to include that. It maximizes our unit readiness through total force integration and training. Thats the prepare piece. General miller will talk more about that, im sure, as he talked about the role the first army has in helping ensure we have total Army Training. Then it becomes necessary for the army to engage the enemy or to meet any requirements globally. We have to provide soldiers, leaders and units to meet the needs in packages and to win decisively and dominantly as general milley clearly articulated. Another way that we generate readiness outside the plan, prepare, readiness model is by recognizing the army reserve is the most closely linked service and component of all services and components, were the most closely linked to industry in my opinion. Most all of your army reserve are technical. Most of the hard Technical Skills that we need in other army rest in the reserve. As traditional reserve i haves, where do they maintain their skills in the Technical Community . They do it in the private sector, doctor doctors, nurses, engineering, civil affairs, lawyers, whatever requires the hard core skills, those of that resides in the reserve in service to the total force. We have to recognize how do we leverage that relationship with the private sector to help generate our readiness . We do this through plan, prepare, provide and private Public Partnership initiative where the army reserve builds upon our relationship and agreements with other 6,000 firms from fortune to small companies. And they use resources to help us train and generate better individuals, soldiers and leelders in terms of readiness using a private sector approach. Merging the best of Army Training with civilian, expands our soldiers. P 3 i brings together the best of communities through a unique program of career development. The army reserve provides highly skilled and educated employees, businessmen and women, needed to succeed in competitive mark places in return for civilian opportunities to enhance the skills of our soldiers. Then they put those skills to work in executing real World Missions that only advance the goals of our partners. It supports combat and command. They help prevent and shape events around the world. They support the commanders when a decision is made to execute lethal operations and when. For example the collaboration we have with u. S. Water partnership and the u. S. Institute of peace addresses the issues of water, access and quality and the significant Security Issues associated with water around the many regions of the world, including those important to the United States. Other projects that we have ongoing include issues like medical capability in the independent state of samoa. Civil affairs and humanitarian assistance in the republic of cogo. More tech inn cogo. More tech inical with Ge Healthcare that will expand skills and experiences of the Army Reserve Soldier and enable them to become real leaders in the field technically and then take the skills and couple them with military skills to be great leaders. The plan, prepare, provide readiness model and the private Public Partnership initiative generates that readiness so whether its contingent or combat, the army reserve can support the total army and final force. Final part is soldier for life. When we think about being a soldier in our great army, we have to remember that soldier for life is not about the regular army. Its about the regular army, the army National Guard and the army reserve and then our great alumni or retirees from our army. We want you to stay a soldier for life. So particularly now during the challenging times that the army, the army reserve and the army National Guard have to downsize, its important to recognize that we particularly in the reserve components want to capture the ac to rc. We ha we need to recognize that we have a place for them in our reserve component so they can continue to be a soldier for life. I look forward to answering your questions and having great discussion here on the important of total force. Thank you. Im going to change the order here. Judd, you want to go next . Sure. Thank you. Its an honor to be included in this panel of distinguished leaders and to be able to share with you all the army guards experiences thus far in implementing our total force policy. I have a few points i would like to make. First id like to emphasize that developing the total force policies has been a very open and collaborative process for the army guard. We have been engaged in the meetings, counsel of colonels, steering committees and other working groups in the penlt gone and out in the major commands. First army and other commands have made an effort to engage and get state input. In particular, general allen, when he was the commander spent a lot of time socializing the interim guidance that general milley talked about for implementation with the agains in getting the feedback. Second, one of the most tangible early wins in total force policy implementation has been the unit partnering that general milley mentioned between the components. Our divisions have been partners with active component corps. And our brigades, starting with the brigade combat teams and extending that into our functional and multifunctional bring grades are partners with their active component counterparts. The intent of the program is to ensure that all of our units are able to plan partner training events and provide Leader Development opportunities. Our army National Guard divisions that are alligned with active component corps do so for the duration of a cycle so that the divisions can alternate between a Homeland Defense mission set such as our command and control, kennel cal, biological, radiological, Nuclear Response element or known as c 2 cre bravo and in expedition sets. Ou brigade combat teams have been aligned with active component teams based on type, location and existing relationships. The partnering of our functional and multifunctional units is mostly complete. We are starting to see the fruits of some of the partnerships. I will highlight a couple of the examples. 101st airborne conducted a summit in may with army National Guard brigades that are partners with the 101st brigades. So we had states in attendance that included indiana, kentucky, wisconsin, illinois, iowa, arkansas, ohio and tennessee. Similarly, the 10th Mountain Division and the 42nd Infantry Division conducted a planning conference this past august to pair up brigades under each divisions command. We had the 50th ibct from new jersey, new yorks 27th Infantry Combat Team and vermont that were paired with the 1st and 2nd ut. Each met to discuss planning trained over the next 18 to 24 months and the potential for collaborative opportunities. We have had Army National brigade teams from idaho, florida, tennessee and virginia that have worked with their active component partners to receive op 4 and observer controller support for our exportable combat training capacity other xctc as well as our war fighter exercises that are guard bcts are under going. This is happening without additional funding. Certainly funding for efforts like this would enable more events. But we all know that funding is scarce, particularly in fy 15. Its encouraging to see what is being done. The final point i will make is how encouraging it has been to see that all major exercises will be multicomponent. Its starting to pay grade dividends for our formations. This past fiscal year, 42 army National Guard units supported 12 active component ctc rotations for brigade combat teams. In fy 14 we had seven guard protagss that integrated in active component battalion with an army National Guard brigade. Looking ahead, approximately 80 army guard units, thats around 6,000 guard soldiers, are supporting 13 active component bct, ctc rotations. We think thats a very good start. The army guard is flglad to be part of the effort. Perhaps in the employment of those forces. Theres significant opportunity for partnering, pairing and mission sharing within our current operational environment and the army National Guard stands ready. Thank you for allowing me to take part in the panel. Thanks, judd. Mike . Thank you, sir. Back in 1993, the Congress Passed aid National Defense authorization act that required the secretary of army to stand up an active component force with the intent of reducing time it takes for post mobilization. Thats a title 11 force. Thats the force that first army is today. The however, the last 11 to 12 years, first army has not had much time to spend in the business of premobilization. Mobilizing up to 09,000 a year sustained, we had very little time but only to push out units to get them ready for combat in post mobilization. The intent was to shape premobilization to lessen the time it takes for post mobilization. As the army told first army last november to shift our focus from a primary effort and post mobilization to look and begin your efforts in premobilization, which is more akin to you could argue the ndaa of 1993, we did a total Mission Analysis of first army headquarters. And in our Mission Analysis, we determined that obviously our mission changed, and therefore, other tda was no longer to support the mission that we had in premobilization. That specifically that 74 of the cs and css forces in the total army reside in reserve component yet very little existed in first army. So we had to change first army. Thats one of the major efforts in whats called operation bold shift is two lines of effort. A bold shift to premobilization training. We have to do most but a shift to premobile training support and then get our tda correct so that we can be dressed for the dabs, so to speak. So that we have the cs and css observer, coach and trainer population to meet the cs and css mos skills that are predominant in the reserve component. So what first army is doing is reducing ourself from 16 brigades, no two were alike, down to nine. The nine brigades will be organized into six combined arms training brigade and three multifunctional brigades teamed with cs and css and adequate armed oct like an ops group. We are reducing battalions from 102 to 49 battalions. These organizations, although their numbers are going smaller, the size fl organizations are becoming larger. And more versatile. Thats the in the business of executing total force policy as the executive for forces command, thats where we are going with bold shift to create these integrated training events of which by the way theres about over 30 a year that the army conducts. They come in the form of combat Training Centers, rotations, war fighter retagss, brigade and division. They are xctc rotations, five to six a year, csts with thewarx the or a my reserve. All of those culminate training events, first armys charge is to headache sure they are integrated. The army is organized, trained, equipped, manned in order to fight as a total force. We never go to war as one component. We go as a multi force. Always. The secretarys intent with the total force policy in the fall of 2012 thats been talked about quite a bit. One of the intents is that if we dont have this policy go into effect and if we dont continue to integrate training together we go back to the stove pipes. So we cant allow that. We have to train as we go to combat. We go to combat as a multi conflict force. The way we organized that is through two venues in the army each year. Last year it happened four timeses a year. The first is training support working group that first army hosts. There we put up the troop lists for all the major collected training events i mentioned. About 30 a year. We are in the room with all of the operators and planners with the forces command. We plug units into exercises to ensure we have a total integrated exercises. Thats the Army Resource council which is hosted by forces command which follows two months later. We do it four time as year so the exercises are sin kroo niezed and ibt integrated. Thats how we integrate total force policy. Of course we need a tda structure in first army thats manned so it has the type of skill sets we need. For example, we are standing up 12 brigade support engineer battalions and 15 brigade engineer battalions in first army that dont exist now. We are doing the entire transition in 18 months. It will be complete by the end of 15. Correction, end of 16. Its neutral. We have had to shuffle the deck chairs on the first army to create a matthew tral solution with a tda that matcheses the mission set from november which is hard government work. If you are a force manager, you are our friend. Because we have spent a lot of time with you lately. The execute of bold shift will be tomorrow. Its been a long road. We are exciteded about operation bold shift and our ability to help the commander execute the policy. Thank you. Paul . Very glad to be here with you representing the acting assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs. The honorable jessica wright. On a somewhat humorous note its difficult to be the last person that speakses for two reasons. Number one, you may forget what everyone else has said. You might remember what i said. So i might get a lot of questions afterwards. Secondly, when you hear what everyone else has said i may have to you may hear something or have been trying to edit my remarks so i dont repeat what my fellow panelists have said. But let me break into my comments. First of all, i want to give you a brief description of what osd reserve affairs does. I will give you examples of what we do to support total force integration. Since this is a forcecome sponsored panel the examples i will give will be focused on training integration and the all important readiness mission. The core mission of osd reserve affairs is to develop policy and legislative initiativeses in the areas of man power and personnel, Readiness Training and mobilization which is the directorate in which i work and material and facilities. In many cases, these policy and legislative initiatives set conditions to enable routine use of the reserve component as part of the Operational Force. Caveat, the services make Service Specific policy planses and programs. We cover all the reserve components, not just the army. Two recent examples i want to give you, as i mentioned before of policy initiatives related to training address the burden for both active and reserve component presented by common military training which, as you may know by the old title general military and ancillary training and separate but related a policy that addresses the use of electronicbased distributed learning outside of the drill weekend to accomplish some as pecks of individual training as well as professional education. You may ask what do these individual training enhancement initiatives do to affect the collective training mandates of the d. A. And total force implementation guide as mentioned earlier. They do it because the goal is to ebb able reserve component unit commanders to achieve a more productive weekend drill and to be able to devote more weekend training time to collective training on mental tasks. This in turn increases unit readiness within the statutory budgeted 24 drill days. Therefore, fostering a greater focus on collective training goals at annual training. Of course it goes without saying that its critical in an increasingly constrained budgetary environment to drive readiness efficiencies and Cost Effectiveness from 39 statutory training days available to the reserve component. Meeting eight points and being a ready and trained force is a basic criteria for the army to consider to plan and program for use of its army National Guard and army reserve formations as part of the Operational Force. I hope you would agree that reserve affairs is doing its part to ensure a ready total force with these policy initiatives, not only for the army, but for all serviceses. Let me conclude my remarks with a strong endorsement of first armys bold shift initiative. The advantages of first armys partnering and engagement with the army National Guard and the army reserve in premobilization assessment, Training Plan development and post mobilization training in preparing units identified for mobilization for combat over the past 12 plus years in afghanistan and iraq are well documented and brought the level of total force integration to unprecedented heights. Bold shift maintains the critical first army role but expands it in two very important ways. First of all, first Army Training support shifts to include premobilization as general tucker mentioned. And not of all units that are above battalion and higher formationses, not just those that are deploying. So you could look at bold shift as a continuation of the concept that we are so familiar with for scheduling deployments of army ac and rc formations in support of sent com in iraq and afghanistan. Now the training support encompasses it is entire multi year readiness Generation Cycle and instead of deployment to theater the deployment is a culminating training event to warx or a home station equivalent event. Secondly, first army playses a Critical Role in supporting all army rc training by bringing to bear all the assets of force com as a force provider and unit training component for the army to ensure multiple training in an efficient and Cost Effective manner and to standard. This encompasseses training support personnel, facilities and equipment but also bringing together combat, combat support and combat Service Support formations mentioned earlier from all components to train as you fight. The partnering initiative mentioned between ac and rcbcts institutionalizes year round training of Army Reserve Combat formations, adding another layer of depth to acrc integration. All of this results in an optimally trained force with important second and third order effects. For example, acrc partnering and integration in mutual support occurs throughout the training and readiness generation process. A more ready force whose progressive unit collective training and Staff Mission battle command readiness is acknowledged and recognized while readiness is generated during the me mobilization training. Thus force com Decision Makers are more likely to consider the army guard and reserve unit as a viable solution to meet Mission Requirements for Combatant Commanders in peacetime and in turn plan and program for the routine use as part of the Operational Force via bravo authoritieses. This holds equally and especially true for the use of Army Reserve Components as part of the Operational Force to provide Surge Capacity to the active component for mernling contingencies, Disaster Response and humanitarian operationses and the benefit of reduced mobilization requirements that is bold shift yields will make the reserve component more responsible under the emerging and contingency scenarios. Its osc drks conviction that the 2014 bold shift goes farther than the initiative mentioned from the 1994 time period. Its the right thing to do for total force integration now into the distant future. Thank youment. At this point, we can open it up to questions. I have asked them to call on folks in the audience. I think there are rules of engagement. Come to a microphone if you can because this is being broadcast. We want to make sure your question is important and captured for the audience thats out there on tv and on the internet. So questions from anyone about anything. We can talk about everything from the red sox to the new york National Guard to 82nd airborne. Please state your name and organization. Sergeant john mcgilligan. General carol. My day job is separate but im also a cochair of the guard reserve committee of a military coalition. Powerful lobbying group on the hill. Represents all service members, veteranses and familieses, tracking big issues like the commission of compensation and looking at the potential commission looking at the army structure. My question for you is different about the use of the reserve components in coordination with the guard units to respond to domestic emergencies. Whats the real timeline for when the policieses will come together to activate reserve components with the capabilitieses we have. Make sure i understand the question. Use of reserve component, either guard or u. S. Air to deal with domestic emergencies and the timeline associated with that. Yes, sir. I will let jeff deal with that first and then go to paul. Thank you. Short answerses. We have the authority already. National defense act of 2012. The reason the National Defense act of 2012 provided the authority for Federal Reserve, not just the army reserve but the Federal Reserve to help support the homeland was because secretary stockton who came from california, stanford specifically to p an appointed under secretary for Homeland Defense at osd got tired in california. Seeing challenges in california and the federal force, Federal Reserve force not able to be utilized to help the guard address those issues. The National Defense act of 2012 provided that authority the. Those authorities were utilized in super storm sandy. The army reserve as a command and component has the authority and i have delegated this authority down to the command team, Company Level for immediate authority to save life and limb. As we speak, anything happens anywhere in the homeland, a company commander, Detachment Commander of the army reserve has the Authority Given to him by me under the immediate authority for under 72 hours to launch personnel and equipment to save life and limb. Beyond that we need a different authority. Going back to super storm sandy, general jy