opposed to aircraft carriers. he was later given a congressional medal of honor by the congress. i think he's been vindicated but i'm going to ask the question that follows up on the. you put out a strategy on the arctic and yet the russians are making huge moves with regard to new bases, with regard to new airfields new arctic command claiming territory overshoots one of the arctic. we had a big support in alaska, the last week on the army task force that was up looking at potential force reductions looking at two brigade combat units potential being moved out of alaska. if the army eliminate even one brigade combat team and alaska how do you think kim jong-il or vladimir putin or our allies in japan korea singapore, would react to that given how important the arctic is, given

how important this new part of the country is? to be honest we have a 13 page paper. russia's putting major, major troops and infrastructure in the arctic. does that concern you into would be looking at removing or katie combat teams, our only brigade in the pacific? sorry mr. chairman i went on a little longer. >> i think both of your points there are very important. the arctic is going to be a place of great strategic importance. the russians are active they are. we are as your state is right on the point of an arctic power. and that needs to be part of our strategy. and it needs to be more than come at a think it is more than a pamphlet as you say. the other thing you raise with kim jong-il's thinking and so forth this is why whether we

continue to invest in the defense that we need whether it be bct's as you say, or any other part of our force is something that others are watching. it's important if we ever have to use it but it's also important in ensuring that it is less likely that we will have to use it. entity worry about -- and i do worry about our foes being encouraged or heartened when they see us debate whether we should spend enough money on our defense. and that's just yet another reason why i really hope we get the support for the defense spending we need. >> i won't speak to the number of army bct is brigade combat teams, but i will say the russians have taken a decision to activate six new brigades and four of them will be in the

arctic. >> some of us -- >> thank you. >> some of us still believe in battleships and we are not sure that alaska should've ever been made a state. [laughter] >> senator king. >> with some trepidation mr. chairman,. [laughter] i want to associate myself out to with the senator from alaska's question because the arctic is emerging as an enormously important strategic area. just one of the simplest measurements is we have one handy icebreaker and one medium icebreaker. the estimates are the russians have seven to 10 icebreakers. that's just basic infrastructure, and the resources up there and the strategic complications are enormous. i appreciate the senator raising that question. i think one of the things we have to do is put this discussion context in terms of your budget. this chart which i'm sure you're familiar with them is the last 50 years of defense spending as a percentage of gdp.

starting in 1962 at about 9%. today it is that 3.3 person and headed down at a time of increasing threat and peril for our country. often we get confused but the absolute dollar amount but a person make a gdp is with comparing apples to apples throughout recent history. and we are reducing the defensive function dramatically dramatically at a time as a set of increasing threats. general dempsey i want to put a fine point on your testimony. you talk about numbers of deployments and readiness. if we are not able to avoid the sequester, our american lives being put at risk? >> yes. >> that's an eloquent answer, general. i appreciate it. secretary carter, i do want to talk about an area of your budget in a little more detail,

5.5 billion scheduled for increase activities insider. i am extremely -- in cyber. i think it is the next frontier of warfare. we've had plenty of warning shots across our bow in the last couple of years, and yet the congress hasn't acted and they think, i commend you for taking this initiative. is my concern however. news reports are that the cia is expanding their cyber capability and, of course in sa has a substantial cyber capability, and you're but a cyber capability. i don't want to return to the post-9/11 days when we had a lot of intelligence capability but they were not talking to each other. please assure me that you will be coordinating with the cia and nsa so we're not duplicating overlapping, spend more the taxpayers money than we have to, and worst of all not sharing whatever information is being derived in this field.

>> well, thank you and you are absolutely right. this is a terribly important dod mission and that's why both i and i think the chairman has been a great leader in this as well and so determined to do more. but this is one of those things, it just like you analogize it to door on terrorism before 9/11 it requires us to stitch together the efforts of different parts of the government. to the list you named i would had also fbi which has capabilities and a force in this area, dhs which has capability and authorities. got -- so even as we as dod move out and make the investments we need to, we need to coordinate with the others. our investments are into categories. one is to make sure that our networks are secure. because our forces depend for

their ineffectiveness upon information networks. so the buying of planes ships and tanks doesn't get us anywhere unless we have the networks to go with them. and they don't do anything good in water and less the networks are survivable and able to avoid penetration. and also, another thing we need to do is build cyber weapons as weapons of war. because a war comes, that will be a dimension of future war for as many noted. we also play -- >> if i might i'm concerned that our cyber defense system is just that, it's defense and we don't have an offensive capability. or if we do is not broadly known and, therefore particularly nation states to act against our cyber come we are very vulnerable because we are such a wired country. there's no price to be paid. i wonder if we shouldn't be

developing a theory of deterrence similar to nuclear deterrence in the '50s '60s and '70s which served us well, actually until today so that people understand that if they come against our cyber infrastructure they're going to pay a price. is this something i hope you can consider? >> i think that's a very wise. i appreciate that, that thought. and i think that is something that we need to think through better than we have. what does the doctrine mean? what does deterrence mean in this new domain? so at the same time we build capabilities we have to build doctrine as well so i think that's a very wise point. >> final question i'm running out of time so i will ask you to respond to this perhaps on the record. and that is you've identified as a priority acquisition reform. and i know that you once held that job, and i hope you will

hold to that. i did like to see a little more detail about how you're going to talk about. i know that chairman has expressed this concern how do we get out procurement not only in terms of cost but in terms of timeliness that we are not taking literally decades to develop a new aircraft but we have a more timely procurement process? you don't have to respond now, but i would appreciate seeing something on that because i think it's a very important part of your mission going into this job. and by the way i'm delighted you are with us today. thank you. >> thank you, and will do. i will respond. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. chair. a.q. secretary carter, general dempsey, for being here with us. we appreciate your service and your testimony today. secretary carter in the beginning of your testimony you have given quite an extensive list of the trips you have taken the people you've met the places you have been and

impact with equipping and training our soldiers. so i can tell that is very important to you. is it correct, do i understand correctly that he also took a trip to arlington? >> i did in the morning. i was sworn in with my wife. >> and i appreciate that so much secretary. that tells a lot about a person, butthat not only are you recognizing the sacrifice of the blue star families give to their loved ones that are serving overseas right now but also to those gold star families that have left someone behind. >> thank you. >> thank you for doing that. i learned about and i was immediately impressed that you take the time to do that. so thank you. i do want to talk a little bit about, we've talked about this all day with the shia militias. i know senator mccain has spoken about this earlier. in the fiscal year '15 budget we

at $1.6 billion that we used for the iraq train and equip fund and that was to train and equip the iraqi security forces, the kurdish peshmerga come and sunni tribes and, of course other local forces. and now in this fiscal year 16 budget, you are requesting $700 million for this fund. added to support this effort. i think we should be training and equipping the kurdish peshmerga. i think they have been important allies in the pushback against isis and others. but what i am concerned about though is the relationship between the iraqi security forces, iran which has been the sidebar topic of many conversations today, and and the shia militia forces. during the iraq war, ieds were

a huge concern to american troops. and i think as senator mccain had alluded to earlier there was some types of ieds explosively formed reject aust that were used, they were devastating to our men and women left many gold star families out there. we know that those dsps a lot of those came from iran, and so right now what i would like to hear from you is our american taxpayer dollars going to the shia militia that once were fighting against american soldiers? and how can we be sure the american taxpayer that these dollars going to this fund to train and equip iraqi forces will not be used against us as we move forward? secretary carter, if you could

address that. >> thank you. and then chairman dempsey. well, first of all i share your concern about the shia militias and the face of sectarianism blooming again in iraq which as you know extreme wealth from your own service, it is the principal challenge that the government of iraq faces going forward. our training and equipping you to iraqi security forces through the government of iraq. and assistance by the way with the peshmerga also reflects the view that a multistate carrying iraqi government is the best way to keep iraq together and to defeat isil in iraq and ultimately drive them out of the country. but i say i share your concern

because what we've seen in the last few years has been sectarianism the road in the capabilities of the iraqi security forces, and that's why they collapsed in the face of isil. so at the bushehr your concern -- absolutely share your concern. you know that well from your service but we've had that express before, and general dempsey who was there also in iraq does as well. so let me ask him to join in. >> i will express my own concern as well, and i think if the general austin were here i guess you'll be or actually, he was a the reason his campaign plan is delivered is that one of the lines of effort i mentioned there were nine is iraqi governance. and if the central government of iraq does not achieve, let's call that reconciliation because that's probably the right word

with the shia and the kurds than it does put our campaign at risk. and so i am concerned about that. as far as the weapons we been issuing to the isf as well as to the peshmerga through the government of iraq we've got confidence that those are going into the right hands. some of the weapons you have seen in the hands of the shia militia, because you can see it on youtube and on twitter and places are things that were procured by the iraqis through our foreign military sales process that they bought a couple years ago, but we are monitoring it as well as we can. >> i thank you very much. senator mccain, thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you to the witnesses for this excellent testimony. i would ask about two items. sequester and the isil aumf.

on sequester i received a letter last week as a member of the budget committee from chairman mccain and ranking member reed that i ask unanimous consent that be entered into the record, highly important letter for budget committee members and i just want to read one once and then ask if you agree with it. quote if we continue on our current path i.e. sequester we risk undermining the central pillars of our all-volunteer force, and with it the foundations of international keys and security, which a united states military has been the most reliable guarantor since the end of world war ii. do you agree with that statement? >> i do. >> general dempsey? >> i do senator. >> it strikes me could we send up any sort of clear white flag of beginning like a partial disarmament than to place a vote on the bca from august 111 as a higher priority from the nation

-- august 2011, in the world is changing put new threats on the board since then? >> could we do anything that would send a worse message to our allies about our weakening resolve? >> i'm very concerned about what our internal budget debates look like to friends and foes alike internationally. yet another reason why really need to knock it off and get ourselves on a stable budget path that gives us enough to defend ourselves properly. >> let me just say we've had an interesting set of discussions about afghanistan where i think the committee has come to the position, we should be conditions base not calendar-based. let me apply that same analogy to our sequester issues. shouldn't we be conditions base? all we really going to elevate easy take-out that we voted on in august 2011 before north

korea cyber attack him before putin went into the ukraine before eyes was grabbing acres? are we going to elevate that of other conditions base national defense for the same reason we shouldn't elevate a calendar over the conditions in afghanistan we shouldn't elevate an august 2011 vote over the conditions of security that face the country. i took that as the point of a letter and a recommended to all my colleagues. with respect to the isil aumf an area where i so disagree with the chairman but where the back and forth has maybe think about my position the question about the issue of ground troops as part of the isil aumf. been listening to the chairman about this, what i realize is that my concern is not really about language and is not really about sort of the constitutional allocation of power but what about the definition of the nation. i would like to ask your question on this. we've heard in the last three weeks indeed with the foreign relations committee by first king abdullah of jordan and then

the sheik the an era of qatar last week, about the battle against isil. both of them said to us essentially u.s. ground troops isn't a good idea because this has got to be our fight against our terror threat. we want your help. we want you to be deeply involved, but if it gets pitched as the u.s. against isil, or even as the west against isil it takes on a fundamentally different tenor and could even be, become kind of a recruiting bonanza for isil. king abdullah in a very courageous way and sadly we met with him on the very day that it was revealed that the jordanian planet was so horribly murdered burned he said this is our fight. we've got to show the world that this is our fight. if we are willing to do and we need all kinds of help from you

but we've got to be up front that this is our fight. the united states didn't create isil. it didn't create this extremist ideology. it was birthed in our region by people claiming the mantle of the religious -- so both of them have sort of guardedly advised us against ground troops but towards the big picture goal that this battle against isil has to be the big region policing itself, not the u.s. trying to counter them. what is your response rates as we think through this military mission, what is your response to that sentiment? it's not about draftsmanship are about the allocation of power but it's about who, you know isn't there a compelling need for the region to show the battle is its own threat and if so we will help them rather than maybe the united states burden? >> that's exactly how the campaign is designed. it's designed to leverage a

coalition of regional partners assisted by those outside the region but a very much aligned upon those in the region to lead the effort. required the government of iraq to lead the effort, especially in terms of reaching out to form a coalition within iraq of sunni tribal leaders and kurdistan peshmerga. so i recently say that's exactly how the campaign is designed. >> i second that. that is how the campaign is designed and that's how it needs to be designed for the two reasons you say. the first is that we don't always seek to defeat isil. we seek a lasting defeat of isil to an out of of their defeated a stay defeated and that means somebody who was there ensuring that defeat. in the second reason you also say, which is that if it becomes

our war, it becomes a harder war. so for both those reasons we need to have others involved and that is as the chairman says what the campaign calls for now. >> thanks so much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator cotton. >> thank you. sector carver, welcome back in your capacity as secretary. i could go back to something we were discussing a few series ago about the leak of our plans to mosul. i believe sector carver said you are looking into. general dempsey, i know you said you were looking into it. i don't understand what we take so long to get to the bottom. this is not a leak. it was a planned conference call with members of the media if i understand the reporting correct with the fns time this understand something here? >> no. that's my understanding as well. and i would just say two things about this, this whole incident. the first is senator that when

an operation is mounted against mosul and anywhere else it needs to be a success and it needs to be iraqi lead, supported by us and it has to be successful. and that is a little bit like the conditions base point that -- >> i agree fully. i agree fully. i don't understand why announcing any timeline or contribute to any idea that would've been a success nor do i understand why you would take so long to understand why and organize conference call with the media was held. >> i will say something about that and let the chairman who is also spoken to general austin about that. that clearly was neither accurate information nor had been accurate had been information that should be blurted out to the press. so it's wrong on both fronts, on both scores. and the only thing i will say is

that we try as the department of defense of a democracy to be as open as we can. so there are lots of people out there talking all the time about what we are doing. and everyone's a summer gets out in front of their skis. but i also, even as we make sure this particular incident doesn't happen again, i think that it's important that we be open as a department, not with military secrets and not with warplanes, which was the mistake made in this case by we do try to keep the country informed of what we are doing. it's about protecting them. it is a democracy and to openness is important. it has to have limits when it comes to security matters. those limits were not respected in this case. >> senator mccain and senator graham have sent a letter to the president to the secretary to me to general austin actually

to ask that very question. and i must suggest that i will await until the letter, until we respond to the letter. >> secretary carter junior confirmation hearing you had mentioned to use options respond to the breach of the inf treaty by russia this is a quote i think you alluded to this earlier when you're speaking to senator fischer, active defenses to counter immediate range around launched cruise missiles. counterforce capable to prevent intermediate range ground launched cruise missile packs, and countervailing strike capabilities to enhance u.s. or allied forces. would you elaborate on the size and the scope of those capabilities and what you think the russian government's reaction might be afford to fund such capabilities? >> i think in this setting i

would like to limit the amount of detail that i go into but i will affirm what you just said, which is we have three kinds of options for responding to a violation of the inf treaty. i think the russians need to know that this is a two-way street. they signed, we signed. and we can and will react and those are the three categories in which reaction, which we could react militarily. active defenses which are to protect ourselves and our allies and their territory against this new threat. counterforce which is a way of making sure that, if god forbid there's an actual military confrontation they can't be used. and the third is the option for us to have systems which we decided to forgo in the interest of this inf treaty years ago. we don't have to forgo them

anymore because the treaty is a two-way street. and with that, chairman come to want to add anything? >> the only thing i will add, the development of capabilities to fit into the categories that the secretary mentioned would be imf compliant. and that's the difference between the two of us. >> this may be a question about military terms of art so i will start with chairman if that's okay and then let sector carte back cleaner. mr. chairman, what are quote enduring offense of ground operations -- spent i will tell you as the one who would have to assist in the application of that i would consider enduring the mission, mission by mission to if we were to for example decided our advice to the president would be that we would have to introduce ground forces

to accompany iraqis into combat in mosul because of the complexity of the terrain, then we can do that but it would be mission specific. as opposed to a temper, temporal dimension, meaning two weeks or two years. >> secretary carter, you have anything to add? >> no. i think that's acted. i think the important thing about language, about the language of the aumf and however that discussion debate turns out from my point of view is first that with a flexible to run the campaign when you to defend the country. and the second is that our troops see our government as a whole supporting them. those are the two things that are important to me in this whole debate. >> thank you. >> general, you keep saying that

if you decide to recommend to the president to we would like to know when you're going to decide to make that recommendation to the president. >> well, senator, when the task at hand, when i took the advice from centcom of course, general austin, and when the mission would require it. and we have not reached that point. >> things are going fine. >> senator nelson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen, it's good to see you. mr. chairman, in your professional military opinion if additional arms are not provided to ukraine you've got a little david fighting the russian bear is it reasonable

to assume that russia, through their subterfuge of the rebels, would continue to advance on right across the country? .. so that on the chance the russians are telling the truth which i doubt very much the

sovereign state of ukraine could compete on a level playing fields. >> why do you think the russian policy is such that if they decide to take you with ukraine they could. wyatt and not moving across ukraine? >> this is probably speculative because intelligence doesn't support it. i suspect it will. it is designed to create uncertainty with european allies. putting friction inside of nato which is larger strategic. and if successful in ukraine and

russia wanted to continue to be aggressive they would suddenly mass on the borders of the three baltic states. there would be no match their but now we have nato members, what do you think is the resolve of the european nato membership to stand and fight in the baltics if it comes across the line. >> as a member of nato they agree to live up to their article 5 responsibility. based on the european reassurance initiative that made no, the joint task force, nato

and they take all of them, they take that responsibility. the problem we could potentially have, there might be a dispute about whether it is happening. we are working with our nato allies to work through that. >> and of course the situation there with those large russian-speaking populations in the baltics, especially in estonia. could give the same excuse he tried to use with regard to crimea. let me ask you about mental-health. i have been enormously impressed with some of our special operations forces. they are now realizing that the stigma against mental health

counseling, they are really trying to turn it around because its performance enhancements. to what degree are you trying to implement the same thing across the board, the department of defense. >> when it started under bill the craven when he was centcom commander, is what you said. not enough to say it is not a stigma. they found a way to turn it into positive, we would call it a combat multiplier. not only is it something you do after the fact that you build in the resilience you need from the start. >> final question for either of

you, training $500 a month for every 32 months a free syrian army, is that going to be productive? >> that is a small number that grows over time. it is paced by the throughput of the training centers. i think the u.s. effort needs to be just one effort. there need to be others in the region. it comes back to something we were discussing earlier, the need for the defeat of isil to the lasting defeat and regional

partners to be involved. the others thing i would say is there needs to be other efforts aside from the u.s. effort here in accordance with the discussion we were having earlier. >> i am sorry. i am sorry. we need a partner on the ground something on which we can have the coalition coalesce around. >> senator graham. >> i appreciate it very much. have you been told by the arab forces in the region, the arab leaders the we are not going to see area unless we can get rid of a side --assad? >> some say that and some do not. >> they don't want to defeat isil and karen syria over to iran. the you agree with that? >> i do.

>> allotted arabs are saying not want to destroy both enemies assad as well as isil. i don't see a chance of a regional force until you put assad on the table. the authorization to use military force a very specific question. the people we are training throughout the region to go in and fight isil, the mvp -- the young men who will join the cause. what happens if the air power of assad helicopters if they begin to attack the people we train because they know they will turn on assad. under authorization of military force can we protect the people we train against an attack by assad? >> i think we have an obligation to those we trained to protect them. the manner in which that would

be done is something that is being discussed, but in my view we have an obligation to do that. it goes with that training part. >> i agree with you both and i ask white house general counsel, the authorization to use military force would not allow us, the united states, to engage the air force of assad, that is not within the authorization. that is an important point. can you check with the white house and see where they come out on this at another time? >> if the sanctions were relieved tomorrow. if they got sanction relief, what do you think they would do with the money given their behavior on the ground today? >> i can't speak to that. i am under no illusions that ending their nuclear program

ends the problems we have got with iran in the region whether it is surrogate and proxies', arms trafficking, cyber, so this is an adversary who has some pointed out earlier has -- the deaths of american servicemen on the battlefield. we have to keep an eye on them in that regard as well. >> would you agree with me the most likely outcome given their behavior today is there are not going to build hospitals and schools. they will probably put money into their military. >> they will probably distribute their money like we do but i hope they don't sequester it. >> i hope we don't give them more cash because i think they are wreaking havoc as it is. secretary carter do you agree with me the iranians are wreaking havoc throughout the region without a nuclear weapon? >> i do agree with that

senator. yemen to styria and iraq and lebanon and elsewhere and that is why i have think that it is important that we remain vigilant and prepared and we in the department of defense need to and will be prepared for iran across a very wide front. >> would you agree with the following statement? the iranians with a nuclear weapon would be the most significant national security threat is real faces in the united states with it? >> certainly let the israelis

speak for themselves. the two things i would say is we need to be concerned about iranian behavior beyond their nuclear program. >> can you think of anything off the top of your head that would beat out an iran with nuclear weapons? >> there may be a close tie with north korea with nuclear weapons. >> they have already got nuclear-weapons. >> i understand that in terms of the danger posed by difficult stage with a nuclear weapon. >> to you think is more destabilizing for iran to get a nuclear weapon than north korea? in terms of the middle east? >> in terms of the middle east surely. >> have you been told by arab allies anything you give the iranians on the nuclear front are going to want the same thing

or more? if the iranians get nuclear capability do you think the arabs in the region will want nuclear capability to match the iranians? >> there are those who have said that and that is one of the reasons we oppose iran getting a nuclear weapon because it could be the beginning of a power train that would encourage others in the region to go -- to pursue a nuclear program as well. that would unleash proliferation in the middle east. >> the prime minister's warnings in that regard is probably well heated. >> i did not hear the prime minister today but i certainly think that the danger of a runaway iranian program stimulating runaway nuclear programs elsewhere in the middle east is a very serious one. >> thank you both for your service. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks to each of view for being

here. thanks for all you do. secretary carter, the department of defense is calling for a background in 2017, it has nearly 20% more infrastructures and it finds necessary. can you give award detailed explanation as to what the department finds within its infrastructure that is in excess and why, and also can you describe to as what improvements need to be made to the process to avoid the cost overruns we experienced in the 2005 round? >> thank you. we are requesting another round, the basis for that is a measurement of our

infrastructure against our current holdings of equipment and our needs. aircraft fleets versus apron space. that kind of analysis that measures the amount of excess infrastructure we are carrying. with respect to backgrounds. the 2005 background was not what we are seeking. we are looking for what occurred in the 1990s where true savings but kurd. why didn't savings occur in the 2005 background? it is because when it became time to reconfigure bases, that was a time when the defense budget was growing very rapidly. we decided the department decided at the same time to modernize a lot of installations

at the same time it was consolidated with others and that created far fewer savings that your brac ground was. we are seeking brac authority. i know that that is not an easy thing to get but we simply have to reduce tale or we have to take it out and i don't think anyone wants that. >> a lot of americans were frustrated last summer when we saw the iraqi security forces on whom we had spent $25 billion training and equipping over the course of the last decade. quickly free from a much smaller and less well-trained less well equipped basis force in northern iraq giving up ground and weapons and leaving behind a lot

of weapons. you just returned from a visit to the middle east to look into our strategy and how things are going there. can you discuss for us the oversight we exercise over the train and equipped missions in iraq and syria and tell us a little bit about what is being done to make those forces accountable for the training and equipment we are giving them to make sure that something more doesn't happen and our investments. >> thank you senator. let me ask martin dempsey to chime in also. you exactly put your finger on it. what happened last year was an unwillingness of the iraqi security forces to fight using the equipment and training the

united states has given them and the reason for that was a political failure on the part of their government to keep the promise that had been made to the country. to keep a multi sectarian state. not what is happening under maliki. that is why the forces folded. the most important thing we can do going forward is make sure iraq doesn't decline into sectarianism. that is the most important thing we can do and is a political thing rather than a technical thing involving the training but it is job 1. as far as training is concerned i will let the chairman speak to that. we are giving training and we are going to give them support when they go into battle and we are now and have been for quite some time investing in a

campaign against isil in order to blunt their offense and prepare their way for the counter-offensive. >> let me ask the chairman if he wants to add anything. >> four locations bashar al-assad in the west, baghdad, the training is centralized, the oversight once they deploy it is built around the supply chain. the things we are giving them there is a tender that goes out to where they are operating. to this point, our program is to take some units offline, put them back out as well as help the iraqis manage their own training base. does that answer the question? >> i think that is helpful. as my clock is ticking down let me ask one other quick question

that either one of you can answer. how are you as defense and intelligence agencies adapting to the collapse of the yemeni government? the loss of primary counterterrorism partner against one of the most capable al qaeda offshoots? what are we doing? >> i will start and the chairman please add, first thing is al qaeda in the arabian peninsula which is in yemen is that very serious offshoot of al qaeda. very serious for us because they are determined to attack us. they make that clear. our counterterrorism operations in yemen are critically important and therefore the restoration of government there that will cooperate with us is very important. we are trying to do everything we can to combat aqap in the

face of what is going on with the government, but it will be much better for us if we are able to assist in the reconstitution of a government there in some odd --sanad. is important to counterterrorism efforts. >> diplomatic effort to keep the country together. countered terrorists are based mostly on iaaiden of in the south. we have a partner who is interested in keeping al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, and our fear is if the country does devolve into civil war we will lose that platform. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> i want to thank the witnesses for long afternoon of testimony.

i believe it is important that all of our colleagues as well as the american people understand the message, sequestration cannot continue without as you responded to senator king, without putting the lives of men and women serving in uniform today in danger. i thank you for that frank and candid testimony and i thank you for being here this afternoon. this hearing is adjourned. >> coming up friday night on our companion network c-span supreme court oral arguments in the health care law case of king versus byurwell, they're looking at whether the federal government can help insurance premiums for people anywhere in the u.s. or as the plaintiffs argue only in states that have established their own health care exchanges c-span: states have established such exchanges. your audio of the case beginning

at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> keep track of the republican-led congress and follow its new members through its first session. new congress, best access on c-span, c-span2, c-span radio and c-span.org. >> now afghanistan operations commander general john campbell testified on military strategy and troop withdrawal before the house armed services committee. president obama is expected to decide soon whether to adjust troop levels in afghanistan. this is 2 hours and 15 minutes. >> committee will come to order. the house armed services committee meets to discuss the

ongoing conflict in afghanistan. we have been engaged in military action in afghanistan for 14 years. the predictions that this would be along conflict have proven accurate. there have been setbacks in recent years but there is also cause for cautious and optimism. the united states and its allies, especially the afghan forces have made some meaningful gains. counterinsurgency is one of the toughest types of war a democracy can fight while this conflict has been a difficult one, it is not impossible. our future security and the future of the afghan people depend on our success. the people of afghanistan have the best opportunity for stable relatively peaceful country they have had in four decades. together with the cooperation of our allies we have built the 352,000 strong afghan national

security force. building a cable security force takes time but is growing in ability and capability. now is a critical moment. you must not repeat the mistakes of iraq, early withdrawal based in my view on political rather than strategic calculations contributed to the rise of isil where an enemy once devastated has reconstituted itself to pose an even bigger more deadly threat. the operational outlook is different from iraq. afghanistan could also become unstable should the united states end the mission before the afghan forces are capable of providing their own security. we should not have in my view a withdrawal from afghanistan and i hope the president reconsiders the approach he has previously announced and listens to the request of president don day. i will hear answers on questions such as what objectives must be

met to secure our gains, what are the key tactical and operational challenges facing the ansf and is this adequate to meet those challenges. as congress considers that counter isil request some of our questions are what implications that would have on ongoing and future operations against isil, al qaeda and other terrorist groups in afghanistan. we were fortunate to have general campbell with us to a series these and many other questions but before turning to him my turn to mr. smith. >> i appreciate you holding this hearing and i think general campbell for his service, the right man for the job. he had a lot of experience in afghanistan and in different roles during our conflict in afghanistan.

there has been progress as general campbell took over and i give you all the credit for this. power-sharing arrangements within the afghan government, signed bilateral security agreement and laid the foundation at least to build off of the solid government and build a partnership unlike in iraq where we have very strong difficulty getting any bilateral security agreement that would allow us to stay. the president wants to be there and hopefully we can make that relationship. ultimately that is the challenge which afghanistan has to be responsible for itself. they have to provide their own security and they made great strides in doing that. they have taken over the primary security role throughout the country and have done ok. not going to sugar coat that. it is a tough fight but they have held their own.

they keep the country relatively stable in light of the insurgency and we need to build on that because ultimately in afghanistan and iraq and all these countries western military forces cannot impose security on another country. a fine line between helpings and appearing like a foreign occupying force. we draw down and responsibility of the afghan security forces we have done it about right, giving them that responsibility but going forward there will continue to be many challenges. the government still has corruption problems. the taliban are still very active, border issues of pakistan have not been resolved and we definitely have security interests in that region. as i said many times i wish we didn't. it is a difficult place to deal with but we do. the taliban, al qaeda, these are groups that are part of the larger group that threatens us.

hopefully one that builds towards self-sufficiency and the afghan people being able to stand on their own security and governance. i look forward to hearing from the general on how we are progressing on those goals and where we go from here. with that i yield back. >> on an administrative note, all members offices were notified yesterday that for the purposes of this hearing we are going to go in reverse order. for those who were here at the gavel. my thinking is we had a number of members newer members who have sat through a long time on other hearings before getting to answer questions. in addition those who have been here a while had the opportunity to ask a number of questions about afghanistan. this is a good opportunity for newer members. after we hear from general campbell we will start, go in

reverse order for everyone who was here at the time of the gavel and as we always do recognize members in their order of appearance coming in to the committee room. thank you for making time to be with us. your full in statement will be made part of record. >> chairman mac thornberry thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i am honored to represent the service men and women of the service forces of afghanistan. i think the committee for steadfast support of our airmen and marines and due to your leadership and commitment, the best trained and best equipped force our nation ever deployed and outstanding performance bears testimony to your backing and the backing of the american people so thank you very much. i pay tribute to our military families, the unsung heroes of the last 13 years, our frequent,

and they could not succeed. i think the military families. over 2200 service men and women killed in action in afghanistan and the 20,000 plus who have been wounded each day. we struggle to bring meaning to their sacrifice. and we continue to build a secure and stable afghanistan and by protecting the homeland. ..

>> in september afghanistan complete the first peaceful democratic transition in its history. this was after a prolonged, very prolonged campaign. this transition was a monumental achievement. it represented their commitment to democratic and open society. the difference between the new national unity government and its predecessors is night and day. president ghani and she did sake of abdullah have embraced the international king dirty our coalition and the afghan national defense forces or ansf. our partnership is strong. we now have a ratified bilateral security agreement. i will take a lot of people work very, very hard for the. the nato status of forces agreement which gratis necessary authorities to continue our mission. dynamics within the region continue to evolve as well. president ghani has made

regional engagement a top priority in order to address shared security and economic interest. nowhere is this more evident than in pakistan and afghan relations. the pakistani taliban's murderous attack in ashore on 16th december may prove their september 11 -- 9/11. most officials recognize they can no longer separate good terrorists from bad terrorist. in the last few months i've witnessed firsthand substantive improvement in their interaction between afghan and pakistani militaries. they are now talking. the pakistan army chief of staff remarked during his recent trip to kabul, the enemies of afghanistan are the enemies of pakistan. this is a constructive admission. we are doing everything we can to promote their closer cooperation. while we must temper expectations i remain optimistic that both countries are working towards a more productive relationship. the enemy remains in a state of flux. the taliban failed to achieve

any of their stated goals in 2014. they failed to disrupt the elections. they failed undermined the political transition. and the failed to prevent the afghan government from signing a long-term security agreement with both nato and the united states. on the battlefield they achieve no enduring games. mullah omar has not been seen or used to the taliban senior leadership is in disarray. constantly pressured by ansf, suffering from the sage within their own ranks and a lack of fiber supportive turn a high profile terrorist attacks particularly against soft targets inside of kabul. they attend remain relevant by failing to win over the afghan population. with the coalition off the battlefield they are primarily killing their fellow afghans and muslims and their murdering innocent civilians. it's time now for them to lay down their arms and he'd president ghani's call to help rebuild the afghan nation.

the possible rise of daesh or isil vessels are you doing. as far we believe that they present that can represent more of a rebranding of some of the marginalized taliban. we are still taken this potential threat with its dangerous rhetoric and ideology very, very streusel. we are working closely with the ansf to evaluate understand the dynamic nature of this fledgling network. the potential emergence of daesh represents additional opportunity to bring both afghanistan and pakistan is together to confront this common threat. we will continue to engage leaders from both countries on ways we can collaborate to meet this challenge. we are all driven to do that is him establish a meaningful foothold in central asia. the united states forces afghanistan and our coalition of undergo tremendous changes as well here in the last six months. on january 1 the united states forces afghanistan formally ended its combat mission, operation enduring freedom. we commenced a new mission operation freedom said the.

we have ended all detainee operations simultaneously troops from 41 nations which comprise the new definition resolute support, begin executing their trained advice and assist mission in order to develop the capability long-term sustainability of the ansf. on january 1 the ansf assume full security responsibilities. they are ready and it's done. in the second fighting season the ansf were challenged and tested. but they held their own against a very determined enemy. on the battlefield the ansf at tenaciously and demonstrated their increasing capabilities. today the government of the islamic republic of afghanistan remains firmly in control of all 34 of its provincial capitals and all of its major cities. the afghan special forces in particular have proven to be the most proficient in the entire region. they constantly execute a unilateral direct mission using their own intelligence, their

own special mission wing helicopters to carry along range insurgents. these are remarkable capabilities for any military. for both the ansf and coalition come afghanistan continues to be a dangerous place. tragically we lost a coalition soldier from a turkey last thursday in a soda -- suicide attack inside of kabul. rates increased in 2004 2014, she's the. roughly five to 7% higher than they were in 2013. however, i think this must be viewed in light of the fact that they are operational tempo was four times greater than it was in 2013. over 100,000 coalition forces were not on the battlefield. even considering a higher casualty rates the ansf attrition rates which account for all losses to the force have not impacted to super the army and police recruiting has not been a problem. afghan youth continue to join the ranks of the ansf and service investigated forces is

widely respected viewed as an honorable patriotic profession. the afghan national army remains the most trusted institution in the country. on balance after watching a net responder variety of challenges over the past six months, i don't believe the insurgents represents the next potential threat to the government. however, ansf still get a great deal of help in developing the systems and processes mr. to run a modern professional army and police force. they also need sustained support in addressing the capability gaps aviation come intelligence sustainment and special operations. to address these gaps are a divided nation and mentorship will continue to be vital. our advisors at the security ministries, at the army corps level and police owned and those remain our main effort. although clear challenges exist i do believe that the ansf capabilities the capacity and the morale will be sufficient backstop by our advisory

efforts. this will provide for afghanistan's long-term security by the end of the resolute support mission. president ghani remarked that, quote, compelled by tragedy and cemented by mutual sacrifice the partnership between afghanistan nato and the united states has entered a new phase end quote. i believe we are at a critical inflection point in our campaign. many challenges remain before us. as a new afghan government continues to form, it's still find its footing and it must do so while contending with a security threat, corruption and economic challenges. yet all of these changes transitioned over the last six months offer us really a tremendous opening and opportunity. the president ghani administration offers us a strategic opportunity to put a strategic partnership that will stabilize afghanistan and then in turn provide and offer greater security for the region and ultimately the united states homeland. there is a new spirit of cooperation in and kabul.

something we didn't have before and i firmly believe that our concurrent counterterrorism and trained advice and assist efforts will reinforce and deepen our strategic partnership and should conditions for favorable outcome to this conflict. we could offer no greater tribute to the american people, our fallen, and their loved ones, and by maintaining a commitment to a long-term stability of afghanistan. and the interim protection of our homeland. i'd like to direct the members attention to the charts and a couple photographs to your right front that we had to split the we've also provided paper copies for you to look at. i'm often asked, what have we accomplished? what we achieved? what is success? has it been worth it? i frequently sure this statistic send images to underscore the progress that has taken place in afghanistan in the last 13 plus years. every measure will be should take a look at roadways, people use the internet, the number of

people in school, dean wilson school, the workforce, pretty incredible. unprecedented. the life expectancy, increased to 21 years and the last 13 years. that's unprecedented. a remarkable investment, a remarkable return on our investment. few countries advanced so rapidly over the last december years, and that success and the coalition and our ansf created the conditions for that success. 741 million years, life years of afghanistan people based on new life expectancy. i want to underscore we are undergoing this progress not just for the afghans but for the american people. the afghan stability and security contribute your own. the next would be pictures of where we were in 2001 and where we are in 2014. the first one shows inside of kabul. then and on the bottom now. then kabul at day -- kabul at

night, sort the fifth fastest growing city in the country. remarkable difference. we have undercut the terrorists a few which feeds on desperation and instability. the hard work and significant sacrifices of countless u.s. and coalition military personnel and civilians over the last 13 pleasures has created the conditions were afghans cannot take responsibility for their own security and governance. the afghans welcome the opportunity to shape their destiny but they will still desire and need our assistance. we are supporting the emergence of a secure, prosperous afghanistan, the desire to be in can be our reliable strategic partner. and one that will never again allow terrorists to use its territory to launch the plan and launch attacks against us. president ghani sass for additional flexibility in the nato and u.s. mission to account for the fact that his government remains in transition. he acknowledges that while the ansf are better equipped, better

equipped and trained than ever work remains to build their bureaucratic processes and system. additional it he believes that a sustained u.s. and nato commitment provides vital stability to the country as a new government solidifies. a tremendous psychological boost to the afghan people. we will continually assess the process of resolute support and the united states forces afghanistan is going bald in a comprehensive winter review of our campaign in this review is to get look at all of our lives of effort, not just the military. i provide a very's options and recommendations for adjusting our force posture through my chain of command. one issues determine how long we should stay and can stay engaged at the regional level before we concentrate inside of kabul. once again i expressed my profound gratitude to the committee members for her unfailing support of our mission and our troops in afghanistan. i am humbled and privileged to lead the men and women of the caliber encourage and every day they're making all of us proud.

i ask that my original statement submit early be taken for the record. i do look forward to your questions and i noticed the first two rows are filled so i look forward to that as well, so thank you. >> thank you, general. i appreciate the data you brought to us. some of this is surprising to me. summit information about the attitudes of the afghan people i think are helpful to us. or particularly helpful to us but i think mr. smith and i are going to withhold our questions at the moment. i would request if we could put the posters down just come in less members of questions about it, just to not block folks view. and i would yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, mr. mcarthur. >> thank you, mr.mr. mcarthur. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, i also really appreciated your comments and want to echo what you said about our men and women in uniform and

their families and the sacrifices they've made. i think it's important at every opportunity to remember them. i had a question about it that sucker carter made yesterday, and i want to get your take on it. -- secretary carter. secretary corder told the senate armed service committee that withdrawal from afghanistan would be conditioned based. it seemed to me that tended that maybe there was no firm deadline for withdrawal and my understanding has been that there has been an articulate plan by the president to have troop drawdowns by the end of 2016. so my question for you is do you think that extending withdrawal past 2016 would help you better accomplished your goals on the ground? >> sir thank you for the question. and i did see the secretary's

comments. i really provide options that stay within the framework of what the president put out there and it does show the current plan is 9800 u.s. going down 5500 by the end of december 15 going down between 1000 1500 by the end of 2016. the options i presented did not go past 2016. they were all provided flexibility within 2015 and 2016 2016. >> not to put you in a difficult position, relative to stated goals by the president but it's helpful for us to get your perspective as the commander on the ground. you should tremendous progress here, which we i think all celebrate and what to see that continue and be in a position to be sustained after our mission and there is complete. what would be your level of confidence that you can achieve that by the end of 2016?

>> honestly, to be very candid and i do my best military advice as they do to my chain of command. i don't know what we can accomplish in the summer fighting season of 15 at the train advice level we are currently conducting. we started a new mission on one january. what i want to make sure we can do is get through a full will be called a fighting season april to late september time frame, focus on train, advice, and assist was with rct mission. it would look at the downsides of 5500 that potentially could take our eyes off of focus on train advice, and assist we really need. so that's what the folks that i think is very, very important. a segment on the ground we take a look at all the different conditions out there. we make assessments taking into account the enemy situation, the from the forces how they're doing, the people, different regions. all of those will go in as i continue to make assessments and provided. i do need to understand and see will be can do with these new entities, will be called trained advice assist commands in our

spokes adding east and in the south, the west and the north. this is a new dynamic. we have been at that level before. my initial assessment right now is they continue to work very well. the afghans really do you know, over the last 13 plus years have continued to develop this is my third time in afghanistan. my lesson was is the original command these commander, 101st 101st, 2010-211. visit a couple times between 2011 and when i took over the summer. but the difference to where we are today is night and day. it's incredible. the afghans a giddy forces continue to progress. they have an operation ongoing know. i won't go into great detail because it is an ongoing operation in northern helmand but this was an operation that was entirely planned and led from afghan perspective. i took a back brace on it three weeks ago was down in helmand. this is a three core operation. the main effort is a to a 15

than doubled. it has supporting efforts. i've never seen an afghan operation that was that complex back briefed to me and the senior leadership inside of afghanistan and the police and the other side and integration with all the afghan security goes, the police army intelligence was pretty remarkable. i think they continue to get better and better. i will be able to answer that after the fighting season to see how it goes but if you believe that the flexibility with a fork in several to options and we put forward will provide us a better opportunity to take advantage of things have changed over the last six months. president ghani and his embracing of the international community, the relationship between pakistan some changes in leadership in the afghans a giddy forces. i really do think that leadership and holding people accountable really makes a difference. >> thank you, general. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the change in

format to our be sure to add you to the christmas card list. thank you for the. thank you, general, for being here. with respect to the aumf if congress were to pass the proposed aumf could you provide us with examples of what you could and could not do within that? >> thanks for the question. i have not read the entire aumf. i can tell you from looking at it briefly but that would provide. the authorities i have today and the resources i have today, i can continue to work hard at the seeking issue judgment mission and the trained advice this is measured by a. with the aumf the way understand it now with no geographical boundaries i think i still go to prosecute what they need to for today. after 2015 where my authorities may change, i would have to go back and look but today i have no issues as i think --

>> have attention policies change? >> i do not have the authority to change the insurgents. all detainees that we would've had them they've been turned over to afghanistan or other countries. i have no detention facilities inside of afghanistan. >> thank you. one of the things we talked about extensively is risk. can you talk to us commend you mentioned in your testimony that it would be affected too severely, but could you add some more color to the discussion of risk associated with the proposed drawdown? >> risk takes in a lot of different factors. the risk to the coalition of u.s. forces the risk to the afghan security forces i think again any command on the ground would like to have more resources, more people. we continue to work hard through that. as i make the assessment today and take a look at many other things as we are drawn down. i don't say with a drawl but we are in a continuous transition.

i think for the next two years plus it would be a continued transition. we have to adapt. but as you transition you lose people which provides security. most of my force protection is by with and through the afghans as we consolidate. we've gone from 300 plus copts combat outpost afford opportune bases to less than 25 today. so that increases the risk in some areas, force protection to security. as you continue to transition forces you lose some resources so the number of aircraft, the number of as our platforms, all those go into the calculus out of take a look at at the risk assessment, both to the risk commission and risk to force. and again as i look at flexibility president ghani as for flexibility. as i looked at that i did take into account all those to try to mitigate risk to force as we move forward. >> can you give us some examples? i know can be speculative but examples of things that

president ghani may discuss when he addresses congress later this month? >> first off, with president ghani and dr. abdullah, the senior, the cbo, it is a new dynamic and other to deal with president karzai when i first got there times before. i think the american people, all the people need to understand that every time resident connie our dr. abdullah addressed a crowd, they think the international community. they think the u.s. in particular. they take the use the. i thank them for their support they thank the families for their sacrifice other sons and daughters. you never would've heard that before so it is a completely different atmosphere. i think the president will talk to all of you about that. i think you quite proud of that. he's quite proud that he is taken, he's taken on his leadership role as a commander in chief. he's visited training sites visit military hospitals. he engages with the core commanders. i mean i intend our national security conferences.

i am able to talk to him about different security issues at any time. i think he would tell you spends probably 40% on security, 40% on economics and what they need to go. but i think he will really talk about where afghanistan is come over the last 13 years, where its security forces are, we would not be without the help of the great coalition and the u.s. in particular, not only for the men and women who make sacrifices for our families but also the economic impact that the u.s. provided along with many other donor nations. i think he may talk about how he sees the future and that he will get after corruption at how we will continue to attack that. how people broaden the perspective and deal in terms of original aspect how he is engaged with pakistan and india, china, saudi arabia, the entire region and our needs to do that both the economic perspective but also from a security perspective. i think he's looking forward to it and i think all of you will find you will be very engaging

and his message will be one of thanks but also as a great vision for the future of afghanistan. >> thank you for your continued service, general. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. knight. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, i'd like to talk about a couple of the things. let's talk about readiness of the force. this has been a generation that could have gone into their military career in 1990, and now be retired. and have been or has seen battle for the last 24 years. so here in congress we worry about things like sequestration worry about readiness of force. and worry about one to one ratios of young men and women being over there, for a year and then back here for year, six months or a year something of that nature. can you give us an idea of the readiness of force today as compared to maybe four or five years ago or maybe even 10 years ago?

>> i can talk better and give a perspective on the readiness of forces that i get from the services as their service providers. a little different perspective when i was the vice chief of the army before it went over the six months ago but all the forces i get in afghanistan, particularly from the u.s. from our trained at the highest level and our focus on their mission in afghanistan. no issue with that. i think all the services prioritize their deploying forces first and assure they get the necessary training because they will be putting their lives on the line. odyssey question i would just tell you it was six months ago when i was a vice and a continued to talk to senior leadership from all the services that would sequestration that would devastate the services and our ability to provide the same type of forces i get today. my son is a sergeant in the army. he's been to afghanistan twice. ..

>> sir, it's probably all of the above, quite frankly but with the detainees that we have, there was a long process that went through to get assurances from either cubs that they were -- countries that they were sent to or to afghanistan as well to make sure the right assurance was put in place, that they would be tried the they had

to go through that process that they would be treated humanely. and so that was carefully taken a look at at all of the different detainees that were released from u.s. control coalition control. again, no longer do we have detention facilities. inside of the afghan system, that continues to grow. up at par one outside of bagram is probably the best detention facility in all of afghanistan continues to be, i think the gold standard that they have there. they're in the process right now based on direction from president ghani to move the national threat detainees to par one and get them out of places that are overcrowded like down in kandahar and outside kabul to insure they have the right security so that they're not freed without going through the proper trials. and so i think they continue to work that very hard. but par one is a gold standard. it has the right prosecution efforts, has the right folks that judges all kind of

contained in one unit there, and we do have a small train and advise cell that will continue to help build that capability more them. >> thank you, general. i yield back, mr. chair. >> mr. mollton. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and, general, thank you very much for joining us this morning. i was impressed by what i saw in the codell two weeks ago with the progress that you've made and i share the chairman's view of the situation in iraq where i think that all the progress we made or much of the progress that we made during the surge has now been squandered by withdrawing too quickly and not providing the ongoing political and diplomatic support that we, frankly, knew was necessary. ambassador crocker, general petraeus called for it at the end of the surge. so i'm interested to hear from you what specifically you were doing differently in afghanistan this time around, and i'll add that i have the highest respect for president ghani, but i'm not interested in hearing what's different t about our partner because i think that after you invest trillions of dollars of our national treasure, after you

invest thousands of lives we shouldn't leave the eventual success of our mission up to the whims of our partner. so i'm interested in what you and the u.s. effort there is doing differently from iraq. >> sir thanks for the question and, again, thank you for visiting our troops there. i apologize for not being there. was back here doing the sas testimony as you were forward. so i would think, again i spent 18 19 months in iraq as a one-star back in 2006-2007 during the surge inside of, inside of baghdad. and i think the fundamental difference for me is really the afghan security forces and their leadership and their determinationing to make sure -- and they see the news, they see the media they understand what's going on with iraq and they have personally told me many of the senior leadership that they will not let happen to afghanistan what happened to iraq. you know, during the political instability last fall many people thought that they would

divide among the ethnic fractures which is what happened inside of iraq in afghanistan. they did not do that, despite a lot of talk. in fact they solidified around that and took that as a point of pride to make sure that they didn't fracture and that they were above that and that they were a national force, and they took great pride in doing that. i think the training that i've seen for the most part is all afghan-led training. i was out in the 207th a couple weeks ago and kind of unannounced i said let's ask the corpses commander, let's look at training. he took me to some of their marksmanship training, i saw them clearing buildings -- again, this was unannounced. >> general with all due respect, that's fantastic news, but that's what the afghans are doing and how they're doing things differently than the iraqis. but what are we doing to insure that? president ghani is a great partner today. he could, you know, i don't want this to happen, but he could be gone tomorrow. what backstops are we putting in

place to make sure if this does start to head south for any reason, we could recover, and we won't end up with a problem like we had in iraq. >> thanks, i think for me train and advise at the ministry level and what we're doing with the mod and the moi and all levels of those organizations that control the army, that control the police are working on their transparency and accountability oversight, we're working on their planning, programming and budgeting, we're working on their sustainment their planning capability, working on their strategic communications, their intelligence these are all functions they need to continue to have as we come out of there, and i think our continued work in those areas at the ministry levels will continue to help that. they are working hard at insuring they are a professional army and a professional police. they have leadership courses that continue to go on, they pick bright leaders at all different ranks and bring them into special courses on leadership, and they understand that leadership makes a dishes. >> general -- >> i think different from what

you saw in iraq. >> are you seeing the state department devote the level of resources needed to continue this mentorship and support on their diplomatic side of the house? >> yeah, we have a great relationship with ambassador mckinley and the folks -- we're connected right next to the embassy this. they don't do the mod and moi, but they're engaged in all the other ministries and the ngos, and i think they're very dedicated and they continue to work very hard. again, all the coalition, all the state department of all the different embassies are all there because they're passionate about where afghanistan can go in the future. they're excited about the future of afghanistan. i think everybody's working very hard. and the fact that what's happened in iraq has been in the news just gives them more determination to say this ain't gonna happen here. >> and my last question, just to insure that we are maintaining our commitment to the stability of afghanistan as you said in your spoken testimony, what is the ongoing financial commitment of the united states to make that happen? >> sir, we're looking very very

hard at how we continue to be more efficient and how we can reduce that, but it's about for '15 about $4.1 billion and looking at fy-16 i think i've got that down to about 3.8 billion because of some efficiencies that we've garnered both in their forceses and how we operate and we'll continue to look at that very, very hard. they are very dependent upon the u.s. and all the other donor nations to have this army and police that they have absolutely. >> thank you general. thank you, mr. chairman. >> ms. stefani. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you general campbell for your service and leadership. i, too, had the privilege to participate in the codell chaired by our subcommittee chair, joe wilson and i join congressman moulton and congressman ashford on the trip. it was great to visit some of the troops deployed from my district. so my question is in late february the dod announced the three units to deploy as the upcoming rotation of forces in afghanistan, and one of those units is the second brigade from the 10th mountain division which i have the privilege of representing which is located at fort drum, as you know.

the 10th mountain has supported operations in afghanistan since 2001, it's the most deployed unit in the u.s. army since 9/11 to both iraq and afghanistan. so based upon my visit and our privilege of meeting with president ghani and the upcoming deployment of soldiers in my district that i represent, i'd like to know from you your assessment of the risks to the security situation as we draw down in afghanistan and how that will impact our future operations against the taliban. >> ma'am again, thank you for visiting and thank you for thank you for the question. i do have colonel pat frank with me over here that commanded third brigade 10th mountain was down in the southern part of afghanistan back in 2010, 2011, and we are very appreciative of the 10th mountain support. what i will tell you is they'll come in and work the train, advise and assist. force protection is our number one priority. the president has told me that's

his number one priority. i look at that every single day. we continuously monitor the threat streams both inside of kabul and at all of our combat outposts and our taxes. every single day we're looking at how we mitigate that threat but, frankly, it will continue to be a very dangerous environment. there will be insurgents that want to kill our soldierings, you know? we -- soldierings. we shouldn't put that aside. that is out there every single day. so every day what we can't do is become come place sent. we tell our soldiers to add their -- they will have an opportunity to make a difference. it may only be 15 seconds where they make that difference and their entire tour when it comes in terms of force protection. they don't get to pick when that 15 seconds is, so they have to be ready all the time. and i think the services do a great job and our noncommissioned officers do a great job in preparing our soldiers to understand the risks that will become when they do deploy and, again, many of our soldiers have been there

numerous times they understand that. it is changing and we continue to take a hard look at that. the green on blue incidents that have been in the news during the last several years where we have afghan soldiers or police attack u.s. members, that continues to get much less as we mitigated that through our own training with different programs to provide overwatch the afghans did a much better job on vetting both soldiers and police in how they do their training, so that has gone way down, and we feel -- we can't get complacent but, believe me, ma'am, force protection is utmost in our mind. once we get in country we're continually reminded to go through processes to make sure they don't become complacent. >> i wanted to ask one follow up. in our discussions with president ghani we talked about the threat of isis and the potential for isis to grow in afghanistan, and their most recent recruiting effort. does that concern you? can you talk about what those

challenges are going to be not just in the short term, but the long term? >> again, thank you for the question. you know, it is a potential threat. it's how president ghani's used that, a concern to him so it is a concern to me. we take a hard look at that. we've engaged with our afghan security partners in making sure they're seeing what we see. we understand how they see it with all the other intelligence organizations that we have inside of afghanistan, we come together to discuss that potential threat. i would tell you right now we have seen some recruiting in different parts of the country. we have seen some night letter or drops. we have not seen it operationalize, we have not seen a lot of money come in, we have not seen those forces gather and prosecute targets at all. but, again, it is a potential threat for afghanistan and pakistan. so as i said in my opening comments, it is an area where i think afghanistan and pakistan can continue to work together to go after a potential threat that has already displayed how horrendous they will be. and the afghan security

institutions and the army and the police have told me they will not let that happen. and the dynamics inside of afghanistan are different than iraq. you know, with the sunni prosecution, in iraq, the political piece, this didn't just happen in the last several months: this has been building up for years and years in syria, iraq and afghanistan. it's a different dynamic you can there with the culture as well. but we'll see it, and we'll continue to monitor it and make sure that we have a strategy that can attack it on a short term, a midterm and a long term. >> thank you. >> mr. ashford. >> yeah, thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you, general campbell. i can tell you that when we went to see general ghani, he was so terribly appreciative of your efforts and all the efforts of our military and our support personnel. it was absolutely incredible. i was also happy to hear from president ghani of his relationship with the university of nebraska at omaha and tom --

[inaudible] in the afghan studies program which has been gown -- going on there for over 30 years. i was glad to hear that. and i want to thank congressman wilson, as chairman of our subcommittee, for his leadership and also my two colleagues. it was an immensely important opportunity for me and, i think, our district to see what was going on. just a -- and we had, we went to obviously we went to jordan and iraq and to afghanistan, so we got the entire picture in a way. and congressman stefanik i think, asked a critical question that i was left with is, you know, we have many fewer members of the armed services in iraq that we do in afghanistan and for historic reasons and for reasons that you've discussed. could i just ask you to comment just a little more on this situation? if the isis situation becomes

more -- it already is very dangerous, but where more troops from the american side are necessary or whatever the eventuality may be, could you just comment a little bit more on that interrelationship? president ghani did talk about what you suggest that they are observing, watching. he talked about his pakistani his openings to pakistan, his discussions with pakistan which seem very, very positive. but this threat in syria and iraq which is growing but we're containing to a certain degree, that it's the same middle east area. how do you again, could you just comment a little bit more on that interrelationship? what if it becomes more difficult for the iraqi forces to be successful in their country? thank you. >> thank you. sir, i can't comment on the iraqi forces, i can comment on the afghan forces and, again, the senior leadership of the afghan police and army have told me on several occasions that you know they will not let what

happened in iraq happen in afghanistan. they're very determined about that. they've gone out of their way to tell that to me. you know that question's been raised in many different instances with them as they have talked to to their leadership as they've talked with their president. the president wants people to understand that the environment in afghanistan continues to evolve. it is a dynamic environment and he doesn't want his forces to become come place sent. he wants -- complacent. he wants them to understand what happened in sir. >>, in iraq and this network can jump stages and that it evolves very, very quickly. so i think he just wants to make sure that his forces, his intelligence services are taking a look at everything and making sure that it doesn't get a foothold inside of afghanistan and continues to spread. and he can be helped with this association with pakistan because they have the same issues here, and i think that relationship and understanding that they have a common enemy that they can work toward together will help them.

so i think that they're looking at this very hard. he gets several security updates a day and the isil piece continues to be on his mind. but in the national security council meetings that i sit in, he has all the senior cabinet folk in there, that is a point of discussion can with most of them. but i think they view it as a potential threat moving forward, and i think that'll continue to evolve over time. >> thank you general. and i would -- you know, yield back my time at this point. i had a question about pakistan, but i'm sure it'll be asked and answered, so thank you. >> thank the gentleman. mr. zen key. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and, general, it's always good to see you again. let me tell you i sleep better at night knowing you are there. you know as a former deputy commander and acting commander of special forces in iraq, you know, i think we left iraq too soon. i think when we left iran or iraq on a timeline rather than condition the ground it affected the sunnis.

we disenfranchised them i believe. we isolated the kurds. we, to a degree, empowered the centralizedded government to be noninclusive. and the result was a vacuum. and that vacuum, i think we're seeing today, was filled with isis. i think the concern of the committee remains that we don't see that happen in afghanistan. looking forward, what would you consider to be your three priority conditions, and what's the end strength to support that? and lastly in my experience having a detention center or at least a temporary detention center gave us the ability to rapidly turn around sensitive site exploitation and do follow-on mugses -- missions that made a difference on the ground. and not having the ability to have a detention center, a temporary detention center, to me would adversely affect your

ability when you find a target to rapidly turn around and do follow-on missions. the if you'd comment on that whether, in fact, it does adversely affect your ability to turn around. >> sir, thanks for your service and thank you for the questions as well. if i can answer the last one first and come back to the isil piece on the intelligence, so intelligence as you know drives operations and that's what we really try to instill in our afghan partners that all their or operations should be intelligence-based. and we continue to work that very hard. we do have a very good relationship with the moi and the mod and the nds which is their intel service. so as they have the detainees, we work the relationship to make sure that we can partner with them in the intelligence, and the information they get from their detainees we try to make sure that we can get that information as well because it impacts our force protection, and we can also help guide them. they are building a fusion cell which combines the mod, the moi and the nd together, lessons that we've learned over years and years. they're stove find where they

are now so you have -- stove piped where they are now. what we're really trying to force is this sharing. they're testing this really with a pilot down in northern helmand in this operation today and we're seeing quite good success off of this as they do share all that intelligence and understand that it makes them a better capable force as they get this intelligence, turn it very quickly to drive the other targets. so i think our relationship over the last 13-plus years of working with them at ministry levels now and at the corps levels, we have a relationship to enable us to make sure we can help them with that intelligence. i feel comfortable where we're at. still got a lot of work to do with that. they don't have the same type of isr or those platforms that provide us some of that. of we share where we can, but we've got to make sure we continue to build their capability. so we're working on how we build the intel capability. intelligence is one of the eight essential functions that we continue to build at all the ministry levels. my senior deputy chief of staff

for intelligence the j2 major general scotty barrier, was a centcom j2 before this. he works with both the moi and the mod to build that intel capability. so i feel much better than where we were on building that and i think that's going to help all of us in the end. on the isis piece, sir, on conditions, i take a look every single day and assess those conditions. time is one of them. people on the ground both from a coalition perspective and from an afghan security position is another perspective. i really do want to take a look at what happens after this first full fighting season where the afghans are totally on their own. they've led it for the last two years, but this is the first time that they really are on their own and we really are just in the train advise and assist and don't have the resources to provide for them, and they are working very hard on their own capacity for close air support and intelligence in those areas.

so, you know¢ give you a -- i can't give you a number that i would feel comfortable with right now, i think need to let this play out. but the best thing we can do to hedge against afghanistan not becoming an iraq, my number one priority would be to continue to train, advise, assist and build their own capacity and their capability both in close air support, both in their special operating forces which increases their ct capability, and they want to be, and president ghani has said many times, you know, he is a strategic partner and wants to continue to build the afghan ct capabilities so down the road they have that. and we'll continue to work with them on that. >> a follow up on the detention centers. do we have, do we have the ability if you get a high priority target, do we have the ability to be present during those initial interrogations and interviews, or is it separate? >> the gentleman's time has expired. is there a one-sentence answer, general? >> sir, i'd rather coffer that

if you -- cover that with you in a closed session and i can give you more detail. >> all right sir, thank you. >> thank you. ms. graham. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you, general. it's very -- it's so good to hear some good news. [laughter] so thank you for your report. one thing that you stated is that the terrorist appeal has been undercut in afghanistan. that's something that we need to figure out how do we bring that reality into other places in the region. but my question focuses on local law enforcement. i'm aware that recently that prime minister ghani has changed some of the leaders of the local police forces. and i was wondering what is the interaction between military and law enforcement? my husband happens to be law

enforcement, and i know how important it is to have that close relationship. it's often to note those closest to us that can have the greatest impact on our behaviors. so is the military involved in working with local law enforcement? and do you see that as a positive development with the changes in law enforcement recently in kabul? thank you. >> thank you, ma'am, for the question. you know, in afghanistan it really is -- we talk about pillars and the security pillars, the police and the army being two different pillars here. and what i tell people is when these pillars they do cross-pillar coordination they work together -- the army and the police -- they are much stronger, and they can't be beat. and i attend a saturday three, four-hour session every saturday which we call the senior security shura, and that has the senior members of mod, the senior members of moi, nds which is their intel arm and then the national security adviser, and so the police and the army interaction is daily, every single day. the police operate a little bit

differently. they do have the law enforcement aspect, they continue to work through that. but in many places they are the only security institution in the far reaches of afghanistan. and so they are a threat to the insurgents. the afghan local police which are designed to provide security inside the villages are probably the most attacked. they have the least amount of training, they don't have the same weapons as the regular police or the army and so they do get attacked, but they do stand up and they do protect, and they are feared by the taliban and other insurgents because they are directly linked to the people inside the communities. but i think the linkage between the police and the army is a strong one and they continue to work it. in the provinces they have what they call occps or occrs. these are institutions that the governors have that have police army and the intel folks all together inside of one, for lack of a better term an operational command and control element at both the regional and then at the provincial level. and they provide interaction

between the police and the army. they sit right next to each other in desks and work that. they interact with their higher headquarters which also has police and army. and my headquarters inside of kabul, i have army, afghan army representatives, afghan police that sit right nexting to each other -- next to each other inside of my combined joint operation center as well. and if i could just hit the terrorist appeal piece what i'd tell you is less than 10% of the people in afghanistan embrace the taliban, and that number continues to go down. a lot of that is because of the actions of the taliban, and they understand that the civilian casualty piece -- although reports that something like 75% are caused by the insurgents, our record show potentially above 90% are caused by the terrorists and the people are just frankly, tired of this. they want a better life -- they want the exact same thing we want, to be able to send their kids to school, have a roof over their head, have a job, provide for them. and so they understand underneath this national unity

government 85% of the people want this government they want it to do well, and they're tired of what the taliban and what they represent. and so that's a big change from where we were just a couple years ago. >> well, thank you very much for that positive report. i want to correct myself. president ghani, get his title correct. and let's hope that what you have accomplished in afghanistan will continue and can be spread throughout the region. thank you for your time, general, and your service. >> ms.-- [inaudible] >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you general, for being here. my question is i think it's been fairly disconcerting -- to me, anyway -- of how much information when it comes to operational security the president of the united states has given out and how we read it every day in the media. of we learn about the withdrawal the troop size, we learn as the taliban does at the same time all kinds of unbelievable information. and i guess -- and to kind of follow up on my colleague's comment, and i really don't want

to ask you this for public disclosure, but i want to ask for it either in writing or classified briefing, i want to know detailed plan b what are the flags and signs that are going to trigger our reengagement should this go awry? i don't want to ask it in public for everybody in the world to listen, because it really does concern me but i would ask for you to provide that in writing or classified briefing so we don't end up, again with more loss of blood and life and engagement from america as we're looking at iraq? and then my other question is on this new aumf with isil as you understand your role i had attended a briefing a couple months ago. nobody was here from the state department, and we were talking about current rules of engagement as it pertains to afghanistan with this train, advise and assist mission. and my question specifically was as we know isil is networking all over that part of the world, we know isil is looking around and recruiting in afghanistan.

so my question was under this current operation you're under was if isil's identified by american troops or afghan national security forces in our train, advise and assist mode that we're in can we absolutely destroy isil when they're identified? and the answer from the state department was no, ma'am, they would not be considered a threat to the united states at that point. my comment was i would consider them that the fact we're at war with them means we should destroy them. so in your role right now, what is your understanding of your current aumf when isil's identified? are they taken out because we're at war with them or are they given a pass? >> ma'am, thanks for your question. we don't talk about rules of engagement obviously, and the tactics, techniques and procedures, the ttps that go along with that. i would just answer that and say i'm comfortable with the authorities that i have today that i can prosecute the mission both from my ct perspective and from a train, advise and assist

perspective and also protect the force that i have. but i can't go into the rules -- >> i understand. >> -- in this environment. >> i understand. and, again, i would like to have a conversation or some kind of follow up that talks about that -- >> absolutely, ma'am. >> -- am some point -- at some point. and also with this new aumf, what's the difference going to be in how you can engage isis now? do you see further gains, do you have more advantages than you do now? >> ma'am i haven't seen the final written document, i've glanced through pieces of it. i know there's no geographical boundaries which would help out in afghanistan. i'd have to do a more detailed look at that but, again, for right now i have the authorities that i need to be able to prosecute t the ct and the train, advise and assist mission i have. i'd have to take a harder look on the aumf and how that would impact '15 and more important already my me as we transition -- >> i appreciate it. >> in registration to the size of the -- relation to the size of the troop strength compared to what you're doing right now where are -- what additional

kinds of missions and what additional kind of coverage do you have right now that you're going to lose? and if that's something we can't talk about here either, i'd like to have a conversation about that. we're talking about drawing down from 10,000 to 5,000, what are we actually losing there? and, again what steps are in between there that talk about for our purposes of the train assist and assist the afghani forces? what does that mean? how much coverage then are the afghan forces going to have to be doing on their own? what does that mean as far as risk? i understand you probably can't talk about that here, but i really do want to the follow up answers to those questions so we know as members of congress who are going to be voting on this kind of aumf that there really is some kind of plan. we may have all the faith in the world in this new president, but we also see how these things change on a dime, and i think we owe the american public a chance to at least have seen even in classified setting that there is a plan. so i appreciate it, and i look

forward to your responses either in writing or in a classified briefing. thank you, sir. of i yield back my time. >> thank you, ma'am. mr. o'rourke. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, i'd first like to thank you and those who serve and have served under you including the bulldog brigade from fort bliss in el paso, texas, for the incredible job that you are doing and have done in afghanistan. and i join my colleagues in just thanking you for this terrific performance which goes beyond any claims that someone can make or anecdote but actually by the numbers and by the pictures and what we can see and what my colleagues were able to see in their recent visit. i agree with many of the comments made so far that i think there are many lessons that we can apply from your success, this country's success in afghanistan to our operations and objectives in iraq. when it comes to the proposed

aumf that we're considering to combat isis my understanding that the immediate goal is to top isis and ultimately to degrade, defeat and destroy isis. what is our goal in afghanistan relative to the taliban? >> sir, thanks. and i really do believe that again, on aumf, i have to look at that harder and look forward to other questions in maybe a closed setting, we can talk through that, on the resources we have to be able to do that. sir, on the taliban piece what i would tell you is our goal really is to build the afghan capacity both in their police and in their army to be able to have a secure stable afghanistan for the future. and the taliban and their message, you know is not having any traction with the afghan people. and as i said in my opening comments, it really is time now for the afghan taliban to take a look at what they're trying to

do and become part of the political process. president ghani in his inauguration speech opened the door for them to come back and really work hard on reconciliation which could potentially be a game changer down the road. but, you know, that has to work with pakistan and where they go and afghanistan as they continue to build their afghan security force capability. but i do believe that, you know, they want to get the taliban to where they are part of the afghan vision moving forward. and killing other afghans is not part of that vision. so they have to operate from a position of strength and i think 352,000 security forces and another 30,000 local police give them that capability. and the taliban now are looking around and saying, you know, the coalition force they've signed a bsa, a sofa they're going to continue to train assist and advise, but we've got to come in. i think that's really where we're going with the taliban but it is because the afghan security forces are going to

drive this not the coalition. .. and those who seek to do us harm. what status and to the degree you can offer clarity in this what would you have to see on the ground in that country to

recommend that we no longer need that flexibility, and that we can meet what was going in 2016 our goal of having normal embassy level of protection? again, through numbers or as close as you can describe what the condition let you look like for you to make that recommendation. >> thanks for the question. if i could address the casually peace first entry as a talk about five to 7% probably larger increase than 2013 but again if you put in context it is about the operational tempo that both the police and the army and four times greater than they had in 2013. 100,000 coalition were not out there and so it was expected that casualties would rise. one casualty is too much but what we continue to focus on, two things, one is in jim thurber the afghan capability to reduce the died of wounds can work on the doctors combat

medics, light saber capabilities. we are working that hard. that continues to progress. also the recruiting peace. they've got that much better. they don't recruit all year round like all of our services do. they can't stop during the summer. now they have processes in place to do it year-round. so doesn't have any flow like this. the casually peace is not really from the attrition rate is not based on the casualties. the number one reason is leadership in making sure that the right leadership as opposed to combat casualties. what it would take for me to really recommend we will continue to transition and work at glide scope carefully to make sure the scenes in the gas of identified for very long time that we need to continue to work on the afghan security forces and on their ministries that we've got them to a level that they could have the processes that they need without us. the areas of aviation and the

continued build up their aviation capability. the first thing i always ask for is close air support. when we are building their close air support. so i get a request this has can you fly close air support i ask do you have a quick reaction force out there? have you fired your mortars artillery? have you taken your mi-17s? you have a few 35 us. we try to get all those out to make sure they're working through those processes. we are working a little bird helicopter that has machine guns on the site. we will work that. they won't have much for the next fighting season but that will continue to develop and where working on a fixed wing capability that provides close air support in the future. that will continue to grow but once we get the aviation support their intelligence work on on the sustained, continue to build the forces pressure to promote i feel better as we close the gap on those things we had other. >> thank you, general. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

general, the president stated policy is to take our strength from 10,800 troops in afghanistan down to 5000 troops by the end of 2013. in your best professional military judgment, is that right in strength at the end of 2015? >> it's about 5500 somewhere around 5500 by the end of december. the options i provided i think provides flexibility both for president ghani and is the kind on the ground to take a look at force protection and how to get after the train, advice, assist. in 2014 the afghan city forces lost over 20,000 personnel to desertion and deaths. does that concern you? >> the numbers again as a talk about, if you put into context then i think we are working processes and procedures to make sure that doesn't have a great impact. as i said it has met a severe impact on the readiness. any desertion, any casualty of course would concern me.

a concerned their leadership the president. it is about having processes in place to bring those people on board to keep the end. it isn't about the combat casualties. that's a fraction of it but a lot of the desertion peace is on leadership, making sure people are looking at financing are they getting paid? to the have the right living conditions be? is there a correlation between our drawdown cutting our troops by half and their desertion? >> i haven't looked at the heart of my dad would tell me no. >> onno. >> on page 16 of the test went -- looked at that hard but my gut would tell me no. >> you suggest that isis is your priority is one of your priority intelligence requirements. can you share with his family what's going on with isis in afghanistan now that makes it a priority intelligence requirement? >> thanks for the question. priority intelligence requirement, i have some of

those. that's not my only pir. as we take a look at and talk to president ghani as we did a deep dive with other city agencies and the intel agencies inside of against them to look at what they were doing, i said i need to learn more about this and one way to do that is make it a pir for my intel folks. as we go through a number things we take a look at as we allocate resources from isr platforms because it is a pir it will get more, a better look at it and provide me more continued updates. that's why i did that because again concern for president ghani, concern for me could grow very rapidly. at the state that turn that has been out there is mason. it is a nascent organization again as we talk about it grew very quickly in iraq and syria. they have the potential to jump over different stages of the building network and we want to make sure we are looking at it very hard. making a pir kiss me better

visibility. >> press reports in our february indicate that mullah abdul rummells was killed in a construct of the "washington post" called him a figure actively recruiting for isis in afghanistan, specifically helmand, where coalition troops withdrew in october. can you confirm these reports of? >> it's been in a lot of the media. mullah abdul had been was designated as the deputy emir of daesh inside of afghanistan. what they call a course on which is pakistan and afghanistan in that area. was actually a tpp from pakistan so this was the guy that said hey, i'm the deputy. >> i've got one minute left, a few more questions about -- >> the answer is yes. >> okay, you're a winner. when you think about him he was

a taliban commander. he was detained at gitmo, release. we turned over to the afghan detention facility where he escaped and he became a recruiter for isis. are you aware of all of this? >> somewhere from gitmo views on the afghan control. i don't know any details on the escape. >> as a look at the ndaa coming for we've got to make decisions about gitmo and the ndaa. does it concern you our troops are fighting the same enemy twice? >> it concerns me they're fighting in india, if it's once or twice, i have the same concern. >> in your best monitor judgment is closing gitmo at this time knowing that 30% of the people are going to hack into the war is that good or bad judgment? >> that's a policy question. i'm a military guy. i don't want to get drug into the policy. want a want to make sure i have the ability to do is that people come back into afghanistan that had to go to make sure i'm come

through with the assurances that afghanistan or whatever country makes in a release people and turn them over to another country i had the ability to make sure what assurances we have put these people will not attack coalition forces again. i want to make sure i'm typing to that as we move forward. >> thank the gentleman. mr. beazley. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to ask the general a couple of questions based on the popular opinion poll that he gave us a big it was talking about afghan six pressing confidence in the new government. do you have any sort of sense of how afghans feel as far as confidence is concerned with afghan capability post u.s. or post u.s. a drawdown? >> again it's like anything else. they understand the capability that just having a coalition with them provides and a lot of it is giving them some confidence. as i've taken a look at close

air support, and example any close air support? in a close air support? what i tell the afghans is don't plan your operation holy depend on close air support. the taliban doesn't have close air support to the taliban doesn't have humvees. the taliban doesn't have howitzers. the taliban doesn't have the weapons that you have. a part of it is leadership again and having the confidence to take this fight to the enemy. if you go out on the streets of kabul and you engage in 85% 80% of the people they will take their thankful for the coalition, but they want the coalition around the thing their more cultural if the coalition because one from helping of history forces also provides in the opportunity to engage with jobs and that kind of thing. i think they would tell you if you're comfortable with the coalition presence. >> what about with a u.s. a drawdown how would that be perceived in the terror community? do you think the people in the

terror community wonder if the taliban or even outside of the taliban, outside of afghanistan how do they view the afghan capability sourcing able to protect their own country? >> i would go back if i can answer the last one more in detail. it was i think a different point of time a sense of abandonment if you talk to some afghans but for the most part the security forces as they get the message out into the people of against and what they're capable of, i think that increases their conference at the afghan security forces can handle it. there was early on i think some abandonment type discussion. i ami have not seen that quite frankly in the last several months as the afghan seek a divorce continues to get better and better. i think on the terror community that you talk about, i think they were thinking the coalition would be gone after 2014.

and that they would wait that out. with the bsa and so put aside their stand for many, many years we will have a continued -- sofa, commitment to remain in afghanistan both in some number but also in the resources provided to afghanistan. i think the time is come they've got to become part of the political process, they've got to get back into being part of -- they can't have afghans going afghans, muslims killing muslims. i think it's a sign of strength that president got on his first day of office side the bsa and the sofa in the message is sent to the terrace community is without is going to go away and it's not. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. yield back my time. >> thank you. mr. cook. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, first of all i want to commend you. your testimony, your years of service, combat, peace can add up all the deployment you've

been through. what i wanted to address is something that isn't here and it's of concern to our nato partners. may be under the radar, that's the situation of the poppy and the drugs and the corruption. from a rational viewpoint it affects you. how are we doing on can you comment on the status of that were it is going right now? >> thanks for the question. there's been a lot of different reports on the cultivation of poppy and what impact it has financially for the insurgents in the area. a lot of that coming out of the helmand area. media reports will say that is increase the last couple of years as opposed to going down. it is a concern to president ghani. he's looking hard at a strategy of how he goes after that and deals with the people that produce it that deals with insurgents that use of for the again.

a look at different options. they do have quite a good record of a small task force that goes after and seizes different places, for lack of a better term drug labs that produce what comes out of there. quite frankly it has not been enough and the strategy there has not taken that away from the insurgents. that is not part of my taa or part of my ct mission. so i can't comment further on that piece. bottom line, it does provide fuel financial assistance to the taliban and the government of afghanistan is looking hard holistic look at how they can combat that. >> thank you. the relationship with pakistan. obviously, has improved quite a bit, the military. the equipment. at one time we're always concerned about the equipment backlog going to pakistan and everything else. are we in pretty good shape

right now on that? we had contenders backed up to the sky just a quick update on that. >> thanks for the question. the logistical community and what our nation is has done with retrograde of equipment is phenomenal. years down the road when people take a look at this and understand, fully understanding of the equipment they came out and how it came out, this is record-setting. we are on glidepath now. we hit those, all the without we needed to hit coming out of the nation to where we are today we are on those numbers. i feel very, very comfortable. it adds inflows of how we do that based -- adds inflows. but again the relationship with pakistan today afghanistan is the best i've seen all the times i've been over there. a lot of that is because of the general come cheaply on in pakistan and president ghani and the relationship out of come together with retrograde i think

is on glide slope i have no concerns right now. >> i was very happy to to hear that. i want to switch gears real quick, uzbekistan in the north. landlocked country, obviously i think i have to have good relations with pakistan. iran is a whole new ballgame as you know. what's the relationship with uzbekistan right now? i know one time they were working on the bridge i think the train that was going down there. is that still ongoing? >> i haven't seen a final peace where they signed and m.o.u. memorandum of understanding or an animal a agreement. i know president i have personally reached out to all the countries in the region. uses as many of them. i don't think in the last couple of months is visited uzbekistan but i noticed talk to the senior leadership there. they've talked about the rail talked about the bridges, talked about sharing of intelligence back and forth and how they can

fight different its origins. really a lot in the north is around criminal activity as opposed to the insurgent peace. there's arms trafficking, drug trafficking, those kinds of things. they are working together. he has sent senior members of his administration to different countries around. i can find out but i know several members of senior positions have gone to visit uzbekistan is a. >> thanks very much. again thank you for your service. i yield back. >> ms. duckworth. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, thank you for being here today. at a time a sequestration when we are cutting our funding for u.s. forces in the u.s. and looking at everything from shutting down commissaries on basis to adjusting retirement benefits for our forces, we are looking at future expenditures in afghanistan. i have concerns that we have sufficient oversight without afghans are spending the money and we're providing them with

the resource, and specifically you had mentioned their lack of self-sustaining capability logistics capabilitcapabilit ies but i'd like to look specifically at of their ability to account for personnel. we talked about already the over 20,000 troop attrition in afghan forces that has been reported. i rely on the special inspector general's for afghanistan reconstruction's report as to what's going on there and i see there have been some real concerns. the numbers of afghan military and police forces fluctuates admittedly sometime from quarter to quarter by as much as 20,000 or 40,000 personnel. i'm worried we're spending this money not spending as much on our own u.s. forces here. those 40,000 troops fluctuations, are those best case scenarios and accounting

air? those folks were never there? or they quit or will we pay for folks that were never there, the soldiers that were on the books? so can you talk a little bit about how we're providing oversight for the afghan and help to them to figure out how they can get a handle on their forces and how they're spending this money we're providing? >> thank you for your service as well. that's always a very, very tough, complex thing to get chance around people in our own army as you know we have a hard time sometimes to get out exactly was present for duty, was not. many of the figures i think you've seen in the last several days on numbers, first off we need to make sure that sigar and members of congress have total transparency on everything that we're doing inside of afghanistan and i want to make sure, and we are committed to provide sigar and congress everything they need to do that.

some the things are classified. back in august time frame, when i got there i asked that we take a holistic look at all the information that was going out to not only the sigar butt to the press and everybody else. i said anything that is readiness and data, sometimes numbers of people and they take a look at that could be construed as readiness data. i said anything that is readiness data for the afghans needs to be classified. we just can't put that out. for the afghans good and also because were only given on the afghans now for our own force protection became more so that a need to have the readiness data classified. the u.s. army is readiness data is classified. all of our services and it is classified as you know. that decision was made in august. i reaffirmed with president ghani, he approached me about having that kind of data classified. again in the last probably two weeks or so i went back to him and said i want to make sure you're comfortable because i'm getting asked a lot of questions. he was absolutely adamant that

afghan data that pertain to readiness data is classified. i feel very comfortable where we are at. and i have not as has been reported in some media changed my mind. i have not. readiness data remains classified. in the numbers of people and begin the last report became a couple days ago from sigar i think what happened there i didn't want to make sure cigar's of the need to do their job and congress has that information. i think numbers reported and numbers where you get that information come from many different sources. there is a report that congress has dictated, and that is sort of that's the baseline and that's with the numbers need to come from. i think sigar understands that his will that some of of the reports you saw and what the discrepancy word like quarter reports. and may not have come from my headquarters but maybe from lower headquarters where members of potential sigar went down toward lower headquarters and said hey what are your numbers? we have to do a much better job

to make sure we have processes in place that we can provide the right data at the right time but we have to have a better procedure to do that. we are working at the. i just signed a standard operating procedure to consultant how we work that. we have over 50 probably 62 different audits inside of afghanistan from sigar to aaa the dod ig 60 plus. so as we transition and brought our numbers down, i have -- i don't have people in country to do that. and depend on reach back. we've got to come up with a way to be able to figure out how we provide audit data but at the same time continue to transition to i don't have that capability and have to raise that with my own leadership as we go forward. but the numbers i think he saw the last couple days i think there's a miscommunication. when i learned through "the new york times," not through sigar that these numbers will be replaced i contacted sigar incident when you take a hard look at this data you're getting ready to release. i don't think it's right.

i alerted them to the. they stop the release and inward looking hard at how we can continue to work making sure everybody gets the right data. hopefully that cut to your question. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. skancke. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, thank you for being here. if there's one thing we've learned over the last several months, it is that the people of the country to willing to hold that country. i'm speaking specifically of iraq. afghanistan obviously a very different country. i think that from the context of the american citizen maybe may be the way it's talked about perception is it's all one and the same issue, if you will. and i do think that we need to do a better job of getting that message out when we do have the victories. because all of american is hearing right now is bad, that's happening in the middle east. so thank you for your service. i want to talk about what the

issues you talked about a couple of times, close air support. obviously in order for afghanistan to the success they had to be able to hold of the country from the taliban and other terrorist organizations. when we are hopefully completely out of there, the afghanistan air force the light air support mission right now is currently they are being trained at moody air force base. if you just speak to the telecom how critical it is the air support and afghanistan being able to carry out their own air support long-term, and then how many a 29th do expect we should be prepared -- a 29th for the afghan air force because thanks for the question. and again we are very thankful in georgia that they have that capability provide the training. it is a very long process. looking in hindsight i wish we

would've started that years ago and would have that capability now but we are we are and i think what's happening there trying the pilot, training for maintainers for this fixed wing close air support to build is critical for afghanistan and air forces of the future. quite frankly can't get it quick enough for them. the current program has about 20 aircraft over the next three years that will come to afghanistan to we will not have any for this writing season. we will get some of the interview. a couple more before start of fighting season 16 but most will be out in 17 and in 18. that's another reason to continue have the training advice assist for the next several years and working on air force peace. it is a great great capability they're looking forward to it. and i think it will give them and the people in the region will understand that the afghans have this great close air support capability we are working in other ways in the near-term.

and attended to have indirect fire mortars, 120 mortars howitzers that will continue to work with them on giveaways to improve that capability by this is a huge asset they're looking for to getting inside of afghanistan. >> again, we have to make sure that when we leave that country that country is prepared to hold and govern themselves, just the situation in iraq. right now is that is certainly lessons learned the hard way, if you will. thank you i don't have any for the question. i thank you for the 829 mission. if we ever host you at moody air force base, be happy to have you done to with that i yield the remainder of my time. >> thank the chairman. mr. courtney. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you general for your endurance and service. tomorrow night at the state armory in hartford there will be

a sendoff for the connecticut army national guard, 192nd military police battalion who are heading off to afghanistan. and first of all they were given notice almost 60 days ago to the day that they were being sent over. i realize this is not sort of in your lane in terms of making the decisions about region into guard and reserve units. what i would say is that franklin our folks were kind of scratching their head if we're at a force level of about 10,000, you know, guard and reserves, there was a big an understanding and acceptance back into the search days when we had hundreds of thousands of people in the middle east, you know, tapping into the guard at this point and, frankly, doing it with almost at their notice required by law is something that again, folks are struggling with. so first of all i would ask you

i don't mean to put you on the spot, but if you were in front of those families tomorrow night you know, what you would share with them? i'm not asking you to explain the decision-making process because i realize that that happens them or else in terms of your commend. but again as their leader over in afghanistan what would be your thoughts that you would share with the family? >> thank you. and again the army all of our service could not do what we do without our military families so i would first thank them for their sacrifice, for allowing us to have that soldier continue to serve. i would tell them what they're getting ready to do two things, it's a very very important mission, will mean a great deal to the afghan people but also provide for our own security. i would ask them to watch out for each other and always take care of brothers and sisters on the left and right to make sure that force protection is always foremost in among. i would ask him to never get complacent. but they do have a very, very important job. many times or until the soldiers

arabic, sears, brains, sometimes they can't see some of these change we talked about earlier. people serve for different reasons but they do so because they know that they're certain for the greater good. when they come to afghanistan i tell them whatever you do make that place better than when you found. i think i've seen over the years everybody continues to do that. they will have an impact on have a give and go with a touch. sometimes it's an impact they can't be able to put into words but i would just tell you their service would be honored and that they will feel good about what they have done after they leave there. i can't speak to the service provider peace only for many many years our national guard, our u.s. army reserve have played an important role both in iraq and afghanistan, and will continue as we move forward and so i appreciate their service. >> thank you. and i will share those thoughts. frankly, i think as a sort of

russell with the drawdown in force reduction -- wrestled. and sequestration of the budget control act it has we ignited a little bit of the sort of tension of whether the guard and reserve really are on parity in terms of the rest of the forces. and, in fact, that they got this order to head over you know again at a time when maybe the average person wouldn't think that is consistent with the rest of the force level, underscores to me the value that active duty still apply believes exist in terms of the guard and reserve units. they have done yeoman's work during both conflicts in iraq and afghanistan. they deserve all the kudos and appreciation week and possibly give them. again thank you for your comments and i'll pass them along. i yield back.

>> thank the gentleman. mr. chote. >> chairman, thank you. general kehler, thank you and your staff are being here today. i'm going to take a little different approach. i looked at narratives and the comment by senator levin who is now retired and sent eyesight is public opinion polls, america 65, 70% that we haven't achieved anything. in his critical of the people don't think we have achieved anything by saying at the end of it, and the people who are 7000 miles away think we haven't? you know i would say to the senator it's those people back home are paying the bills. they need to get something out of the tax dollars that they are paying. when we went into afghanistan in 2001, the debt of our nation was 5.9 the $5 trillion. today it is over $18 trillion in debt. and you know from your relative brothers and sister in the military what we're faced with

with budgets all right then i read in a blog from yesterday by jason ditz between casualties and desertion from afghan military is shrinking fast. the desertion problem is a long-standing one with many afghans sign up for the military sticking around long enough to get their first paycheck, then bailing. and often taking their weapon with them as a sort of severance package. then in the guardian yesterday, afghan officials sanctioned i realize that this is from human watch and we can have our views on that whether it's liberal group or a conservative group or whatever. that's their what they still write this and apparently there's been no dispute and i will reduce one paragraph. the report focuses on eight

commanders and officials across afghanistan. some of them counted among the country's most powerful man and key allies to foreign troops some were accused of personally inflicting violence others of having responsibility for malicious or government forces that committed the crimes. i know some good things that her happening. i don't question that at all but afghanistan has been proven that yes it is the wild west. what my concern is that we've got nine more years of a financial commitment and a military commitment, which might be limited in numbers but they're still young men and women over there walking the roads to be shot at and have their legs blown off. i just wonder because we in congress will be grappling with sequestration this year. the chairmen and ranking member, who are doing a great job are

very concerned about the military budget. and i think all of us here are as well. i know i am. i at camp lejeune done in my district. but i get to the point that i just wanted, not talking but you, you're an outstanding greek military person. but will there ever be anyone in the diplomatic corps with the military that say, you know, we've done about all we can do some things are impossible. yet some people will benefit but when i read reports like this, whether they be from the left or the right, pat buchanan is one of my biggest hero's. ron paul is one of my dearest friends. and i continued to see nine more years of spending money that we don't have so we can decrease the number in our military? it doesn't make any sense. i know you don't make the policy decisions, i understand that but will there ever be someone who falls -- follows behind you

and follows behind me that will be honest to congress and the american people who have to pay the bill, that we have done about as much as we can to? >> thanks for the question. i would answer like this. again, quite frankly this is a the world we live in. not maybe the world we want and i think the complexity of the world we live in is a generational peace that's going to go on long after you and i are out of here. we need to understand that, and look at it as a generational issue and put strategies and policies into place that will get at this long-term. it's not going to change overnight and i think we just have to change our mindset on where we are at. i think the american people are well served by the great men and women who continue to raise the right hand and serve knowing that they can go into harm's way, knowing that despite try to do something bigger than themselves, that they are going

to face going into the service that that's going to have budget issues, take away. and so i think this is a long-term issue where to get it. what i'm pleased about is that come you mentioned all those different course. our challenge is not only in afghanistan but many places around the world. i see afghanistan as a place because of a significant investment in lives and in financial that we provided to them that this can be the bright spot, that this is the for the lack of a better term is strategic when that will carry on in this part of the world that is a very complex, dangers partner for very little continued investment we can make this a shining light of central asia in that part of the world and i think we've got to start someplace and afghanistan is the good news story among all these other bad things that are coming out. out. for every bad his report, there's probably nine or 10 good news that don't get out because as you know good news doesn't

sell. when i said to stay, i give president on a good news story storyboard, that i clicked each week. i have my commanders provide a good is storyboard that talks but the good things that afghans are doing in different areas. when i meet with them i say mr. president, dr. abdullah, is some good news stories. you need to know this is happening. i give them 10 or 15 powerpoint slides with pictures showing good news story in afghanistan and that word just doesn't get that but it doesn't sell. for every suicide vest that went off in kabul there are nine or 10 better stop. there are good news out of there. >> the gentlelady from guam. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. general campbell thank you for your challenging leadership in afghanistan. i want to quote by 2050 national security strategy in saying, quote we must recognize that a smart national security strategy does not rely solely on military power. indeed, in the long-term our

efforts to work with other countries to counter the ideology and the root causes of violent extremists will be more important. i strongly support this approach general. however, i am also concerned that the persistence we have shown in afghanistan and our presence there could have harmful effects on our long-term readiness. as we draw down to a force capable of protecting our security interests in the region, how will we capitalize and we utilize the equipment? i know this was brought up earlier that we currently have in country to protect the readiness of our total force? specifically can you comment on retrograde efforts as they are supported in the fy '16 budget, and what impact sequestration would have on this effort if sequestration is not reveal? >> thank you ma'am, and thank you for your visit last fall as well. i haven't looked at the numbers for the retrograde portion for

fy '16. i will tell you we will continue to meet the necessary resources, financial base to bring back the retrograde that we have in afghanistan so we could put that back into the force, probably 80% of that is for the army. the very best equipment that we have is in afghanistan's we need to continue to make sure we get that back, get it reset and get that into the force. i do think we're on glide scope to do that. we have some concerns a year, a year and a half ago but a spice now as commander on the ground i don't have the same concerns and will continue to get that back to the army. sequestration from different perspective i think will impact the readiness of all of our services and again that's what i think all the service chiefs, the chairman of come out and said it has a really bad impact. >> thank you. thank you very much general. and my second question is recently the first lady of afghanistan had said, women come to me and say you have forgotten

us. i am a strong champion of women's rights and wonder what can we do working with the afghans and nato to ensure women's rights are respected across the country as we continue to draw down our forces? how are we encouraging or working with the afghan government to ensure greater inclusion of women in civic society? and a few years back i traveled with then speaker leader pelosi and we visited many of the women leaders in afghanistan and they were very very concerned about the future. so can you comment on that general? >> we work very hard both coalition perspective but also president ghani works very hard to make sure he looks hard at how he is working on the gender issues and particularly the women, peace. both from an osha perspective comes to good perspective in getting women into the police getting them into the army the money, 25 million that congress has approved for those

specifically pinpointed to work on these types of issues is helpful and we are thankful for that support. but it will take time for the police and the army and the police are doing much better than the army quite frankly on integrating women into the force but we will look very hard as we go through the but some of the differences they have make that a little tougher. i think they are both committed from the m.o.i. perspective, minister of interior, minister of defense fund revenue minister of defense. i have engaged the current acting chief of army and they're always looking at ways on how they can improve, i want to say 24% of parliament is women. i don't think we have that in our own congress so that's very good in afghanistan. so president ghani and the first lady have really put hard-pressed on this throughout afghanistan and reaching out as well. i do have a gender advisor from my force from australia actually the focus is on a lot of different activities that are going on to see a we can do that

much better. she engages with nato and all of our nato partner forces will to ensure we're doing what we can to enrich this and continue to keep emphasis on. >> thank you very much general for your comments. i yield back. >> dr. wenstrup. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general campbell thank you for your service and taking on the nation you are taking on. it's encouraging to see the positives that we don't often hear about. i would agree with you wholeheartedly. i think it was a great move by president ghani to sign the bsa and sofa. that bodes well for all of us. i think it was probably wise from where i sit for them to come together as partners. so i question to you is what are you seeing as far as that relationship between the two of them and its effect on any national unity in afghanistan? >> thanks, a great question.

i look at this every day and they do think that both president ghani and dr. abdullah give up some to make sure they can continue to have afghanistan as a nation continue to move forward. they both did that after our long period of as they worked together and as i see both of them many times both together and then separately. i think they complement each other as they work together. they both have great vision for where they want to take afghanistan and it really is that people read each of them. i think that the continue to work through. they have run into instances where they fed differences but i think they work hard to make sure as they come out to the public that they have one voice as they move forward. that's not easy all the time but i think they understand how important it is something to the from effort security perspective and economic economic perspective. the government economic perspective. they government each other and i'm honored to have an

opportunity to engage with both of them quite a few times every week. week. >> in that sense is that carry over to the military in some way as far as unity and cohesion amongst the military and the morale within the militant, the afghan forces to? as i said doctor, president ghani is a commander-in-chief. he said that up front. so his interaction with all the security forces is completely different from where we were under president karzai. they are more row it's gone way up just don't offend some who cares for the welfare that is visit them at training sites visit the wounded in hospital, talking about changing the authority for core command of what they can and can't do. he has a video teleconference is several times since i've been with him with the senior leadership. yes national student council meeting every week that he brings in the senior leadership from the police and the army. they are thankful that they do have a commander-in-chief that is taken not only their own

welfare but also their families welfare as he looks to voice but wounded warriors, those kind of things. it is quite good. >> with that in mind since they have not been in office very long, do you anticipate the question has come up a couple times about deserters, you anticipate that that rate will slow down as a result, or hopefully it was? >> president ghani, which is trying to do is put leadership in that can make a difference. he's taking a hard look at all of this generous. he has retired on or about 60 general officers since he's been asked the president to they haven't had any retirement in the last four or five years underneath president karzai. in the last four months or so they that about 60 plus. so that's confusing new blood. is looking hard at the people that he puts into this position. he's trying to interview everyone of his general officers or people he promotes.

heis trying to put them based on their merit which is very good. i think leadership is going to train the attrition peace. i said part of it is combat casualties. that assertion if you take a hard look at why people deserve, and they have instituted an attrition working group in the army that i senior advisers that it didn't. it went dormant for a while. we have instituted that back up. when you take a hard look, it is leadership. it is having a soldier that assigned to the to 15 helmand and he's been there for for your saltiness is combat and combat after combat had been able to get on a cyclic so they have a red and green and they can take leave comment training and then they can fight. they are just now starting to cyclic force generation process that gives them the ability. wants to get it into place i believe you think you'll see that assertion peace awaiting part of it is their side to the 215.

you see no future about being relegated to another court and you will always be on it because their personal management is not right. they're moving toward that but if you are in the 215 down helmand but you live way up north, it takes you days to get back there, or you may never get back there. what you do get back and you interact with your family and their out in the field trying to harvest you may go past which are 20 days of leave would be and then you're considered a deserve and you don't want to come back although many do. leadership will make the difference on the attrition peace, and i think president ghani is a big part of that. >> it sounds like a lot of things to address. if i may mr. chairman just one quick question. what percentage, you mentioned wounded warriors. what percentage of the medical care being given in theater right now is coming from american personnel? would you estimate a supposed space for the afghans? >> for the whole theater. you talk about the wounded warriors. is that u.s. surgeons taking

care of the wounded predominately, or is it the afghan medical -- >> they have their own medical system. i sat down with the afghan army surgeon general and talk to him on one occasion how they can improve different areas but may have regional hospitals. we have some advisers at different places that continue to work through that. they only come to a coalition so bagram, if it's a very, very worst-case that they can't handle and that's been on very few instances since i've been there. >> thank you very much. we will have a chance to meet with you again in a classified setting i would appreciate it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you, general for hanging in the. i appreciate very much her knowledge and very nuanced testimony. i want to follow up on congresswoman's last comment. as a member of congress i've made six trips to afghanistan, and for with a delegation of

women, generally three republicans congressional congresswoman and through democratic congresswoman. our goal has been twofold. it's been over mother's day to thank our women soldiers, often we commiserate with them know how hard it is to be with him on mother's day as it is for all those who are serving. but was also the real opportunity to see the gains that have been made for women in afghanistan. while they're not as widespread as we would like i think kabul has been a prime beneficiary of them, and other urban settings but nevertheless those gains have been real. your report shows that in terms of health care, access to education, a whole access to work although however limited. so as we are drawing down our concern really is that those gains are not similar traded away. and as you've talked about president ghani's reaching out and referencing the taliban in

his inaugural speech i can say that as we meet with women over there, those comments send chills through the because we know how terribly they suffered under the taliban regime. so i think our concern, it has become how do we protect the gains that have been made? as we've talked to the about some of the differences about afghanistan and iraq, it seems to me that one of them actually been the site of the battle security agreement, and that has set up a very different framework. and i think has given us leverage, a role in afghanistan as it transitions to its next phase. so i'm curious while the sector to situation is really your role and many of these other gains of investments that come about through other parts of our presence there, how you see the united states role using its ongoing relationship with the

government to make sure that let's just say negotiations to go forward with the taliban how we make sure how we use our leverage there, how you use your leverage as representing the united states to make sure that women's gains remain on the table and they are somehow not triggered away as others argue for a path forward in which the taliban are brought into the government? >> thank you for your visit thank you for your question to again i think leadership has a big deal here to play. i think again the difference here is that president ghani and dr. abdullah are very committed to this. it is written in the constitution, and so as they work with the taliban if there's reconciliation down the road, i think one of the key parameters will be the constitutional hold and inside the constitution talks about respect of women's rights. again i think with the first lady come with president ghani

come with ambassador kim and his team at the embassy with the 30 40 plus ambassadors i interact with periodically they'll have this that most in the mine. it comes up in different meetings on the. it's sort of a drumbeat that senior leadership and the other ministries continue to hear. and they understand how important it is that they abide by the constitution where they want to go. i think leadershileadershi p will make a difference and understand in my realm come in the security realm what we changed it is everything these conditions base. we signed letter of commitment to provide finance to provide fuel come on and on and on. this is one of the same ways we look forward in this area that it can be conditions based at everything we continue to do. i think leadership can make that happen. >> i remember a hearing we had where a woman who is a leader of

one of the ngos over there said, the first indication that things are not going well for women will be the street but if you stop seeing women on the street. so that really does come back to the role of the afghan national police but are you confident that there up to the task? if not do you see how would we challenge them to do it better? >> the police have done much better on integrating women into their force. they are doing much better now in anniston have had to deal with communities and extending community policing as we did a deep dive back in december on all the security instances inside kabul. we talked about high profile getting after that was having a police force that had community policing undermined and understood what that meant. as was mentioned by one of the members, president ghani made a change on the district commanders inside of kabul, made a change. they been talking about that for a while. i think that will adjust it as i

travel around the streets of kabul, the streets are bustling a lot of women are out and around. and so that indication is that continues to build. i think this will be a challenge that leadership and keeping a spotlight on this and having the international community make sure they understand how important it is. if they don't continue to abide by this then there's a conditionality retake with something, whether it's financial they are very depend upon the donor nations under such conditions have to go on this. i know they're working very, very hard on this but there will be challenges as they move forward. it's going to take time so as i talk about within the army they have a goal a very hard goal of getting 10% into their army. they are at less than 1% in and they try to work towards the. i look at my own army after 230 '90s, we are at about 15%. it's going to take time and it's part of his on the cultural differences but i think they are committed to working at this

very hard. >> thank you, general. thank you for your testimony. >> general religions you about the questions would be better starting from the bottom, or the more junior members of the think the question has been excellent today. i think we touched on a lot of topics. you've had a number of questions about isis or isil. and i realized that you are not here as a lawyer and that you haven't read studied carefully the implications of what the president has proposed. and i heard you say that at this point isis is a nascent threat in afghanistan, although one you're watching very carefully. but as we explore this aumf that the president has requested for isis thinking about how it would work for people like you when we talk about afghanistan syria, iraq or whatever, one of the concerns is that it has more

restrictions on jesus than the current aumf has on al-qaeda. -- on isis. some of these groups live side-by-side. so to me there's just a commonsense concern here that if you have two different standards to go after two different terrorist groups how do you have the intelligence to know which is which? and then operationally how do you have to have a lawyer either side to make every single decision? isn't that come if it comes to be that way and this is a big if and again i'm not trying to put you on the spot either but operationally with a not be a matter of concern? >> thanks for the question. any command on the ground what do you want as much flexibility as he can get. so any policy that provides commanders on the ground the flexibility to make decisions in a timely manner is something that i will be in favor. those are the ma the

insurgents, and i can only speak for afghanistan by insurgents inside of afghanistan, they in many cases feed off of each other. they are interrelated in many different ways and you may want that provides finance food lodging to one, one that may provide weapons and secure routes for another but some fight each other internally but also it is very, very tough as we take a hard look at it to separate some of these organizations. what i do have right now is the authority to prosecute those to come after the coalition and that's i take a look at as i try to bend home been to those not by their status but by the conduct come after coalition forces. >> the reason we're in afghanistan to begin with is because that is the place from which a plot was launched that ultimately killed 3000

americans and what can you tell us about your assessment of al-qaeda's core ability to reconstitute itself, were it not to be under constant pressure from us? >> thanks again for the question. i do think we have to make sure we understand the threat and that the threat will continue to evolve continued pressure that we provide now with our very credible cd capability, the very best in the world i believe has prevented another attack on the homeland. i do believe that if you don't have pressure, continued pressure on a.q. that he would be a matter of time that they would read generate that capability. >> under the current drawdown plan would your ability to

gather intelligence for the ct mission be significantly ground aided -- downgraded in this calendar year? >> as i look at it i would much rather go into a classified session with you to discuss that piece. >> i sure don't want to get into details. >> as you know as you go anything to go from one number to another you have to make very, very tough decisions on where you balance that. as i talked before, force protection is the most on my hundred isr and other pieces that provide, they do provide continued force protection for me. and so i look at it very hard and have to balance that. and so those numbers, you have to make some very tough decisions on where you take that. and then what i did if i don't feel comfortable with that i need to make sure i can forward

to my senior leadership and provide them what i believe the risk to forces of what the risk to mission is. .. >> okay. svea boggart somewhere, but not

all necessarily to the afghans. >> that is correct, sir. >> last. as you know, general austin yesterday and i am struck by the number of members on this committee on both sides of the aisle who have served in iraq and afghanistan and feel very strongly that they do not want the sacrifice that has been made in afghanistan. i hate to say go to waste but there is tremendous frustration at what happened in iraq in your datacenter that today. i know from your service and from those who serve under you we shared the determination to make sure that whether we are talking taxpayer dollars are american lives, that the sacrifice is upheld and honored and that it is not wasted

because of policy decisions. the only thing i would request of the u.s. as you watch this situation afghanistan, probably closer than anybody else if you believe that we are headed down the wrong path i.e. headed down a path that we went down in iraq, i know this committee expects and requires you to raise the flag to us as well as your chain of command and say this is headed in the wrong path because this committee obviously shares what is no doubt your commitment to make sure all that sacrifice these last 14 years results in a stable relatively peaceful afghanistan from which terrorists can not again launch attacks against us. i appreciate that.

you're welcome to say anything. >> certainly. i'm committed to that. i leadership in congress to give you my best military guys as we move forward. thank you for your leadership as well. >> thank you sir. i appreciate you answering all the questions today. and with that, our hearing stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> why do i have to come up and say to combine the mission at the whole lot better and you can do it where an asteroid is like the national resource council said we should do. maybe that is not essential. i happen to think it is where you can fly a ride with the

long-duration support system. that is what we do when we got out 1402. there is going to be a system that lets us a much longer. we are rotating commercial cruise up and down. not just the space station, the commercials will go the vicinity of the moon. we are going to keep these things and build but we don't have to put all the money in building those habitats because the foreigners are going to want them and we are going to want them there and we are going to want them out mars. the foreigners have to land. we are going to develop a very sophisticated landing system and we will be landing so many people out mars that we can take them along on the first landing. take us along as visitors on your landing. let's not go broke by doing

things, but let's astutely learn to do things to make sense. >> it is here at c-span around this time we talked to you about our student cam documentary video competition. the ball with their annual competition is to challenge middle and high schools is to think about issues affecting them and their communities. the 2015th and for student cam this year was the three branches of view. we asked students tell us a story about how policy, law or action has affected them or their community. in addition to telling her video, we ask them to use the spent programming in their radio and the world turning points of view. before we meet one of the grand

prize winners and watch a portion of the video, here is more back out on the competition. there were five top themes among the any entries received this year and they were education health the economy equality and integration. we received more than 2200 entries from 45 states in the district of columbia. students can enter as a team of three or individually and there were four categories they can enter. they were broken not by regions at the high school level. high school eastern states, high school central states and high school western states. middle-school competed separately. in the act 150 student prizes were awarded totaling $100,000. now it is time to enact the grand prize winner from a team of eighth-graders were named the grand prize winners in 2015 for their video on the minimum wage titled the artificial wage. here is a small clip from the

winning piece by anna gilligan, katie demos and michael lozovoy. ♪ >> sidney jones is a single mother with the poor girl child. she estimates have choices every week since she has to make an mean on a minimum wage job. $7.25 an hour. $15,080 a year isn't enough to get by. >> it is hard because sometimes i have to decide if i'm going to be laid on a bill to buy a pack of underwear or ask people to borrow money. so it is hard sometimes. >> sidney is not a bone. according to the bureau of labor statistics three-point revalued american make minimum wage or below. that is 2.6% of all u.s. workers. most minimum wage workers are employed in fields like food service, retail sales are

personal care such as day care. rosemarie gray makes minimum wage is a custodian. >> we take care of ourselves and pay our bills and pay for housing and stuff like that. we can't do that on minimum wage. you just can't. so you've got all these programs like food stamps. why do you need food stamps? you've got to eat. you don't make enough to feed yourself and pay your bills. you just don't. >> it pushes on to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to maybe $10.10 an hour, which would provide over $21,000 a year if the individual works 40 hours a week. it has been dixie or since the minimum wage was raised a southern congress say now is the time to raise it again. >> things are getting better. the problem is they only get

better for some. we know corporate profits have continued to break records while americans are working harder in adding paid less. >> but some like kentucky commerce men in the bar say raising minimum wage will cost jobs, citing a nonpartisan study by the congressional budget office. >> if we mandate a higher minimum wage in entry-level jobs, we lose 500000 to a million jobs immediately. that is the last thing we want. we don't want to create more employment. we will hire employment. >> more education a better worker treating by the keys to improving lives of minimum wage workers like sydney and rosemarie, an ardent artificial age. >> now it's time for us to meet one of the student on the grand prize prize-winning team. anna gilligan is joining us from kentucky. congratulations to your team.

>> hi, thank you so much. >> where were you when he heard you won the grand prize this year quite >> as i was my principles office with my team and a few teachers and i got the call in for the first time i didn't have anything to say. >> is not terrific? were you surprised he won the grand prize? did you feel this is a top winner? >> well, my team and i when we were making up we would joke around, let's show so in though. we wanted to get the word out and let some people now. we had no idea. there's always somebody better out there and we didn't know this was a possibility. >> how did you choose the topic the artificial wage which deals with the minimum wage. >> well, we were looking not the clips you had available. we're all very passionate about human rights. i was like to look at this. minimum wage.

hey for the people. give them our money help them out. right there were like that is what we will do. we want to help people. >> is interesting and i hope people will take the time to find the video in the website come you have a decided point of view that you speak during your documentary. was it your opinion that you started out the piece quite >> now our opinion changed. we started researching we saw the top layer. if you give people more money they will be happier and buy more things. we started to dig deeper, found that the cost of inflation and people can send work elsewhere and put people out of the job. so we decided it is not asked for the workers in our community. >> how did you find the people you interviewed, particularly those for non-minimum wage to interview for your piece quite >> my father had a job connection. he found them through a job fair

and we were able to coordinate those interviews three program called jubilee jobs. they were like all right. we have three people if you'd like to interview them and they are happy to tell you their story. >> are you surprised they were so willing to share like to do quite >> absolutely. one of the gentlemen said no i don't think it's a good idea. i'm not sure shocked us. just everything about it. it was very interesting. >> have you worked this video is this your first documentary project quite >> this is my first time. michael is very experienced and they definitely helped out the technical aspect of that. >> how did you put your three-member team together quite >> well it was originally katie and i since we've been fans since fourth grade and then i was like hold on, how are we

going to put this together? who will help us make this into a new story and just facts? i was like michael hey, how about you help us out by he is like sure, that sounds great. we work together. we are all in speech to mimic it along very well. >> ali celebrate your windows in school and what will the three of you do with prize-winning money? >> starting out we didn't even think this would have been. i haven't made any plans. invest in the stock market, do something worthwhile and maybe do a little bit. >> do you know how your school will celebrate? >> well, we will watch this on tv. we are going to have an assembly and all sorts of unstaffed. >> are all the other students in your school happy to cheer you on? congratulations from c-span two all of you and your school for your big witness here. we are very proud of you.

>> thank you so much. >> in addition to grand prize winners they were winners in each categories. here they are. first prize high school years went to retain the readers from sandy spring maryland are they produced a video in school lunches. their cable provider is comcast. first prize of high school central went to a senior from oklahoma. her topic, public access to. cox communication is their local cable company. another cox communications said he won the first five and high school west. three seniors from unix come arizona focused on the individual with disabilities education act. and finally here is our first prize in middle-school. it went into young ladies from silver spring maryland with their cable service provided by comcast. they chose ethical research funding for their video. and finally, one were prize. mckinley layer first prize from jenks high school in

oklahoma also won her first-ever fan favorite prize. this was student cam first time to casos for the documentary. you should know a 150 main prizes were decided independently of the public vote but during the week of voting was 325,000 votes cast. mckinley's documentary received 119,000 of the votes. shall be recognized as this year's fan favorite and when an extra $500 in cash prize. congratulations to ken lay. congratulations to the student cam winners. you can watch all of the winning entries on our website at student cam.org. >> next on this treasury secretary jack lew and john koskinen testify about the budget at a hearing. they talk about the increase posed in the presidents request cybersecurity, combating tax

fraud irs, taxpayers service in helping small business. [inaudible conversations] >> the subcommittee on financial services and general government will come to order. good afternoon. the subcommittee has a federal come to order. today marks the first airing of the financial services and general government subcommittee for the 114th congress. this is also my first year in a subcommittee chairman and i'm pleased to serve alongside the new ranking member, good friends. i would also like to acknowledge the other members of our subcommittee, senator moran senator lankford and senator durbin. i though i subcommittee small we find the impact on the

economy is significant. i'm confident numbers are up to the task before us. as we begin the important hearing to review the budget request of the department of treasury and internal revenue service, we welcome our witnesses. senator jack lew, senator john koskinen. and i'm not the first one is struggled with that a little bit. boozman -- boozman. in the treasury ig for tax administration, russell george p. thank you for being here. we look forward to your testimony. as members of the committee we have a two ministers on stability to ensure the hard-earned tax dollars for millions of americans and to probe really. the president put forth a budget out of touch with the needs and concerns of hard-working taxpayers in the budget vote fiscal year 2016 the president proposes to create 2.1 trillion in new taxes, increase spending by 65% and at a $.5 trillion to

the debt over the next 10 years. while hard-working arkansans in the last few years as the president beyond willing to do the same in washington. our countries in need of serious budgeting and all too often washington was the site of the fact every dollar government spends comes out of the pocket of the taxpayer than one month salary taxpayer can spend to provide the family or the business is or help their neighbor. we have a responsibility to ensure decisions about federal funding are made with taxpayers in mind. but the irs actions that faith in the impartiality of the agency, the cells in the compliance system to function. americans have lost faith in the institution menu hovers on

stability to regain the trust. we've heard too often investigations into these issues are distract and everyone should move on. unfortunately to taxpayers this response abilities cut the lack of accountability and leadership. to repair the damage there has to be fundamental change in the agency's culture in the change must begin with complete transparency and acceptance of responsibility. unfortunately, the culture is simply out of touch with taxpayers. for example, hiring employees of past performance or conduct issues undermines the public trust and tax administration. additionally we can public confidence in the iris ability to safeguard taxpayers rights and privacy. making bonuses does not help the irs regain trust of taxpayers or race confidence that the agency will enforce tax laws without regard to an individual exercise of the cons additional rights.

as was the case in the previous fiscal year and 2015, one of the first actions after the enactment of the appropriations bill was to announce they would pay $67 million in awards to employees. once again irs management seems to have forgotten the most important customers and their employees. they are the american people. it's disappointing to see the budget request is unrealistic. the presidents request for fiscal year 2016 is almost $12.9 billion. under the budget control act the discretionary spending caps for fiscal 2016 limit nondefense spending to $493 billion. this represents an increase of $1.1 billion over fiscal year 2015 level for nondefense departments and agencies. get fiscal year 2016 the irs has

requested get fiscal year 2016 the irs has requested a base increase that is higher than the total increase available for a nondefense discretionary spending. also travels request for $667 million above a limit on spending of current law. treasury and i are asked are fully aware such adjustment are not included in the budget control act of 2011. no calf adjustment has unauthorized been done. given the fact submitting and realistic request simply sets unreasonable expectations. this is even more troubling when funding for critical work to protect taxpayers in the future from the trauma of identity theft is left to be funded through a cap adjustment. the american people want a government that works for them not against them. they want to curb washington's

spending habit and make the government more efficient effective and accountable and pursue policies that create economic opportunities for everyone. these are priorities that the american people reflected in the critical oversight. we conducted to consider fiscal year 2016 budget request for all agencies in our jurisdiction and with that i yield back to senator coons. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for bringing us together today and i look forward to working with you and with new blood and energy we might note a strong partnership. secretary lou commissioner koskinen, i look forward to your testimony. i have no -- irresponsible stewardship among the important obligations. it's important we work diligently together to uphold

the trust and i recognize areas where we disagree. it is my sincere hope that can approach workers seriousness it deserves. today we consider the agency central zürich government to build the nation's fiscal health and i welcome the chance or examine the treasury's budget request and how request and have what i hoped to be a frank discussion about what is required to fulfill responsibilities. i'm eager to learn how treasury has adapted to budget constraints and how you will deal with resource competition and competing demand. much of treasury's budget goes to the irs but they are important beers and functions. three in particular and please the president requested strengthening community development financial institutions and state small business credit initiative. programs like these can provide access for small businesses around the country and help them grow jobs and support the affordable housing and developed communities. i look forward to talking more about those. i've concerns about the proposal

and pressing issues against iran and russia. i look forward to hearing your thoughts on that topic. no government agency is more visible than the internal revenue service that's a 95% of our federal government and each year more than 80,000 public servants fbi arrests may come as a of contacts with taxpayers as the face of government it is my hope is the national taxpayer advocate has suggested the irs could be described for fiscal 2016, the presidents budget request in a team% unnamed and on this point it is valuable that while there is a broad bipartisan dislike of paying taxes.

the more i cut i are spending the harder it becomes for the agency to respond to the needs of taxpayers. i hear one across go unanswered or takes a long time to connect and get responsible answers many offices have the same experience. every dollar results from seven fewer dollars by one estimation by formal irs commissioner douglas that was a 2011 estimate. we have a lot to discuss today. ways we can improve function and operation of the irs responsiveness and engagement ways to improve function and operation of the treasury department. the fiscal 2016 forecast is not encouraging a significant restraints remain in place and i look forward to hearing secretary lou and commissioner koskinen's to enforce laws.

and i've ended up an exchange of ideas of their hearings progress. >> now we turn to the testimony. >> our economy and country have made to manufacturing and export energy. the fact is in 2014 we saw the best year of job births in the 1890s and over the past five years america businesses have created 12 million new jobs the longest stretch of private-sector job growth in our nations history. our economy continues to expand with healthy growth in 2014 and forecast project an above trend growth for this year. we continue to outperform which are struggling to recover.

and this record was largely driven by small businesses. our deficit fallen by almost three quarters is forecasted to decline further in the next cisco year. achievements -underscore americans enduring economic strain and we can keep progress going with the right policies and bipartisan cooperation. the presidents budget is a blueprint to work together and not only lays out a path with common ground but puts forward sensible solutions to make sure every american who works hard at the chance to get ahead or the budget knocks down barriers for working families such as care, mortgage payment and college education are more affordable. in modernizes job-training system, research and development and prepares roads, bridges and ports of more companies will invest, locate and hire the united states. it reforms the tax system to effeminate loopholes strengthen middle-class and the blue playing field for business.

the bipartisan budget act of 2013 reversed a portion of sequestration and a lot higher investment in 2014 to 2015 but did nothing to eliminate sequestration in 2016. the arbitrary spending five poor economy and security. the across-the-board cuts were never intended to go into effect. they have responsible deficit reduction. congress should act to provide acceptable funding to meet our domestic and national security requirements. as part of the president's approach, treasury's budget will allow the department to carry out its responsibilities efficiently and effectively. instrumental in helping implement economic policies in today's request will allow the department to promote economic austerity fiscal responsibility and resilient financial system even as it addresses our national security objectives and bolster stability at home and abroad. the treasury department touches

virtually every american driver to responsibly manage the government i meant is streamline and reform tax system, small businesses, spur economic development in struggle communities and advanced strategic interests, nick social security payments and producer niche as currency. since president obama took office the department has had to marshal its resources for a deep domestic and global challenges and consistently met applications efficiently and at the lowest cost to taxpayers. this budget request continues to achieve savings and fund vital programs on strategies will make the department were effective. the primary area we request additional resources is in the internal revenue service. funding for the irs has been cut dramatically. these amount to a total of $1.2 billion or 10% of the agency's budget. taxpayers now face longer an unacceptable wait times on the

phone and takes the irs longer to respond to correspondence. the sustained deterioration in taxpayer service combined with reduced enforcement activities presents long-term risk based on voluntary compliance. the treasury budget request restores funding to the irs that we can provide an acceptable level of customer service the taxpayers deserve as well as modernization for mandates that the congress. these funds will help the irs update antiquated computer systems and protect taxpayer information. in addition we seek a cab to allow the irs to address enforcement initiatives and investments that generate a sizable return jaleel $60 million in additional revenue at a cost $19 billion meaning it will reduce the deficit by $41 million the next 10 years. this budget includes additional

funding the treasury commits obligation under the digital accountability and transparency act and prevent americans of the most accurate information about government spending. we are requesting reauthorization of programs with proven results for the budget proposes an extension of the development financial institution program which unlocks long-term financing for your institutions in underserved communities improvises a new investment in the state small-business credit initiative which leverages small businesses nationwide. in closing i want to thank talented team at the treasury department. they are dedicated to the work of the department and committed to the american people. i'm proud to represent them here today on behalf of hard-working men and women i want to say how much we appreciate support of the committee. thank you and i look forward to answering any questions you have. >> thank you are you much, mr. secretary. at this time i will perceive where each senator will have

seven minutes per round if there's sufficient interest for additional amounts of questions we will try to accommodate. i read your testimony and appreciated. and they are, you mentioned the need for finding common ground and i think you mentioned infrastructure, things like that. i would agree totally. we have different viewpoints as to how you get the dollars to get that done and that is the sticking point. the other thing and that they do this in the form of a question. a concerned our community bankers. i feel like the back of north america is a small business, but the backbone of small businesses community banks. a number of community bankers have expressed concerns about the cost of complying with what they feel like you're onerous regulatory burdens back on small business as i said in again the bat phone of our community

which are also the bat out of communities. harvard university released in report about community banks in the united states and how poor the regulatory coordination and design regulations are on community banks. this is particular concern to states like arkansas weathers 96 pounds with only one physical banking location and two thirds have less than 1000 residents. what do you propose? what is the administration's doing to ease the burden and costs facing community banks? >> mr. chairman, we very much share with you the view that community banks five an important part in our communities, but in the fabric of our national economy. if you look at the design many of the laws and the rules you will see there are standards that reflect differences between

smaller and larger financial institutions. there are exceptions in many cases were smaller and to tuitions and bars that are easier to clear or smaller institutions that don't present the same level of financial risk. the regulators have a look at discussion i have, always looking for flexibility or whether there is a risk they need to be concerned about. they have consistently made judgments to have the burden on smaller financial institutions reflagged in general lower level of risk. we have to be careful to remember the purposes of financial reform. the purpose of financial reform is to make sure we never face the economic crisis we had to fascinate. i think the standards we use had to be mindful of the fact that the architecture put in place was designed to prevent the taking of risk that could add a

to a risk to the country. the relatively easier standards for smaller institutions is appropriate and in 2008. we had a lapse with bricks developing to protect the u.s. economy. the financial reform has been quite effectively in making our system safety or sound or at least tried to it in a way mindful of the burdens on smaller banks and smaller communities. >> i guess my concern is when you get out and says that anger to various institutions like this, 96 times again it is universal. they feel it things have changed

manically. these types of community banks didn't have anything enough to do it in meltdown we added several years ago. i wish he would look at that as some and we are lucky not. we are having a one size fit all and again the idea that these banks are some hobbies uncivil for that simply don't agree with. we sent tidal security report revealed a cyberterminal brain from russia, china, ukraine and other parts of russia to 100 bank. any payment system in our countries around the world including the united states in its 2013 cybersecurity is a huge thing we are very coming very can turned about. in your opinion is america's personal and financial information updates safe from cyberattacks? >> senator cybersecurity is an

enormously ordinate difficult issue and one i worry about everyday and when i sat to ceos of financial institutions, retail business is, they worry about everyday. we are doing an awful lot that is the right kind of defense against cyberattacks. they are honing their attacks. we can't wait to get ahead of them. our challenge will be to keep up with them. the ability to respond when there are attacks and share information so the best part says can be available throughout the system. we have legislation in and that the president has proposed which we think would go a long way towards providing the ability to scare information which would make the system safer. the financial sector is probably in a better position now to another set tears, but i don't

think anyone can set back rest comfortably. mr. chairman, i can't help that that is the ranking member came in. and i want to thank her for her service. >> i will have more to say in a minute. we are going over those items. >> very quickly and very shortly i'm running over my time. i am encouraged by recent steps to reform the u.s. cuban relationship boosting our commercial ties at a significant advance for both of our economies. the homestead of arkansas exported nearly $34 million in goods to cuba before peanut

restrictions were tightened in 2005. earlier this year, researchers estimated and in travel to cuba would bring an additional $50 million to arkansas. what is done to lease payment restrictions and how would this impact u.s. agriculture. >> mr. chairman, the actions the president announced just a few months ago it will help u.s. businesses. mostly it will help advance the kind of positive change in cuba which would be positive to make a difference in which the old policies would not. we have tried to make it easier for the kinds of transactions for america not grow closer to go forward consistent with the legal restrictions that remain in place.

i think there are opportunities for americans and i were cultured in other sectors to do business in cuba. i think the bigger story in terms of u.s. cuban relations is the chance for cuba to be more exposed to u.s. values and u.s. ways of doing business in u.s. freedoms in a way that will be more effective pushing back on practices in cuba that still need to change than the old policies that were both not productive in terms of changing cuba and hurting u.s. interests. >> senator coons. >> thank you, chairman boozman. thank you secretary training for your presentation. with the access to capital of small towns and make a significant difference. just describe briefly how the community development financial and to tuitions fund is used to help rebuild distressed neighborhoods and support small businesses than what bond guarantee program if they were to read about 2 billion might be able to do and how they might

lay a constructive role providing access to capital and small communities first. sacking senator boozman asked about the regulatory burden on smaller banks. i've heard from a number of folks in the financial community who believe once banks obtain more than 50 billion in assets they suddenly become subject to all the regulatory oversight of the 90 days here while i am a strong supporter of steps taken in doc frank to prevent crises, i wonder if that is accurate or if there is a step series iii steadily ratchet up regulations in accordance with growing size that would welcome your insights into that point as well. >> thank you, senator. cdfi has been -- you know, just looking up the raw numbers, in

2014 we made $146 million in the words and produce 50,000 new jobs almost 10,000 businesses finance. in the communities where they are present there is a financial and dictation and local businesses can go to. in places where community banks weren't able to have a foothold it has created access to the benefits of a community banks offer. the cdfi bond program addresses one of the fundamental challenges in revitalizing communities. in many vile income in underserved communities access to long-term fixed-rate financing is just hard to find or impossible to find. they carried tape or agreement to date as guaranteed $525 billion in bonds to the

program to help cdfi provide financing needs for the community. i think it is a very above-average than successful program which is why we propose the reauthorization again. senator, with regard to the threshold question you asked about you are totally correct. it's not a hard line where everything happens to institution if they pass the $50 billion threshold. many requirements for which institutions remaining tent. other cases in which standards are modified to reflect the lower level of risk and with that bad and as i said to the chairman, we remain very much focused on what we can do to make the burden even life without creating risk to the general architecture of financial security. it is an area of the regulators are focused on them we are focused on treasury. >> good. i share the concern we find ways to provide better access to

capital more monday night the community banking level without increasing risk to financial system as a whole and making basic changes to what i think are important safety and soundness protections. let me briefly ask you about sanctions. i made a reference in a hearing in the last congress, senator mikulski, vice chairman kolsky was central and not vacating a significant increase to make sure we have got resources in the office of terrorism and financial intelligence. i was struck in the ongoing issues with russia and the ukraine comest area and in particular with the wrong of a chair proposes a reduction. why does it propose to cut funds for the office knowing the significant rise. given the real potential that we may return sanctions against iran come into rehab to resources? >> senator i think that the

work are off of terrorism financing does is enormously important and the sanctions program and all future presidents are some all tools extraordinarily effective and powerful and i must say when i think of how much time i spend working in this area, it is a bit of a surprise how much of my time goes into this because the world we live in today. as far as resources go we requested the resource level of the floor. and we propose putting it in the departmental offices so we would have a little more flexibility. there was a one-time expenditures last year that may or may not recur. as far as brand stations go, we have not lessened our level of act committee. we are fully funded in the russian sanctions were a new start this year. i don't think we missed a beat in terms of any other sanction

programs we administer and they came up to speed quickly when there is a need for russian sanctions and i'm proud of our team for having mastered the edge you see is that the financial institutions and its interconnection to the global financial system and how they can use targeted in surgical sanctions to put the maximum pressure on the target of the sanctions with the minimal spillover to europe and the rest of the world. we have funded it at the right level, but you know we appreciate the support that this committee has given for this very important function. >> just speaking for myself, this is an area i intend to follow closely and i want to be reassured you have more than adequate resources for the fight. two quick questions if i might. your i.t. investments which are significant relative to the total increase requested i share the chairman's concerns about cybersecurity.

these two strike me as ways to modernize and strength and systems entries errancy of the budget and must be questioned about nlp. >> i agree. the investment in the data act is extremely important. we worked with congress on the development. we are eager to implement it well. i don't think we can implement without resources. we can't implement dispose of a a ship without resources to do it properly. i think it helps to safeguard systems to invest in cybersecurity by having better systems to begin with. acting outcome in many systems are quite old. >> i was struck the budget proposes limiting partnerships as a structure. i have long been an advocate on a bipartisan basis opening to renewable energy. it is a technology natural politically feasible ways to provide long-term financing port for renewable energy. i wondered if you add a comment.

>> senator, it's an area i would be happy to follow up. our proposal -- obviously many proposals to promote her noble energy and financing in research and development with regard to partnerships we've had concerns over the years and i look forward to discussing it with you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the senator from kansas is recognized. >> welcome. before asking any questions since i last saw the senator from maryland and she is announced her intentions to not seek reelection and i want to use this as an opportunity to thank her for her service. i've enjoyed your tenure of the appropriations committee and appreciate the tenacity with which you have tackled are spending and the continual attempt to get the appropriations process back to regular order. thank you area much. i appreciate the way he treated me for the last several years.

mr. secretary i think three relatively quick questions. as i was walking and i was told the chairman was questioning about community banking regulations. i add my voice to that issue. my understanding is your response was something along the lines community banks are better regulators today than previously. i would indicate i don't think that is the case. i think community banks has been caught up in a broader regulatory scheme than they deserve to be in. the consequences are significant to the economy. in a state like mine in which community banks provide necessary capital to a growing business, to a startup about the relationsrelations hip banking is important in the example i use that has become so annoying to me and so devastating as many community banks have made the decision no longer to make home loans -- home mortgage loans to individuals who want to buy a home in their hometown with the bank is located because of the significant regulatory

environment now operate in. i doubt that dodd-frank original intent but that is bad and result. the consequence is that there's a failure by the bank to cross every t. and dot every i. the reason is necessary to bring this kind of issue to you in so many regulators are not subject to approach haitians. therefore in this setting you are the one opportunity to express concern about things happening within the treasury department are broader in the bank regulatory environment that does banks face. >> senator, i understand the concern and share the concern free with all of you who have expressed the view that community banks are an important part of the fabric of our economic system and communities. as we were discussing a few moments ago what happens at the

cutoff point is not quite as dramatic as sometimes described because there are different rules for smaller dictations. with specific regard to the housing issue, i know some regulators are reviewing the rules that have been of concern by community banks. the intention was to stop the lending you described. it was intended to the burden some lenders to know their clients better and offer different products, but not to shut down the lending. i know things like looking at the back of risk, regulators have been trying to take some of the unknown out of the system by being clear, what would and wouldn't reconsider and actionable error. the regulators are attuned to it. obviously mostly this is not directly the jurisdiction of treasury but i'm very much concerned as the chair of us soc but also someone who cares deeply about the health of our

banking and financial system and look forward to working with you. we have to be careful not to undo the architecture that has made our system so much safer than it was. >> is there anyone media thursday at the treasury department that would be a good person to talk to? >> we have people who work on banking issues and i'm happy to have been in contact with your staff. >> thank you. part of the review underway in which banking regulations are now considered on a periodic review. i would welcome the report as to how the process is going and whether we are headed in that direction that would eliminate or modify rules and regulations. >> i is very much focused on not. when i was a would-be director we did a rule across the federal government and we didn't have the ability to reach and to the

agency is, so i am now pleased to see this process underway for independent regulatory agencies doing the same to. i know from conversations i've had that the heads of agencies are focused on it if they participate in regional hearing and i think you will be interesting to see what they come back with. >> i am pleased with your smile i am pleased by your interest in this topic. i wasn't sure he would know about this process, but i guess you would know hopefully as treasury secretary but also certainly as director of omb. let me ask a question. this congress passed last year, last session the tribal general welfare exclusion act. what was going on was irs activity on native american land involving activities. that legislation requires that a tribal advisory committee be established to advise you on matters related to taxation of

indian intrigue in an educational system for the irs field agents. it seems to me the treasury department is going out of its way to not have native american fun it is to be committee. would you dispel me of that belief? >> i am not sure where the notion comes from. we filed the charter for the treasury tribal advisory committee and issued a call for nominations for the numbers to be appointed by the secretary. the deadline application is april 28. we are very much in the process of reviewing candidates. >> you than ever these tribal leaders should not be about the numbers of the advisory committee? >> i don't start out with a preconceived notion. we should review the applicants that comment and look for the

most qualified and strongest candidates. >> that's a good answer now is it just tribal leaders in part of the makeup of the advisory committee tribal leaders abusiveness became an important component in providing you the treasury department iris advised tiered >> i did have a meeting several months ago and it was a good exchange and the feedback i got was that they welcome the interaction with the treasury department and we will continue to stay very much working with them. >> thank you. >> the senator from maryland. >> thank you, mr. chairman. by colleagues for your kind words. secretary, thank you for your service. we've been together a really long, long time. in fact, when we were discussing earmarks in the old da hud bill. again, thank you for your words and also four euros service.

i want to reiterate some questions about community banks that i see as a common theme here among all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. perhaps mr. chairman will require may be a meeting with this domestic find, but a conversation. let me get to my questions. i am concerned that the shrinking number of community banks. and number two i'm also concerned about the shrinking number of minority owned community banks that have demonstrated solvency and stability. i know since even the last year we've gone from 47 to the number in their 20s. i think these are issues we need to really be looking at. we could talk about the merits of the community bank as compared to be an original our franchise banking in our

community. ready to use to my question. one of which is where the growth of government are interfering with banks being able to get back on their feet. a specific question that i have is that there is a community bank in maryland that needs the approval from the federal reserve bank of richmond in order to buy back what they have gotten in the t.a.r.p. per program. they are told they can't buy back but can make it right for a hedge fund to come along and by the bank. well, they've got the money to buy it back. i don't want to get into individual, but where the variables of government seem to be either a t.a.r.p. who were derailing community banks to move out of the recession and yet there is solvency, which were absolutely committed to.

do you have any thoughts about what treasury is telling people about writing back stop in the regulators kind of my view on actions on this. >> senator, from a treasury perspective we have been working our way through the t.a.r.p. assets trying to resolve them so we can recover taxpayer investments solely wherever possible. we have worked with community institutions and have no objection when community institutions are able to do that. i am not sure what the regulatory issue is that you are describing, but i would be happy to look into it. we don't have any of rudy over the fed decisions. >> one of the things we do have to cordoning the treasury. i would like to get you a formal letter on this. >> i'd be happy to look into it.

>> two other points that are very specific to the maryland d.c. area just to bring to your attention and ask you to look into them and then i had a pretty big question. one of which is the retired d.c. firefighters have called my office along with eleanor holmes that there is an accounting -- an old accounting error was discovered in several retirees are getting notifications at their benefits might be reduced. these are the pensions that we are responsible for. i would like to get you a letter on not in a letter from eleanor holmes norton. i'm not asking warriors bonds there. the other is the treasury i know is merging financial management service at the bureau of public debt. the financial manager is services and hyattsville.

i was there to negotiate a five-year delay with treasury in terms of this move, but we hear that there are employees and treasury so grouchy about what i did to the those people so we can sort this out that they are being devoted come intimidated and pushed out. would you take a look at that? >> i will take a look at it. it would obviously be unacceptable if that were true. i think the merger has been a fact is that there should be no kind of treatment like you describe. >> you know they were looking for $8 an hour to countenance in west virginia. i don't take any account in his $8 an hour. i am not going to get into that. i want to have as many legacies as barbara mikulski as i can. the other is the larger question for my colleagues. you and i have two appropriations together when i was chair, now the vice chair.

could you tell me the impact of crisis driven appropriations with last-minute agreement through amadeus very well organized. nothing but excellent words to say about my colleagues and of course congressman howard rogers. i wonder with u.s. secretary of the treasury our domestic economy and global economy what is the impact of crisis driven appropriations what i would like to raise and colleagues moran has raised about getting back to regular order. >> said on her that's an extraordinary question and i commend you for the work you did last year to put together an omnibus appropriation was funding levels designed to meet current needs which is so important in terms of having our system maintained its responsiveness and agility.

continuing resolutions don't have that ability. i think when you look at that deadline driven crisis funding decisions made over the last number of years and s. cause substantial anxiety. not just the united states, but around the world. when one looks at business investment environment, it is about confidence. government behaving in the way the reasonable set of his tuition should behave at to confidence. the sense we are hurtling off of a cliff to stories that sense of confidence. i have detected considerable improvement in the united states and internationally as a system and an economy since the wii is seeing a return to something that approaches regular order. maintaining regular order is extraordinarily important to keeping the recovery we have

going and having the investment decisions that depend on people thinking about things going the right direction in a year, two years, three years not a week month or part of this year. i applaud the effort he went through to put on the best together and if congress can meet the requirements to fund the government to make sure that our dad doesn't become an issue of anxiety can that would be very important. >> mr. chairman, i know my time is up, we've got worldwide breaking news. this is good news. the senate version of the homeland security bill cleared the house 257 to 167. so that means me on the appropriations committee have now passed 12 bills and we have completed now today our fiscal 15 work. >> congratulations.