plan or budget for the future. it pains me to think about how much less efficient the department of defense has been over the last six fiscal years as it has been forced to carry out our national defense strategy in an increasingly unstable security environment that you have described. we are navigating the unpredictability of sequestration, government shutdown, budget caps and continuing resolutions. even the most clairvoyant among us camp perceive the problems looming in fiscal year 2018. the bca was sold as the deficit reduction reduction tool, yet the congressional budget office projected the cumulative deficit will be 5 trillion more than the office projected in august 2015.

the prolonged inability of congress and the administration to find a consensus needed to replace it in a full austerity policy that truly address long-term drivers of our deficit, but growth and mandatory spending is an abject failure. despite the ongoing efforts to renegotiate, i am optimistic that they will provide some help in this appropriation process. we have a number. i hope the subcommittee under the chairman's leadership will be able to make the difficult and deliberate decisions needed to prioritize. sec. carter, you did state this is a major inflection point for the department. further you have indicated i was

pleased to announce both those sentiments but based on the outcomes of the last budget request, i am skeptical again of any strategy, plan or program that is relying on caps in future years. i certainly understand its motivation between dod's decision to assume more funding in the out years. however i am worried that that assumption may not come to fruition. i assure you that i am committed to working with my colleagues to find a lasting solution to our fiscal problem. in conclusion, i would simply also observed that i appreciate the much anticipated plan for the closing of guantanamo bay detention facility was transmitted to congress earlier this week. i hope the plan is considered on its merit rather than to be rejected. mr. chairman, think you for holding the hearing.

gentleman i look look forward to your testimony. >> thank you. mr. rogers, chairman rogers. >> thank you mr. chair. mr. secretary, thank you for being here. thank you more importantly for your years of service to your country. we appreciate that very much and we thank you for being here this morning for what is the first hearing of this subcommittee for fiscal 17. we have 21 hearings across the committee this week and you are one of which that we think it's very important. the fifth-year and the role of the subcommittee has been able to pass the defense appropriations bill out of the house. i am confident we can do the same this year. we know our troops and their families are depending on it. our only hope is that when we pass a bill through this committee and on the floor the house and send it to the senate,

that they act. they have refused to do that for the last several years. consequently, we get into a negotiation about necessity to keep them from closing down the government. it's time the senate acted on a bill. amazing. under your leadership the men and women who served in the u.s. military answer the call time and again and leave their loved ones and put themselves in harm's way, execute challenge missions abroad and we are mindful that our responsibility to support our allies in need and respond to threats from our enemies imposes significant demands on our troops. this committee appreciates their dedication and willingness to serve and your leadership admits the unprecedented challenges facing our nation this day.

the global security environment continues to grow increasingly complex. it's also unpredictable. the mounting threats we discussed this time last year still with us and in some cases have increased. two years after the russian annexation of crimea, russian aggression remains a threat. the sovereign states in the region and a considerable influence across the middle east. the islamic state maintains its hold on population centers where it terrorizes innocent lives which created an unlivable situation for countless syrians, iraqis and even libyans. we've seen this conflict force the migration of millions of people, precipitating an

unprecedented humanitarian crisis across middle east and europe. meanwhile, iran and north korea continue to rattle their sabers while china exerts military strength in the pacific. today we will discuss many of these threats and how your budget requests and our ability to defeat them. we continue to hear rhetoric from the administration that appears to minimize or just flat out misunderstand the reality and the magnitude of the threat that we face from violent extremism. just this week, the president had asked us to close the guantanamo bay detention facility at a time when the threat of terrorist activity at home and abroad shows no sign of abating. they are fighting for the transfer of known terrorists out of the united states custody. the they're going to countries

where we cannot control their return to the battlefield. he asked the american people to allow them to be detained on american soil. as the president made the case that they will be subject to strong security measures in other countries, a prisoner was arrested on terror charges. they tell us that 30% of the prisoners released from the facility have reengaged in terrorism. yet the president continues to argue that releasing these prisoners will make us safer. that's twisted logic. once again, i am perplexed by the administration's decision to continue to prioritize this misguided campaign promise despite clear direction from this congress, not to mention the implications for national

security. with active duty set to decline further until 17, the convert to station we will have about responding to threats across multiple regions with enemies with very different missions and capacities becomes even more of a cop located matter. the challenges you face are well documented. the demands they place on our troops and leadership are great. i look forward to discussing how this committee can best equip you to lead in these uncertain times and respond to threats of american security around the world. this committee remains confident in your ability to lead and protect our troops and to ensure the safety american troops at home and abroad. we appreciate your service and

commitment to the nation and our service men and women across the world. >> indeed you have our full support. along with the remarkable women and men that you represent. the best of america. we are so proud of all volunteers doing remarkable things. the mr. sec., the floor is yours. thank you for being with us to this will be put into the record. >> thank you chairman. thank you. and to all of you, thanks for what you said about the troops. that means it all. that's what i wake up for every morning. i'm sure that's true of the chairman as well. they are the best of america and we are very proud to be associated with them and i'm very pleased to hear you say the same thing. it's good for them to hear that as well. thank you all very much. and thanks for hosting me today

and in general for your steadfast support. i'm pleased to be here with chairman dunford to discuss president obama's 2017 defense budget which marks indicate a major inflection point for this department. i'm also pleased to be discussing the budget first before this committee which has been a leader in securing the sources the department needs. in this budget, we we are taking the long view. we have to. even as we fight today's fight, we must also be prepared for what might come 10, 20 or 3030 years down the road. last fall's budget deal gave us much needed stability. i want to thank you, all of of you, your colleagues for coming together to pass that agreement. the bipartisan budget act set

the size of our budget which is why our budget submission and my testimony focus on its shape. changing that shape is fundamental if carefully considered ways to adjust to a new strategic era and sees opportunities for the future. let me describe the strategic assessment that drove our budget decisions. first of all, it's evident that america is still today the world's foremost leader, partner and underwriter of stability and security in every region across the globe. we have been since the end of world war ii. i was in brussels the week before last meeting with nato defense ministers as well as ministers of the counter isil military coalition. i can tell you they all appreciate the leadership from the department of defense of america.

as we continue to fulfill this enduring role, it's also evident that we are entering a new strategic era. today security environment is dramatically different from the last 25 years. it requires new ways of investing, new ways of operating. five eve all strategic challenges, namely russia which has already been mentioned, china, north korea, iran and are now driving dod's budget. i want to focus on our ongoing fight against terrorism, especially isil which we must and deal a lasting defeat. most immediately, the tumor in iraq and sue syria but also where it's metastasizing elsewhere in the world. we are doing that in africa. were doing it in afghanistan

where we continue to stand with the afghan government and people to counter terrorism and isil. all the while we continue to protect our homeland. :

>> to. >> end ultimately the sec the tumor into two parts whenever iraq and the other syria. this is just the most recent example of kobe are enabling local forces to deal with isil as a lasting defeat. next to of the four challenges affected the recognition have a great power of competition. to be a strong and balanced approach to deter aggression we have not had that certificate portion for a quarter century.

the other challenges in the asia dash pacific but behavior aggressively to continue the of rebalance to maintain that a regional stability to allow 72 rising and prosper for america's future. with north korea that is on the peninsula to remain ready to fight tonight. the other is iran. and before getting a nuclear weapon and they must still teacher iranian aggression

to fight the influence of the friends and allies of the region especially israel with that of an breakable commitment dod must address to address all five of these challenges as part of this mission with two postures with enhanced capabilities. to confront these five challenges we will be across all remains with the areas of cyberor electronic warfare or space for our reliance on technology has given us great strength and opportunity but also to folder abilities the vacancy to exploit. our approach to detour the

most advanced competitors must have the ability to ensure any one who starts a conflict will regret doing so. to be clear that military will fight differently. we must be prepared for a full spectrum. we must demonstrate that they have the capability to win to show that they can dominate the conflict russia and china are the most tests for stressing competitors including any access systems

we saw at in syria as well. in in some cases we don't is desire a conflict but the their country and all in need to say to work together with imported nation's public don't blind ourselves to their goals and actions it because of this dod has elevated the importance in planning and budgeting. in my written testimony to make critical investments to help us better address these challenges to 3.$4 billion

quadruple requested last year with the fighter aircraft in investing in innovative capabilities with micro drones the strike bomber with the new anti-ship capable missile to maximize production of a the next five years. and i expect will expanding their commanding lead. with those submarines this

triples the strike capacity of 12 tomahawks through 40 talks. and to invest in these three domains of $34 billion in 2017 to help build a force of next generation electronic timbres to prepare for the possibility of a complex that extends in space. we will continue to ensure the dominance of all domains. the budget also seize this opportunity for the future. that is the responsibility i have to my successors that it is just as strong or more so than the one i have the privilege of meeting today.

to build new bridges to the innovative system where we're also making our contingency plans more dynamic in every region. why we are building the force of the future. as good as our technology is nothing compared to our people. end as well as toward to support military families and to expand access because the poet to taxpayers to spend our defense dollars as wisely as possible we're pushing for needed reforms.

to further reduce the overhead to propose new changes in let me close of a broader shift of the budget. we saw how the luxury of just one opponent. that is what the budget is designed to do. it sets the size of the budget to focus on the shape we hope you approve it. so maybe looking at the difference but i want to reiterate that the budget meets our needs.

end to jeopardize the ability could to listen in that stability this year to sequester the caps in future years. that is why the biggest concern is strategically is congress with the sequestration to sustain all the critical investments over time. we have done this before. but also in other areas of the all volunteer force.

across bridges of beverage across multiple administration is that is essential today to address the security challenges that we face to seize the opportunities within our grasp. and america's military will continue to defend our country and make a better world for generations to come. general thank you for your career. to a the moderate to represent the joint force with civil servants to read

our single most important is thanks to your support. with your support to adapt while simultaneously investing in future challenges. we should never send americans into a fair fight but maintain a force to reassure allies and partners with that capabilities to restore full spectrum readiness craft and united states from traditional state actors and on state actors. and with those strategic challenges that secretary carter has already addressed continuing to addressing capabilities to reduce our

competed - - competitive a vantage. and that falls short with the threshold of military response. including russian action in the you trade and activities and iran's activities across the middle east at the same time not a state actor such as al qaeda in isil threat our homeland and their partners and allies. giving the they would change the way of life. derecognize successful execution of with capabilities the deterrent be made effective to require modernization therefore those needed for safe and secure nuclear deterrent we make investments to anti-competitive the

advantage off was further develop capability zaph in the contest -- and the contested domains of space. we do that in the fiscal environment that has hampered our ability to use resources most effectively. they have absorbed a hundred billion of cuts with sequestration in induced risk over the past five years to invest in the capabilities unless we reverse it with the most critical investments required for the competitive vintage lowe's resources provided by the bipartisan budget act to address the

five challenges. it does so by balancing three major areas of investment in to rebuild readiness after extended period of more. with adequate funding levels from over a decade of war. with cyberspace investments it will be several years to replenish the stock of munitions. the f-117 budget puts us on the right trajectory with the death in flexibility in readiness response, that any future fight is not fair thanks for the opportunity of forge your questions.

>> we talk about prisoners being released to guantanamo that is disturbing and makes me quite angry. there has meant some speculation to the naval station of guantanamo can you assure us that there are no plans for a change of operations in the historic role? >> i know of no such plans and ours is opposite if you're talking about guantanamo bay naval. it is not about that is a strategic location.

the detention is a separate subject. the reason to have a conversation with the congress of that detention facility is precisely because there are people there that cannot be safely transported it to be somewhere in the united states and then to ask congress to work with us with that the tensions facility precisely in recognition. >> but my question had to do with the future.

is there an announcement that will change? >> i will focus on the middle east and working very closely with the contingency account that historically is still aimed to do a pretty good job of all aspects of that accounting kid you say very briefly of the troops in the region. give your review of force protection in may i say rather expensive investment

and their capabilities even after all of these years as to how capable they are and the two areas mired in controversy and here is the focus. and then ask the chairman also. and there are others insurance initiatives about russia. we very much appreciate your support it real understand

it and every nickel is subjected to that ability is to be very comfortable with that. so force protection is the highest priority it remains a high priority. it also the expert in afghanistan just so he doesn't have to sing his own praises. and as a consequence end

than national unity government and we cannot read and write. to read the fbi as security forces is growing of they have many capabilities in the plan is to stick with them. end we request funding for the afghan security forces and the plan is tink to continue to do that in the future. and that whole strategy was executed so well. to make the afghan security forces capable to secure the

country and stop terrorism him and all of that is pursuing. stewart with some extent part of the we are during with afghanistan is perpetual so about three years ago. so the and the afghan security forces to have to be elections to go through a

very turbulent period. and with an intelligence source so forth that is more importantly to maintain in the effective care is some platform it is a significant threat. certainly not as quickly as we wanted. to have standards if you see secretary carter was the deputy moving forward today the standards have been incorporated it reflect the investment with syria and iraq.

>> with the lack of success and to talk a little bit about that? >>. >> we have a lot of people on the payroll. >> the endeavors of iraq is syria is still relatively new. and it was recently demonstrated in the anbar province so i would tell you four months ago we did not have that campaign with iraq but we do have an time and with that anbar province also the extraordinary successful between iraqi and

syria to conduct operations but syria itself of those partners we have on the ground and those of just recently took down isil and the caliphate location in to cut the lines of communication so from my perspective there is work to be done to significantly reduce the freedom of movement to isolate the major areas of concentration did we do that from the partners we have changed -- trade over the past year there is much work to be done with that trajectory. >> thank you for your assessment. >> i would continue to

reiterate my concern to make sure we are on schedule for the for initial statements of 2017 if you could respond to any major investments to be made whether or not day are fully funded fiscal year 17. in the industrial base i am very concerned. are there any particular sectors of the industry's or components that it has a problem with? from the department of the acquisition brings this problem to mind of what can

be done it is said a budgetary standpoint? henry long share that concern is the unparalleled quality that the world has ever known. it does depend on the healthy industrial base. that stability that you have provided is simply having a knowledge of what the budget will be two years in a row. to manage programs and a basis that that depends that state in the game.

invest sacred sector and why we have started to manufacturing the institute's the private partnerships because it is the problem overall to make sure we maintain competitive a vintage relative to other parts of the world and there is some products that we cannot outsource because he cannot fully trust them. to make sure we have control of the components.

of the investment ever industry every year of research and development with the industrial economy to manage it well so the strength of the bass stayed strong. is there anything we can do to make sure there is no more degradation as far as manufacturing? >> if i may i will come back as to try to highlight what we have done a very much on the mind of the logistics' in this teetoo as we have

made but the main stability of the overall programs. so i share your concern. >> chairman? >> and with those capabilities with those territorial claims to the selfie in east china seas end to exert more influence to build itself into a maritime power. meanwhile to be.

-- provoked by their neighbors to the west using that as a justification to aggressively pursue their own interest regard to territorial disputes in the south china sea. and what is your thinking in the process in light of these fairly recent developments with the importance of china's place of the naval force? and the assessment has changed over time. and that china is doing exactly as we say. with a land-based military focused on defense a

territory. in the united states policy has been the last 70 years to remain that power in asia pacific that is what it is about. with the high end of naval warfare aircraft can strike fighter it ended recognition of that. in the recent there noticed is a because united states is doing something in over decades. with what is new is the

chinese exactly as you say. to be reacted to with the investments and to of others in the region to align them with united states with allies like japan self korea in the philippines is though the chinese behavior of self isolation but this is the

change a bad strategic aspect that china prevents to have a peaceful and stable environment that is where the miracle has occurred of the united states to a would-be a new security structure we have provided that. does that threaten our ability to tie line? >> if those treaty obligations is more of the threat grows from china and the more we have to adjust to the operational approach.

to those capabilities but to follow with what you said china's activities have expanded to beyond tie one with the east tennessee case you address the threat of china's activities in regard to the capabilities with the aircraft or land-based? >> it is very clear that they are intended to move into the pacific so those

developments and as you described so with this budget we are focused on capability developments to maintain the competitive vintage also with those most modern capabilities like the f25 and f-22 so i share that concern with those joint capability development to insure was secretary carter said is true to meet the obligations there is no doubt in my mind they have a competitive bid to joe for china today. if we were not to maintain that investment profile with the current budget we will

said unable to look into the pacific. >> they say what they are doing is to intimidate their neighbors what do say to that? >> that is definitely intended to dominate the neighbors also partly strategically directed at us because we provided the security structure. i am not one of these people that police conflict is inevitable but we have provided the environment to help china develop freely

with taiwan in southeast asia to provide that environment we're not about to keep china down we'll look for anybody to dominate the region we are a pacific power in we're there to stay. with half of the world's economy. >> thank you for your service secretary carter i know there is some discussion before i arrived in the budget but what problems are created what is said to for your budget?

can you carry out the department's mission with the f-117 request? >> with the budget that we have proposed with the bipartisan budget agreement that stability is important to us and then start to do things inefficiently and shore in the contract time and we can plan programs for the long run and stability or for our people is bad for morale people say what is

going on here? i don't think it is fair to our people look at our families trying to plan the future look at the volunteer force and then i worry around the world those who say can you get it together to have a budget? and that is why i am so grateful end to have a bipartisan budget of which we submitted. >> and the secretary's

comments that we can meet those obligations alluding to his opening remarks over the last few years his ability to be paid in the future. that we will continue what we have done there is no way fiver seven years from now to have the same conversation about china beverages said with the chairman. to have a coherent long-term view of the year. london to be efficient with the taxpayer dollars. but lower importantly in the near term but we have to do those innovations in to

achieve that balance to one for some three or four years. things here question. a question on cybersecurity. please describe the press very risk from department of defense is to increase the capability to be initiated in those primary elements. and had is the support your efforts? the highest priority has to

be defending our own networks because that is what stitches together the ingredients of the military so all operations as it comes together in the network and then to spend effort on that. and cider can be a tool we can use against our enemy. for example, right now i cannot go into detail in cyber, is operating against isil. these are people that are not part of the open in culture and the internet should not be used for that

purpose. as part of the campaign against isil if there are other kinds of attacks on the homeland potentially in in terms of the investments because the services all have cyberefforts to put it into the operation plan and we have the room is investment with our systems of tens of billions of dollars all of which is modernized to put into the cloud that could be better defended and we have

increased it the recognition with the importance of cyberto focus on the future. >> i will be very quick with the primary risk to protect our own capability is critical but we also talk about opportunity as well. so that second question to defend our own network to support the defense of our nation as well as the capabilities to take the fight to the enemy which obviously not in this venue but to talk about that cybernation force we did build those teams the issue refocused on providing the training but those are true

the other areas to enhance that effectiveness. the budget is focused on enhancing the capability over the last few years. >> thinks general to as we do that we have partners to play an increasing role. to be cumbersome and bog down it has been with the executive branch since march march 2015 it is one sign of many to drive out the partners elsewhere with russia and china for

assistance that the relationships are critical path to preferred -- with the current action with a long time to teach a client's this isn't just the duty issue for you play a significant role in the process. what you doing to expedite the request and what changes be made and. >> that export helps the industrial from when others make investments those are the investments with aircraft and to make them less expensive for us.

id how important that is in it makes them stronger. they are friends. we don't want to do everything yourself so we're trying to get other people to be in the game with that capability into absolutely right. and for all those other reasons the speeding up and the approval process and i talked to secretary kerry about that that this is an important positive thing for a american defense so they can help themselves lynette

with the counter par with the chief of defence as a great partner with to prosecute that curt fight it has been critical for the last two decades and they are incredibly frustrated those are the countries we should be keeping close with those valuable allies from the u.s. perspective and we should live for ways to expedite because they will go elsewhere to build in dropper ability and one of the ways you do that is the commonality of the equipment if you buy that chinese aircraft ahead makes it incredibly difficult to put coalitions together and to

require the effective coalition. to read sure we have that we have to make it easier. >> if there is anything we can do to help speed that up please let us know. ha -- with the uprising of egypt except military to military we kept that going we need to do that to make it faster and smoother. >> you have many smart decisions one as principal

deputy assistant secretary beginning your career in my office. >> thank you for that. he is fantastic and i rely on him and i am grateful for him. >> mr. secretary but part of the debate on the budget i want to ask about the software and how we educate our troops with that intellectual talent that we need. to work of professional military education speaking with general oh dear now he went through a variety of issues when dash odierno

said we have situational awareness but that includes awareness of culture and logistics' when you kick in the door who's behind it so i would like you to comment there are redoing enough to invest in the software? are some of those challenges the we are too busy to learn the don't allow was to make those investments in what can we do on his obligations that we have? >> while we are acknowledging people come with like the technology also for your service in this body with your loyalty to the department of defense >> i think we feel most passionate about is

professional military education of our people. once we get them we need to develop them because the world changes in technology changes the skills that they need changes in order to retain them they need to feel like they're building their skill set that is crucial and when you talk to folks what would it make you leave? if you sit around the dinner table there are a lot of things that they talk about but the big one is that it was part of society today

and not so much in the past is companies recognize that it didn't end when they were kids you have to keep up or the world will pass you by that is true everywhere and in companies they try to do that it is critical for the military to keep the skills sharp to make them motivated. one of the things we are addressing in the budget is every time there is little shaken the budget i was asked about the consequences of turbulence of the kraft many did you have to grab it that is a bad way to manage yourself that we have to do that one of the things you grab is education funding that is penny wise pound

foolish and i thank you are absolutely right i will stop at that point. >> actually may also ask you to comment on something you have worked on to shape a sharper in better mind in the military? >> i became aware six years ago from the marine expeditionary force looking for ways to enhance the resilience at the time and i gather briefing who at the time made it clear that that will help us of consequences like posttraumatic stress in deal with those challenges and focus its so i think

there is a lot to that in there is a lot of promise to enhance those capabilities. >> thank you for all you'd do you are an important part and i am proud to know you. secretary carter only five of our nato allies have kept their obligations as strong and stable europe are more importantly from u.s. citizens the european reinsurance initiatives funding what steps are you taking and how we better

incentivized to contribute more to their own safety? with that rotational abc-tv? to encourage critical strategic partnerships with the allied nations to provide that greater institutional knowledge. >> you are right the europeans need to gore i am now with a long string of secretaries of defense with the decline in european defense there are that are

increasing their level in think of the united kingdom as one and of course, our allies around the world but japan and the australia so they are getting stronger but in general to be invested in the european reassurance initiative the plan is to work with them and to do that we need their participation and assistance with their own capabilities. kept its equipment there permanently but the approach to increased force presence is rotational rather than permanent.

in the reason is that it is to fold. we don't think it is practical to get support for increasing more pressure that is justin the other direction as we continue to have a strong defense with fewer forces positioned in in europe.

which is what we have experienced when they participate. experienced when they are still challenging, but in reality we have to have people to fight. >> i have the privilege of commanding all the nato nations. we have 50 members of the coalition command i will tell you there are some tell you there are some , but that issue of caveats and rules of engagements and we have some incredibly effective partners and over time they

accomplished the mission. my expectation is they will do that in the future. we don't have nato and iraq. we have members of the nato alliance or nato itself, and we can work through those in the past. it is a political issue. the forces are more than capable enough to be shoulder to shoulder with us to make an invaluable contribution. >> it is a critical issue. >> i think right now your in a good position as far as protecting our country. we know a lot about cyber. it affects our business, communities, combatant command. in that regard because of

the fact that we need to deal and focus on cyber, i personally believe we need to take cyber command and make it into a fully functional combatant command. i represent an essay. are you considering that? and we need to focus on the budget issue. and then one question about russia. >> thank you, congressman. we continue to consider ways to improve our approach for cyber. it is a growing organization. it is now a sub unified command. that is an arrangement that works but is not optimal.

we have a reluctance because what we are doing is cutting headquarters staff. but whichever way that turns out, cyber come as an important future.future. it is important to me that cyber comment nsa are in the same place. >> i agree with that. >> skilled cyber people are not -- they are hard to find. cyber is partly a money issue. having nsa next to cyber, cyber, means that they can interchange talent and drawn one another. the fact that admiral rodgers words both fat --

both hats is a critical advantage. for now i would not recommend that separation. >> i also want to field questions about russia. and then we went to estonia and latvia. there is great concern, why won't the united states stand behind them? especially in border states. they are concerned. we have concerned. we have to let them know and let the world no we are the strongest military in the world.

i am wondering if there are strategies we might consider. you need to get them around these countries. putting troops on the border that is your call. we need to show we are strong and will not tolerate the aggression of russia and especially with our allies. >> i will start 1st. the reason we are quadrupling is precisely for the reason you say, to signal the determination of the united states and nato to defend nato territory. we do that with activity sets the permanent presence, exercises and so forth and russia should know that what

they see in europe on a daily basis is not what we used to defend europe. we have plans to do that, the defense of nato territory and we would do it with the full weight of the united states as has always been the case. it will be different, and i emphasize that. it is not just territorial. little green men, hybrid warfare. the kinds of things you saw in crimea and ukraine. a different kind of threat but what we have to plan for in order to show strength

and be strong. >> very briefly. >> very quickly. the secretary mentioned exercises. posture forces, would that make a difference. with the european initiative does, it helps us develop interoperability. the exercises are designed to send a clear and unmistakable message of our commitment to article five and as importantly a clear demonstration that if russia faces nato may face the full weight of the military capability and the full political will 28 nations and quite frankly if you put that together it is an overwhelming challenge, and our exercises designed to

make sure one part of that is clear comeau we can bring the full weight to bear in the event of a contingency. >> that would be appreciated by the ukrainians. >> thank you and thank you all for your service to men and women in uniform. pretty well laid out all the threats we face. i cannot think of a time where we faced more on near-term, short-term, long-term. we are facing them at a time a shrinking budget. the subcommittee has a role to play. i think we all bring unique perspective. i want to have a brief discussion about your decision to end the combat program at 40.

if you look at that program you can see that it was set up to be a 52 ship program, and that decision, the secretary of the navy reported in the press and talked about the fact that some of the lethality was not there. it was almost like maybe the navy spends too much money on ships and not enough on some of the other platforms like the hawkeye command i happen to be a big supporter. but i am not sure it is correct to justify them comparing them to the two other programs. when i read that memo and talk to senior members it seems like there is a question, more of a presence

ship like a patrol board or frigate, does not have the kind of high-tech capabilities in this new world to deal. that is one opinion. he read articles about how important the lcs can be, talk to folks in the asia-pacific and they tell you you almost need those kind of ships. i guess my question is if the navy says we need 52, they reiterate that after they did a year-long study and then your decision as they need 40, the question becomes how does that requirement change so quickly and really get an

analysis that when into your decision? in other words, do you really believe we need less combat ships or spend more money and other areas? is that a decision based on long-term national security or decision based on a short-term budget? >> a decision based on long-term security. a successful program, an excellent ship and will be much better than the mine counter ships and so forth that it replaces. these are critical capabilities. and in general and shipbuilding this budget makes a huge investment and shipbuilding, new ddg, new

submarines, aircraft carriers, overhaul and maintenance, amphibious ships, the 1st ohio class replacement submarine. an enormous amount and the added virginia payload module for the submarine program, so there is a lot that goes into it. the number of ships in the u.s. navy is increasing. the will go to 308. we did want to apply resources elsewhere as to the lethality of our ships. that is critically important.

we not only have enough and more but that they are the best. that is why we are investing in, systems. a new lightweight torpedo, various missiles including the new capability for the sm six missiles, surface-to-air missiles, the stuff that makes our navy the most lethal. so there is balance that needs to be done between high-end and very important lower end. nothing wrong. we like it. our plan is not to buy 52 at 40 which doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the program. >> thank you. >> the gentleman from georgia.

>> thank you. the 2017 will be available to support the policies and the programs and ex-president the american people in november. telling the american people in the world the torture works. things way beyond waterboarding, order our military to take out the families, directing the secretary of defense intentionally kill innocent family members including children that might be suspected terrorists. i find these frightening. do you support allowing us

troops for the intelligence community to use torture to exact information from suspected terrorists. the question is aa fair one. i want to say something about the framing of it. this is an election year. i feel very strongly our department needs to stand apart from the electoral season. i respectfully decline to answer questions arising from the political debate. general dunford even more so

not to be involved in political debates. if you address the question of how we conduct ourselves as a military in the air, that's fine. >> we respect your decision. >> we had discussions on the political nature of guantánamo. a blanket statement as to the military's role of the use of torture? we have had a lot of hearings on this. we went through one administration. as far as i know wei know we are working to stop and ban the use. >> let me answer the question broadly. one of the things that makes me proud is that we represent the values of the

american people. when young men and women go to war they go with our values. this reflects that young men and women bring values with them. when we find exceptions you can see how aggressively we pursue. we should never apologize for going to war with the values of the american people. >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> am concerned with the timeline from the reduction. the timeline for ioc is gone

from 2002 and the reason -- the existing fleet lifecycle cost is going to go through the roof. they are missing out on $100 million or more in reduced operations and maintenance. maintenance. the current ea aircraft are reaching the end of their service life now we are being told there is need for more tech maturation.

the recap will only be an integration effort. explain why this year's year'syear's budget includes additional delays which result in additional expenses and gaps in capability. >> i cannot. i will describe the acquisition. you are absolutely right, the air force does have a continuing requirement for ground moving target indicator radars. a fleet of 16707 based aircraft and have to be recapitalized. you don't need as big physically of the radar.

flew them in afghanistan and have flown them elsewhere. the air force is committed in our budget does lay in the funds for a j*recap. they have not chosen. they want to do a competitive source selection both for radar and integration. they have not picked a winner yet. i have announced competition and then i think it is somewhere between two or 3 billion. so that is the acquisition strategy. i think the thing i can say is we are committed to capability and after recapitalize because it is an airframe now that is decades old.

>> thank you, mr. secretary and you are absolutely right. it is an old platform and the needed platform. my understanding is in the not-too-distant future half of the fleet will be at its full lifecycle and we still do not seem to be on the timeline that would fill the gap. we have had tremendous support in the community for the program and advancing it and moving as swiftly as possible because of deep concern for the troops in the capabilities that they have. any additional support or hurried mess would be greatly appreciated. >> thank you. captor and calvert.

the state program and survivor benefit. on russian propaganda i read your statement and the testimony the russian military presents the greatest challenge. i agree. i want to express my own concern about russia's well-funded and organized propaganda war in ukraine, politics, europe command here in the west. andwest. and i observed the west's approach to confront that force of harvard warfare respond, review what is being done, design a strategy to counter russia and their efforts including assigning a lead.

number two, on a state partnership program it is one of the most effective tools to meet the challenge of facing europe, ohio what does the budget due to facilitate this growing capability that is essentially carrying out activities. thirdly, describe the development and size as a terrorist force in the motivation for what seems to be drawing additional adherence and would appreciate the view of victory in syria. i was recently contacted by a veteran constituent at the 87 level and has pts, gold

star wife due to the death of her husband in iraq. under current law required offset and payments private are from receiving the full amount. let me also state 5 percent of widows remarry. for women with children it just seems there ought to be something going on that would help those who have so nobly served our nation. i want to put that on the record. first on the russian propaganda issue. >> thank you very much. it is related to hybrid warfare.

sometimes that contains what i call the big lie. our principal response to that as a country is the truth, but we have to watch the effect of that. the state department does that, intelligence community does that, but it is related to harvard warfare. earlier we were discussing the european reassurance administrate and we were talking about territorial but another critical part is heartening the states of europe to essentially subversion which is hybrid warfare shades into subversion, heartening them by helping them to defend

themselves from cyber manipulation and from other kinds of insidious influences that we saw precede the russian actions in crimea and ukraine. we are trying to learn from that. that is why hybrid warfare is part of the new playbook. it is not like nato was long ago which was more conventional kind of conflict. we have to expect more unconventional kind of conflict which is exactly what the chairman and i am general breedlove think about and plan for when it comes to europe. i will europe. i will stop there. put in a plug for the state partnership program. we get huge value. the fund them and the people are enthusiastic.

countries tell me all the time much they love the state. it is a great way of tying america to others and complementing with the defense department does institutionally. >> find ways to broaden it. i really hope you can lead in administration effort to be a little more coordinated we need a strategy to combat the propaganda that is floating nations like ukraine. it is is not in our interest to have this continue. >> let me commend for your persistence on this issue. we might come up with a game plan.

>> thank you. for being here. i want to expand on chairman rogers questions regarding china. closing the technology gap between our countries. historically focused internally with the primary mission to protect the communist party and existing government. they have been interested in projecting military power in their own region. i would argue that we would wars not because we are the best trained and most proficient because we are good at large-scale strategic operational and tactical logistics, supply

maintenance procedures and practices, good at getting people and equipment anywhere on the globe in a timely manner and prepping in executing combat service support functions. china is new. china is knew to power projection. i question her ability to conduct these functions effectively. you can have the largest military in the world but if you cannot feed the more supply them they become worthless. can you comment on china's ability to effectively project war fighting power beyond the shores especially with regard to conduct effective logistics supply maintenance operations external to china? i don't think we put a lot of thought into that.

>> congressman, thank you for the question. i agree with just ask is one of our competitive advantages and the chinese capability is relatively mature. however, ifhowever, if we are talking about within the pacific may have one advantage. if we talk about a conflict in the south china sea, the logistics challenge significantly less than that we would have as we project power to places like the middle east a pacific. i do see when you talk about putting equipment at sea and deploying sea -based capabilities and deploying logistics, that takes many years. i was around in the early days. we put equipment aboard a ship how to do that. that was a discovery learning process.

i would agree with the thesis that the chinese have a long way to go in terms of developing power projection. if you look at the investments they are making, attention they are paying, recognition of the comments made looking at capabilities in terms of shortness and integration and have just made major reorganization insight to chinese military which is important to mitigate challenges. do i think they have a legitimate power projection capability? no. twiceno. twice he forces deployed to places like djibouti, the maritime development, aviation, yes. it is fair from my perspective. i look at the trajectory and think it is fair to say

whether they continue to emphasize and make the investments that they are that they will develop projection capability that that is sometime away. what they are developing would provide the capability that is much easier, the capability with interior lines to project power. >> mr. ryan and mr. womack. >> thank you for being here.e tt here, budget, money, and we have priorities and the challenges we face are unlikely have ever had to making sure they offset, so we must be smart and i know we have been spending a good deal more money on health

care. causing us to spend money in the healthcare system. i want to talk to you about the healthy base initiative, the food, the nutrition that we are giving these elite warriors. many of these are diet related and it would be smart to take a holistic approach and say if we know we start feeding soldiers, airmen and the rest healthy food many of these problems can be avoided. you do not have to necessarily comment, maybe comment for the record on a healthy base initiative and what we can do to drive down

healthcare costs to free up money. the defense industrial base issue is home to america makes my doing a phenomenal job and can transform manufacturing. want to make sure we robustly support institutes as we move forward and then just to touch base quickly, the idea of mind fitness training, mind, body, health , how we prepare men and women to function at the highest level possible in using the most cost-effective ways to do it you mentioned liz stanley. she is not doing any more work within the military now and i would like to say we need to reconsider that because that would be a huge opportunity.

leslie youngstown we have the only aerial spray unit and are now dealing with the globals he can issue and ii see that we are reducing rc 13 j request by three and wonder, can you touch upon this issue, keeping troops safe, making sure we have the capacity to address and will the reduction affect our ability to combat this global problem. >> i will be brief and we can get back to you. we spent 50 billion a year on health care. obviously we want to not see

that grow too quickly. keep people healthy by teaching them how or what is healthier. i also wish to thank you. these are public-private partnerships, model ways of doing things high skilled jobs but more importantly industries supporting defense. i will say this and get back to you, i am not aware and anyway the program is at risk as a consequence. we have several hundred. we adjust accordingly. we have not been assigned a role in that.

the department of health and human services. we stand ready to help them with research, whatever they end up asking for. we are on tiptoes. we have not been asked yet but will play a role in fast. >> our focus obviously has been on preventive medicine and protection and force. pregnant women in south america and those kinds of things and affording them the opportunity to leave the area. right now we're making sure particularly in those areas where the virus is present taking measures to ensure. the things that we do, congressman, medical professionals are experienced in good at preventive health.

good at making sure we are proactive. >> the committee would like to commend the department department for the good work that they did addressing the ebola. command-and-control was important. >> thank you. >> thank you for your patients. >> great to see you. i am a big picture guy. it is obvious you are a big picture guy. there is another big picture view that a stark reality. we talk about it a lot, the trajectory of the federal budget and the squeeze that is happening in the fewer and fewer dollars there seem to be for discretionary programs including the defense of our country is alarming to me and we do not

have an answer. that said, as a result of sequestration in the budget control act we have lost a lot of what i believe is writing this capability because of difficult, constrained resource environment and it looks like we are going to be trying to buyback readiness now and deferring our other obligations to the future which this congress is good at. i hate to see the department of defense have to do the same, but that is the reality. i am just going to throw that on the table as a concern from this member of congress and ask you to comment and give us the reality of what is happening in the pentagon and how we

are having to push vital procurement needs to be able to buyback readiness that has been lost today. >> you are right we are trying to give priority in this budget to restoring readiness and modernization. we must balance the two, trying to find money elsewhere in the budget which is why the shape of the budget is different this year. with respect to readiness, each of the services is somewhat different but there , but they are all trying to get back to full spectrum readiness. we are funding their return to full spectrum readiness. the stability that you gave

us is absolutely critical. without it we cannot be on the trajectory to full spectrum readiness. you began your question by talking about everything that goes into it. we understand you have to deal with all of the parts, but we cannot just keep focusing energy on the discretionary part of the budget as has been the case and is why i am glad the budget agreement was reached giving us stability. readiness is a big priority. i could go through the services but do not have time. let me ask the chairman to comment. >> thank you for the question. we cannot buy our way out of the problem.

a couple of things that impact. there is a factor of time. operational tempo has an effect and then the impact with regard to the industrial base and maintenance backlog is a physics issue in terms of getting the equipment fixed and then of course the modernization that has been deferred because the equipment buys are out. but what i would say i try to do is you look at readiness and force structure and modernization and the foundation, my perspective was given the resources we have you have to achieve balance. so you are right you do not want to make decisions for

the near-term that mortgage the future. we have lived year-to-year, just trying to get through the fiscal year and delayed decisions. we reached a point where we recognized we can no longer wait. what we tried to do is achieve the best balance we could so that we were making investments. job number one has been making sure the young men and women have the wherewithal to accomplish the mission. given that we made otherof the decisions that would allow us to balance near-term readiness with long-term modernization and i describe that as wellness. so tough decisions had to be

made and what i would say is we came out of fy 17 balancing the best that we could call that you identified something that is my number one concern. my number one concern is where we will be five to seven years from now, five to seven years from now if we don't start making investments where we can say russia is a challenge, sure it is. but make no mistake comeau we have a competitive advantage. i am not sure we can say that in 2022 and that is what we are most concerned about. >> others have referred to

the enormous contribution of our natch -- national guard. a lot of keen interest. let me know if there is italy's. i would like to talk about the whole issue of deacon flexion with russians and others in the middle east. a lot of open source. we see russian superiority in major portions over syria. talk about what we are doing , getting, letting

russians no where certain operations are occurring? >> i wouldi would love to go in the greater detail privately. in terms of russians and syria they have a memorandum of understanding, the word is accurate and precise. the conflict from what the russians are doing which is unfortunately something quite different which is not what they said they would do. so they are off on the wrong trajectory