a defense. this has been true since castles. this is the way offensive and defensive work. in 1972 when they wanted to limit the offensive weapons of each side, the strategic arms limitation talk they agreed to the abm treaty, antiballistic missile treaty which capped the defenses each side could deploy and that logic held. it helped rain in the cold war and in fact when neither side, in fact, since ronald reagan's day, when he just not only limited but starting cutting nuclear weapons, the arsenals have been coming down steadily. there are about 15,000 nuclear weapons in the world now. there used to be 66,000. in the world without missile defenses, the numbers have been coming down steadily. that will change if you start deploying defenses. how do we know? look at south asia. there's a debate going on about missile defense, both the pakistans and indians are talking about missile defense systems are negotiating with various u.s. contractors to help with missile defenses and what's the answer of

proliferate missile defense. missile defense will save us. you think we have trouble with our european allies now? deploying nuclear weapons in europe and see what happens. remember what happened in the 1980s. this would be a disaster. the course that senator cotton advancing is not only -- will not only fail, it will make our more dangerous. to gain and a whole lot to lose. worked issile defense and that we could do this. awful math of the atomic bomb does not permit any easy solution. you should keep trying. deploy systems that don't yet work? no. not.hould since we began deploying those 2004, it has a 50%.ss rate of only fails half the time. the reason -- and this is really do. to it's hard to hit a bullet with a bullet and it's amazing that we at all even under ideal, pristine conditions. fails 50 percent of the time. kill vehicles don't work very well. it's a fundamental flaw. we know don't work and there's problems even with the replacement kill see.le but we'll it shows more promise. the best record ince 2010, since 2010, we still -- w

been playing around with limited defenses, theater defenses.the place where it will flareup is europe, so-called european phase adapter approach. it was supposed to be aimed at an iranian icbm with a nuclear warhead. that iranian deal has truncated that program to ensure they won't be a nuclear weapon for at least 15 to make 20 years and yet the missile-defense systems we said were aimed at the audience are still going in and out tuesday and. of the russians say, see it's about as. it's been about us all along and in fact you have some senators who want it to be about russia. they want to put missile defenses in europe. you do that and you have just done what's going on in south asia pouring gasoline on the fire and you will see the proliferation of nuclear weapons in europe once again. >> just a couple of factual errors there. that approach started by the obama administration was not merely to handle an iranian missile. there is a approach with the deployment of short range ballistic missile defense weapons and to end in the fourth phase which

missile defense policy. part one will be the gentleman sitting next to me, senator tom cotten from arkansas. part two after his keynote address as well as q&a will be a lively debate on missile defense with joe and rebecca from the henriksen institute. we want to spend as much time with senator cotton as possible so i'll keep my remarks short. washington is faced with severe challenges when it comes to missiles throughout the world. obviously north korea is very much in the news due to the development of the short, medium and long-range missiles and the ability to actually hit the homeland at some point. senator cotton has been at the forefront of advocating for a robust strategy. his remarks will be around 20 minutes. that will open the floor for questions for about 25 minutes. keep in mind during the q&a, the state your name and affiliation as we are on the record as you can see by the cameras. also if time is limited, please keep your question compact and precise. with that, senator cotton. >> thank you a

missile defense review to identify missile defense capabilities in the face of rapidly growing missile threats. the bmdr will be informed by the administration determination to develop state of the art missile defense system, to defend the homeland and our regional interest. we expect to complete it this fall. it will complement the report mandated by the fy-2017 ndaa. the department of defense continues to develop systems to protect vital u.s. national security interests. we intend to stay ahead of the cruise missile developments, sea capabilities to lower cost per intercept and defeat emerging ballistic and cruise missile threats. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. look forward to your questions. >> i thank you. the chair now recognizes admiral syring. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear today. i'll submit my written statement for the record. in lieu of an opening statement, i request permission to play the video from the test last week. >> we would love to see that. >> i will narrate as this goes since it's unnarrated. give the committee an idea of what

missile defense policy. part 1 is with the gentleman sitting next to me on the right, senator tom cotton from arkansas, and part two after senator cotton's keynote address and keynote address is going to be rebeccah heinrichs and joseph cirincione. and obviously, north korea is very much in the news, and due to the short range and ba lis h tick missiles dews due for the fact that it could reach the homeland. and senator cotton has been at the forefront, and his remarks will be around 20 minutes or so, and after that, we will open up the floor for about 20 minutes. in the q and ash state your nam and affiliation as we are very much on the record as you can see from the cameras here, and as time is limited, keep the question as compact and precise as possible. with that, senator cotton, the floor is yours. >> thank you, ha ri, and thank you all for being here to discuss this very important topic. the defense of the homeland is the most basic premise of the american grand strategy and has been before this count

missile defense test. and the white house's 2018 budget request. he was also asked about north korea's nuclear program at this house armed services subcommittee hearing chaired by congressman mike rogers. >> good afternoon. i want to welcome everybody to the hearing today. fiscal year 2018 missile defense programs and activities. we have an esteemed group of witnesses with us today. mr. todd harvey, acting assistant secretary of defense for strategy plans and capabilities. vice admiral james syring, commander james dickinson for integrated missile defense and commander army strategic forces command. and mr. barry pike who has the best accent on the panel. and before i get started, i want to take the chairman's prerogative for a minute. for almost 37 years vice admiral syring has served his country in uniform. many are familiar with him as director of missile defense agency which he has led since november of 2012. i remember the problems with the prior leadership of mda and the devastating impact in 2012. t

, deputy secretary of defense. i would like to knowledge my three children, who accompanied jac, k,a, will, and seated behind me. i want to take a moment to recognize and honor my parents, joanne and michael shanahan. i'm the oldest of three boys. my father michael shanahan and my brothers and i, from as early as i can remember, practiced service before self. my father was an army veteran who served in vietnam. he taught his boys to love their country and value its freedoms. my father served in law enforcement for over 25 years. he taught us to treat people fairly, respect law and order, and the importance of protecting the community. cofounded a food bank in 1982 that is ongoing. today it has distributed over 2 million pounds of food to the needy. he showed us that with initiative and outreach, good ideas can scale to make a big difference. at age 52, my father was afflicted with parkinson's. he battled that savage disease for 17 years before passing. and i never once heard him complain. my father model for us wha

he also knows the department of defense has served adds general manager as the boeing missile defense system and aavailableable in dv so he has has bonn he understands the department. d.o.t. is the largest with almost 3 million people and the largest in the world. he has management. i am confident he will be an effective leader. i will excuse myself. thank the committee for this opportunity to introduce mr. shanahan. >> thank you. we fully understand you have other duties in the senate. thank you for taking the time to introduce mr. shanahan. >> thank you senator for your kind words, thoughtful int introducti introduction. my thoughts and families go out to the seven si sailors killed on the u.s.s.fi strks ztime. i am greatful to the president that nominates the position of deputy secretary of defense. i would like to knowledge. >> me here today shlgs this are. i. i also want to rock cog noise and and nor my parents. i am theest of boy -- i can remember service before self-. my father was an army veteran who served in vietnam. he taught his boys to love their country and value its fre

is tapping into those defenses -- those advancements is the defense innovation. that works with entrepreneurs to deliver these technologies into the hands of the war fighters. can you just say a word about your level of interest in investing in diux and the dod and striving for this innovation? mr. shanahan: i think that's more of the type of work we'll be doing, because what companies -- the smaller companies do is they unlock the creativity of the war fighter. so they get exposed to some initial technology and then they say to these companies, can you make these changes? and the companies can rapidly so advance. the development cycles are very quick. i'm a big proponent of that, but there has to be adult supervision. i can't be everybody -- indiscriminately going to work with these different groups, but it's the fuel for the future. sen. warren: we have an amazing in massachusetts and we need to continue to make these investments in the commercial research and to develop the kind of game-changing innovations that we're going to need. mr. shanahan, in your respo

-- defense? >> rep. thornberry: last fall, the toaker act us to -- asked us look at problems in the military, planes that could not fail, and the number we came up with was about $640 billion for the next fiscal year. president trump one election. navy,ked about a 355-ship a variety of other things. we still think an appropriate number for the next year -- and that is the number we are proceeding with in our markup. it may be at the end of the day, there's negotiations and we don't quite reach there, but our committee does not believe that we can continue to put then dates on the situation when we have so many problems -- band-aids on the situation when we have so many problems test planes, ships, ground vehicles -- and when the threats are multiplying -- north korea, etc. joe: the house committee number is somewhere in the neighbor of $620 billion. the $640 billion figure is $37 billion more than the president's budget. is that a realistic number, given the dynamics in congress? what is the strategy for

we're going to get quickly to meters of the defense budget, defense spending and where the entire debate may go with the release of the president's budget tomorrow. i thought just to get us energized on a good monday morning if you can please join me in welcoming the chairman to the brookings. applause i thought i could ask you to summarize your reform bill last week, any couple or three headlines that you wanted to make off that and one additional aspect to my question might be, i remember when you were here talking about your efforts are senator mccain and others on last year's acquisition form. a lot of whether what you emphasized is look, if it saves money, that's nice but the biggest goal is to get information quickly. i'm struck that you're trying to help the taxpayer with reforms and efficiencies that may save money looking hard at contractors, looking hard at theirs kinds of requirements, logistics matters and how we purchase regular supplies. i wonldered if you could explain the latest reform proposal in the context of how you think about acquisition reform. >> sure. and maybe i

that is part of the in addition will defense agency's charter. let's take back there. >> sir, sidney freebird, breaking defense. the energy part is relatively smart. but it got a lot of excitement and interest around it. what is the actual program there you? hear things about a long endurance uav being the instinct. but that's not what you're buying now. you're buying them as a testing step toward that. >> yes. so our low power laser demonstrator is a stepping stone to that. one of the things is looking at the platform, which we would not develop, we would either lease or have a platform that we would use for testing. and our focus is actually on the laser itself, scaling the laser up in power, reducing the size and making it more efficient so it could be on an air borne platform. that's what we're doing is the demonstration of that, that's correct. >> the budget for the integration transition plan. and what is the thinking right now in terms of boeing's contract expires at the end of '18 you guys say signal industry you want to bring it in house

thanks again to secretary matters and the department of defense. they have, actually, detailed over to us some of their key executives who have worked on their projects and they now are at va and there helping us actually begin this. we had institutional knowledge from them that's considerable. your second question had to do with who at the white house has been working with us. i will tell you that in this decision i not only reviewed large numbers of reports, independent, management's of that we had consultants help us with but i consulted with all the stakeholders that i could. hospital cios and ceos, members of congress and people at the white house to be able to talk to all the stakeholders to make this decision. at the white house, of course, we talk to the president's office but also working closely with the american office of innovation. all those are stakeholders that contributed to my thinking. yes. >> during the bush years when it came to medicaid and medicaid and the obamacare we knew -- [inaudible] >> no guarantees. high-risk process es

with the department of defense item unique identification policy. item 37r-1 by mr. cook requires that secretary of defense to report on mutually beneficial infrastructure projects between military bases and local municipalities. amendment number 38 by mr. shus ter clarifies nothing in the ndaa can be construed as authorizing a base realignment and close your round. amendment number 40 withholds 25% of funds of the office of secretary of the navy until request for proposal for a dry dock in the western pacific has been issued. amendment number 47r-1 authorizes the secretary of the army to sell and convey three plots of land in massachusetts and use the proceeds to fund military family housing and other supporting facilities. amendment number 106 by mr. coffman directs the secretary of defense to provide a report on each military services existing process for stationing, basing and lay down decisions. amendment number 108 by mr. coffman directs the secretary of defense to provide a briefing on the potential of using additional military solution range

but i would tell you in terms of defense of the country that is what the department of defense doesn't to make the department the most we felt it could we is where the focus although a look very closely with the secretary and support his efforts. >> thanks for being so patient with us. are like to go back to the discussion earlier of the signs of our navy fleets. that for structure assessment from last year recommends 55 ships. the president and commander-in-chief says we need to be close to one another. the cbo gives an estimate to require an additional $5 billion per year for ship building. so do you agree in general with the cbo analysis what we need to be spending per year on shipbuilding?. >> i have seen that and it looks right based in my experience. have you heard questioning we know that we're not going in that direction with the proposed budget to 2018 proposal at one point will we spend that extra $5 billion?. >> chairman thanks for asking. my characterization it is the second year in a row that we begin a trend that was eight years in the making and will take several years t

now is better than no defense. what was said back then was, we need to work to improve the system over time. and i've stated openly in this committee and others that i have reliability concerns with the system, that have been systematically addressed in large part over the last i'll say six years, bit by bit. it's not just the interceptor. it's the entire system. we're not there yet. we have continued work with the redesigned kill vehicle. we have continued work with the components of the system to make it totally reliable, to give the war fighter options on shock doctrine in the future. i've been very open about that, that we are not done yet. >> let me ask you about that. the president has talked about an expanded missile defense system. you've talked about in response to one of the questions that, if i can characterize your answer, we may be keeping pace with the threats, but perhaps not as quickly or as effectively as you would ideally like. what did the president mean by expanding missile defense systems? is t

but i would tell you in terms of defense of the country that is what the department of defense doesn't to make the department the most we felt it could we is where the focus although a look very closely with the secretary and support his efforts. >> thanks for being so patient with us. are like to go back to the discussion earlier of the signs of our navy fleets. that for structure assessment from last year recommends 55 ships. the president and commander-in-chief says we need to be close to one another. the cbo gives an estimate to require an additional $5 billion per year for ship building. so do you agree in general with the cbo analysis what we need to be spending per year on shipbuilding?. >> i have seen that and it looks right based in my experience. have you heard questioning we know that we're not going in that direction with the proposed budget to 2018 proposal at one point will we spend that extra $5 billion?. >> chairman thanks for asking. my characterization it is the second year in a row that we begin a trend that was eight years in the making and will take several years t

>> we know the department of defense had a $4.3 billion contract. we have not begun the negotiations. i absolutely believed and i spent a lot of time viewing the materials. it is in the public's interest to move quickly. i believe that we can do this cheaper for the taxpayers by moving without a lengthy process. >> did you drop the ball in the obama administration, if you can explain a little bit? >> the commission on care which is a $68 million study came out of this recommendation. i think people felt that this was a direction that they should be moving in. i will tell you, it is thoohard make decisions. there is a lot of built into keep them the way they are. i think it was really was this administration and the presence mandate to do business differently than allowing us to move forward with this type of speed. >> yes, sir. >>. [ inaudible ] >> two questions. one is the timing and when do veterans experience this. that's what we'll be determining of the time line during this three to six month period when we roll out. everything that i am doing

last year's defense bill instructs the secretary of defense to designate a senior official at the pentagon to have principal responsibility for the development and transition of directed energy weapons systems. as of today it's my understanding this position remains unfilled. secretary, can i have your commitment to meet this requirement and to assign someone the critical responsibility at the pentagon? >> yes sir. thank you for bringing it up, i didn't know i had that responsibility and i'm learning more every day. it will be done, i would tell you right now i've been briefed on the selected energy r&d and advances so i know people are working right now but we haven't filled that, that's my numbered assignment and i will get on it. >> i appreciate that very much, thank you mister chair . >> thank you gentlemen, i want to associate myself with the remarks about our budget picture ecretary mattis had been chairman mccain had. i agree, i think the president's budget is inadequate to the threat we face but the more fundamental problem is the budget control act. and the simple solution probabl

defense contractors amendment number 30 -- 313 by mr. walton to require their briefing on the afghan special immigrant visa program. is there any further discussion on en bloc package number three? >> mr. chairman i would like an opportunity to speak briefly on my amendment on that en bloc package. mr. chairman my amendment regarding the afghan program concerns a matter that is important to me and many others on this committee especially fellow veterans. as ensuring the continuation of the afghan special immigrant is a program. this program of forge the consideration to afghan individuals such as interpreters intelligence sources, the ability to resettle in the u.s. but they do their work with our armed services. bipartisan efforts have resulted in a multiyear extension of the program there last year's nba a subsequently a bipartisan effort to add visas to the f-117 omnibus. we have kept this program alive and functioning. nonetheless i was recently informed that the state department has continued issuing special immigrant visas there ar

as secretary of defense. the fundamental responsibility of our government is to defend the american people, providing for our security and we cannot defend america and help others if our nation is not both strong and solvent. so we in the department of defense owe it to the american public to ensure we spend each dollar wisely. president trump has nominated for senate approval specific individuals who will bring proven skills to discipline our department's fiscal processes to ensure we do so. this first step to restoring readiness is underway thanks to congress's willingness to support the administration's request for an additional $21 billion in resources for fiscal year 2017 to address vital war fighting readiness short falls. your support put more aircraft in the air, troops in the sea and troops in the field. we all recognize it will take a number of years of higher funding delivered on time to restore readiness. to strengthen the military president trump requested a $639 billion top line for the fy 2018

is a two-way street and a benefit for the defense of our own homeland, as well as for the defense of japan. but i don't think that right now we can find -- they are in that top tier of allies, frankly, that we have around the world. >> so you feel, then, that the japan and the u.s. in its partnership for the build up on the u.s. territory is solid? >> i am absolutely certain. i've met with prime minister abe, and he's committed to it, to include helping to fund the move with the marines from okinawa and the other japanese islands down to guam, and we'll continue working it along those lines of a partnership with japan and get the marines in place. >> well, i thank you both for your support and i yield back, mr. chairman. >> mr. conway? >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, thank you. general mattis, secretary mattis, thank you for your clear statement on supporting the audit of the books and records of the financial statements of the department of defense. thank you for that continued leadership. it's important, obviously, leadership from the top. general dunford, i took a quick look

companies to hack back active defense. i hadn't realized before this is apparently illegal today absent a law change? so could you reflect on this proposal and whether it's a good idea or not? >> so, broadly -- i only speak for mike rogers because i'm not in the policy lane but i have an opinion. as an operational commander, my concern is while there is certainly historic precedence for this, nation states have often gone to the private sector when we lacked government capacity for capability. we did that in the revolution war. go out and capture cargos from the royal navy and the merchant fleet. my concern is be leary of putting more gun fighters out in the street in the wild west. as an individual tasked with protecting our networks, i am thinking to myself we have got enough cyber actors out there already. just putting more out there i'm not sure is in everybody's best interests. i would also be concerned about the legal liability you might -- and i'm not a lawyer. the legal liability. i would think that you would have

we require the missile defense to begin development space sensor layer for ballistic defense and $705 million for co-production and co-development of israeli missile defense systems including iron dome and arro aero and produce a modernized schedule that meets war fighter requirements for replacement of the legacy patriot air and missile defense system. i urge the committee to support the legislation and in doing so, make america safer. and i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the rarnging member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cooper. >> in view of the late hour i would just say ditto to my friend, the chairman of the subcommittee's remarks and look forward the amendment process, which we in the subcommittee have tried to foreshorten. without further ado, i yield back my time. >> is there any further discussion of this subcommittee mark? are there any amendments? >> the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks. >> mr. chairman, i'm concerned about the current balance of the funding levels between r&d and procurement for israeli missile defense programs in this mark.

. >> my question is to the minister for the defense industry, representing the minister for defense. will the minimum story outline for the house while the largest military buildup in our peace time history is vital to defeating enemies abroad so we can be safe at home. the minister for defense industry. >> thank you, mr. speaker. thank the member for his question. as members are aware there war two heinous attacks in baghdad overnight and we press our deepest sympathy to people of sprague the family of the australian girl who was mentioned before in question final, who was killed in one of the attacks. is has claimed responsibility for the attack win. condemn these attack inside strongest terms and reaffirm our commitment to defeat is in iraq and prepresent its pred throughout the world. defeat is broad with assure safety of australians at home. that's a reason for the commit tom the largest military buildup in the peacetime history. the government ill will ensure $200 billion investment in defense capability, but our aid here can continue to apply lethal force required to defeat te

>> this past wednesday the house armed service committee worked on the annual defense authorization bill over a daylong session. here's a portion of the session were members debated banning government spending on properties owned by the president. this is about 30 minutes. the gentlelady is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. our president has said that he does not have a conflict of interest. some want to ask my colleagues on the committee what we would call this situation. the president decides to host the world leader at one of his resorts. in addition to the foreign delegation, this event requires the presence of hundreds of use government personnel, everyone from policymakers to security officers, to communications technicians to the officer carrying the nuclear football. advance teams are required to prep the site weeks ahead of the meeting took all the time those people are spending money come meals at resorts, parking at the resort, golf course to follow the present around at the resort. maybe even rooms at the resort. and because the presidents refusal to divest himself of h

as the defense budget was being cut, our debt went up, so it is clearly not the defense budget that is driving deficits and debt, and the other thought i have is we cannot wait to get our budget house in order before we fix the planes and ships and tanks for our people. they deserve to be safe. they deserve to have the best our country can give them now in spite of some of our political dysfunction in washington. that's why we are so committed to try to make that happen. gordon: let me move to a broader issue, which is the building of various strategies that i know that defenseiar secretary mattis is trying to do. i think there is a suspicion, as you are well aware, that these strategies going forward, which will inform if they send 3000, 5000, or more troops into afghanistan, are going to look much different from the previous strategy or the existing strategy under president obama. what is your view on that, but also, what is your rider or upper limit on what you are willing to accept when it comes to deploying more troops and what they want to do? rep. thornberry: i think there is ag

we would dig in defense after defense after defense, and i could not imagine somebody trying to charge one of these things here and plan on living through this thing. the marine corps will try to conduct an amphibious operation against the japanese deliberate defense. there will be 2000 fewer marines in the process of trying to do this thing. they had a two-hour prep for this. at normandy, they are going to have 40 minute preparation for this thing. ,y the time you get to iwo jima the marine corps are requiring three to four days of preparation against an enemy defense before they conduct an amphibious assault. again, at normandy, you are going to have 30 to 40 minutes. you ask yourself, why do you do it this way? big red one has conducted a few of these. they landed in north africa and in sicily. both times, they went in at night, under the cover of darkness. they went in under conditions that limited the effectiveness of enemy fire. at normandy, they did not have that either. they went in just as daylight was breaking. 6:30 in then at 0 morning. the question is, why did they do this?

reducingopposed to defense spending. but it is the duty of this committee to carefully review the budget proposal to make sure our fighting men and women have what they need to complete their mission and return home safely. our military personnel have a vision of america and it is our duty to protect that. this robs from peter to pay paul. 17 -- $70 billion from the state department's everest prevent wars, which is the very kind of spending that secretary mattis says is so crucial to our efforts. includes funding to prevent epidemics like ebola before they reach the u.s. needsnly our military and two, atesources the same time to turkey on foot with near peer competitors, but we should not do so at the expense of americans. and we have not had the courage to pay forvenues these wars as this nation has historically done. -- the bca should be defense and nondefense spending has the unfortunate effect of pitting spending categories against each other. it would be better if we consider the needs of our nation has this -- illi

from kelly to other ceos of defense contractors, more meetings than ever before defense in demand and seeing that in paris. back to you. >> great stuff we look forward to on-going coverage through the day lots of exclusive interviews to come. >>> still ahead on "worldwide exchange." live in cannes, battle for ad space is brutal. who is competing, what's at stake. stay tuned back in a couple of minutes. ♪ anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. northrop grumman command and control systems always let you see the complete picture. and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us. thithis is the new new york.e? think again. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov >>> good morning welcome to "worldwide exchange." up to speed on the market picture. u.s. futures taking a lead from asian and european trade which is positive. decent moves infutures market, particularly from nasda

that's the department of defense. went back and looked at this issue very carefully since becoming secretary, i was able to trace back at least 17 years of congressional calls and commission reports requesting that the v.a. not only modernize its system but work closer with the department of defense. so that went back to 2000. but actually to this date, the department of defense and the department of veteran affairs have gone separate ways. we each have separate systems and each are supporting separate electronic systems. while we've been able to advance at the cost of hundreds of millions to the taxpayers, today we still have separate systems that do not allow for the seamless transfer of information. i just want to expand on that a little bit being a doctor. what we're able to do with the department of defense over years and years, and as i said, hundreds of millions of dollars, we're able to read each other's records right now. that's called intraoperaability. but what you're not able to do is work together to plan

and the problem is not south it in a fully defensive system for the defense of their own people. the problem is north korea, and it we want to stop bringing more into thecapability northwest pacific, we have to address the problem that is a threat to japan, to south korea, and all the other nations, so we have many areas we can work with korea, but at the same time -- excuse me, with china. at the same time, north korea is a problem that has to be addressed, and we can do so. we believe that by now, china is working this issue, but i hope that addresses each of the four questions. >> thank you very much. i will take a quick round. please keep your questions crisp. from india. secretary, i am from india. we have been hearing not just but we talk about rules-based laws being followed. will pullhink china back his militarization -- back its militarization. are we going to lay down a timeline or are we going to keep doing this for the next decade or more? thank you. >> thank you. i will take three more. richard from the u.k. >> thank you. richard lloyd parry of the times. ttis, you m

next week the defense minister and i will host in sydney u.s. secretary of state rex tillerson, u.s. secretary of defense, jen jim mattis -- general jim mattis. for the annual australia-u.s. ministerial confrontations jmin. as aus it has been a principle forum for our bilateral consultations for about the past 30 years. and this ministerial meeting will be the first formal ministerial meeting with the new trump administration. it follows on from the very successful visit to us a dwrail by vice president pence -- australia by vice president pence, the prime minister's meeting with president trump in new york, and indeed there have been 13 ministerial visits to the united states since the inauguration, all high level, all targeted to mats that are will benefit the australian people. mr. speaker, -- matters that will benefit the australian people. mr. speaker, ausmin builds on the strong foundation of this long standing bilateral relationship built up over 100 years and formalized in 1951 with the signing of the treaty y my distinguished predecesso

allies announces plans to expand its defense budget within the next decade stand by to bust starts right now. big task is off and it's pulled the markets with it to record highs the dow jones industrial average added a point five percent to reach twenty one thousand four hundred ninety eight the nasdaq composite jumped one point one percent to six thousand two hundred twenty two dollars standard poor's five hundred index rose point seven percent to two thousand four hundred fifty as of noon eastern time holding at that number means it surpasses its record closing level of two thousand four hundred forty thirty five cents last tuesday technology stocks in the s. and p. five hundred rose one point three percent the largest gain among its eleven sectors to heavy weight examples apple rose two point five percent to one hundred forty five dollars eighty four cents and google's parent alphabet. up one point five percent to nine hundred seventy three forty one overseas now france's cac forty jumped after french voters granted their new president emanuel macron a political majority in parliament

as we shape the 2019 to 2023 defense programming. the department will work with president trump, congress and this committee to ensure future budget requests are both sustainable and provide the commander-in-chief with viable military options that support america's security. in some asian, first i need the bca lifted and budget, not a continuing resolution passed on time and elimination of future sequestration cuts could provide a stable and adequate way ahead on budget. for those who are concerned, we are not asking for sufficient dollars. please consider the following. 2017, as a supplemental, we ask for $30 billion in the congress provided $21 billion for our administration to address readiness shortfalls. second, the fiscal year president trump is requesting 574 billion+29 billion in the department of energy budget plus $65 billion for overseas contingency operations. this is a five percent growth over what the department had for2017 . this request is $52 billion above the budget control acts defense. we have underway at this tim

shea-porter directs the secretary defense to report to the department of defense efforts to develop joint minimum standards for commercial off-the-shelf equipment protective covers to improve readiness by preventing corrosion. amendment number 122 by mr. rogers requires a report on the army contracting command reach back functions. amendment number 140 by mr. bishop directs the military department to report on the amount the military base facilities used by contractors. amendment 144 r-1 by mr. bishop extends the time for the multi-traits dimension project demonstration project through the year 2024 amendment number 145 by mr. bishop improves existing biannual reporting requirements on court dapl level maintenance and repair capabilities by clarifying what specific data should be included in such reports. amendment number 190 by mr. swazi includes a report on the environmental restoration at active installations formal utilize defense sites and realignment and closure locations. amendment number 199 by mr. langevin requires a briefing on how the department of defense can leverage the smar

europe needs to spend more on defense. europe needs to do more to protect its own interests, its own borders, in the ukraine, in the border states. look at what happened to syria with a solid driving out the millions of people who became refugees, and so on and so on. europe needs to do more. that has not changed through anything mr. trump has said or missed merkel said. -- mrs. merkel said. america needs to have europe watch what is happening -- the e.u. to watch what is happening in its major market, europe. not having i am about values. forget values. interests. we have the same interests. rieke: but there is all those issues of climate change, trade. there are so many in this globalized world, so many issues where it would be highly dangerous as america gets more and more protectionist antron trump goes forward with his america first strategy. that would be a loss for americans and europe. >> there are a lot of voices that theactly that, united states cannot pull out of its agreement, needs to stay engageged, will stay

and investing the defense dollars into addressing budget shortfalls of the past. by recruiting and allowing transgender individuals to serve openly in the military, we are suggesting taxpayers to high

we would did in defense after defense. i could not imagine charging one of these things and plan on living through this thing. will try toorps conduct an amphibious operation against japanese defense. they will be 2000 marines in the process of trying to do this thing. they had two hours prep for this thing, two hours. in normandy they will have 30 to 40 minute preparations. by the time you get to iwo jima, the marine corps are requiring three to four days of preparation against enemy defense before they conduct the amphibious assault. in normandy you have 30 to 40 minutes. you ask yourself why you do it this way? korea --ained in north north africa and in sicily. both times they went in at night under the cover of dark. they went in under conditions that limited the effectiveness of enemy fire. at normandy, they did not have that. they went in just as daylight was breaking. 06:30 in the morning, that is when i went in. the question is, why did they do this? they have the amphibious marine corps, the british doctrine, and

the rotten truth is there is a revolving deal between the defense contracts in the defense contracts.paid $242,000 and up to $500,000 in stock options by the company general dynamics that builds tanks and submarines. he also received a $20000 speaking fee. he is now secretary of defense where he has authority over the department nearly $600 billion annual budget. then there is john kelly he was paid $166,000 as an advisor to a company that gets 96% of its revenue from government contracts and which was recently selected to train immigrations and customs enforcement. he is now secretary of homeland security where he oversees ice. whwhile they were required to sp down from those positions before working for the government, it's typical. these defense companies have been built on having friends in high places. william lynn has made his way through the revolving door three times. he is currently the ceo of the defense contractor leonhard leonardo drx. from 2009 - 2011 he was deputy director where he saw the oversaw the annual budget. before that he was in charge of government operations a

the office of secretary of defense. multiple degrees from m.i.t. and a masters from george washington university. ladies and gentlemen, it's my pleasure to introduce the moderator for today, mr. john conger. sir, the podium is yours. [applause] we doing today? it's a little warm. we are going to keep the door open so the airflow is ok, but we are going to get background noise. that's the trade-off you are all going to have. thank you for being here for what i hope is going to be a pretty enlightening discussion. you heard the reference to how timely this was. i want to thank president trump for making news last week on this topic. we did not plan that in advance. nonetheless, as we go forward with the change in from president obama to president trump, the apparent changes in opinion on climate change, we cannot help but wonder whether this topic is still won the dod is going to care about. whether this was politics at the beginning or whether it is a national security issue that and theod interest impacts of climate cha