tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN February 19, 2016 2:03pm-4:04pm EST
frame to develop new weapons that place adversaries at risk including the next generation land attack weapon, the offensive antisurface weapon increment 2, standard missile 2 improvements, tomahawk upgrades and enhanced lightweight torpedo capabilities. the fy 17 budget request also provides substantial investments to modernized systems to continue to overhatmatched a varies. the consolidated afloat network and enterprise services program advanced to outpace the threat. canes provides all information networks including cyber security. it has been installed on 25 ships to date, 12 installations on in progress. this budget funds an additional 10 installations. upgrades to our surface ship warfare systems which provide detection and protection from antiship missiles. this advanced capability is
integral to our warfare dominance. the fy 17 budget provides $275 million for procurement and $76 million in research and development. the marine corps continues to balance ground equipment procurement and future development to ensure marines are supported in the current fight while modernizing to dominate future fights. the fy 17 procurement marine corps budget of $1.4 billion funds major programs include being the ground air task oriented radar and the joint light vehicle. fy 17 procurement of ammunition marine corps funding of $337 million buys vital ammunition for the war fighter, including $66 million of funding that replenishes weapons used in ongoing contingency operations. in the research and development appropriation, science and technology funding remains steady at 1.3% of the total budget across the fit-up. the other end of the r & d funding spectrum we have several programs transitioning out of major r & d investment into
procurement, including the advanced missile defense radar and the ch-50k helicopter. in areas of ship building, aviation and unmanned system, the navy's top programmatic priority where fit-up r & d investment of $3.9 billion leads to develop of the first boat construction construction. in aviation the f-35 will maintain the f-35 until 2018. in unmanned systems the unmanned carrier launched airborne surveillance and strike will be restructured in fy 17 to bring high-demand fixed-wing capabilities to the carrier air wing in the mid 20s including intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and targeting. limited strike, and tanking. this program increases air wing capability by freeing strike aircraft in combat missions,
fighting strike fighter fatigue life while enhancing the long-time endurance capability of air wing. the fy 17 request also includes $150 million for technology maturation in unmanned under sea vehicles to increase endurance, payload hosting and payload delivery capability. the marine corps and major r & d initiative continues to be the amphibious combat vehicle. two vendors were awarded in the first quarter of fy 16. the department continues to prioritize funding of cyber capabilities including continued emphasis on cyberspace operations, training and equipping cyber mission forces, investments in cyber science and technology, and information assurance activities that strengthen defense of our networks. the navy stood up in 2015. navy cyber security division to provide a strategic approach to the cyber security and oversea the cyber resiliency
investments. this budget includes an increase of $370 million over the fit-up across a spectrum of cyber programs including to significant improvements in the department's cyber posture. to address the imperative to increase agility, the department proposes in this budget a single streamed line department wide approach to innovation in a rapid prototype program that will field urgent technological advances to the fleet within 24 months. we intend to work closely with the congress on a framework of governance and congressional oversight that ensure effective and efficient use of the rapid prototyping funds. budget provides $55 million in fy 17 for the rapid prototyping initiative. finally, the navy continues strong r & d investment in energy initiatives to provide a more energy efficient and operationally effective navy and marine corps. the fy 17 base budget request funds facility sustainment at 70% navy, 74% marine corps,
taking risk into our infrastructure in order to meet the fiscal constraints. down from 85% navy, and 84% marine corps in fy 16, this sustainment funding will be prioritized to preserve the service life of our mission critical facilities and key facility components across the services. in depo investment the fy 17 budget exceeds the 6% legislative requirement. 7.1% is provided across the shipyards, fleet readiness kern centers and marine corps depos. the department continues to pressurize military construction in order to meet fiscal constraints limiting projects to the department's most critical needs. fy 17 request funds 36 projects, including 33 baseline. these include key quality of life initiatives, paris island and unaccompanied housing at
port ship naval yard. a tritan u.s. mission control facility and an f-35 maintenance hangar at marine corps station buford. new electrical transmission lines in guam. however, three fy 17 guam projects are deferred due to fiscal balancing. the ioc of the marine course in gu -- corps remains unchanged. in family housing the budget supports operations maintenance and leasing of 73,000 units worldwide. so wrapping up the overview, overall this budget provides the investment required for the navy and marine corps to execute the department's mission guidance. in a challenging fix cal context it reflects the best balance of investments across people, presence, readiness and capability. across the full scope of the
request, we emphasize innovation and reform to sustain advantage, accelerate learning and strengthen our team. in making the hard choices and allocating risk, the request fields a larger fleet, a more sustainable deployed and navy marine corps presence and improved capability. this completes my overview and we look forward to your questions. >> hi. with u.s. nay val institute new. i wonder if you could talk about the cruiser modernization plan. will they be kept until they're needed on a one for one replacement. how this decision fits in with overall efforts to achieve both more ships in the fleet. >> addressing the latter part first, it clearly is one of our hard choices that reflects the fiscal pressure that i talked about in the budget year in particular. but it has a number of compelling elements to it which
drive our consideration of resubmitting this to the congress. >> the two four six plan, the prior plan which was being executed, would have brought in two more cruiser to fy 17. this plan bracically brings in those two plus an additional five. it provides by doing that it provides some flexibility to your question on when within that period, that phase modernization period, they'd be inducted into availability. that's advantageous because it helps us level load the industrial base and address as there is peaks and dips in the repair industrial base, that these ships can be essentially adjusted to come into that period. long-term plan in fact would have them continue to have as a one for one replacement as the oldest 11 cruisers were retired. one of these phase modernization cruisers would then many could out. the department leadership has spoken very clearly about the commitment to bringing these
cruisers back into the fleet because we have this important requirement for air defense commander capable platforms, one per carrier strike group, into the 2040s. so the evidence of that commitment is the $500 million that are invested in this budget to make the fy 17 plan work. as part of the legislative proposal the department is proposing essentially increased congressional oversight that would be applicable for any changes to the status of these cruisers in terms of activation. was that helpful? >> it was funded through the funding you've gotten in the past or is there a new line for this? >> it's a combination. it continues to use the funding that's been enacted before. in this budget, to execute this plan it funds additional money across modernization and sustainment. >> last week the secretary announced $40 billion across the
fit-up, $8 billion in '17 to beef up underwater capabilities. can you point to anything that benefited from that increase that wasn't part of the plan? as you said that's embedded in your plan. >> things not embedded in the plan was the ohio replacement funding in fy 21. virginia payload module as well. you look at those numbers compared to the prior year that's incrementally above as well. unmanned underwater vehicles. i talked about the $150 million in the budget year. but across the fit-up as well. this is a substantial investment. it is really to build on the operational deployment we had last year of submarine unmanned underwater vehicles there. so those would be a number of elements that reflect increased emphasis in this budget. >> he also acknowledged $2 billion to buy 4,000 tomahawks. i found 1 00 across the fit-up. what happened there? >> i can't speak to the factoid
that you described. >> factoid? $2 billion? >> i'm sorry. this is what is in our budget so i can talk to what is in our budget. >> on vpm and the sea bars, if i remember the term correctly, there's more money for vpms. how many more virginia class subs over the history of time actually end up getting vpms or just simply shift the profile to the left, and if so, how much? sea bars did you mention that would have a striking ability because i haven't heard that before. >> virginia pay load module profile is the second fy-'19 boat and then every boat thereafter. there's the change there. >> before it was -- >> i believe it was one -- so it's an increase from one in the prior fit-up. and your question on sea bars was on whether it had limited strike. exactly right.
the real value of this restructure is that it incrementally gets at the manned/unmanned interface and operation on the carrier deck in the air wing by the mid-'20s and brings these highly required capabilities, yes, limited strike, isr and t and mission tanking. it's a smart acquisition approach to incrementally burn down that risk and we'll continue to look at developing additional capability. >> how different is that from what you envisioned for? >> u class i would cite as main difference was penetrating strike, non-per missive isr. it was a much more aggressive increment of capability just to get that platform. at the same time as that was going to be platform to develop the learning, how to operate unmanned off the carrier big deck.
this is a quicker mid-'20s ioc and get experience while we build the capability as well. >> on the sea bars, you evidently measured raq 25. could you explain that. q 25, it's an unmanned aircraft. a is attack. r is reconnaissance. but it is called sea bars, the carrier-based aerial refueling system. so there seems to have a certain identity crisis and i would like you to say what is the primary mission of the first iteration of this aircraft and also can you explain -- the r & d funding drops to about one-fifth of the previous year's rates. $435 million down to $89 million. >>. are a kwchq is the same class y picked up. there's no change there. essentially has picked up in the current iteration as this moves forward with the same designation. absolutely, the budget documentation for the carrier
based aerial refueling system, i would cite all those requirements, all those capabilities. the mission tanking is going to be critical to make the air wing more effective in delivering projected power forward. but the isr and t long endurance will be critical as well. limited strike as a function that has value. so, it's the total package of those integration of required capabilities that's being sought. the funding profile reflects the change in the restructure from where u class was in last year to how this program will be executed going forward. >> you don't need any more money? what's your anticipation for next year's level? back up to $400 million? >> i won't project or speculate on what next year's budget will be but it's fair to say as this now accelerates this restructure
that there will be a higher fidelity profile based on that work. >> thank you very much. i wanted to ask you lcs when the secretary of the navy negotiated with the shipyards in 2010 to do a dual source program there were some significant savings. as you get ready now to select down to single source, what are some of the potential cost implications? do you have some thoughts on that? >> there's work to be done but ate great question. certainly underpins the long term navy strategy of injecting competition and getting savings to the government through competition ship building. i think the competition it's fair to say is going to drive some significant savings to the department as well. in terms of how after that initial block buy of frigates,
how that plays out, i won't speculate. as you know, the navy's approach to acquisition puts a premium on competition and created tremendous value for the taxpayer. >> does that mean higher costs? >> say the question again. >> having a single source instead of a dual source doesn't that increase the cost. >> there are so many factors i wouldn't make a blanket statement like that. i would just say again our acquisition approach -- if you look at ship building overall, the margin of ship building, compared to other defense industries, you'll see the value of the way the navy buys ships through a competitive approach. >> lcs memo a couple of moments ago secretary carter directed the navy to either maintain or increase key munitions production. but as he said there's a modest increase in '17 and a pretty big drop-o of across the fit-up. how did you prioritize on how to
ultimately become a bill payer. >> if you look at the details of munitions and we'll take you through some details after this session, there is focus on increases in specific munitions, some aviation missiles and tactical tomahawk. you also see not in the wpn charts but in the ind i alluded to. strong investment in future missions. so that's essentially the prioritization, but it clearly reflected some of the hard choices and the fiscal pressure as we allocated risk to get the best overall balance. >> admiral, the navy was headed to 330,000 in strength.
it's now looking at 322.9. seems to be going down from there. what drove the change in direction? and i guess what do sailors need to know about their jobs in the future. >> that's a great question. thanks for asking that. sailors need to know on the deck plate level, hangar deck of our squadrons that we sustain, as i talked about here, and on the slide, the 92% fit, 95% fail. at the deck plate level, we have a strong commitment to sustain the same good manning we have now. i also mentioned the fact that the officer manning increases as well. the reductions, the main drivers that you saw number one is the deactivation of carrier wing 14. that's going to be done through natural attrition. those sailors and those officers will have, be strongly focused on making that ease of transition as they move elsewhere into other squadrons. the other main driver of the end strength reduction was this innovative approach to ready, willing and learning. it's important to note that's
not units. those are savings in what's known as an individual's accounts. individuals that are in transit, in school houses through this very focused approach, mobile learning, distribute learning and it's not, you know, it's not the old computer base training, not clicking through a powerpoint. it's new content. it's gaining technology. it's use of afternoon lsh use of avatars. getting them to the fleet and chief properly trained. pilot program right the bottom line at the deck plate level, equal or improved pose -- posture in terms of manning and through efficiencies and responsible decisions, the proper and best use of resources. >> that's all the time we have for questions. thank you. >> thank you.
supreme court justice antonin scalia's body is lying in repose today in the court's grand chamber. he passed away last weekend at the age of 79. the public is allowed in to the viewing. c-span has live coverage throughout the day. it will last until 8:00 p.m. eastern. justice scalia's funeral, by the way, is tomorrow. c-span will once again have live coverage of the funeral mass at the catholic basilica here in washington, d.c. vice president joe biden is one of the dignitaries attending. you will be able to watch it live tomorrow morning starting at 11:00 eastern. coming up tonight here on c-span3, we're showing you american history tv in prime time. it is the american historical association's annual conference with panels on the history of the death penalty, the 1916 election, and the history of terrorism. that's tonight here an c-span3 at 8:00 eastern.
c-span's coverage of the presidential candidates continues this week with campaign events in south carolina and nevada, leading up to the south carolina gop primary and the nevada democratic caucuses on saturday, february 20th. our live coverage of the results starts on saturday at 7:30 p.m. eastern with the candidate speeches and your reaction to the results on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. this weekend the c-span cities tour hosted by our charter communications cable partners takes you to greenville, south carolina, to explore the city's history and literary culture. on book tv. >> in 1939, september of 1939, when europe went to war, our allies primarily england and france, looked to washington, d.c. for goods and materials that they needed. so washington, d.c. looked down to the textile capital of the
world, and all of a sudden government contracts came funneling in to this area asking the mills here to begin producing for the war effort, initially for our allies. then of course for the united states as well. >> and on american history tv -- >> so we're standing right here. this really was a pretty nasty spot. it is hard to believe now looking at it one of the best parks in the country. but this really was a very depressed, nasty place. and it's a great story of how a community can get behind a park and start to appreciate and cherish its river and its waterfall again. >> watch the c-span cities tour saturday at noon eastern on c-span2's book tv. and sunday afternoon at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span3, the c-span cities tour, working with our cable
affiliates and visiting cities across the country. the missile defense agency director updated reporters on their department's budget request. president obama unveiled his 2017 budget request of just over $4 trillion last month. including in the budget is the pentagon's proposal of nearly $583 billion for defense spending. this is 35 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. i'm going to just go through the highlights quickly and then i'll get right to your questions. today we're here to brief our budget request of $7.5 billion in fy-2017. in the budget we really continue four main priorities. the pv-16 strategy in the '17 request. increasing the capability of gnd while increasing gbis to 44 by '17.
preserving the homeland and regional missile development and capabilities. from october 2014 to the present we've executed 20 flight tests. let me give you a few highlights on gmd in particular. the request for gmd is about $1 billion. it continues to support the efforts to go to 44 gbis by the end of '17. it funds the gmd flight testing in support of all the intp which is the test requirements, increases the liability funding and continues the gmd fire control and kill vehicle software testing. in addition we continue on with are the rkv program in requesting $274 million for that continuance and flight test is still scheduled in late 2018. we'll begin deployment that in the 2020 time frame and undertake the other gbi improvements that we've briefed in the past. continue reliability improvements, obsolescence mitigation, technology modernization. everything we briefed last year
continues this year in those important areas. shift gears in to epaa. phase one was deployed in 2011. we declared technical capability of epaa phase two in december. it is over to the war fighter at this point for testing, training an operational acceptance. we continue to support epaa in phase three in particular, $630 million towards epaa phase three to include the second aegis in poe land. we anticipate beginning construction in poland in 2016 with a ecd by the end of 2018. we continue procurement of missiles, continue to deliver missiles to the fleet. we continue the development at a pace of $106 million and that program went through two successful flight tests in 2015. with two intercept tests scheduled later this year and then another intercept test scheduled in early '17.
for thad, one unit is deployed to guam in 2013 in response the north korean threat in the pacific area of operations. we continue to procurement of thad equipment including 24 interceptors for a total of $370 million request. by the end of '17 it will deliver 61 additional interceptors to the army by the end of 2017 for a total of 205. shift gears to sensors and space. continue work on deployment and testing and sustainment of the radars. the air force uewr, total of just under $500 million is requested in this area. continue to support the sbx at a pace of request of $70 million. continue to move forward with the long range discrimination radar program in alaska. we've requested $162 million for that effort and requested
another $155 million for phase one of the mission control facility and radar foundation in fy-'17. follow that with a phase two request of $150 million for the rest of the project. the space program we've talked in the past by the space kill assessment. that experiment planning going well and focus area in the 2014 authorization act, we expect a launch the sk network in fiscal year '17. $20 million requested in that area. very important area. for ctb and cyber, $430 million requested for ctubc. this gives us the capability and five fold increase in the defended area in particular and allows us to field the functionality and support of phase three and important engage capability. continue to integrate and plan
for and fund a-25 which is the spiral that will bring in the long-range discrimination radar. cyber operations program, i just want to mention because of its importance. we continue to work hard in this area as well as other tests in general service systems. several initiatives that we got going, computer network defense certification. credit activities. cyber monitoring, response team continues to pay great dividends. we continue to focus on discrimination across mda, across all of the elements of mda, and that request has continued in '17. just a word about advance technology. continue down the path with important laser technology development and the experiments and testing that are going on in particular at the laboratories and have now broadened into asking industry what we can do
in this area. laser technology maturation is critical for us in terms of not only discrimination but getting to concept feasibility point on this intercept. just a word on mokb, a multi-object kill vehicle program, we've got $72 million in '17. not a full program we're continuing to refine the industry concepts in this area. and evaluate the future program based on those concepts. one final word about international, continue to support the development of all of the regional defense capabilities which are so vitally important, expanding our work with international partners. i won't go into specifics. but a lot of progress has been made there. a word about israel and our continued long standing support of their cooperative programs including the development of upper-tier interceptor and
aerosystem improvements and finally continue the previous efforts in co-producing the iron dome defense system in the '17 budget. those are the highlights. i wanted more importantly to get to your questions. i think we have handouts that describe in more detail but i'll be happy to take your questions. yeah. >> i wanted to ask if the president's budget included anything for thad extended range, you know just given what some of the evolving things are happening in the pacific, if there's any speeding up of that possibility? >> there's not a speeding up but a continuance of the work we started last year with concept developments and not only for that system but other systems as well that are important for that region and other threats we're concerned about. >> are you still on track for 2025 deployment time frame for that? >> that's the notional time frame that a future e.r., if it
was approved, program would deliver. it is about a ten-year development program. 7. >> korea as far as the republic is concerned after the launch, i asked peter cook, your ground space systems had one successful intercept incident in 2008. you had two non-intercept tests. tell the american people why they should have confidence in this system given it's had a spotty record albeit successful intercept in june of 2014. what gives you confidence, what gives you some concerns and i have a follow-up on the kn 08. >> sure, if i can expand the one for three back to the mid-2000s. and actually quota four for seven intercept test record, since the mid-2000s. on the fielded versions that are available to war fighter. ce 1s and ce 2 versus.
we're really 1 for 7. and it's not just flight testing that helps us inform the reliability number that the war fighter uses to inform how they fight. there's also ground system architecture improvements that have gone on, and the work, more importantly, most importantly in terms of the discrimination efforts that we focused on to take the system from a simple threat capability to a much more complex threat capability that coupled with the reliability improvements that have been on a steady glide slope to improve the program since a couple of years ago gives us confidence that we're on the right path. the flight testing record isn't where we would like it to be. but the failures that we've had have been very simple. mechanical, vibration of the imu, and literally electrolyte leakage from a battery. we're not talking about the science and the algorithm and
the hard part of hit-to-kill systems. we're talking about simple corrections that have been found in flight testing and corrections have been made and flowed back to the fleet. we've learned a lot from the flight testing, but we've also learned a lot through extensive ground test being that we've done. i'll speak for the war fighter. i think he's testified he's completely confident in the system and very comfortable with the path we are on with improvements. >> he alluded to it it could be a direct threat to the u.s. if in fact you can feel it. what's your understanding of the status of that missile because you're designing a system to conquer it. >> sure. the efforts that we have focused on specifically since back in 2013 when secretary hagel made the decision to go for that very threat in terms of where we saw
the numbers progressing, and where we saw the capacity that we need to defeat the potential inventory that they may have. of kno 8s. the second part of that equation is and i'll just reiterate they never successfully or attempted to flight test it. and flight testing an icbm is much different than flight testing what was demonstrated on sunday. not that what they did on sunday was not provocative. it was. disturbing, alarming, but everything that we planned and have been supported by the department have been to stay ahead of that very threat, across the kill chain. and i'm very comfortable that we're one ahead of it today and the funded improvements keep us ahead of it on where it may be by 2020. >> you alluded to the lock wire here.
zip and zap there. how are they improved or not improved? >> have gotten a lot better. we've seen a marked improvement in their efforts in this area. we continue to focus down at the subcontractor third and fourth tier level and continue to ensure we're passing the same quality rigor down to that lower level of all the suppliers. as you know there's many on the kill vehicle, and it's a constant focus. yeah. andrea. >> just want to follow up in terms of this changing scenario with korea, with north korea. there's been some discussion that admiral harris has acknowledged about, you know, making the test site in hawaii a permanent facility or an operational facility. can you say a word or two about how those discussions are going
and also is there some need or some discussion about adding interceptors even beyond the 44, moving to a higher number in california where, i believe you only have three interceptors now, you know, given the shock doctrine and the concerns that, you know, still are not completely resolved because you haven't gotten all the fixes in? >> sure. i'll take the first one first. the aegis is a short discussion. i have personally spoken to admiral harris about that last week. as a combatant commander his job is to continue to pursue as many tools in his toolkit to defeat the threat that he sees coming. that said, this facility was built as a test facility. and nothing more. but the question and his desire and it's a logical one and what
it could provide in terms of sensor or engagement capability. again we've not made any movement or decision on this. i would, i would characterize it as we're discussing and considering options. but, again, you know, it was built as a facility and nothing more and before it transitions beyond that you have to see a whole department agreement and approach on that. [ inaudible ] >> i don't have a cost. there are many different levels of capability that could be considered. >> [ inaudible ] >> i'm sorry can you repeat the question again. i got more on the west coast. the answer is no. 44x17. as you know, the effort on the kill vehicle on the redesigned kill vehicle is
progressing and is far future, beyond the c2 block 1 which we'll test later this year in terms of what we plan to do with that kill vehicle back to the ce 1 fleet and then any more beyond that i think you would see us requested in that design. we continue to, in the new design if we were to go beyond 44. the program plan is 44x17 with back-fit capability with the rkv to get the ce fleet recapitalized. would say the third thing i would answer is environmental studies that are going on with the east coast site continue and you'll see us come out with the final eis by the end of this fiscal year. but, again, no decision has been made on that and it's only
preparatory environmental work that we've done. >> is the system being considered for foreign military sales? the last congress inserted language seeking an explanation of the obstacles to something like that for, say japan. >> yes, it's being considered for foreign military sales. i don't want to get out in front on policy decisions. but those countries have expressed interest in it and i'll just leave it at that. >> thank you. >> yeah. >> how much money has been requested for rdt and e work on laser systems and are there any milestones ahead for fy '17 or later on in the fit-up? >> i'll have to buck it and get back to you on total number for lasers in particular because it's broken down in many
different lines here. but the request and really our focus on lasers continues down the path of scaling up in power, scaling down in size for both the discrimination first mission that we see and potential scale up to a high powered laser some day. so we're focused on several different technologies in this area. we brought industry in and asked them to help us with their thoughts on concepts of potential applications. there's been a lot of work, great work done in the services on this in the army and air force and navy in particular, but for our application we're talking about the need for a much smaller but at the same time for some applications much
more powerful. and it's not the same science in that problem. it's a big focus across our request this year as it was last year. the last thing i would say is the testing that we're doing with the reapers and the unmanned aircraft in particular is not just lasers but it's u and ir sensing capability which you need to go with the laser to provide the initial cue. big focus for us in terms of where we need to go with that capability. yeah. >> i wanted to ask an additional question on thad given that it seems like there's more serious discussions in sending thad to south korea. so, with that possibility now, is there more discussion or talk of -- you know there's still a requirement for nonthad batteries but only seven
budgeted the last time i checked. so will we potentially see a plan to actually buy eight and nine now or what's the discussion behind all that? >> so, seven fully funded, seven to deliver by 2018 to the army. interceptor procurement through 2021 at over 400 interceptors total. we continue to discuss with the army that requirement and when it would need to be fulfilled and what the budgeting year would be for that. it's not off the table in any respect. but not included in this year's budget. yeah, tony. >> how many ce-2s or warheads are in the field now?
they are going to go to 44 by 2017, but how many now, roughly? >> i'll try to keep it unclassified. it breaks roughly one-third/two-thirds. based on maintenance we always say there's 30 but it can go up or down one or two total and then you'll see us as we go to 44 that mix will be a higher percentage of ce-2s. >> 30 to 44 by the end of '17. incrementally adding. >> we're adding -- we're going beyond 30 every month between now and the end of '16. i think the number is 37 by the end of '16. and then 44 by tend of '17. so you're going to start to see that number go up. >> what's the next intercept test scheduled? you haven't had one since june of '14. >> we have learned a lot through our non-intercept test. like the one last week -- or two
weeks ago. i would argue that that data is equally important to any intercept test that we do. the intercept test that we're scheduled to conduct is in november of this year. against an icbm. and that will be the ce-2 block 1 intercepter. >> it's going most sophisticated target ever? >> certainly the longest range target ever that we've intercepted. and i'll keep the other part of that test classified in terms of what we're going to present and what the speed of intercept would be. >> replicating a -- >> replicating the expected range and speed of an icbm. we would be more concerned does it replicate the kn08.
>> i know you're planning an intercept test to test that against an icbm as well? >> not an icbm. >> what is the next test? so if that's proving it's short and medium-range targets, right? >> we're looking at two tests in the '17-'18 timeframe that will test against the intermediate year range ballistic missile that's similar to what we expect from north korea or iran. >> just on north korea, just because it's been in the news so much and we've been thinking about it, do you have any preliminary thoughts now, assessments of both -- the implications are both the nuclear test and this most recent launch in terms of any additional capabilities or additional knowledge that they've gained and what does
that mean in terms of the program here in terms of defending. >> i'll leave others to talk about what the policy implications are of that. i'll talk to you what we're doing specifically and what we planned against that threat. again, i keep walking back to the decision that was made to go to 44 gbis by '17. we were in a steady state effort on this program when epa was born. and there was no planned improvement beyond what was done to just maintain the system. i give great credit to secretary hagel and jim miller in particular and admiral winafeld to have the vision and see this coming. and that decision has enabled us now to be three years ahead of where we would have been if we'd done nothing.
so i've got great confidence in where we are today which is a complete capability against that threat that's never been flighty 2020. i just reiterate to the american people that that foresight has enabled us to build and maintain and improve the system in a big way, can't go into the numbers in terms of where we will be in terms of reliability, but it's across-the-board increase in capability and across the kill chain that gives the war fighter great confidence that we're on the right path. >> thanks. you've addressed the possibilities of an icbm from north korea. could you share any threat analysis you're operating under for the possibility of an iranian icbm? admiral courtney told the house armed services committee that the iranians wouldn't be able to field an operational one until
later this decade at the earliest. >> i'll let the intelligence community speak to that officially, but what we've done is not deviate since, you know, years ago on our path against not just the regional threat that iran poses but the potential long-range icbm threat that they pose. and today the current system would protect against that hypothetical threat. and the improvements that we're undertaking with 44x17 and everything that we've done to field improvements like the ft. drum integrated data terminal, the one that we're going to cut into the architecture this year, gives us that extra communication capability to that exact threat along with all the uewr improvements that i briefed and taken that radar which was fairly old technology and with air force's help upgraded that into a good first step of
ballistic missile tracking and classification capability. and with those improvements and the other efforts that we've made across the kill chain with gmd we're equally postured well for that threat should it materialize. yeah. courtney. >> i wanted to ask you if you believe that your rdt & e funding in '17 is enough to outpace the threats at this point in time and if you have had to take a step back on anything in '17 that you are worried about. >> not in at our request. that there are upgrades and programs that are continuing in '17 that we started in '15 actually that continue to be supported by the department and, you know, i get that r&d question a lot, is, you know, there was something that was
ready now, you would -- you would hear me talking about the need for more r&d. but we're progressing on many fronts right now at a pace that will get us to decision points in a logical, system-engineered, well thought out, well tested, well analyzed pace to inform those future capability increases. and i throw thad-er into that mix or any other capability we're looking at against the hypersonic light vehicle threat that we see materializing in the future. and i'm comfortable that we've got the key decision points laid out over the next several years on laser capability. i'll just leave it at that. interceptor upgrade capability and more sensor capability as well.
and i think that if there was a glaring hole, having been in this job for over three years now, and there was a glaring need like there was in 2013, the department would step up and fund that. i think we've got the right balance. >> overall missile defense funding in the overall defense budget went down from -- to i think 7% to i think $9.1 billion. i know that's not all mda. but what did the -- you know, what -- what went away? what did you have to sacrifice? >> the -- so of the 9 that you see, 7.5 is mda. and our pb-16 request for '19 was 7.8. and that was our share of the
amount that was given to the department below the budget agreement. and i think you've heard maybe of the $22 billion at the department level, our share of that was that $300 million. and where we took risk was in interceptor procurement, thad and aegis in particular. and we looked inwardly and have garnered more efficiencies. i've talked to you about what we've done in the past, but i'm the first to not want to trade immediately war fighting capability when a cut comes down, but there's efficiencies that we've taken across the program. and the test program in terms of becoming more efficient there at a better cost. everybody in the department is challenged that way and those are the -- those are the
trade-offs we made. yeah, back here. >> i think you said the sensor aoa going on right now, but does the budget speak at all to an sts, maybe post-sts? a satellite with maybe an mda payload. >> there's been a lot of studies done on what should be next, not just for beyond -- for us in particular beyond stss but we've proposed ptss several years ago. and we've engaged with the air force and other partners in those studies and partners outside of dod even. and our missile defense function is a big part of those discussions in terms of, you know, if there's a new constellation where does missile defense fit in. and we're there. it will not be an mda centric
satellite system request. and i don't want to get out in front of those discussions. but that's -- that's where we're headed. we've got the right effort in terms of the space-spaced kill assessment which we're getting up on the commercial satellites which is going to help a lot in terms of inform that mission, the kill assessment information that we need and prototype that. and then the work that we've done in terms of some of the reaper work with discrimination and sensors there, you know, eventually you're going to want to get something into space and prototype it. and then i think that will inform what's the long-term -- what's the long-term end state. but i can assure you that the discussion is where does mda fit in with partners in that discussion and that's where we are coming out and through the aoa. >> a follow-up. when do you expect to have a --
or hold a competition for rkv? >> there won't be a competition. we brought the industry partners together -- [ inaudible question ] it will be in the '18-'19 time frame for production. there are a few funded to get us through the test program but the long-term production of that will be competed. yeah. >> israel, there's been two -- there were two memorandums of understanding for co-production in the united states. i think you were executing for david -- for iron dome and david sling last year. roughly where are those? are you as companies now getting shares of iron dome funding? >> there's only one signed co-production agreement today. we're working on the david sling co-production agreement. and we are garnering -- and i won't go into the percent. but it's a not significant, not
small percent of work share that has come back to the united states with iron dome. >> you mean not insignificant. >> not insignificant. and i'm very comfortable that that agreement has panned out not just for us but for israel and the importance of that system. yep. >> one more question. >> let's go here and then i'll take andrea's as well. go ahead. >> doing work right now to upgrade the patriot system or is it in the army? >> it's an army program and army improvements. yeah? >> real quickly on david sling and the funding for israel is in the 125 -- >> that's correct, just over $100 million. >> for the david sling co-production agreement when do you anticipate completing that? and is it not correct that the congress has asked for that to be a 50-50 split on both iron dome and david sling? >> i don't know of that
specifically. there certainly is interest in it. i would guess on the percent. but i can tell you that we're working hard with our israeli partners to come up with the best agreement that we can for us and them. and it's been a very open, transparent discussion, and it will follow the path that iron dome followed. >> so, do you expect an agreement this year? >> i can't put a time frame on it. these things take time. but as you know, david sling was extremely successful at the end of the year in their test series. and, you know, exceeded our expectations and their expectations on its performance so we're very comfortable talking about production at this point. >> so, last year the israelis came back with an additional request after the budget had been submitted for additional missile defense support. do you anticipate that they might ask for additional funding
beyond the level that you provided? >> not to me. that will be a discussion with us and them. and more succinctly between them and the congress and i'll stay out of that. >> but do you know whether that's going to be part of the mou that is being negotiated with israel broadly? >> i don't have the details of the specifics of that mou, and i'd be guessing if i said it was better suited for state department or policy to answer that. thanks. >> thank you very much, folks. don't forget, rick has some hand-outs for you that the admiral mentioned at the beginning. >> thank you. >> thank you. supreme court justice antonin scalia's body is lying in repose today in the court's grand chamber. he passed away last weekend at the age of 79. the public is allowed into the viewing and c-span has live coverage throughout the day. it will last until 8:00 p.m. eastern. justice scalia's funeral, by the
way, is tomorrow and c-span will once again have live coverage of the funeral mass at the catholic basilica here in washington, d.c. vice president joe biden is one of the dignitaries attending. you'll be able to watch it live tomorrow morning starting at 11:00 eastern. and coming up tonight here on c-span3, we're showing you "american history tv" in prime time. it's the american historical association's annual conference with panels on the history of the death penalty, the 1916 election and the history of terrorism. that's tonight here on c-span3 at 8:00 eastern. every weekend on "american history tv" on c-span3, feature programs that tell the american story. some of the highlights for this weekend include saturday afternoon at 2:00 eastern, president woodrow wilson nominated boston lawyer louie brandeis to the u.s. supreme court. he became the first jewish justice to sit on the nation's
highest court. in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of his nomination, brandeis university in massachusetts hosted a panel including ruth bader ginsburg to discuss his contributions to american democracy. then at 6:55 professors joanne freeman who studies early american politics and brian ballow who specializes in the 20th century discuss the evolution of political parties to partisanship from the founding era to present day. and from the 2000 campaign a south carolina republican primary debate featuring texas governor george w. bush and arizona senator john mccain and alan keyes, cnn hosted the event and larry king moderated. governor bush won in south carolina halting senator mccain's momentum and he went on to secure the republican nomination and at 6:00 american artifacts looks at selection of objects left at the vietnam
memorial war. the collection includes about 400,000 items all stored at the national park service museum resource center in maryland. for the complete "american history tv" weekend schedule go to cspan.org. i am trying still to decide which candidate to support. i'm trying to decide between the governors who have executive experience or some of the other candidates like mark cruz and marco rubio. >> and the most important issue to me is national service. there are more than 5 million young americans that are ready to step forward and serve their country for a year with programs like ama maamericorps and the p corps and youth build. president obama's special envoy to the coalition fighting the islamic state brent mcguirk
talked about the u.s.-led campaign. mr. mcguirk was in the region to meet with syrian kurdish troops in rebel-controlled territory. this is about two hours. >> all right. this hearing will come to order. today we will hear from the administration's point man on its effort to combat isis. he is back before the committee again. now, this is an issue that this committee has raised repeatedly since isis first began its -- its attacks. and we began calling for air strikes against isis. so, it's now been two years since president obama dismissed isis as the jv team. today the administration claims its goal is to degrade and
ultimately destroy isis. but it still doesn't have a strategy to get that job done. the tide has not turned in terms of the growing influence of isis. instead, these fighters on the back of pickup trucks, to use the president's term, have grown into a global force, a force capable of striking in europe, in asia, in africa, and, yes, capable of striking here at home in the united states. there are now in terms of groups supporting isis, there are 50 isis-linked groups on the ground in 21 separate countries. and it is everywhere in cyberspace and everywhere in cyberspace it spews that deadly message to kill. ambassador mcguirk just back from the front lines with syrian
kurds will note some encouraging developments. ramadi in iraq was retaken in december. and after some much-needed loosening of the rules of engagement, isis-controlled oil installations in syria has been finally bombed. this is good. but these gains have been too slow to come and too limited. every day that isis makes advances, seemingly unchecked, it draws recruits. it draws recruits to plot new attacks abroad, including the united states. and meanwhile, the iraqi government hasn't been able to deliver as it should. the iraqi kurds, long denied better arms, are desperate. sunni forces, key to any success, do not trust baghdad as the government has failed to include them in their view to include them in the government and to include them in the armed forces in a meaningful way. and across the region the u.s.
is perceived -- the perception there -- is that we're only willing to back nonsunnis. now, this only empowers isis. and militarily the size of the recently announced special operations force to target isis leadership is a fraction of what past efforts have entailed. our air strikes are still only averaging 23 a day, a fraction of what a serious air campaign looks like. in the failed state of libya, where militants don't face a threat from the air, isis has doubled in size. these 6,000 fighters are several hundred miles from europe. they have their sights on libya's oil, a tactic that made it the world's richest terror group, and despite years of warnings about libya's course,
the administration's response has been feeble. in afghanistan, too, isis is spreading. but only recently has the president lifted the rules of engagement that were preventing our troops from targeting this deadly group. last week u.s. air strikes finally destroyed an isis voice of the caliphate radio station there in afghanistan. so, what took so long? isis propaganda operations are in overdrive. they're getting better every day. yet our government's effort to countermessage led by the broadcasting board of governors, remains in disarray. and when it comes to syria, tragically, the u.s. response has been downright shameful. the slaughter goes on. trained and equip failed. in december the u.s. joined russia to pass a u.n. security
council resolution that required humanitarian aid and the end of civilian bombing as part of its plan for peace talks. but rather than stand firm and put pressure on russia to abide by this resolution, secretary kerry pushed the opposition to the negotiating table even as the russian and assad regimes intensified their bombings. and the result is predictable failure. as syria has imploded over the years, rather than tackle the problem, the obama administration has sat on its hands paralyzed by a series of what-ifs. today assad and russian forces have aleppo under siege. they are relentlessly bombing u.s.-backed sunni opposition forces that is critical to the fight against isis. and just yesterday lieutenant general stewart, the head of the
defense intelligence agency, warned that isis will attempt attacks on the u.s. homeland, in his words, in 2016. if we are to truly defeat isis -- and we must -- the half-measures and the indecisiveness must stop. and i now yield to the ranking member, mr. eliot engel, from new york for any opening comments he may have. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, and to our witness, welcome to the foreign affairs committee, special envoy mcguirk. brett, i've been impressed for many years by your record of service to our country. i want to thank you for it. you've notched another remarkable achievement working to negotiate the release of five american prisoners who were wrongly held by iran, and i join the families of these men and all americans in thanking you
for your efforts. today we're glad to hear from you about the fight against isis. the way the organization is adapting to challenges and growing, the united states has spearheaded a coalition of 66 partners with the goal of destroying isis. different countries play different roles, cutting off isis from its finances, stopping the flow of foreign fighters, providing humanitarian support, countering isis propaganda, joining in air strikes, building capacity of fighters on the ground. the shared burden prevents the united states from being drawn into another long war. we must defeat isis, but we cannot and should not do it alone. between 10,000 coalition air strikes and the relentless press of local ground forces we've seen some progress from kobani to mt. sinjr to ramadi, isis has lost a quarter of the populated territory it held in iraq and syria and yet the reality across the region remains grim.
syrians continue to flee the assad regime in droves. assad has been given another lifeline by russia's bombardment of civilian areas, attacks that continue to kill women and children. and isis latches on to the deplorable actions to use for recruitment and propaganda. iraq has also had to rely on shia militants, shia militias loyal to iran. as a result, iraq remains divided along sectarian lines. this could leave the region with the same cleavages that allowed isis to thrive in the first place. the same themes are already playing out in libya and yemen. terrorists love a vacuum. in the absence of real stability, rule of law and effective government, isis will fill the void. focusing on long-running tensions in these countries will go a long way toward denying
isis safe haven. so, today i hope we can have a good discussion on how the united states should continue responding to the threat. how can we stem the growth of isis. how do we stay one step ahead of them. sometimes unfortunately it seems as if we're only halfheartedly going after isis and halfheartedly helping the free syria army and others on the ground. as you know, for many years, three or four years, i have been calling on aiding the free syria army, and i believe that when we didn't aid them, they withered on the vine, and isis moved into the void. i hope that we will be part of a robust campaign, not a tentative one, not one that seems like we're dragging ourselves in, but a robust campaign to destroy isis and get rid of assad. i understand that we cannot do it alone nor should we, and we need our arab partners and our
middle east partners and other partners on the ground, the kurds and others, to help, but i think we have to lead and i think it's important that we do that. so, i look forward to hearing from our witness on these questions and others, and i'm glad that congress is staying engaged on this issue in various ways. another step we can take is push for a robust foreign affairs budget. the president sent his budget request to congress yesterday, and i hope that we on this committee will make all the needed investments to meet these challenges and all our challenges abroad. i hope we will soon take up an authorization for the use of military force which gives the president when he needs to grapple with this threat without running the risk of another full-scale, open-ended commitment of american forces in the middle east. if we're asking american service members to risk their lives in the fight against isis, we should at the very least, i believe, do our job as well. so, thank you, again, mr. mcguirk. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. engle.
this morning we're pleased to be joined by special presidential enjoy brett mcguirk. mr. mcguirk was recently promoted from deputy special presidential envoy for the global coalition to counter isil. prior to these assignments special envoy mcguirk served as the deputy assistant secretary of state for iraq and iran. mr. mcguirk has been a valuable voice in the administration, pressing for a more robust u.s. role. i appreciate that. without objection, the witness's full prepared statement will be made part of the record, and members will have five calendar days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record. so, we'd ask if you can summarize your remarks, ambassador. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member engle, and members of the committee. it's a real honor to be here. i first appeared before you and
this committee in november of 2013 to talk about then what we knew as al qaeda in iraq and the emerging threats which we now know as isil. i've been back a number of times since then including shortly after the fall of mosul. i deeply value the partnership with this committee and i thank you for your leadership on this most pressing national security issue. i was in iraq when mosul fell in the summer of 2014 and the situation could not have been more serious and dire. baghdad was under threat. collapse of the iraqi security forces, seven entire divisions, the situation seemed almost hopeless. we had to build a foundation of fight back and that required a new iraqi government, a better intelligence picture, a military strategy to strike isil and train local forces and a political strategy to reflect the realities on the ground. we also had to build an international coalition from around the world, recognizing that this is a global challenge like none we've seen before. at one point with more than 130,000 foreign fighters from
120 countries from around the world. we acted and aggressively and we're now beginning to see some results. however, while the progress is clear, which i'll discuss, the challenges and threats to our national security interests remain acute. as was stated yesterday before the senate armed services committee, isil remains, quote, our preeminent terrorist threat. how do we analyze isil and make sense of it? only with making sense of it with data and analysis and empirical underpinning can we effectively defeat it. first, its core in iraq and syria, second its networks around the world, foreign fighters, finance and propaganda, and third its affiliates, now of which there are eight. i want to focus in this introductory statement on the core and it's the key. it's the phony self-proclaimed caliphate that isil claims to have. let me start with some facts.
isil has lost 40% of its territory in iraq, more than 10% of its territory in syria. it has not won a single battle since may and as you can see in the map that i have -- that i have projected here, the green areas are areas in which since the summer of 2014 we have now retaken from isil. but the figures, for example, 40% of territory, really does not matter. what is important that is this strategic ground. in iraq, tikrit and ramadi, in tikrit 95% of the population is back in their homes in the city according to u.n. estimates. in ramadi it was the first test of iraqi security forces acting on their own to liberate that iconic city. in syria, it's not just the data it's what's on the map. the green taking away the entire border area which used to be controlled by daesh to the euphrates river. and that border is green because of what happened in kobani. i traveled there last week in northern syria and i was brought to the site of where we dropped
supplies, where president obama ordered an air drop of military equipment and supplies at a key moment in november of 2014 when that battle was about to be lost. i spoke to one of the commanders and he said without the air drop they would have been overrun. it was from the air drop and working with the forces on the ground that they were able to defeat isil, 6,000 isil fighters lost their lives in kobani and expand the presence outward and take away the entire border from isil. it's a testament to the courage of the partners we have on the ground and also the many challenges ahead. i was able to travel to syria because we now have a presence on the ground in syria and there's no substitute for this. having a presence on the ground we gained better insights every day and with better insights we can act with more devastating effect. our better intelligence picture is allowing us to eliminate isil leaders. including 90 leaders including baghdadi's key deputies, the number one leader in iraq, and the number one financier. our heroic special operators did
a raid in northern syria not long ago in which they killed the number two man and in that raid they collected more information and we learned more than we could ever have imagined by isil's financial networks and we pooled intelligence from the department of treasury and the state department and the intelligence community to relentlessly uproot their financial apparatus and that's what we've been doing. isil is now cutting their salaries for their fighters by about 50% and we're seeing the effect they're having by the strikes on the trucks moving oil and on the oil platforms and on the cash storage sites. let me go around the map very briefly if i could, mr. chairman, just to bring you into the overall campaign and how we're approaching the core. i'll start at number one. number one, is a 98-kilometer stretch of border, the only stretch of border that isil controls with turkey. is it its remaining sole outlet to the world. we've worked very closely with our turkish partners including
with the president in the past few months and they're doing quite a lot. they're building berms and increasing patrols and they're setting up risk analysis and conducting cross-border artillery strikes. this is having an impact. it's much harder for isil fighters to get into syria now than six months ago and once in it's harder to get out. that's our objective when they get in, they will never get out because they'll die in iraq and syria. the impact is in the numbers from our intelligence assessments from the summer of 2014, 31.5 thousand foreign fighters now it's down to 21,000 and the tide of that number is starting to turn. we know from their own publications they are telling their fighters don't go into syria, go into libya, that's because it's much harder for them getting into syria. raka remains their headquarters and hub and it remains where most of the leaders are and it remains where the external plotting networks are established, that's why we're
going to work with our local partners in syria, a collection of arabs and kurds, to push on raka and isolate on raka. i'll move quickly in the interests of time over to iraq and i'll skip to number five and mosul. mosul will remain a tremendous challenge. there's about a million people in mosul. it's a politically diverse city and to get it right we have to work politically and militarily hand in glove. when i was in iraq last week we met with iraqi leaders in baghdad and with the kurdish leadership including the prime minister and others and we now established a joint operational headquarters on the map here and that's where we're going to pool sunni fighters, kurdi fighters and with our advisers to plan the liberation of mosul. this will be an integrated campaign across multiple lines of effort. it will not be a d-day-like campaign. it's not going to tart on a date certain because it's already starting. we're already cutting off the
road access to mosul. we're already doing air strikes in mosul every single day and we're learning more about what daesh is doing in mosul that's why we're striking their cash warehouse sites. the campaign has already begun. however, it will be an extremely difficult endeavor and we are not going to put a timeline on when mosul will be liberated but it will. moving south i'll go to number seven which is tikrit. tikrit an iconic sunni city. it was totally depopulated by isil, not only that they killed thousands of people in a massacre known as the camp spiker massacre in the summer of 2014. iraqi security forces with our help were able to liberate the city and most importantly we're not just focused on defeating isil but what comes after and working with the coalition and an international stabilization fund that we did with the government of iraq, and we've been able to return the population to tikrit. the u.n. reported in rome last week at a coalition meeting that 95% of the citizens of tikrit are now back.
we're building on those lessons now. i'll go to number eight on the map which is ramadi. that was the first significant test for the iraqi security forces since their collapse in the summer of 2014. this was an operation done entirely by the iraqi security forces and local sunni tribal fighters and the sunni tribal fighters in anbar continued to grow in number and capacity. we hoove aboave about 10,000 no. we've liberated ramadi but the city remains quite devastated from the fighting. nearly every other home is booby trapped or has ieds and i met with the governor of anbar province and he told me specifically what he needs. wow without getting the counter-ied people back into tikrit, they are booby trapped. and i'll move finally, mr. chairman, i can go through the map in detail in my testimony but i want to point out number 11. number 11 is where you see dark red as we push isil and squeeze them, they will try to fill
spaces in the soft underbelly of syria. palmyra they took some time ago, that's been in the news. but the small drk rark red blot heading towards jordan is what we're focused on. we're very focused on jordan's security. in october the president authorized enhanced military assistance to help intensify the counter-isil campaign that includes $200 million for border security and detect and deter threats. i'll be in jordan next week with a delegation including our overall commander lieutenant general shawn mcfarland to see his majesty king abdullah to make sure they protect their border. that's a very, very brief and quick summary of the most complicated situation imaginable but i look forward over the next two hours to answer all of your questions and i want to close where i began to thank the committee for the leadership you've shown, mr. chairman, and the entire committee on this issue. i value this partnership and now
that we look to accelerate the campaign over the next year, i look forward to the close partnership that i've had with you going forward. with that, i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, ambassador. briefly here, an argument, as has the administration, about the importance of local partners in the isis-held territory. sunni fighters are very important. if aleppo falls as the russians pummel it and as hezbollah and assad attempt to collapse ale o aleppo, will we have any free syrian army partners left? and then the other concern i have in terms of the sunni population is, i understand that the shia-led government in iraq is working to use the justice system to further push out the sunnis. and so if the central government in iraq is unwilling to make the reforms needed in order to create a more inclusive
government and inclusive security forces, what will be left of iraq? and what will be left of this effort to include sunnis in our effort to put down isis? >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. it's a critical question. it's something we work on every day, not only at the local level where the fight against isil is going on, but also at the national level and i'll start in iraq with the government of iraq. iraq just passed a budget with a very important provision, article 40 of its budget. and it allocates 30% of what he called the popular mobilization forces. 30% have to come from provinces that are actively fighting isil and that authorizes almost 30,000 sunni fighters enrolled in a state security services to fight isil. we have almost 15,000 now. and they are being paid. and they're being paid about $680 to $750 a month and that might not sound like much to us, but the rural labor earning for
an average iraqi worker is about $36 per month. the prime minister has put his money where his mouth is. it's reflected in the budget. he tells us every single day he wants to get the local sunnis in the fight and we're helping them. when ramadi fell, president obama deployed u.s. special forces just east of ramadi, in the heart between ramadi and fallujah and we dee ployed immediately and that lhas been success. we are working with three local tribes mobilized and actively fighting isil. we're gaining real capacity in iraq on the sunni tribal fighter side. in syria, mr. chairman, you hit something on the head because what is happening with the russian air strikes is that they're primarily focused on the opposition. and what is happening with opposition forces, we were working with to fight isil, if
you look on this map, just to the north of alone peppo, we we working with local opposition forces to move east to fight isil and that was a very sophisticated endeavor. but as the russian air strike campaign has begun particularly north of aleppo, the fighters peeled off the line to fight the regime advance and this is causing us real problems for the counter-isil campaign. we tell the russians this very clearly, you say you are fighting isil but what you are doing is having a very detrimental effect in the fight against isil. >> thank you. i was going to ask you, ambassador, also, in addition to this job as mr. engle pointed out, you helped negotiate the release of the americans being held by iran and last year the families of these americans sat at this table and three of these families are overjoyed by your work and, of course, we all want answers to mr. levinson's whereabouts. but i am concerned that on the
same day these americans were released, the department sent iran a check for another $1.7 billion on top of the $100 billion that was released. at that time. and i was going to ask you what you knew about that payment. i found that in politics there are rarely coincidences. and a state department spokesman said that iran raised this payment with you as part of the talks on the americans. and iranian commanders called this $1.7 billion ransom, in his words. and as you know, i've submitted detailed questions to the secretary, which we are anxious to receive. >> well, first, we look forward to answering all your detailed questions. this is a very complex negotiation, it went on for 14 months focused on the issue of prisoners. the issue of the hague
settlement was a parallel process. we really had three areas of negotiations with iranians really over the last 30 years. there's been the hague tribunal process and in that process over 30 years almost 4,700 private u.s. claims, every single private u.s. claim has been adjudicated by the hague. those have all been settled. all that is really left is the government-to-government claims and the hague negotiation with the lawyers at the state department doing this, many of them for decades and they'd be happy to come up and discuss with you in some detail, they were negotiating with iranians with a number of issues at the hague in the fall and they came to some important agreements on fossils, on artwork and also the opportunity opened to settle this very important issue having to do with the $400 million fms claim and the lawyers that negotiated they were able to close this out which was very important. and they will be happy to talk to you why this was in the interest of u.s. taxpayers and the united states. we are facing substantial, substantial liability on this
claim. we're kind of -- we're at it as i understand it from the lawyers who negotiated this, we were at the courthouse steps and there was going to be a judgment and it would potentially be in the multiple billions of dollars that we settled on. i know we have our questions and we'll be happy to answer them and the attorneys working on it every day will be happy to give you the details. >> some of the details probably should have been shared with us during the negotiations. but let me raise this last point. i raised libya with you. the new visa waiver law that we passed. you now have a situation of foreign fighters traveling to libya for training. it would be possible under that law to categorize foreign nationals who travel to libya as qualified -- as not being qualified for visa-free entry into the united states. and i was wondering if you were involved with discussions with homeland security or if the
administration was on that problem. otherwise we may find some of the same challenges we found when out of syria through turkey, to europe, we had isis fighters who could have taken advantage of the visa waiver program. >> mr. chairman, i have not been involved in the precise discussions. i am concerned about the situation in libya and i'm sure we can -- >> i'd like to have libya added to the list. >> thank you. >> thank you. i'll go to mr. engle. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. in a recent op-ed in "the washington post", former senior state department officials nicholas burns whom we know well and jim jeffrey, concluded that relying on diplomacy alone will not be effective in syria and said that and i quote them, the obama team would have to reconsider what it has rejected in the past.
the creation of a safe zone in northern syria to protect civilians along with a no fly zone to enforce it, unquote. a safe zone would allow for refugees to have a place to go where they would not be under constant bombardment by assad or russia, and since assad remains a magnet for extremists, i believe the longer assad remains in power, the longer the coalition will be fighting isis in syria. assad's reign only exacerbates the refugee crisis, making a safe zone i believe even more necessary. however, assistant secretary anne patterson said at a committee hearing late last year and i quote her, there is no option on the table or a recommendation by the defense department that does not require a massive, massive amount of air support that would then detract from the effort against isil, unquote. so, let me ask you this, ambassador -- under what circumstances would the administration consider supporting a no fly zone?
what are the challenges in establishing a no fly zone or safe zone? and how has russian military involvement impacted the prospects for a safe zone or no fly zone? because absent a safe zone, i don't know how innocent syrians protect themselves. >> congressman, it's something we look at all the time. we actually have had a number of internal discussions about the possibility of establishing some sort of no fly zone. and you should talk to -- speak with some of my dod colleagues about the details and difficulties of actually establishing it. it's been -- it's been fully looked at. but everybody would agree with you that the situation right now is totally unacceptable. i am leaving tonight for munich where we will have a meeting tomorrow with everybody in this -- this international support group for syria which includes saudi arabia, turkey, qatar, also iran and russia, us,
of course around the table. and there's a recognition that this situation is completely, totally unacceptable. we are very close in vienna not long ago as secretary kerry has discuss thod a cease-fire and we're going to work very hard over the coming days to try to put in place a cease-fire because as long as this conflict is going on it makes my job against isil all the more difficult and the humanitarian consequences of what is happening is just truly atrocious and terrible. so, we have to get to a way to deescalate this underlying conflict, to deescalate the underlying conflict there has to be a political process that can ultimately lead to a transition in damascus. the struggle we face from time to time is the collapse of the regime in damascus would open up a vacuum which terrorist groups are able to fill so we want to have a political process that can lead to a transition. that's something that secretary kerry in particular has been working very assiduously on, but nobody can underestimate the difficulties. we are hopeful that in munich
over the coming days we can make some progress on a cease-fire and most importantly on a humanitarian corridor. the russians claim they are cutting off weapons supply corridors, but they're actually cutting off humanitarian corridors, so at the very least they need to put their money where their mouth is and open up the humanitarian corridors immediately to all of the besieged areas that the u.n. has identified. >> you know, not long ago we were saying that assad has got to go, and we were saying that assad has got to go before we can have these discussions. and now we're sort of hedging our bets and saying, well, you know, assad can sort of go at the end of them or as long as assad understands he cannot be part of a -- of a new syrian coalition. doesn't it seem like we just keep backtracking and backtracking? >> i think there's -- everybody looking at the syria situation recognizes that so long as assad is in power there will never be a stable syria.
too much has happened. the crimes against humanity, everything that he is responsible for, he will never be able to govern and his writ will never extend to the rest of the country. it's impossible. the russians understand that. the iranians don't seem to understand that. but it's a complete fantasy to think the assad regime can establish its writ over syria. so, we have to find a way to have a political transition, but we do want to do it in a managed way through a political process that doesn't open up further vacuums but i agree with you entirely, congressman, assad cannot remain in power if we are ever going to get out of this -- this incredibly difficult situation. as i mentioned, discussed with the chairman, his question what's going on north of aleppo. my job in fighting isil, we had some real progress to push across the mari line and the russian air strikes have pulled those forces to fight the regime and they were ready to fight isil. what russia is doing is directly enabling isil, so that's one of
the reasons we're getting together in munich tomorrow, but this will be a very difficult three days coming up but, you know, we're going to be very firm. the situation is totally unacceptable and it's causing a humanitarian catastrophe and strengthening assad and it fuels extremists on both sides of the divide, the hezbollahs, the isils and the nusras and we have to come together as great powers, all of us, turkey, the u.s., russia, saudi arabia, and we have to find a way to settle the conflict down otherwise it's going to come to haunt all of us. >> i have one final question. i have been having discussions, the chairman and i have been having discussions with some of our sunni arab friends. and they express to us frustration at the united states not being more of a player that's deeply involved, that we
seem to be reluctant to be involved. they paint a picture of the fact that they're ready to come forward if we come forward, if we lead, they're ready to do it. but they describe a reluctance on the part of the united states to get involved. and they say that they believe that russia moved into syria because they knew that the u.s. wasn't moving and wouldn't really be able to do anything or wouldn't be willing to do anything against the russians. how do you -- how do you answer that? they paint a picture of just reluctance on our part, of us not really leading, of us -- they would be willing to be with us, but we are recalcitrant, how do you answer that? >> well, in terms of the isil campaign, done over 10,000 air strikes now and u.s. forces on the ground in syria and u.s. forces on the ground in iraq. we welcome our partners to join us in that endeavor and we've done some real damage to isil and we're looking for others to
join us, to tell you the truth. so, that is manasomething where think we have led and, in fact, secretary carter is meeting in brussels today with the defense ministers of the coalition. and one of the things he is putting on members of our coalition including a number of the arab partners is that, you know, isil is a threat to you. saudi arabia, one of our closest friends in the world, isil is in saudi arabia and the saudis are doing a lot against isil but we, of course, want them to do more. we want all of our partners to do more. so, this is a constant discussion we have. our interests don't always align directly with many of our partners' interest this is something that is natural in foreign policy with our friends but this is something we're discussing constantly. we'll see him in -- i know he saw a number of you and we'll see him in munich tomorrow to try to align -- to align our approaches. but, you know, as the leader of the coalition, congressman, it's something that i deal with all around the world to try to get a focus on this core threat of
isil and try to align our resources accordingly. but when it comes to the assad regime, we have to get a political process on track otherwise this is going to continue to go on and that is why we are hopeful in the coming days in munich, we'll make progress. >> ileana ros-lehtinen of florida. >> thank you, mr. royce, thank you ranking member engel, and thank you back, ambassador mcgu mcgurk. i am stunned that russia and the raid in syria could be a positive development with the help of iranian forces and russian air power, we're seeing assad's forces creep closer to aleppo as has been pointed out, a strong base for the opposition, and the regime is on the brink of encircling the city in order to starve the population with russia indiscriminately bombing residential areas.
assistant secretary patterson testified to a question i asked her in november in a hearing that assad's atrocities are a recruiting tool for isis and that it is not possible for us to defeat isis while assad's massacres continue, with iran iñrussia's help. so what steps is the administration taking to prevent a massacre of syria's remaining moderate opposition? when will we air drop humanitarian supplies to the people of aleppo? is that still something that we're going to do? and you've said to the chairman and the ranking member that russia is a problem, but does the administration intend to take any measure to stop russia from bombing syria's civilians? and how can we justify asking the syrian opposition to drop its condition that the assad regime, russia, and iran cease committing these crimes against humanity as a condition to
continue the geneva talks? so, i look forward to that answer. but let me just bring up two quick points, mr. ambassador. i wanted to ask you about the future plans for the iraqi jewish archives. can they stay in the united states? i raise it now, as i have in the past, we've worked together with you, and i thank you, because you've been very engaged on this with the iraqi government. i don't want the state department to return these precious artifacts, the iraqi jewish archives. and what is the fate of the archives after the exhibit ends its run at my alma mater florida international university? and lastly, now that iran has been legitimized through the jcpoa, received billions of dollars in sanctions relief through -- to which it can continue its reign of terror, what guarantees have you received from the iraqis? and have you brought it up to protect the residents of camp
liberty from the newly strengthened and well funded regime in tehran? you can give me a written response on that. will we be providing aerial protection? which is what the residents want now to the camp liberty residents? and are we going to continue to put t-walls in place or not? but if you could ask the question about what we're doing to prevent a massacre and air drop humanitarian supplies and the role of russia. thank you, sir. >> thank you, ms. loros-lehtine i want to talk in particular with your cooperation on the difficult issue of the iraqi jewish archives and we're very honored that they are on display in your district. when i was at the iraq desk i worked on this issue quite a bit. i'm no longer in that role but i care very much about it. i understand they are scheduled to run through the end of the year. let me take that back to the state department and get you a very detailed answer on the question. and also on the mek. that's also something i continue to follow quite closely.
we've made some progress in getting those folks out of iraq many going to albania, but i'll also get you a written answer on that. on the question of the humanitarian situation in syria, i'll repeat what i said. it's completely unacceptable. the failure to provide humanitarian assistance to besieged communities in syria is anchored by a brand-new u.n. security council resolution. this is something that we have to open up the corridors, period. and so first and foremost on the agenda when we get to munich is the humanitarian corridor issue. there are besieged communities across syria. millions of people. some of them are besieged by isil. some of them are besieged -- most of them are besieged by the regime. some are besieged by elements, more extreme elements of the opposition. all of them should have humanitarian access. it's a principle of international law and we all agreed to as part of the syria support group process and it's first and foremost on the agenda
in munich and without underestimating the difficulty, i'm hoping we can come out of munich with some agreements on that. >> thank you very much, sir. thank you, chairman royce. we go to david cicilliny of rhode island. >> thank you for being here. i want to focus for a moment on the effort to address the issue of the terrorist financing of isil, and i know you indicated in your written testimony that isil controls 80% of syria's energy supply and it accounts for 50% of their revenues, about $500 million a year since 2014. and so my first question is, who is purchasing this oil, wr generating the $500 million of revenue? and you also indicate there are 100 members of a management team and energy related personnel. what are we doing to get to those personnel who are helping
to finance the terrorist organization? >> thank you, mr. congressman. to elaborate on my written testimony, we believe isil's revenue is $500 million from energy products, you know, it's -- it's purchased by a lot of middle men. it's hard to tell exactly where it's going. the russians claim turkey is buying most of it. that's actually not true. the regime is buying a lot of isil oil. but what happened it's sold to middlemen and it goes to a third party and it's hard to trace from isil to the actual end user but it is a significant revenue stream that we are now significantly degrading. they are not able to do what they were able to do in the past. we had a big debate amongst ourselves about when to target the trucks. because the truck drivers, most of them, are ordinary iraqis and ordinary syrians. so, what we did, a very sophisticated campaign in which we -- i won't say exactly how, but we warned them if you are driving trucks here your days
are going to be numbered and we were able to destroy about 400 trucks in one shot with very limited collateral damage or civilian deaths. and it around. so we're -- we'll continue to do that. but it's a fundamental priority of the overall campaign. not just taking back territory, but denying the revenue sources. in mosul because of our intelligence picture, we're able to target where they had cash warehouse sites. that's how they pay their fighters in mosul and that no longer exists. >> we have seen a lot of the success of isil using the internet and social media, both to promote their propaganda as well as recruit. i want to hear about what we're doing and what we're doing to counter that narrative. this is obviously a religious based false argument, but an effective one and i'm not sure we can effectively respond to it, but are there efforts under
way so that someone is responding in the same medium to help stem the flow of additional recruits and final question i'll ask so you'll have time to answer both of them, i know there was a commitment made by germany of $1.2 billion, the united states over $600 million but we still aren't seeing the same kind of level of support from saudi arabia, uae and kuwait. this is a huge humanitarian crisis of unprecedented magnitude. what can we do to encourage the other countries to play a more generous role in dealing with humanitarian crisis? >> let me address the messaging issue because it's really critical. you know, isil we have looked at this in some detail. they have three main messaging campaigns. one is the glory of the caliphate. the sun drenched scenes of children eating ice cream cones
is a total lie but is a majority of their content. second is a religiously based message and then third is what gets a lot of attention which is the gore and the kind of the -- the executions, beheadings. that's the smallest number of their content, but we're combating it at every single level so we have a 24/7 hub now in the uae. the uae has been a critical partner here. these are young people from all around the region working 24/7 to combat the messages. they have had a pretty good effect, particularly with the campaign that highlighted the defectors from isil that told the world what it was like to be under this organization. so i think we're actually making some progress on the messaging campaign. we are working with twitter and facebook and twitter took down 125,000 affiliated isil related sites and the messaging gets easier when we're making progress. if you're doing a messaging campaign for the washington
redskins when they're winning it's easier than when they're losing. when they put out the videos of the flag going from iraq to syria to italy and to rome, they really can't say that with any credibility anymore. their message is now -- their spokesman, most of his statements now are defending the fact, explaining why they're losing so much territory. so it's changed quite a bit. but we have to remain at it 24/7. we want to set up a similar hub in malaysia, because there's a different messaging propaganda component going out there and in east asia. we have to check that 24/7. in terms of the air contribution, the saudis put in millions in a critical moment and i'll never forget that being in iraq. it was a critical need and the money went to good use and saved lives. i'll have to get for you,
congressman, the donations from those states at the recent london donors conference. i think there was some pretty good contributions. but i'll have to come back with the details. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chris smith of new jersey. >> thank you for calling this important hearing and mr. mcgurk, thank you for your good work. let me ask you a couple of questions. while the administration's focus is on isis, how is this impacting the growth of al nusra? does the focus on isis risk allowing other groups like al nusra to grow in strength and what is the plan to defeat it? and other like minded groups? and let me point out you -- you point out that the foreign fighters are coming from a hundred countries. the flow back and forth, how many are u.s. year to date, if you have that number. and when you talk about groups like boko haram, are terrorists from boko haram making their way
back again or is there no flow there? you do talk and i'm glad you do about degrading the global affiliates. with regard to boko haram are we training the nigerians of course with vetted troops how to do counterinsurgency that will make them more effective because obviously boko haram is on tear in its terrorism. >> thank you, congressman. i'll go through your good questions. nusra is a problem as we focus on isil, we can't take our sight off of nusra. the leader reports directly to ayman al a harry. and we think most of them are syrians who are kind of under the banner of nusra because that's just where they're going
to survive. but we have to unravel nusra. when we see a threat emanating from nusra, we target it. the corzine group is something we talked about before. we completely eliminated. we are focused on nusra. it's important to remind us it's not isil, but nusra as an acute threat to the united states. let me jump to boko haram and the affiliates. many who are raising the banner of isil they're pre-existing terror groups. boko haram is a good example. not like suddenly they became an affiliate. it's a problem that's unique to that part of the world, to nigeria. we have to work with our local partners to combat it. i think you have asked good questions about making sure we have a credible force to credibly combat it. but the affiliates with isil, in libya for example, that's where it wasn't a pre-existing
movement. they rose the flag of isil and it drew them like a magnet. we have seen the direct flow of resources of command and control, of propaganda from isil core into libya. again if we see a threat emerging we will not hesitate to react. the president ordered an attack on the number one leader in libya and he was eliminated. he was formerly from iraq so that shows the connections between isil core and libya and it's concerning. the number of foreign fighters in the united states i think we have the specific numbers. i don't want to give it off the top of my head but i believe it's in the low hundreds. but our fbi is all over this problem. and they're doing a great job to protect the country against these threats. and they'll continue to do so. but i'll follow up with you on
the precise figures. >> appreciate it. before my time runs out -- the boko haram fighters any exchange between fighters? do any go to syria to fight? is al shabaab a part of this as well? >> al shabaab is not a formal affiliate, but we have found somalis on the battlefield in iraq. you know, these jihadist networks there's a symbiotic relationship. the good thing about iraq and syria, as i mentioned in the statement they're unlikely to get out. we'll make sure we kill them in iraq and syria. but libya is an emerging threat from africa. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, we go to mr. gregory meeks of new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start with this. i want to kind of follow-up with what mr. cicilline said. he asked about saudi arabia's contributions on a humanitarian level. in fighting against isis, isil,
in syria, et cetera, i'm concerned about -- because a lot of this is sunni, shiia and what the arab states and what the sunnis and in particular in saudi arabia are doing on the military level. you know, on the ground. are they -- initially they sent out a jet, et cetera. whether they're still fighting. what are they doing or what are the contributions that they're making on the military level in regards to this fight? and how does that play into our equation? >> so it's something that secretary carter has discussed quite a bit publicly. he's discussing in brussels today with our partners. most of the gccc states were with us. and jordan has -- they have renewed their air strikes in syria which we're grateful for. saudi arabia is focused on the conflict in yemen of course. this something we've discussed with them quite a bit.
so we're constantly engaged with them about what the particular role can be. i don't want to get ahead of the process, but that's something that secretary carter is discussing with the defense ministers in brussels today. including mohammed bin salaam from saudi arabia. we need to be fully invested in this fight. not just military as was mentioned earlier it's the humanitarian and the stabilization side. in iraq now, as i mentioned these are iconic sunni cities that have been cleared of isil and we want to return the population to get back on their feet. the eternally displaced in iraq most of them are sunni, 70% of them are women and girls and they need help. and so on the humanitarian, on the stabilization side that's something that we're hopeful can step up in a fairly aggressive way. because we have the programs in place, we have the support of the government in place.
but it's an issue of the resources. and one thing that's really hampered this quite a bit is just the collapsing price of oil. which i can go into some detail. iraq is now facing a monthly about $5 billion financing gap. they're producing more oil than they have in some time. over 4 million barrels a day. when i was working on iraq full-time five years ago that would have been imaginable. that's because of the decisions that the iraqi government has made and decisions we have made with them and that's a real testament to the progress, but the falling price of oil has just greatly impacted their budget situation. it's depleted the resources we had hoped to have had to deal with the humanitarian problems. so that is something, congressman we're hopeful can contribute. >> i was surprised at a recent statement that saudi arabia made, saying if the united states put troops on the ground they would be right behind us militarily. i was wondering why, you know, that it has to be as you said
something to be -- if anybody is going to be on the ground, it doesn't look like we are occupying anyone again. and those from the arab league, not the united states of america. when i heard that statement i was wondering whether or not they had been further engaged militarily or not and whether they have shown -- i know about yemen. but have they shown -- but isil is still a threat to them also. so whether they're willing to step up. same thing to some regards with turkey. in what they may or may not be doing. let me ask you this question, what they may or may not be doing militarily also in regards to the fight with isil. what about turkey? >> well, turkey is a part of this process, a very intense negotiation and an agreement with them to basically put planes at the air base and we're
grateful for the agreements we have reached with turkey. and they worked to seal that border, it's much harder for these foreign fighters to get into syria than it was until then. turkey is caring for 2.1 million refugees from syria, spending almost $8 billion. something that people forget about. so turkey is doing a lot here. militarily, they were doing some very important air strikes in north of the country. right now, we're working with them to get them back into the campaign but we're doing that very carefully. because the conflict with -- not conflict but the tension between turkey and russia after turkey shot down a russian plane after the russian plane violated turkey's air space kind of complicated the picture. that's something we're working with turkey on. but we're comfortable with turkey's contributions. they're a critical nato ally of ours so we'll work with them. >> thank you. out of time. >> thank you. mr. dana rohrabacher of california.