tv Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on U.S. European Transportation... CSPAN March 8, 2019 4:04am-6:06am EST
the 1963 birmingham church bombing that killed four black girls. his book is called bending toward justice. he's interviewed by author and journalist diane mcwhorter. >> you were able to, the motive was to stop the desegregation of the school. >> absolutely. >> and then that gives you the whole theme of the trials with the children. >> absolutely, no question. it was the year of the child. fire hoses and dogs in april and may of that year, in birmingham, which started the whole process, the school integration, hope was alive in many corners, but for some people in birmingham, were seeing a segregated lay of way of life sliding away, they had to take matters into their own hands >> watch book tv this weekend on c-span two. >> the senator committee held a hearing with the commanders of u.s. european command and u.s. transportation command. talking about the respective operations. this is two hours.
>> the meeting will come to order. the senate on service committee meets with to continue receiving the statements from our combatant commands, testifying today, general curtis , commander of the united states european command, and general stephen lyons, commander of the united states transportation command, we welcome both of you here, and
thank you for your service. the center service committee to ensure that the national defense strategy, that's our blueprint, and we have agreed to that. it means that we need urgent change is significant scale to address the challenges competition with russia, and china. just got back from munich, kosovo, algeria, and these areas, and that's where russia and china is, we need to be aware of their strength, and what the competition is. pruden has demonstrated the capability and intent to use force to achieve this objective, most notably in georgia, ukraine, syria, he will not hesitate to use other tools in his arsenal as well, whether it's cyber attacks, election meddling, or assassinations with chemical weapons. perceived weakness will only
provoke further aggression. that's why efforts such as support for the european deterrence initiative, that's made up of primarily old soviet union countries, and provides the ukraine and why they are so important. likewise, we knew the defense budget that is of sufficient size in advancing key capabilities, we need in europe, areas like long-range fires, cruise missile defense, and the supporting infrastructure. i was in munich two weeks ago, and it was clear that we cannot be successful in the strategic competition with russia without a strong unified nato alliance, america is safer and stronger because of our nato alliance in general, we look forward to your thoughts along these issues, general liens, you had a long history serving as a
deputy commander for two years, before assuming your current role. i look forward to hearing your assessment of the services, and the resources that you have there, because i know that there's some discussion even and some privatization in that area. so we will be anxious to hear your statements. before i turned to senator reid, i would like to remind all of our members that we will have a classified, closed briefing informal briefing at 2:30, in the visitors center, with both of our witnesses, senator reid. >> thank you very much, mister chairman. let me welcome our witnesses this morning, the general has returned before the committee for the 3rd time on the u.s. military posture in europe, he was due as the nato supreme allied commander, welcome. general liens, i want to welcome you to your 1st hearing before this committee. let me think both of you for your many dedicated years of
military service, and extend our appreciation to the dedicated men and women serving under your command, thank them very much for us. for the last several years, the security challenges have grown increasingly complex, russia has reemerged as an aggressive opponent in the international order, which russia views as a counter to its strategic interest in reclaiming great power status. the national defense strategy issued last year that highlights the need to counter russia with a credible military determined, the demonstrates that any military represents the solitary and integrative nato members or threat of such aggression will not succeed. general, i'm interested in your assessment of the progress of europe, in meeting the requirements. in addition to its military monetization and aggressive military posturing, russia is conducting a campaign of hybrid warfare below the level of military conflict, using all tools of national policy to
advance its strategic interests. our democracy was attacked in 2016, and we have been persistently under attack since. including during last year's midterm elections. be interested in hearing from the general whether yukon is getting the resources and personnel it needs and whether we are investing in the right nonmilitary tools of national power to counter this hybrid warfare. the additional challenge is the unprecedented strain on alliance cohesion within nato. the united states is inextricably linked to our system of alliances and partnerships. a recent report from the sender by an ambassador necklace describes a crisis within nato, which they attribute in large part to the acts of strong u.s. leadership. the senate and congress as a whole have repeatedly gone on record to reaffirm our strong commitment to nato, and the translated relationship, as a core element of u.s. national security.
there should be no doubt among our allies, or our adversaries, regarding the united states resolve to meet its nato commitments, to a defense. the woman and men of trance, sister perform duties that sustain the department of defense effort in protecting our nation security, its ability to deploy and maintain americans, trends, provides beauty with capabilities we have come to expect and to frequently take for granted. france com forces all combatants and commanders every day, without them the u.s. would be at a significant disadvantage most everywhere in the world. the reserve force is a group of cargo ships held by the maritime administration, but it is aging and will need to be modernized over the next decade. two years ago, the committee authorized the department to start a program to recapitalize the reserve force, by authorizing dod to purchase up to two foreign built vessels, where the navy designed a family of auxiliary vessels for a number of uses including the
ready reserve force. last year, connors authorized the department to buy five more vessels as soon as the department put forward a plan to build new ships, in shipyards. i'm interested in the status and the next steps for capitalization in 2020. the defense department needs to ensure that the civil reserve air fleet or craft program which provides as much as 40% of wartime airlift needs, remains viable, after operations in iraq and afghanistan, and will be able to provide needed search capacity in the future. general liens, i'm interested in your view on the state of this fleet and if anything needs to be done to ensure these capabilities and their readiness. our global transportation capabilities undiminished by trans calm is one of our advantages for many years now. we cannot assume that adversaries will allow us free rein in this area in the future. last year, the general told the
committee the transco has been conducting analyses to assess requirements for art mobility forces will be challenged, and his assessment was that additional investment would be needed. when i received a report of that analysis and the mobility requirements, here, the study's conclusions differed from the general's assessment. general line, you could give us an update on why there was a change. finally, trans calm also faces a unique set of five cyber threats because of the commands extensive network with private sector entities in the transportation and shipping industries. general liens, i would like to get an update from you on progress in the cyber security that you have made since last year. let me think the witnesses for their service and their testimony. >> thank you, senator reid. you know the drill, 1st, we will have five minutes try not to exceed five minutes, but your statement be made part of the record, we will start with you, general. >> chairman and off working member read, distinct numbers
of the committee, good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as the commander of the u.s. command. i'm honored to be here today with general liens as well. 1st and foremost, i want to thank you for converses support of the service members , civilians, and families in europe. these warriors demonstrate service and dedication to your atlantic defense, a mission that is essential to our national security and to maintaining global peace and prosperity. we as a nation are blessed by their volunteering exceptional service. thank you again for your steadfast support of these patriots and their mission. the threats facing u.s. interest in the yukon area of responsibility, which includes israel, are real and growing. they are complex, trans regional, although main and multifunctional. this remains one of the most dynamic periods in recent history, in my view. russia has continued its reemergence as a strategic
competitor, and remains the primary threat to a stable security environment. while the u.s. maintains a global military superiority over russia, involving russian capabilities threaten to erode our competitive military advantage. challenging our ability to operate uncontested in all domains. and diminish our ability to deter russian aggression. in light of russia's modernizing force posture, yukon recommends augmenting are assigned an invitational forces to enhance our deterrence posture. yukon also recommends further investments that enhance european logistical infrastructure, and capacity to support rapid deployment in multi-domain u.s. forces in europe in addition to the threat from russia, the risk of terrorism and remains high, despite terrorist attacks in 2018. extremists prevent present a clear and present threat to europe's people and their infrastructure.
thankfully, the u.s. is not alone in facing these challenges across the atlantic, as our national defense strategies states, the nato alliance is deterred to the defendant update terrorism and addressing instability along nato's periphery. ri allies and partners play a vital role on a collective security and they have made significant progress in increasing cash, contribution, and capability to provide our common defense. for almost 70 years, nato has been a cornerstone of the atlantic security. as nato adapts to remain relevant, we will find as we always have that every challenge is best addressed as an alliance. let me close by again thanking congress in this committee for your continued support, especially the sustained funding of the european deterrence initiative. yukon's future success in him limiting our national defense strategy and fulfilling our mission is only possible if congress support. tank you look forward to your questions. >> thank you, general liens.
>> ranking member read, distinct members, it's an honor to testify before you today, and represent the men and women of the united states transportation command. i'm pleased to join the general, he's one of several very important supported commands united states transportation command, with more than 40 years of exceptional leadership remains a stellar example for all of us. i could not be more proud of the more than 120,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coast guard men and civil servants that are assigned to the u.s. command. they project and sustain a joint force every day. the departments global deployment networks, transportation capacity, on land over the sea in our global
command and control capabilities combine to provide the u.s. with a strategic advantage unmatched around the world. around the globe, the trans calm aircraft is touching down every three minutes. trans calm ships are underway. area refueling missions are orbiting overhead. plans converted to a intensive care units are moving the nations ill and injured. i should remind everybody that the key to our success is global access, and i would like to highlight that our allies and like-minded partners that provide access to key regions support substantial reinforced global reach. are critical to our mission. we know we must never take her success for granted, for decades, we could deploy our forces when we wanted, assemble
them where we wanted, and operate how we wanted. with the rise of great power competition, we can no longer assume that we can operate with impunity. before closing, i'd like to acknowledge the letters that i received for more than a dozen members of congress. concerning the defense personal property program, which relocates household goods for service members civilians and their families. simply put, i agree. we lack the capacity during peak season, we lack measures to hold industry accountable. our most important resources are people and we owe them better. in consultation with the service secretaries and the service chiefs, on behalf of the department prince, is leading an initiative to restructure our relationship with industry, in an effort to improve quality, capacity, and
accountability. in closing, i am proud to support dod's enduring mission of providing a combat credible military force, to deter war, and protect the security of our nation. our nation command, to respond with immediate force on short notice, and transmission to have the divisive force when needed. i'm fully committed to retaining this strategic advantage. thank you for your support, the barben and your support to the u.s. transportation command. thank you, general. thank you, general liens. senator reid brought up in his opening statement, the question as to whether or not the general, that we have the right posture and capabilities to handle the credible deterrence against russian aggression in europe. what's your opinion about that? >> thank you, we have clearly
made progress, in european command, thanks to the support of congress. we have added forces and capabilities, we have improved readiness, but i would tell you in response to your question that i am not comfortable, yet, with the deterrent posture that we have in europe, in support of the national defense strategy. >> were the shortfalls? >> i have shortfalls in our land component, and the depth there, i would like to get into more detail on that in the closed hearing. and in our maritime component as well. both of those in particular when you look at the building capability and the modernization of the russian forces that we face there, finally, of concern is my intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance capacity. given that increasing and growing threat of russia. i need more, and in the closed
hearing i can go into detail but >> you will have that opportunity at 2:30 today. general, we keep hearing from sources, that maybe we have some redundancy in our nuclear program. we've been guilty for a long time in not addressing our nuclear modernization, we now, faced with the situation we have in russia and china, we would call a triad system, and i think that, people with your background need to respond as to why a triad system is not redundant, and is necessary. >> 1st of all, our strategic nuclear force is critical, to our deterrence and our security. in a triad as part of that force is important as well.
the triad gives each one of those legs that the components of the specific qualities that are somewhat different. and we need those differing qualities for a safeguard within the components itself. but also to make it complex for adversaries to determine, or believe, that they have the opportunity to strike, and gain dominance. i think with a triad i am certain that they can't. i would note that they also have a triad as well. >> it needs to be repeated. the suggestions keep coming. in the ukraine, russia is now in their 6th year, we talked about, and actually had language in our defense bills, to send help to ukraine, and to my knowledge there's only been one, in the case where we actually were using legal assistance, that was in the javelin. can you tell us why we had not been able to successfully do that?
since the authorization is there? >> senator, i think as it works, as recommendations for ukraine particularly work its way, it has to go through the policy deliberations, that provide authority to deploy those kind of weapon systems. as you stated, we have the authority with javelin, ukrainians in my view have trained very well for the use of that, they've been responsible in the security and deployment of it. and we watch that closely. they handled that well, there are other systems, sniper systems, ammunition, and perhaps looking at the curd streets, consideration for naval systems. as well here in the future, as we move forward. >> we have the authorization bill coming up, is this something that you think we might need more language on? >> as you will see, i will have recommendations for that.
and i would like consideration of those recommendations. >> appreciate that. general liens, i know there's a problem in trying to get all of the service materials, transported out where they are needed, and recently there's been some suggestion that maybe some of that should be contracted out. we've been going through problems with the housing program recently, on contracting out, you have comments to make about that as being one of the solutions to the problem that we face? getting this material out? >> chairman, if you're referring to the joint appointment enterprise, linked to industry on multiple levels, if you're referring to the household good programs, that's what you're referring to? >> that's what i'm referring to. that's where the suggestion has come out, >> and what i would say on that is, that's 100% commercial industry. it's not an effort to
privatize whatsoever. is an effort to restructure our relationship with industry, in a way that delivers capacity, and holds carriers on government accountable. >> good. thank you very much, mister chairman. again, thanks for your service and your testimony. you testified before the committee, i don't believe there is an effective unification, the interagency, the energy and the focus that we could attain, is that still your view? >> yes, senator. it is still my view. with improved in congress as you know, committed funding to some of the entities in the interagency that help us with this, >> and, based on your response, we need a synchronized campaign prosecutor in a unified manner, of course the agency which is multiple, institutions. to counter russian hybrid warfare.
and to deter anything greater than that. is that accurate? >> that is correct. we need a government approach to this. >> where the gaps right now? where are we not making the investments? >> i think, actually, we need to probably get greater focus, and energy into a strategy. multifaceted strategy, as you know, the general just made another speech that underscored their view of indirect activity, use of government activities, as a part of their spectrum of warfare. we have to approach this in a way that we can counter that. i think specifically, with information operations, challenging their this information and cyber areas that we need to continue to press. that would presumably require a state of activity, and again, i'm old enough to recall the
voice of america, which is something that was very pronounced in the 50s and 60s. those types of proactive information campaigns, they aren't being conducted at this point? >> not in the way that you would call, when we have the talent to pursue. particularly when it goes to underscoring our values, which i think is important. >> and all of this is designed to deter and to disrupt business plans or aspirations, and without it, he has an open field, is that correct? >> they have a good deal of agility, they seem to have no constraints on what they are willing to say publicly. >> thank you. thank you for mentioning, in your comments, the defense personal property program, as the chairman indicated, we are receiving some comments, and i will follow-up with some specific questions for the record, because i think this is
an important issue. there is a proposal to move to single move manager, again, this has some echoes of the discussions we are having currently about housing issues, in the military. we want to be ahead of the game. we will send those questions to you for your response. in a report you took charge a trans come, the command was concerned about war planning. for many years, we assumed that we were operating on a benign atmosphere. we could fly the aircraft predicted, we could lose ship etc., last year, your predecessor hinted that for example the kc 46 tanker, might be too expensive to purchase, because the number we would need, in a challenge situation to replace and to overmatched the adversary would be significantly more. as a result, we asked trans come to
produce a mobility requirement study, and the report essentially came back and said there is no problem with our ability to support contingencies, we have the right mix, it essentially was disconnected with the comments that i heard. my perception what we were talking about. what has changed? we all make, we all recognize this will be a more hostile environment, to move equivalent in, and we don't seem to be responding in an appropriate way. your comment? >> thank you for that question. you're referring to the mobility capabilities requirement study that was directed, and the study was directed to tween the department and trans come efficiency of the mobility force against the program, out to 2023. we did that, and we do that based on a demand signal from the existing plans that exist
on the books today. i would acknowledge to you today, as we emerge our defense planning scenarios to be more reflective of the defense strategy, as we emerge and develop integrated plans with her happening right now on the joint staff, we do see the potential for increased mobility, particularly in the area of refuel, which is the lifeblood of the joint force. >> so, what you sent up to us has been overtaken by events? more or less? >> i would say we still have work to do on the plans. of which it is based. the demand signal is emerging in front of us, we will adapt to study to the plants as they evolve. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator wicker? >> thank you mister chairman. thank you very much for your work, it's clear that we have
great leadership, in your area of responsibility. general scott bharati, three weeks ago, this congress sent five delegations, house and senate, to the munich security conference. that show of force was followed on by a delegation going to the nato parliamentary assembly, the delegation going on a week later to the parliament reasonably. does that volume of participation, by house and senate members, send a positive statement? is it helpful to you in dealing with your friends in europe? >> it's very helpful. it's helpful to us as a nation. in munich, that was the largest congressional delegation they've ever had there. it was noted by everyone, that in and of itself is a strong message of commitment to our
allies in europe. i was in the congressional delegations that travel during the year two different spots within european command, have a positive influence another sign of commitment and actual discussion about the issues of the day. i routinely get feedback from the chiefs of defense ministry defense and others when our congressional delegations visit. i know it has an impact. >> well, i guess, we could have a debate about whether there's a crisis in nato, i hope there isn't. but i do hope that the strong statement of we need to be involved was hurt, and i appreciate your comments in that regard. general, you are recommending augmenting our forces in europe, specifically with regard to seapower, what are your suggestions? there are four destroyers now, do we need six? what else needs to be done?
what, specifically, can you tell us in an open hearing that would help with regard to a seapower aspect of helping? >> as you know, specifically for the maritime component, what we are looking at is evolving and modernizing russian fleets. in the hearing i plan to go through the changes i've seen in the three years that i've been in european command, if we want to remain dominant, in the maritime domain, particularly undersea which we are today, we got to continue to modernize, and we need to build our capacity. specifically for destroyers, i've asked for two more destroyers within yukon. i would like to go into more detail on that, in the post hearing rather than here, but again, we need greater capacity particularly given the modernization and the growth of the fleets russian fleets in europe. >> in addition to destroyers, can you tell us publicly, what
else you are asking for in terms of ships? >> is primarily has to do with capability, the deal with the numbers of russian ships that we see, within our theater today, and also for and isoprene warfare. i would like to go into more detail. >> are we going to need more ships? or fewer ships? >> that is a service question, as to how >> in your area? >> in my area, more. i would like to see, at least a rotation of naval component, carrier strike groups, at a better pace than i have seen in the three years that i've been in command. >> general, at the halifax security conference, and the munich security conference, a number of us met individually with the defense minister from turkey, at the military level,
are we doing better with turkey than it would appear on the front pages of the newspapers? what's the news out of turkey recently? is there any good news? >> i would say, 1st of all, we have a very strong relationship with our counterparts in turkey. i know very well there chief of defense and ministry defense, who is the chief prior to this, are to him becoming the minister, we have some differences, as you know. you can see in the paper. we have candid and frank conversations, and we've been successful at working through mutual interests to this point. our relationship as it reflects in the deployment of our forces, in my view, has improved over the past year. so that's what i would hope that our work together will continue to do, here, as we look at the tough issues we've got to face
within the european command. >> in terms of military to military, rings are better than they were? >> they are. they have improved, and we have a good candid relationship. >> thank you, senator king? thank you mister chairman, general lyons, i noted your concern about the movement of personal items, and want to volunteer as a consultant 50 years ago, i worked for allied lines in this area moving military families. if you need technical assistance, it's better to move a card and pick up a card then it is books, i learned that the hard way. i couldn't resist you brought back a lot of memories when you talked about moving furniture for military families. general scott bharati, i know you touched on this, but, came out for me what happens if little green men appear in lithuania. or latvia. have we wore gained what
happened in the ukraine and crimea? how do we respond? it seems to me this is a challenge for our different posture. >> we've taken a close look at what's happened in the past and what we think could potentially happen in the future. the 1st thing i would say is, as a result of that, we've worked with our allies in poland, romania, bulgaria, along the eastern border. on what we have learned and also on the capabilities that we think we need is an alliance, them and us in order to deter this. our 1st perspective is, what we do today? to ensure that russia fully understands the commitment of article 5? for an alliance? >> but what's the definition of attack market seems to me that's the gray area that we are in. to know when and how to respond when it's not clear that tanks aren't rolling across the border. >> you hit that, the thing that
i worry about most. >> you can continue that, i like that. >> you did. the thing that's difficult is not necessarily an actual attack that you can see coming. it's the kind of subversive undermining of the nation's authority, the nation one of the nations that they are undermining which is what they do, and other elements of power that are necessarily military. the military would be one of the last, that they want to use. is the most difficult. but we also work with our inter- agency to the point that senator reid made, that's the importance of our elements of power here. when you can combine 29 nations, with their elements of power and response to russia's, there is no, it's a slamdunk, there's no doubt that we can handle this and will be deterred. we have to work together. >> a question about funding and budgets. we haven't seen a budget yet, but there's talk that there will be a significant increase
in military budget, but primarily in elko, as opposed to line items. give me your thoughts about having money in elko, rather than allocations and authorizations that you can put to work in your ar. >> primarily, those budgets that come in within the base budgets itself, laid out give me greater stability, and knowledge of what's coming in the future. what we need is pretty stability. that tends to fluctuate each year, so, i would, i personally underscore the greater predictability we have an stability in our budget as we look forward, obviously, the more efficient we can be with our funding and the more assured that what we need in terms of force capability readiness etc. can be planned and we can deliver. >> i appreciate that.
general, you mentioned in your testimony, and it's clear that a large part of your responsibility is met through civilian enterprises. shipping, airplanes. are you, you talked about this, but outline for us, your level of satisfaction and confidence in the cyber security of the private sector partners. >> this is a significant challenge. we work closely with industry partners, with introduced language intra-contracts and included self assessments, we do a level of analysis on that and we work more closely to ensure that the resiliency is improving. however, i will admit to you that if an advanced precision were on the systems today would be problematic, there's no question about that. >> do you read team their systems? self-analysis doesn't make me sleep a lot better at night. do you have a written capacity where you can mock attack them
to show their vulnerability? >> no, we do not. >> i would urge you consider that as an option in other areas, that's been effective. it has a way of waking people up when it's going. >> i agree with that. >> thank you mister chairman. >> senator fisher? >> thank you mister chairman. general lyons, as you know, nebraska is the home of the 155th fueling and that plays an important role during deployment, with your command. i'm proud of those airmen, i just met with them a couple weeks ago back in nebraska, but my question to you is, when we are looking at the challenges, and the risk that we are facing, in order to meet the future demands, you touched on that earlier. what is the biggest issue you see contributing to the limiting capacity in this league?
>> sis is specifically? i think refueling is the lifeblood of the joint forces ability to project power immediately, there's nothing in the joint force we can do without the capability. so i was very pleased to see the air force except and begin the modernization process, that's important 1st step, the other initiatives that the services are working in this case the air force, is improved readiness against the casey 135 plane, and the potential deferment and a vestige of some of those weapons systems so we don't have a dip in capability over time. >> and happy to hear you say that. as you know, the kc 46, it's online but going to take quite a while to make it an important part of the fleet. as we look at the 135, there's maintenance issues, and we are seeing delays in that, are you confident that there's a good
balance between active, reserve, and guard when it comes to refueling? >> i am. i will defer the service on the forced mix specifically, but i think you know very well, we have guardsmen on alert today, it's a total force effort in every thing we do, and over 60% of our capability does exist in the guard reserve. >> what would you offer us as suggestions, so that we can mitigate some of the obstacles we are facing with that limited refueling that we have? with our capacity? if you have suggestions for us? >> it's really about generating high levels of readiness, so in the case of the 135, we are unable to me that 85% goal, air force is working very hard to improve that readiness and that would generate more available permission. >> thank you.
general, i would like to ask you about some logistic challenges that i think you face, there's been quotes in the past, in fact from you, when you said the expansion of the alliance to include former eastern bloc countries, has exasperated, exacerbated the lack of common transportation networks between the new the more established allies in the west, for example, germany just allows trucks loaded with tanks to be on their highways, at night, on weekdays, the rails on the baltic railroads, the gauges wider apart than we have in the western standard, so trains is my understanding trains have to be unloaded and then reloaded, near poland's border with lithuania. as we are looking at movement of troops, and were able to
respond quickly to the challenges that we are looking at in that area, how serious is this issue today, and what steps have you taken in order to address that? >> thank you. it's true what you stated. in terms of the status today, in europe. is a serious issue. because we need to be able to move 360 within europe, with our forces and the allies as well. if there's good news, the good news is that we, as congress has supported particularly through edi, some of the infrastructure improvements that we need, particularly in the east, to support our movements, reception of our troops, support of the troops that we put in place there, but it helps the allies, and the allies as well, our financing along with many of those projects, things that they should do with regard airfield
fuel lines, rail, etc. >> are we trying, i apologize for interrupting you, but are we trying to facilitate some changes so that our allies can make those changes? are they working together as well? >> they are. within nato and eu, both, nato had a study within in for structure and logistics and support that needed to happen, yukon was very involved in that, we provided help with them, and provided to the eu, a mobilization study. that's the resulted in, about $7 billion the eu is going to invest in logistics and infrastructure over the next five or six years. much of what we recommended was, in fact, accepted. so, we now have a study, we know what our issues are, we've got insight within you and nato on that, we got a follow-up and make sure that that investment
goes to the right places, and makes a difference in military and mobility. >> to be able to have a rapid response. >> correct. >> thank you. >> thank you mister chairman, and thank you for your testimony, and your service. over many years, general, you are well aware that if there's ever a major conflict in europe, the 1st shots are likely to be cyber , they are not going to be kinetic and we have to be prepared for that, and i know since the russian attack against 2007, the countries have been leaning into this in a major way. there was the cyber defense league established and latvia is home to nato strategic communication center of excellence. but would like you to give us an update and share some of your thoughts on what you are seeing in the baltic countries, lessons learned, things that we
may want to be replicating in other places around the world. scenic you noted the changes that have taken place. i would add, as well, that after nato determined that cyber was in fact the domain, which needed to happen to give authorities, we now have a cyber center that operates within nato, is connected with each of our nations, most of them are building a cyber capability, you noted the cyber center of excellence that is a very good one, it's important because it's true that process has one of those notes that we are able to advance lessons learned, do training, ensure that we can help with defense within nato, but also to specific nations. so, like anything in cyber, it's a dynamic world, we've got, we are facing russia, who is agile in this, and good at it. so, we can't rest, we have a lot to do in cyber.
particularly capacity, we have to build the skills we need to man the centers. >> what idea that has come and your comments on it, as we try to provide more resources into that, and really leverage some of the state partnerships we have with the national guard. so for example in michigan we have a cyber unit in michigan but those around the country as well. and i know our partners in baltics would love to have more presence of u.s. forces in country there as well. talk to me a little bit about whether or not it makes sense to have rotations of particularly cyber national guard units, i'm in this would be good for morale, great for retention great for recruiting. allow them to be at the tip of the spear will exchanging great ideas. is that something that makes sense to you. >> absolutely makes sense in something we are already doing. we had the state partnership program because they have a level of trust that is billed for 25 years. they have that expertise and it
helps me and you come because otherwise i pull from my cyber center expertise and i turned the team out to a nation. here we can rotate forces through from the state with the same expertise and ability to build the capacity so we are beginning to do more of that in europe today. >> understood there might be some need for additional funding through the national guard to do that? or are there adequate resources for you to conduct the program or will you need more? >> you would have to at the national guard for the specific answer that but my general response is when you pick up an opera tempo like that and bring the men, generally for the guard there's a funding issue. and one of us has to pick it up. >> so we can explore that further because i think that's necessary for us to do the. >> general lines, i'm a former supply corps officer in the u.s. navy reserve. so i think there's a lot of truth in general omar bradley's maxim that amateurs talk tactics and professional study logistics. so it's good to have you there. i wanted you to comment a little bit about a recent defense science board task force
, viability of logistics publication that came out that talked about the decay and logistic readiness, was perhaps the result of insufficient war gaming. that incorporated logistics that are in a lot of war games, typically just wished away. we know professionals can't wish away logistics or you were in a world of hurt pretty quickly. could you comment on that report and give you an update on how your integrating combatant commanders with exercises so logistics and an integral part of war gaming mandy real part of real gaming not just wished away. >> thanks for the question. i am familiar with the report. there are efforts actually ongoing now given the defense strategy and the security environment that will operate in the future to better connect logistics outcomes for example entrance comes case, mobility outputs and a bill to generate the force, with campaign analysis. which is currently disconnected. so we are working with the
department to move in that direction in the future. >> general scaparrotti, briefly i know we are running out of time but how is that being a corporate in your war gaming? >> we work very closely here in terms of our war gaming and do transportation visibility in each one of those. so are planners in fact work with his either coming back or when they come into were plenty. that's just a standard part of what we do. >> and you don't think adjusting wished away? the logistics challenges and i working? >> no i don't, in fact if anything we have leaned into this in trying to be very factual about what are problems will be, particularly with respect to those in europe as we mentioned earlier. >> thank you jelm it. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you >> jill:, general scaparrotti welcome to your last hearing and general line to the first hearing. sure there's no jokes date of the general lines expense
before it began. general lines with the smile on your face, i'd like to address some issues i have heard from logistics companies including some in arkansas about dealing not just with the command but with the federal government as a whole but obviously your comment is one of the largest if not the largest government when it comes to moving things and equipment. the express frustrations with the kind of inscrutability or perplexed at the bureaucratic challenges of dealing with the government. blood of these companies are run by veterans or have a lot of large veteran workforce given the training that the military gives his personnel in logistics. they would like to work more with the government and with trans, in particular. they find it to be a challenge sometimes. what kind of working groups if any does trans come have with private industry to my to make what you do more transparent to them so they can better serve our personnel through your command? >> senator it's a great question.
we are inextricably linked in our republic in our industry with to generate the fourth. we have a relationship with her industry partners at multiple echelons from action offices to executive working groups that my three-star deputies leads. i also meet at least two times a year with the senior executives from our industry partners. and i acknowledge your point that from time to time based on a federal acquisition regulations it can be a bit of an obstacle to work with the government., so we try to minimize that as much as possible in effect that's really senator what's driving some of our restructuring is initiatives in the house a good set of the house to open up the market to more capacity. >> good, i would like to encourage that kind of links to continue, especially the logistics interstate changes so rapidly with use of information technology. the more connections you can have two private sector leaders
and to the people who are out there doing this on the front lines will be beneficial to the personnel that you're serving on the front lines, whether moving household goods or getting material down ranges will. i'd like to have my office continue to work with your command to try to facilitate some of those conversations. >> that would be great, thank you. >>, scaparrotti, i know this is great interest that vladimir putin yesterday directed russia to withdraw from the intermediate rate nuclear forces treaty which i find ironic they been filing the commitment in the imf treaty for the last 10 years kiss that you have any thoughts on that? >> it would only be underscore what you just suggestion that was the fact that they let the imf treaty some time ago. years ago. by very deliberately producing a weapon in violation and they been deploying that weapon. >> and united states government has publicly recognized these violations under both the obama administration trump administration. we recently announced our intent to withdraw from the inf treaty, was there any public opposition from a nato partner
or was it uniformed nato support for the united states to withdraw. >> nato in both december and february produce very strong statements in support of each step that we took in terms of our withdrawal from the inf treaty. i would say that our nato allies understand that the inf is an important component to european security from their point of view. they would emphasize i'm sure you heard with each step that they would hope that we would continue to work to bring russia back into the compliance before we are fully out the six- month period. or that we would look forward from that to then perhaps a new treaty that would encompass the new weapon systems etc. so they very much understand the importance of this but they did support a strongly, 29 nations, strongly in our decision. >> thank you. of usually one reason why it's international research against interest to withdraw from the inf treaty decides russia's
noncompliance with the treaty is that china has been free to build intermediate range with missiles at unlimited rates for decades now. as you know from your time with you is forces korea that that has a significant impact on our security interests and specifically china is not limited to the global player i noted with interest last year that the government of denmark agreed to build airports at greenland which it controls. not exactly considered a traditional yukon area but it is within your area of operations. one of the implications of chinese presence if they were to get a foothold which they were largely denied in the airport construction project last year in the high north? >> will look at have an absolute impact. i'm concerned personally about the strategic investments that we see by china throughout europe. and air, seaports or vicinities of that in critical technologies and companies that hold that. particular, high north where you note greenland and iceland both are important.
important bodies in that line communication. so i think we need to watch carefully china's investment in the sports. as you know, many of their commercial companies are actually stayed on. >> thank you. general scaparrotti i want to thank you for your service to our nation for over 40 years. and i know you been wearing that fourth star on your shoulder for longer than anyone else in the armed forces right now. you will learn the retirement that you had a heavy. that i think i speak for most members of the committee when i say that we would like to see you back in the employ of uncle sam sometime in the future. >> thank you both for being here. and for your service to the country. general lyons i want to follow up on some of the concerns that
have been raised by senators reid and fischer about the phasing out of our casey 135's and when the kc 46 arrive. is my understanding in new hampshire where we have the 157th air refueling wing that there will be a period of months between the time the 135 is phased out in the 46 is delivered, given that it is already behind schedule. can you comment on what we should assume will happen during those months when there is no refueling capacity and whether the intent will be to try to keep the 135's around longer until the delivery of the 46 is? >> ma'am from my perspective, that's the key issue is to maintain operational capability throughout the can version. and the air force is working that very issue, in fact they're working currently to delay the divestiture of a select number of casey 35's. the way don't have to this exorbitant. and capability overtime. and so the service is working on that ma'am.
>> and should we assume that that is going to happen? i mean i appreciate the service is working at but does that mean that we are going to see that extension happened? >> senator, it's been my request.'s been well received which both the air component and the chief. obviously is going to cost some money. and when the money is put in the program that's when we will know. that the intent is to retain 28 weapon systems beyond their currently scheduled retirement. >> thank you >> in terms of boeings the delivery of the 46 is, i know that we have accepted or made a commitment to address some of the concerns that have been expressed about the tankers. do we know whether that's going to speed up the further delivery? or should we assume that were going to see further delays? >> ma'am the decision to
deliver i think was a good one. right now we are on a pause, as you may know based on some boeing issues with foreign object. so i don't have a sense until that's cleared up for what the impact on the program. but i'll talk to the air force about the. >> thank you. i appreciate that. i'm sure that all of us hope that boeing will do everything they can to make sure the deliveries are done to address the concerns that have been raised. >> general scaparrotti, you mentioned in your testimony the concern about turkey acquiring the as/400 at the same time they're supposed we take delivery of the f 35. and i know there has been an effort to underway to try to encourage turkey to look at other alternatives and that there was an offer made early in january for the sale of the
patriot system. they have until the end of march, it's my understanding, to decide whether they're going to take delivery of that are not. but the question i have is if turkey moves forward with the agreement with russia on the as/400, do we assume that they should receive delivery of the f 35's? and what does that do to their accessing that technology? >> senator, i would say first of all if they accept the as/400 and to establish it within turkey, there is first of all an issue of, it's not interoperable with nato systems , nor is it interoperable inside of our integrated air missile defense system so that presents one problem. the second has to do with the f 35 kiss that you present a problem for all of our aircraft, specifically the i-35 i believe. my best military advice would be that we don't then follow through with the i-35, liuget,
or working with an ally that's working with russian systems, particularly air defenses of. with one of our what i would say is probably one of our most advanced technological capabilities. >> i'm pleased to hear you say that. the question i have is i understand that some of the parts for the i-35 are being made in turkey. it happens to that assembly. and who picks up that slack if turkey can't receive the i-35? >> well that's one of the issues that's being considered and will be considered i'm sure as you know but for them i would soon underscore the fact that this is a huge decision for turkey and we continuously, i talked to them personally and all of her leadership has, it connects in many different ways. to that and to the employment
and the integration they have within the system itself, the i- 35. but also the fns and other systems that we sell to turkey as well. so i would hope that they would reconsider this one decision on as/400, one system but potentially forfeit many of the other systems and the motion, what most important system that we provide. >> thank you, i share that view and i think turkey is an important ally but one we hope to be able to depend there. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you senator shaheen. at me inform you that some of the kc 46 is have been delivered in fact i flew the right seat of a kc 46 from seattle, washington to altice. senator sullivan. >> thank you mr. chairman. gentlemen thank you for being
here and your service. general scaparrotti i want to talk about a few things. first there's a narrative that i think played out a lot of the media that the administration and what you're doing in your capacity as somehow being weak on russia and putin. remote, i want to talk about a few actions under your leadership that we have been taking because isn't it true that the one thing that putin understands more than anything is power, right? >> would you agree with that? >> i would agree. a forces, energy production, not words but actual power. >> so doesn't help that we now have forces, our forces deployed in countries like poland and the baltics in the european reassurance initiative with this committee has supported in a bipartisan fashion? >> yes or, very poor to. >> it doesn't get a lot of press but my colleague senator ernst was recently in ukraine. and as you know the previous administration was reluctant
and never helped the ukrainians with defensive weapon systems that they could use to protect themselves. undersecretary mattis leadership when he got involved, we did provide the ukrainian the antitank missile system. how is that working out? >> well senator first of all as i said earlier the testimony, they received the system. i've been impressed with their training and their preparation to utilize the. >> you think that mushroom t 72 tank drivers in eastern ukraine a little more nervous? >> i think it does, i think the fact that they have the javelin that they could employ know how to employ is a deterrent. >> are we seeing any forced posture indication that they're taking that into consideration when they move those kind of forces? i'm talking about the russian forces. >> not directly. because we have not employed them right on the line. ukrainians haven't but i'm sure there where of that and they
take into consideration in the employment other forces where they put them. they know it would be, it's a lethal lethal weapon system. >> okay thank you. i don't know if you mentioned, i'm sorry i to step out prior to your testimony. that can you talk a little about the vladivostok 2018 exercises, my understanding was it involved 300,000 russian troops, 80 ships, notably 3200 chinese troops, including up to as many as 900 chinese tanks, are those reports accurate? and should we be concerned about the? >> first of all, the numbers that are publicized are higher than what was actually present. i can talk in more detail on this in a classified hearing this afternoon. it wasn't that large. but it was large. and yes we should take notice. primarily because it was designed for them at a very
strategic operational level, to be able to command and control large forces in a force on force top of exercise scenario. it connected them with many of their multiple, multiple of the regional commands, specifically in order to practice that. it covered both conventional, long-range precision munitions training, as well as nuclear training offset toward the end, and it included china as you noted which is the first time i can recall them providing forces and a partner training scenario, what is quite unusual. >> on the size of it, the complexity of it, the communications that the demonstrated, the fact that it was a hybrid conventional and nuclear exercise, i think is all-important. >> let me ask, thank you for
that, general lines you and i had a discussion and the terminus he was talking about the kc 46 and the deployment of that, i know it's not ultimately your call but it certainly you are an advocate speed i will ask a couple of quick questions and i appreciate a quick answer but when you look at the praises where you want to deploy that, conus or oak on his decisions, the national defense strategy and prioritize big power competition with china and russia, the size of action against north korea, would it make sense to placate c 46 and a part of american territory state or otherwise closely approximate to those places? >> just to be clear, the strategic locations, so you get my punchline. >> i haven't even gone there. we are close to wall those. we are the only state where
you're actually right at the scene where you come, north come, struck him, the state of alaska is clearly in the seams of every one of those. the old plans that support contingencies all focus on alaska, it is the fourth largest fuel storage area of the air force and anyplace in the world. it's going to have over 105th generation fighters in the next two years, 100. no other place on the planet earth will have 100 combat coded fifth jen fighters. it has the existing infrastructure to support aerial refueling operations and j park will be the fifth training place for fifth jen aircraft. is you are advocating for the kc 46, of course am advocating for the state to represent but i wouldn't do it unless i thought it was 100% strategic since. give your thoughts, quickly >> i know the air force is
still developing the base plan, is not complete yet particularly in the future years. and i do have confidence that the look completely at the operational range in the capable to be able to swing and give us the flexibility trends come to employ that importer weapon system. i'm sure in alaska that's part of the discussion i just don't know the details, sir. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. "treme". >> thank you mr. chairman and i hope you try to do a hammerhead or anything. any aerobatic maneuvers? [ laughter ] stay within the restrictions. gentlemen thank you so much for your participation today. general scaparrotti i want to return to the discussion about logistics challenges especially the eastern european eric. illinois national guard has been a sponsor in the state partnership for peace program for the nation of poland for 28
your nails i believe, 27+ years. so through my service i'm somewhat from there with the challenges that we face there. could you update us on how the establishment nato joint support and enabling command is going? and let's remind ourselves why it was created and what will it will better enable you you to do in theater to respond to russian aggression and when will this command be fully operational? >> the establishment of jay sedwick as you called it is moving i think on time and actually ahead of pace in my view. the germans who were the framework nation for this headquarters and only germany have in my view they have really leaned into this. so they have already got the commander designated. they have a portion of the staff there. they been present and my headquarters in shape to do the further planning that needs to take place to ensure its right sized, to make sure the planning, and rules and
responsibilities are correct. that's really the piece that we are doing right now. is moving along very well. this fall is ioc and it's another year before it will be fully operational so we've got some time here before it would be fully operational. but i would say to you that i think they will be ahead of that in terms of real output. are already making a difference in terms of our logistics planning. with other logistics commands within the headquarters. and throughout the components. so i think they'll actually be leaning into that before they're actually fully established so to speak. why do we set up? primarily because in a european environment where we have to be able to support and move 360, not just to the eastern border but to the north, high north, south, and west, with the threat that's actually 360, and then we needed to protect the
central lines of communication, critical ports, seaports, and infrastructure and doing the. because it's been testified here and by general lyons, this is now in a contest environment. we needed a headquarters that looked logistically as well as protection of those key assets. and that's really why we stood up that command and is well placed being in kind of the central, the heartland of europe so to speak. incense of germany. it's an important, important step for nato to take and i think it demonstrates nato's focus on making sure that it's relevant to the environment we are in today. >> thank you. general lyons how would trent come plug into j- sec? and how would you plug it in and how would you plug it in to conflict for example and have we tested it? >> senator first let me say thank you for your understanding of logistics and importance of logistics and two were parting.
i appreciate that. and i have actually been to europe several times and i met with the leadership that was developing j-sec and understand the concept very well. i think it's a great initiative that general scaparrotti and the team are moving out of. i don't know that we plug in directly, we plug in directly to you come headquarters thread european deployment distribution operation center. then across the echelon to include his headquarters. we would take the signals that he would be sending on his priorities for mobility and then measure them accordingly and he would have the role than to integrate that from a coalition perspective. >> thank you. i would like to return general scaparrotti to an understanding of sealift, we had a discussion earlier today and understand we reactivated the elect to command regarding the sea lanes in the approach to europe in the event of war. can you discredit me the general terms of the sealift that would required to move significant u.s. forces to
europe and event of conflict and argue about have to bow with the amount of at your disposal. >> senator, when we go to the closed session i could get in more detail. i would say it is significant and because of the types of forces i move and steve would agree that we rely on sealift largely for the bulk and a lot of that and heavy movement. you know i'm aware of the challenges to are particularly our reserve forces for naval forces. and you know where our commercial support can, that's all-important if we had a full conflict in your. so i would just underscore the importance of funding that, making sure that we have the readiness and the right place. because we were landed heavily for any crisis in europe. >> thank you, kent will probably try to follow up in the session later today, thank you. >> thank you senator duckworth. since you brought up the casey 46, remind all of us here that the it will be replaced with
the casey 35. it was delivered to altice l4 space in 1959. so it's been operating for 60 years, it gives you an idea of the significance of the casey 46 and the future of that capability. senator hawley? >> thank you mr. chairman. is general scaparrotti and thank you for being here and thank you for your service and the those under your command. let me start with you, i want talk about the india strategy the nds commission has studies indicated that we are not optimally postured to deal with a russian assault in the baltics in particular. the nds clearly states the joint forces have to be prepared to present a russian
fait accompli. my question is the positive work in the previous year's and initiatives and other activities, give is a progress report understand you may want to take some of this to the closed session but can you give us a progress report on our force posturing development to prevent that they to complete and where are we from this judgment? >> we had made clear progress as i stated up front. and with regard. largely thankful for the support congress and edi and funding changes that we need to make. we made progress and i would say on every domain. it is important to that including cyber. but we are not postured yet where we need to be. as you cited the studies that came out recently of underscore there. in the closed session i would like the opportunity to talk to you more specifically about where we are what we are short. for instance, we now have rotational brigades, a cab and
east and we have rotation air forces, we have rotation bomber forces. we have had twice now or three times actually areas group and once already and the high north for the first time in 20 years. we started at the beginning of my time here three years ago, we were moving one brigade at the time. a month ago, i moved for brigades, do armored and to cab simultaneously in your it. that's progress. thanks to trains, and others that helped do the work and provide the assets, increase the infrastructure and make that happen so clear progress but we are not there your. >> with the reservation i realize you won't say the specifics, it's important to get some of this on the record that were about to go into the authorization season and the appropriation season where we will be making the case for
authorizing and determining what is necessary in order to get you what you need. can you give us an overview at least about what more you think we need, generally speaking to get you to the posture that the nds recommends? first of all will talk with the cyber domain. there is a plan, an increase in my saver capability and there is an increase in cyber, is a priority. that has happened. and i still have personnel and skills, and the numbers of around 50 personnel yet that would be happy to have to have them in place. that's one of those. if you go to the land component, i need greater land component capability. not only in armored elements but with my enablers. not going to go into more detail in the other. i mentioned maritime greater capacity there as well as specific capabilities to stay ahead of, frankly, the modernization that we see in
russia's maritime forces. the air force is presently in a rotational basis providing fifth jen aircraft to me, bomber aircraft etc. which we need to apply for deterrent factor and it sure a readiness to capability. i'm looking for to those being stationed permanently in some numbers within europe as well. >> aright thank you. let me ask you about the european allies, can you give us a report, you mentioned some of this in written testimony, can you give us a report on the work with european allies, especially german it. to ensure that their meeting their nato commitments and have a plan to do so going forward? >> it you know we've been working with all of our allies and i mentioned that front the cash contribution. so since 2016, our allies have put another $41 billion into defense. by 2020 it will be $100 billion based on the planes that they
had to provide here in december. their contributions have stepped up. we asked for greater force instructor to assist in afghanistan. our allies respond it. so i think when you look at that, you know there clearly respond it. but we have a ways to go yet. germany particular has responded as will. they plan to bring their defense investment up to 1.5 percent. that's not 2% yet. >> that's what needs to be. but there, there clearly refocused on their contribution as well as the readiness. as you know, they've got some readiness issues. has been in the paper, i believe that's true. from what i have seen. but they are providing the very high joint task force, for instance for nato. a major they produce a force that was ready incredible and i have seen it. we operated with that force and trident juncture for instance. so they understand the issue,
and they are working hard to get the readiness up to where it's needed to be. they spent a good deal of time in particular as many and as we did as well but european nations where they rested and they did in the best of their defense. another having to invest heavily to quibec up on step. >> thank you general and thank you. >> thank you thank you janitor hawley. to >> i want to discuss the national security threat that can't be addressed by traditional military power at all. and that is climate change. the unclassified worldwide threat assessment by the director of national intelligence said and i'm quote here, global environmental and ecological degradation and climate change are likely to fuel competition for resources, economic distress, and social discontent through 2019 and beyond." that assessment also said quote, damage to the
communications, energy, and transportation infrastructure could affect low-lying military bases, inflict economic costs and cause human displacement and loss of life. i've asked this question to other combatant commanders so i want to make sure that i get this on the record. general scaparrotti and general alliance, do you agree with the intelligence community's assessment of the climate change threat. >> i do and i believe as you noted, much of this will be drivers for potential conflict or at least very difficult situations that nations have to deal with. the second i would point to your high north, that the increasing opening of the northern sea route, and the challenges that presents from a security perspective. >> thank you, general lyons you also agree? >> yes i agree, their sources of conflict and we certainly had to be approved prepared to kiss the >> i would ask each of you
briefly because we have limited time to just to describe how climate change impacts your operations and your commands and what you're doing to adapt to these changes? >> general scaparrotti? >> well i think most apparent to me is the one that i noted, that is been the arctic. we are going, we already are saying birds of time that the northern sea route is open, and so is a part of that there is an increased interest in commercial and source resource capabilities there. china for instance is pressing to get into the high north and have some presence there. and so that creates competition. russia, because that northern sea route is one that follows most closely to their borders and has increased and reopened 10 other airports there and they now have radar systems it.
they have begun to move on periodic times different weapon systems up there for their control of the area it. so those are all things >> that the risk is a >> i have to bring it to my planning. >> what is been your response to that? >> we have changed and updated her plans, as a result of that. we have had to change the posture of some of our forces, we have changed our operational patterns so that we in fact deter and we send a signal of the importance of the arctic to is. there's a some of the ways on day-to-day that we have made changes in her normal routine in order to demonstrate significant and capability in the arctic. >> general lyons? >> ma'am, anything that the greater ability to project and sustain power globally is a concern. we know that we have to operate in any conditions whatsoever. >> so what are you doing a way
of response? >> ma'am, in other words in our planning and so forth we consider all infirm it. that more specifically to his point, the more scientific piece of this, that's out of my area of expertise. >> fournier, i wasn't sure i wasn't looking for scientific answer but you have to readjust where you are and what you're doing. if i can, i just want to save adapting to climate change impacts our military readiness. i'm glad you both take this threat seriously. i appreciate there. in my remaining time i want to as very briefly if i can, about the imf treaty. we know this is landmark treaty, arms control treaty with russia negotiated by in 1987 by president ronald reagan. the treaty prohibits both of our countries from testing and deploying ground launched ballistic and cruise missiles
with a range of 500-5500 kilometers. yet we know russia is in violation of the treaty since 2014. but rather than use the mechanisms within the treaty or other tools available to us to try to get russia back into compliance, the administration is abandoning the treaty entirely. so i want to ask, what is our plan to prevent russia from building more inf treaty prohibited missiles in the absence of the treaty. we have a plan here? >> general lyons? >> mem would have to defer on that. that's out of my area of expertise. >> general scaparrotti? >> senator i think were still in a six-month period looking where we are looking at what her options are. in fact, we have told our allies and nato that we will do this planning and collaboration with m. we have begun the it. why don't know the we have a
planted it. i know that were working on what we think that plan might be. i personally think it has to be multidimensional. it is be across all domains in it has to be whole of government in order to respond to that. i would finally say that from my point of view, that when you have a pure competitor practically modernizing one, that it will be challenging such as russia. we should look toward treaty capabilities in order to provide some stability it. to provide signals in communications and limits that we understand that we can were from. >> i'm glad to hear that you are trying to work with our allies. i think the polish for example have said they are concerned about missiles on their land it. i urge you to think about instead of withdrawing from the inf treaty, whether or not we
should be redoubling our efforts to bring russia back into compliance with the treaty. we know that putin can't be trusted that we have a responsibility to prevent a dangerous and expensive arms race in europe and without the treaty, i'm worried that that's what will be doing. i apologize. >> senator tillis. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you both for being here i was down at fort bragg this past friday with secretary esper and we were talking with folks there who are in unacceptable housing conditions. we also talked a little bit about that had a number of discussions of the past with families about some other household belongings being moved., the bottlenecks and unsatisfactory service. so i like the idea of taking a personal property program into what i would consider to be one of throat to choke sort of model. but i'd really like to make if you could briefly describe
where you think this is going to end up, i really want to make sure we get this right in terms of accountability, predictability, and customer satisfaction and so that any relationship we create with this confederation of movers, i guess you will have to a consolidator but still a number of individual providers. we have to get the compensation and accountability models right to the we don't end up here honestly trying to do a good thing and then ending up where we are with housing situation. can you give me some assurances or briefly describe how this went work. >> senator ken. this is definitely not a privatization effort by any stretch of the imagination. what i have offered to the service secretaries and service chiefs is a set completed the aggregated, diffused value change, little centralize responsibility even as of the government. to look at than when i say hold me accountable, allow me to develop an acquisition tool to hold industry accountable.
we have a track record of being able to do there. in other parts of the personal property program i know, what vehicles we do that today. i do know senator that there's some concern an industry we get a lot of feedback in industry and some are supportive. they see opportunities to enter the market and others want to grow the market it. others are concerned about the potential change. but i tell them and what i have seen in our past acquisitions is that have been similar is that below the level, we still need some same or greater numbers of movers. we just need the level of quality and accountability in the system. >> and some peeking capability. i would be very interested in maybe having the right people and your organization meet with my staff to look and describe what that really looks like operational it. in a simplistic way, thomas b this baseline guarantee of capacity with some peeking capability that almost over like in terms of having the
household that they will get there things moved at the appropriate time hopefully to a house that is a much better condition than the one i saw at fort bragg. separate issue. not your problem it. general scaparrotti i appreciate the time you spent in the office yesterday. appreciate your decades of service. and i associate myself with senator cotten's comments. hopefully if you take your uniform off we hope it doesn't mean we won't see you back here at serving in some other capacity. i'm gonna save a lot of my questions for the classified briefing. but i do want to highlight my concern with the turkey situation. particularly with the is 400s. i know i and you gave a great briefing on where we are working together on the legitimate homeland security threat that they are dealing with on the pkk. on the one hand were trying to partner and continued on the
relationship. berkeley turkey is a vitally important nato partner and the most complicated part of the role. to understand some of their behaviors that i do not understand under any circumstances one earth they would be considered purchasing a missile defense system that would not be in operable that would require capable deployment capabilities on the ground in turkey that would threaten the presence of our joint strike fighter. while on earth they would be considering a decision that would make us have to rethink whether or not they can actually be in the supply chain for the joint strike fighter. so let alone deploying assets that are scheduled to be there in 2020, but even raising doubts about whether or not we can legitimately manufacture and distribute parts in the supply chain for the production of joint strike fighter. and the message that i want to send to the turkish leadership is this is an areas, congress had got educated quite a bit on the joint strike fighter on turkey last year before we were dealing with the matter
involving a pastor from my state. i think we're very well briefed on it now and some of the risks there. i would just encourage the turkish government and the leadership to recognize that they should not have this one decision, but all the other great things were doing in the balance and have congress potentially in a position where we have to it. >> sinner, thank you. as you know we have a team there today. >> talking to turks and i'm sure a very candid conversation about the as/400 and the potential consequences are part of the conversation. >> thank you senator tillis, senator blumenthal. >> thank you mr. chairman. general lyons let me first ask you a question about privatization. as you are familiar, as you
know, army veteran and military stuff megan hale is hurled was road wrote an article opted to criticize trends come plan to privatize the military move program. she stated that the military move advisory panel convened by trends come has not been consulted regarding privatization and trends come also has not solicited feedback from military families or from the moving industry. do military family support privatization? >> senator, there's no initiative whatsoever to privatize the household goods industry. this is a 100% task inside that value chain is conducted a commercial industry today. what we are proposing however is a restructure of how the
government approaches this with industry. i think to be honest, with with you i received more letters on this particular issue since the six months i've been commander than any other issue that trends come deals with. in fact, i agree with the criticism of the program. need to take action to remedy the program as it is today. >> we've been studying this is 1996 sipp >> you commit to prioritizing the needs of those military families? in any kind of reform that you may consider? >> no question about it, this is all about the military families, that is the north star and the only reason were doing this. >> we you commit to consulting with the trance, advisory panel? yes sir, we consult regularly with industry. some are support where we headed on as you know some are concerned. i do know senator that the moving associations for example
for drafting language to insert that would nda a that would delay any kind of progress in his there. perhaps a study for two more years. i can say really think that would be a got lunch for military families. >> general, talking about the ukraine. is her evidence of the russians meddling in the elections ukrainian elections that are plan. >> in terms of their influence, they certainly are supporting the parties they believe they can have the most influence. and those individuals. they are certainly disinformation as a part of that. they are playing in that. you know, i think for instance rushes seizure of their ships and their 24 sailors and the fact that they have not been released is likely also another way they have some leverage and
influence on the outcome of the election. >> has there been an increase in disinformation or other russian interference? >> just generally it's been targeted at undermining the present government and the president. >> what is your command or other american resources doing to counter it? >> well, both not only my command, i do with the military aspects of this, but there's other diplomatically for instance in the state that we are working with in this regard. but we do have personnel there that support military means. their defense of this disinformation appropriate information and cyber defenses well, and the closed hearing i could be more specific about precisely what were doing. >> just to reassure the
american people and that's the purpose of an open hearing, really to inform the american people, can you describe some description of what's being done and the cyber domain by your command to bolster the ukrainian defense? >> i guess i would underscore first of all what we do with the is to make sure this is a free and fair election. within the cyber domain, mine is to help them with their defense of their systems. so it's not you know, it's not selected by any means. it's primarily defense and help them understand how they ensure that they do have in fact have a free and fair election. >> thank you, thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. chairman. i will tell you it's been such a pleasure for me to go through
this series of hearings with different commands and your area of responsibility in here repeatedly from the wall some of the needs. and stepping up her game if you will dealing with russia and china and especially with cyber. in general, scaparrotti, i am from tennessee, i've got some national guardsmen's that are under your command. at this point, folks in ukraine and poland. and we appreciate their service. and we appreciate you and the leadership that you have shown throughout your career to our men and women in uniform and to those that are currently under your command. let me stay with this looking at our enemies. russia, china, the cyber
component. we will come back to that this afternoon in the briefing, but what i'd like to note general is as you look at europe and we talk about the rollout of 5g, and you are looking at the european deterrents initiative. do you have what you need, where do we need to be planning for forward on that and how are you approaching the integration and the utilization for really, what some of our troops at fort campbell, when i talked to some of our special ops guys, fifth edition, 60th this is very important to them. 5g and the relation is said that utilization of that. knowing that's going to help fuel artificial intelligence. etc. knowing they're going to use that with some of the cave of inr capabilities kiss if you will touch on that briefly and
they will explore the lemoore this afternoon. >> first of all i will start with 5g part of this. this is a considerably different capability than what we have today. is not just a modernization or upgrade. >> it's a whole new world. >> it's a different world. what we have to know is that we have a secure 5g capability. that's one of the reasons that you go to the allies that we have said they need to be very careful about chinese investment . >> and exactly >> and telecommunications capabilities. because we also want to know that we are secure for allies that we connect with. and there may be an outcome where we can't connect with allies unless they change you know the composition of their systems. we are trying to get ahead of the. >> so is this an open discussion that you're having? >> yes, open discussion. i would say to you that just as an idea, to give you an idea
how this has come along, two years ago this would have been a topic. figure goa started to comment and now it's it's front and center. we are having the right conversations. as a security issue. >> that's great. general lyons, trans, had some problems with some breaches. i think it was a couple of years ago, chinese hackers got into the network 20 times. what you do with logistics and we talked about different points, i think chairman worker brought up spain and as you look at the integration and all that comes under you, give me an update on the security of your system and then how are you dealing with contractors that are a part of your system.
>> yes ma'am, as you indicated it is an area of concern and it's a high priority for the command. you know, i tell folks this is a war fighting to make sure there's no one thing that's going to solve this. so we've got multiple things going on, everything from just operator discipline through cyber hygiene through defense and through infrastructure. and a high level collaboration with cyber command to create conditions to cost position to allow us to operate. as for industry partners, we are also upping her game there through a contractual language with cold compliance and standards. basically their assessments and collaboration and information sharing. that is a much more complex area outside of the level protection is lower. that does become a vulnerability in the press. >> we'll talk a little bit more of in this afternoon's hearing. mr. chairman i'll yield back. >> thank you mr. chairman thanks
to the witnesses for your service and testimony. i house bill to overturn president trump's emergency declaration is pending before this committee. and will likely be voted on in the floor of the senate within the next phase 10 days or so. there's only two issues that senators are grappling with about the bill. one, the fact or question of whether there is an emergency. general o'shaughnessy of north, last week said in a straightforward way, there is no military emergency at the border. but the second issue we are grappling with is where will the money come from. the president proposed using $6 billion from the pentagon. to direct where this nonmilitary emergency three and had billion dollars of milk on funding and to have billion of drug introduction money within the dod budget. want to ask you about these proposals because we are trying to get information about exactly how the moving of the
$6 billion could affect military operations. have either of you in your commands been asked to provide list of product milk on projects that could should either be delayed or reduced or eliminated. >> with respect to this particular three and have billion dollar proposal. general scaparrotti? >> knows there. >> general lyons? >> no sir, it probably would not be appropriate trans com related for the services for milk and kiss visit >> so you don't have the big mill, that the others to. general scaparrotti, you say not with respect to the proposal, together what you mean by that you often put them together milk on list, that would be one of the things that you would do when you're looking at milk i needs within that command and so you been doing that. but you haven't been asked with respect to this proposal what
milk on projects could be reduced, delayed or limited. >> with respect to the budget as a whole, we went to the normal process of you know our discussion within dod. as to how or the properties work across the department with respect to my mil con. so we had to prioritize and we looked away something that was well behind beyond this conversation. >> do you know if and when a decision is made about where the three and had billion dollars of milk on projects are which will be affected? do you know whether you will be in the decision loop or whether it would made by others? >> i expect i'll be in decision loop. within the department, we have a close relationship with them. we generally would have no one discussed with me and i'm confident they would win if that changes kiss the >> and they would probably be the service secretaries? >> it would be the service secretary. probably the 2nd..
as well. i mean, i actually talk to the sect that personally. about the potential delay etc. that i told you about is we are going to the budget. >> let me ask a second half the question. the other funding that is adjusted could be used is the to and have billion dollar drug interdiction from the pentagon. sump reporting's adjusters not to have billion dollars is about 750 million of which only 85 million is available for use right now. there's a suggestion on what the pentagon would do would be to take monies out of other accounts to fill up the drug interdiction accounts to have billion dollars prior to using it for the emergency proposal. but the president's adjusted. have either of you involved in discussions about funds within your >> bill: that might be used to pull into the account drug interdiction account? >> no senator i have not. >> general lyons? >> knows there.
will scaparrotti let me ask about this. 70 anniversary and nato is in april. really important one, nato has headquarters both in brussels and also in virginia in the hampton roads area. i have a proposal, a bill that is a bipartisan bill to that would stipulate that nato, a treaty that the senate ratified with u.s. should not unilaterally withdraw from that without either a senate vote or act of congress. the bill is bipartisan one and meant to send a strong signal of congressional support for the nato alliance on the city of anniversary, would that message to be positive received by the allies? >> i believe it would. and the vote by congress that would be taking a pass to reinforce our commitment to our allies has been helpful as well. >> thank you, no further questions, thank you mr. jaire. >> thank you gentlemen very much for being here today and willing to answer questions like so many of my colleagues,
i want to make sure that you have the tools and resources necessary to enable you in your missions and to make you successful. as senator sullivan mentioned, just a little bit earlier, i did recently returned from a trip to ukraine. and during that trip, i was able to see firsthand the new russian aggression that is being exhibited in that region against it is a very important strategic partner to us. so not only do we want to push back against the russia but because of ukraine and europe but of course for many of our allies around the rope as well. general scaparrotti i would like to start with you sir, of course while i was in ukraine, the ukrainians expressed a very strong desire for military assistance. defenses assistance and lethal assistance. senator sullivan mentioned that we have provided javelins to
the ukrainian army. so i met with members of the defense establishment there as well as members of the parliament you crilly and ukrainian parliament and those that had the opportunity to meet with and with the joint forces headquarters near the eastern front, they really appreciated that assistance, what more can we do for the ukrainians in that regard for lethal assistance? is it simply more javelins or is there additional assistance we can provide? >> there is, i think personally, you will see soon here a list i think it's already been provided to congress but as you know we provide that prior to being authorized. the actual purchase from the funding that you have given. but from my point of view, the things we need to continue to their support for counter battery, the b 36 and 37 that they have the assets and systems
they need to do that as well. they have asked for help in communication at an operational level. they do have a distinct need for that. because while we focus on the line of contact, they're cheaper defense is also focused on other areas of the country that are a threat that russia could present a threat is will. so he's trying to determine, he's trying to establish a good communication system for his entire force. as well as just the front. they have asked us for us specifically for systems to help with sniper proficiency, the right kind of ammo and weapons grenade launchers, and then finally the area that i would say we need to study how we help them maritime component with her navy which is you know is not large to begin with, the portion of the fleet that russia took when it annexed crimea, they just lost a couple of ships as well in the straight. so i think there's some areas
there that we can help them get this navy back up and begin to supply it with what they believe they need to defend themselves and deter russia's aggressive action. >> i appreciate that very much. thank you for bringing up the street. they are still hoping the 24 sailors as you referenced earlier and using those sailors as leverage with the elections coming up. so i do appreciate that you think we need to do more in the maritime front. not only assisting them with their navy but is it possible that we as an american force you to have more of our naval forces in the black sea region? >> both united states and nato have stepped up its presence in the black sea. as you know we just had mcdonnell cooked just departed yesterday or the day before, is the second time that we have had a destroyer in the black
sea in the past two months. so we believe there is a need for that, we have stepped up and our allies have as well, nato has in the black sea. >> is it sending a clear message to president vladimir putin? >> i think it is, they frankly don't like us in the black sea. and its international waters and we should sail and fly there. >> that's a great thing and i love it. thank you sir. the presidential elections are coming up and i'll just close with discus i think it was very important that i'm take this trip to ukraine and spent time with the folks within their defense sector and also spent time with some of their brand- new special operations forces that it just graduated from there ukrainian course kiss. which is run by our american special operations forces. i appreciate what were doing and that regions are. i appreciate your leadership in
that region. gentlemen thank you very much for being here today. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you both for being here today and for your service. general scaparrotti i appreciate your come by the office of the day, i enjoyed that very much. i appreciated your candid answers concerning climate change. i think we sometimes get caught up in the political discussions and not about climate and not focus on the real-world consequences that are affecting us today. earlier today you spoke with senator cotton about tynice investment in your a our. if you can, have like to have you discuss what actions you come may be taking to counter tynice activities in europe today? >> most of all, in terms of you come, is discussions with our counterparts and leaders about the concerns of china, what i
would say is strategic investments. most of this is diplomatic at this point, that we do try to ensure that we can point out to them not only economic benefits with china, demonstrates and make sure they're aware of but also the security aspects of their control of seaports, airports, critical key terrain and investment and infrastructure particular with technology. that's critical to security. we try to emphasize the security aspects of their investment. >> has the administration's tactics with regard to the tariffs and european tariffs, have you seen any effect on that with our with our allies, the economic impact? >> well, there certainly a point of discussion among the allies and one of one of concern because our country and europe has a very significant
trade and economic linkage there. but in terms of the direct impact for me, the relationships are strong, we have dealt with in a diplomatic set. >> thank you sir. general lyons, let's go back to the conversation you had with senator king on cyber security. if you can, in this hearing as opposed to the closed hearing, could you please maybe describe the impact on operations of a nationstate cyberattack on trans com's network and how this could impact your discussions and your ability and interaction with co-come? >> senator anything that would degrade our ability to protect our concern, cyber as they were fighting tomatoes create in europe vulnerability across what's largely an unclassified surface of employment.
so we are working very hard to privatize and to ensure that we have the appropriate level of resiliency and to move to an infrastructure that's more secure and were moving rapidly and that area. >> i will just stay with you general lyons, you mentioned earlier there was a plan to improve the household goods shipment process using a single contractor to manage transportation service providers. how will that change and and improve the process? what will it cost and will it increase accountability? >> senator, it will definitely increase accountability and i believe will also increase capacity and those of the two major issues to major complaints. and the way it enhances capacity is that it's a longer- term investment where industry partners want to invest in capacity over time as well as the entry into the market. and foresight we create for
host: a conversation about the concept known as medicare for all with two guest joining us here in studio. joseph antos from the american enterprise institute who serves as a policy scholar and joining us as well is adam gaffney from the group physicians for a national health program. thanks for joining us. guest: thank you. , when we hearney this concept of medicare for all what appears in your mind and what do you think of what has been introduced in congress or the ideas connected to this concept introduced in congress? guest: the concept of medicare for all is not an especially complicated one. it is