schumer told reporters democrats are ready to move as expeditiously as possible. some on capitol hill anticipate a possible vote to dismiss the charges as soon as the articles arrive in the senate. the house voted to impeach sec. mayorkas in february. accusing him of failing to enforce u.s. immigration laws and making false statements to congress. the secretary has denied these charges. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> are you building just a community center? >> it's way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1000 community centers to create wi-fi enabled lift zones so students from low income communities can get ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers,

giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> next, testimony on the 2020 five pentagon budget with defense secretary lloyd austin, the chair of the joint chiefs of staff general charles "cq" brown, and defense comptroller mike mccord. they testified before the senate armed services committee about military investment, readiness and the in israel-hamas war. this is about three hours. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

[chanting "stop the genocide"] >> stop the genocide in gaza. stop the genocide in gaza. stop the genocide in gaza. stop the genocide in gaza. stop the genocide in gaza. 2025 budget request for [gavels] >> committee will come to order.

>> the committee will come to order. good morning. the committee meets today to receive testimony for the governor's request for the fiscal year of 2025. witnesses this morning on secretary of defense lloyd austin. and general cq brown junior. i would like to take a moment to recognize that this is the first hearing before the committee as chairman and joint chief. we thank you to the witnesses for their service and their testimony today. this is a critical moment for national security. among congress and the white house about the threats to our safety. china seeks to challenge economic interest for the united states and our allies.

and increasingly has the ability to do so. vladimir putin is committed to creating the vision of the old soviet empire and taking over ukraine is one step towards that vision. there are those who would expel the united states from the region and further sabotage the free world rule in the middle east. each of these threats can be addressed through the national security supplemental that the senate passed nearly two months ago. the bill was for ukraine, israel, and taiwan and provide with humanitarian relief in gaza and replenish the u.s. industrial base. in gaza and the separate fight for freedom. the most important step that congress can take right now is to address this legislation and

i urge the house to vote on it. biden released the fiscal year 2025 budget request with a top request of $850 billion. i understand this budget is below the plan of the fiscal year, 2025. there is the task set by last year's agreement has the physical act of 2023. the defense had to follow along and admit this level of finding to congress. i expect -- we will stand in recess for a moment. we will resume.

senator, it is a liability being unusually tall. again, the department is responding to the fiscal responsibility in 2023 in terms of the budget they have to resent. i expect there will be a discussion today if it is adequate for the national security challenges that we face. this was a demand by republicans in the house, in order for us to pass the debt ceiling. this has constrained the operations and the budgets. with those limits in mind, the defense budget aligns well with the national security threat

before. as the defense strategy makes clear, the united states is in a strategic competition with china and russia. we will continue to face persistent threats by north korea and issues like violent attacks. we will explain how the fiscal year 2025 budget support -- and the missile defense review. given the competition with china front and center, the request has $9.9 million for the pacific defense initiative. i am encouraged by the progress we have made thus far. and we will continue the force in the indo pacific region. this includes logistics, modernizing infrastructure, and building capabilities of allies

and partners. our approach in the indo pacific should be informed by residents from the european initiative. which has played a subsequent role in enhancing the readiness of allies and partners in europe over the last 10 years. it includes 2.9 billion for edi -related investments and the ukraine assistance ministry. i am encouraged that the budget request marks funding to strengthen america's cyber defenses and cutting technologies like artificial intelligence, 5g and quantum computers strategies towards china and russia should not be defined by how much but where and why we are investing to get

the greatest advantage. i'm pleased to see that this budget request by our ties is taking care of our men and women in unit. by providing a 4.5% pay raise an increase in basic needs allowance eligibility expanding the benefits for military families. these actions send an important message at a time when recruiting is particularly challenging with regard to the nuclear strategy, this request supports important steps towards the modernization of the -- we must continue to modernize strategic forces to deter aggression from our competitors. we should seek ways to achieve strategic stability and if possible, reduce nuclear stockpiles.

the proposed investment in tactical vehicles and naval view was has a grooved this decision. there are a number of long- standing challenge is that must be addressed to use these platforms. the military services have made difficult and practical decisions to identify supply- chain problems, pinpoint shortages of critic will materials and reinvigorate the defense force. they have requested $2 billion to improve the capabilities of the submarine industrial base. i would appreciate views on how congress can help to overcome these issues. i think you for your participation today and i look forward to the testimonies and i recognize the ranking members

that are with us. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> this is a chance to take stock over national security from the past year the department of defense is prepared for the future. this security environment as we all know, has the area rated evidently since we last had this hearing. armed conflict is ongoing in multiple continents, threatening peace and prosperity and freedom around the world. several allied nations are forming a new axis. we are approaching a window of maximum danger. our government is feeling to modernize our defense capabilities and provide sufficient resources to fund our national defense strategy. -- will continue china's historic military organization with a budget increase this year. the military production rates, advanced training improvements and innovative strategies are troubling and they are stunning

in addition to the designs on taiwan there is a very real ross act of chinese action against a filipino treaty ally in the south china sea. both will test american resolve. those in ukraine have exceeded expectation in holding the line against the russian dictators army. if congress passes a supplemental, we can help ukraine win. but to make that happen, the biden administration would have to articulate a real land for provision and training ukrainian horses as gail when congress passes the supplemental appropriation bill. i share the chairs comments about the decision that the house of representatives led by the speaker will have to make

this week. this is an occasion that history will look back on. this is a time for statesmanship and bipartisanship. i share the chairs oh that this supplemental will be signed into law very soon. i'm disappointed in the drip approach to military aid that has characterized this administration's policy thus far. i would appreciate your comments on the situation on ukraine and if a more timely aggressive posture to training and equipping the ukrainians is called for after the hopeful passage of the supplemental. u.s. strikes in iraq and syria have led to a temporary pause. those attacks have restarted. by contrast, we have not figured out how to compel the

koozies. i would remind my colleagues that it was supposed to be an economy of force where we relied upon our allies. we have ignored allies and partners in the middle east when it comes to u.s. interests that could be profound. we face threats on multiple fronts. there are threats that we do not contemplate. secondary austin and general brown, i would like your comments on if it is time to actually rewrite the national defense strategy. is it adequate for the threats that i mentioned? let me say this with regard to my good friends comments with

regard to the caps in the fiscal responsibility act. i disagree that the administration was prevented from asking for more for national security and defense then is contained in the cap. as a matter of fact, the president budget request with regard to domestic spending is $76 billion over the fiscal responsibility cap and for some reason, the administration chose to adhere to that capital only with regard to our most important duties defending this country and making sure that national security is in order. i do have confidence that working together with members

on either side of the chair, will be able to work alongside the committee members and get closer to where we need to be where we want to be defending our country and keeping the peace. what is alarming more than that and should be there to members on both sides of aisle, our budgetary resourcing does not meet even the inadequate defense strategy that we do have. we are dealing with a recruitment crisis, a languishing industrial base, and acquisition bureaucracy and massive backlogs. we need to invest more and we need to invest more wisely. we should cut red tape and guard against unnecessary requirements and use more innovative companies which can respond to defense leads at the

speed of relevance. more military spending is absolutely necessary and will not fix our problems. there are other forms of predatory investment. however, we have the deepest and broadest capital markets in the world, they can be used on behalf of the american people living inside the united states and we should actively work to bring those capital markets to bear, outside the united states , for national security purposes. you have championed the office of strategic capital and the team can do this work if you direct them to. we have much work to do, no time to lose, the last time we were together, we discussed what i can only describe as --

i must say this with contempt that the administrative has treated congress, when we passed the law, that is the law of the land. we would appreciate it being adhered to by the administration. your responsiveness to my support inquiries, mr. secretary, has been lacking to say the least. to take two examples, you failed to follow the law and canceled the c launched missile again. we will have to address that. you have not decided to implement my revision from the marriott which was signed by the president. your department has failed to act on simple provisions of the law that would help her prayer the relationship between you and the elected representatives

of the public and congress. i hope we can fix these issues this year. thank you, senator reid. >> thank you very much. let me recognize secretary austin to his testimony. newly distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in some word of president biden's proposed public request for the budget defense. i am joined by the joint chief of staff, i am also glad to be back with mike record. the departments controller. newly it stands as it is until we can restore order.

>> the committee will be in order. >> let me start by thanking this committee for all that you do supporting our u.s. troops and military families. i have been guided by three priorities, defending our nation, taking care of our people and cisco meetings through teamwork. our budget request for 2025 will advance all three of these priorities. the president's request for investing and cutting capabilities across all domains which in foods $48.1 million for naval and ship building capabilities to strengthen and modernize our fleet. $61.2 billion to reinforce u.s. air dominance and $13 billion to bolster army and marine corps combat capabilities. our request will also provide

$38.7 billion to increase space architecture and to fuel cybersecurity. he will direct $49.2 billion to modernize and recapitalize all three legs of the nuclear triad and will start with a tech edge. through hundred $67.5 billion investment in procurement and $143.2 billion in r&d and second, this budget request will support outstanding troops and their families which includes raising base pay and housing allowances, investing in better housing, and making childcare more accessible and more affordable. the request will also find vital work to prevent sexual assault and suicide in the military. to further deepen our teamwork around the globe. our network of allies and

partners remains a strategic advantage that no competitor can match. you can see it's power in strengthening ties across the indo pacific. in a 50 country ukraine defense contact group to ensure that ukraine can repel aggression. to tackle the departments pacing challenge of the people's republic of china with confidence and urgency. we will provide resources to meet the acute threat of the increasingly aggressive russia. this will help us tackle the persistent dangers from iran, north korea, and global terrorist organizations. and it will help us continue to deter aggression against the united states and allies and

partners and to prevail in conflict if necessary. today, i want to underscore three key messages. first, even as our budget request -- >> the committee stands at recess until the capitol police can restore order. >> the committee is in recess.

>> let me once again reiterate that it is not appropriate for comments or demonstrations by the spectators audience here, we are conducting a hearing and we will do so. >> i will direct the capitol police to remove the

demonstrators. mr. secretary, you are recognized for your remarks. >> thank you, chairman. i want to underscore three key messages. first, even as the budget request abides by the budget caps, it is aligned to our strategy. we make tough and responsible decisions in this budget and prioritize readiness, modernization of the force and support our troops and their families. our approach dials back modernization for programs that are not set to come online until the 2030s. requiring topline growth in future budgets. we can only fully reach the goal of our strategy with your help. i'm grateful that congress

passed the 2024 appropriations in march. and that congress will continue to support the department of defense for sustained and timely appropriations. my final message today is that the price of u.s. leadership is real. it is far lower than the price of u.s. abdication. the president has said we are in a global struggle between democracy and autocracy. the struggle relies on american strength of purpose. we are determined to meet this moment. that is why our budget request seeks to invest in american security and defense industrial base. this is why the administration has requested $60 billion in a national security supplemental for the department of defense. that supplemental will support our partners in israel and ukraine and taiwan while making investments to increase

submarine production. $50 million of the supplemental will rush eight to our partners while creating good american jobs and more than 30 states. i would like to thank all of those who have passed the funding package. we are two years into the war of aggression against ukraine. he is betting that the united states will falter. and abandon our friends and leave you rain in mortal danger. if the kremlin prevails in ukraine it will prevail for aggressors all around the globe. we would be less secure if putin got his way and ukraine. president biden has warned that you will not.i ukraine. if america walked away, it will put the free world in peril and risk unimaginable cost. we know that china and others are watching and learning from what he does and how we

respond. we look to our partners in congress to help us make the investments needed to strengthen american security for the supplemental and fiscal year 2025 budget request. the u.s. mid to is the most lethal fighting force on earth, with your help, we will keep it that way. i am thankful for your support in our mission and for our troops, with that, i look forward to taking your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. secretary. newly chairman reed, i am honored to join secretary austin to appear before you today on behalf of the joint force, and millions of our families, i want to thank congress for your support and the opportunity to testify on the 2025 defense budget request. the security environment is

increasingly complex. the strategy identifies five key challenges. the people's republic of china, continuing its risky behavior around the globe. and the unprovoked war against ukraine. and violent extremist organizations that use instability to advance their cause. this requires a strategic approach preparing for future contingencies. i have laid out three expectations in my message to the joint force. modernizing and aggressively leading with new concepts and approaches and trust as the foundation of our military to fight and win our nation's wars. we are so good at what we do

that we deter any adversary from engaging the u.s. in conflict. this budget last is to ensure the department can counter any threats. operations by investing in print critical programs. expanding security operations and training interoperability. the investment ensures that the joint force can respond when the nation calls. we remain focused on readiness for the day is critical to modernize and lead with new concepts. the department continues to invest in capability capacity to outpace competitors while transforming from costly legacy platforms that are no longer relevant to the threat. this budget will invest $167.5 million in procurement, underscoring our commitment to equip the joint force with capabilities across every

domain. the budget also invests $143.2 million in restructuring, development, test, and evaluating new capabilities to retain strategic edge. finally, the budget invest significantly to nuclear modernization, digital innovation critical munitions and the strengthened industrial race. rapidly evolving threats and tech ologies accelerating monetization is crucial. lastly, trust is the foundation of our profession. the joint force must build upon and uphold trust in each other, trust with our families, trust in our elected leaders and trust of our nation. enhancing the quality of service and quality of life for personnel is not just a moral obligation but a strategic imperative. the budgeting cleats -- includes investments in advanced training, educational benefits while also investing

in quality-of-life projects like housing, medical clinics, and childcare facilities as well as funding spouse initiatives, enhanced mental health resources and combating sexual assault. we must create an environment where all can reach their full potential. choice stands ready to deter aggression, and ready if necessary to fight. i thank you for your support and collaboration in the shared commitment to face the security challenges of today and prepare for tomorrow. we are living inconsequential times and there is no time to waste. thank you. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, general brown. general austin the most pressing is not just the consequences in ukraine but throughout the world. the cia director recently stated

no one is watching u.s. support for ukraine more closely than chinese leaders. one of the surest ways to rekindle chinese perceptions of american fecklessness would mean abandoned support for ukraine. do you think that is an accurate assessment? >> i do. we would ask that congress pass the supplemental as soon as possible. ukraine matters. the outcome of the conflict in ukraine will have global implications for our national security as well. we take a look at what ukraine has done with the support we have provided. it has been quite remarkable. not only have they stopped a much superior force in terms of quality of equipment and numbers, they have taken back some 50% of the ground that the

russians initially occupied. they are not asking for someone to fight the fight for them. they are asking for the means to sustain their efforts. without security assistance, they won't be able to resupply the much-needed air defense interceptors and systems that they need to protect their skies and their people. so we would see things continue -- begin to atrophy in a very meaningful way in a short period of time. so i think it is really important that we pass this legislation as quickly as possible. i would remind everyone that we -- the military does not give ukraine money. it provides security assistance

in the form of weapons and munitions and we replace those weapons and munitions by purchasing new weapons and ammunition's for our inventory and that flows through our industrial base. some $50 billion of this request with flow through the industrial base and would create new jobs for americans in 30 states. i think this is as much about our national security and industrial base capacity as anything else, but ukraine matters not only for europe but for the entire world. >> shifting to another area of contention, the humanitarian crisis in gaza is something that is obvious to the whole world. the united states is trying to

assist. for many people this is a moral principle but also an operational principle. unless you can separate the palestinian people from hamas you will never defeat hamas in my view. this is something that operationally we encountered any rack -- in iraq. let me emphasize mr. secretary, you understand this as well as general brown. i assume you concur with that comment. >> absolutely, chairman. if israel wants to create lasting effects, then it must address the humanitarian needs of the palestinian people.

not in a marginal way, in a meaningful way. we continue to encourage israeli leadership. i talked to my counterpart on a weekly basis. just spoke to him yesterday. encourage them to increase the volume of humanitarian assistance going into ukraine. we have seen them do that recently but we need to sustain that. the united states continues to do everything we can to assist. we have seen air drops on our part. you have seen is working to provide additional assistance as well in a maritime corridor. >> the maritime corridor, in your opinion, is a legitimate mission for the united states military? both you and general brown consider that a legitimate mission? >> i do. we are using the capability

that we have. joint logistics over sure and certainly our troops are trained to be able to put this into place. we expect that the initial operation capability will be in place by the third week of this month. so it is something that we have the ability to do and should do. >> the number one priority is force protection? >> it is and always will be. >> thank you very much. >> secretary austin, did a genocide occur around the gaza region and around the gaza is really border around october 7 of last year. >> what we witnessed on october 7, senator, was a horrific terrorist attack by hamas. >> was it a genocide?

let me be more specific. when noncombatant israelis were killed and their families were burned alive, was that a genocide. >> again, israel suffered a terrific low. >> so you are not willing to call it genocide? was it a war crime? >> it certainly is a war crime. >> when noncombatant americans were taken prisoner by hamas, was that a war crime? >> all of that. the murder, the taking of hostages or prisoners, all of that was was a war crime. >> on october 7, the war crime

was entirely committed on the part of hamas that day. was it not? >> it was. >> since that time, is it true that hamas has in violation of international law placed civilians in places that they knew would be vulnerable to attack and used civilians as a human shield? >> we have consistently seen hamas use civilians. >> in gaza. right? that is a continuation of war crimes, is it not? >> it is. >> secretary austin, if hamas lay down their arms today, with the conflict stop in and around gaza?

it would stop, would it not? >> we certainly would hope so. that is left to be seen. i do not want to speculate, but that is the goal. >> who started the conflict? >> hamas initiated the conflict. >> if israel lay down its arms today, would hamas stop their aggression against israel? >> i seriously doubt that. >> all right. i think we have made that clear. let me ask this, secretary austin. the admiral has convinced us that a standing joint task force , a separate standing joint task force for operations is needed. are you in support of

the admiral going forward as soon as possible with the standing joint task force? >> let me say that it is clear from our strategy and budget request which is linked to our strategy that the prc remains the pacing challenge. we have done a lot in terms of force posture and investments in the region. >> i'm aware of that. my question is specifically about the joint task force. we want to go forward with it with all due speed. >> command and control is really important to me. what i have asked my team to do is look at this and do an assessment to make sure we get it right and understand the operational and cost issues

associated with this. they are doing that and will come back to me shortly. >> how soon will they come back to you? >> in a couple weeks. >> how soon do you think we can move forward with implementing the plan? >> it depends on what the assessment is. as soon as we have a readout i will come back and review. >> finally, do you agree with my opening statement that the defense department and administration could have asked for more? under the law they were not constrained to ask for the number much as the defense part of the administration did not feel constrained by the caps? >> again, we have to comply with the law. >> why did the domestic departments of the biden administration not comply with those caps? >> i cannot answer that,

senator. >> you acknowledge that the administration asked for far more money above the caps than was provided in the statute and did not ask for more money with regard to defense spending? >> again, with an $850 billion budget what we have done is make budget requests -- >> it is okay if you answer the question. >> i support the budget. >> do you acknowledge that the budget request with regard to domestic spending was far in excess of the fiscal responsibility cap? >> i cannot speak to the domestic budget. i can only speak for the defense budget. >> thank you. >> thank you, secretary austin, general brown and undersecretary mccord for your

service to the country. one of the things i think we would all agree as we are talking about budgets is that if congress would pass the budget bills on time with certainty it would make the job of budgeting a lot easier. do you agree with that? i think you made that point in your opening statement. >> i absolutely agree. >> thank you. chairman reed talks about this. i think you made up really clear but we just returned from a trip to the indo pacific. what we heard from our partners was concern that our failure to follow through on our commitment to ukraine when embolden the prc. i think you made that pretty clear in your earlier statement, but can you speak again to what the impact would be for global security if we fail to live up to the commitment to ukraine?

>> it would be a signal that the united states is an unreliable partner and it would encourage and embolden autocrats around the globe to do the types of things that putin has done. >> it would have an impact not only on china but on a ran -- iran as well given that they are major contributors of drones in russia and they are benefiting from this war. so if we care about what is happening in iran this is a good way to address what is happening there as well, correct? >> yes. >> last week, thank you for taking time to talk with me last week, but one of the things we saw was a cbs news investigation which was the first public report that pointed to evidence of russia's responsibility and the anomalous health incidents also known as havana syndrome. our office has been in touch

with victims almost since the first reporting of those incidents. what we have heard from a number of those victims is that they believed there was an adversary that was involved in those incidents. can you tell me, in light of the reports, do you believe the intelligence committee should take another look at the assessment? you have oversight over two intelligence agencies. the defense intelligence agency and the national security agency. have you encouraged them to take another look at the reports and provided any resources toward that action? >> let me say i take the health and well-being of the forest extremely seriously. i have spoken to leaders in the intelligence community and addressed the issue with them. they have assured me that they will continue to address and investigate any new evidence that presents itself and will

continue to assess. the intelligence agencies that are part of the department of defense will continue to support that overall effort. yes. to answer your question. >> do you consider the revelations that cbs report that included several other news outlets and a fair amount of real investigation, do you consider that new information that would warrant that kind of further investigation? >> i do. they are looking into those things. each element of that report. >> thank you. do you have any sense of when you might be able to report back to the committee on what they have found? do you have any kind of a timeline for that? >> i do not but i will certainly get with the leadership of the intelligence community and get a feel for

the progress that they are making. >> thank you. i would appreciate hearing what they expect and what they are finding out. i think this is both for you, secretary, and for general brand. one of the things we continue to hear about is russia's maligned activities in the information space. in fact, just this week we heard from two members of the house. the chair of the intelligence committee and the foreign relations committee that they see russian disinformation being parroted by republican members of the house. is this a concern that you all share? and how do the russian tactics in the information domain impact what is happening in ukraine? >> the russians have always

endeavored to be effective in the information space. we have seen that from the very beginning with the russia and ukraine conflict and that work continues today. they will also seek to influence attitudes and operations in countries that are supporting ukraine, not only in the united states but other western countries and that continues. i expect that we will see that in the future and there will be a greater effort on the part of russia to take advantage of what they consider to be an opportunity. i think anything we can do to burst putin's bubble in terms of providing support to ukraine would be very helpful. a big thing that we could do was pass the supplemental. >> thank you. >> thank you very much.

senator fisher. >> thank you, mr. chairman. think you gentlemen for being here today. six months ago the congressional commission on strategic posture in the united states released their final report on america's strategic posture. despite bicameral participation we found that the nation is on the cusp of having not one but two nuclear adversaries looking to change the status quo by force if necessary. the situation which the united states did not anticipate and for which it is not prepared. these conclusions are not surprising. the planned nuclear force posture was decided in 2010 when the united states considered russia to be a partner and back before china's nuclear breakout the scale and speed of which were called breathtaking by the commander before this committee just two months ago. in order to ensure that we have

a safe, reliable, effective, and credible nuclear deterrent as we look to the 2030s and beyond we need to start laying the groundwork for significant changes now. i strongly encourage mr. secretary the department to take seriously the recommendations made in the strategic posture commission report. i am also working with colleagues here to address many of these recommendations through upcoming legislation. secretary austin and chairman brown, do you agree with the commissioner statement that, quote, the nuclear force modernization programs of record are absolutely essential although not sufficient to meet the new threats posed by russia and china and that the elements of the program of record should be completed on time, expedited wherever possible and expanded as needed? >> thank you, senator. thank you for your sustained

support for our efforts to modernize our nuclear triad. we agree with the strategic posture commission that u.s. deterrence remains sound. we have been taking a fresh look at the assumptions that are underlying the modernization program. we also agree with the assessment that the program of record is necessary but may not be sufficient. to the point that you made, we need to be looking forward and making sure that we have the agility to adjust the modernization program as we go forward to make sure that we not only keep pace but maintain a competitive edge. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator fisher. i have the real pleasure to have the commission come to

speak a few weeks ago. i agree with the assessment that the nuclear modern -- modernization is necessary but not sufficient. it is all things that we are doing to modernize the force that will be important to support our portfolio. >> did you discuss any specific recommendations that are put forward by the report that you would support? >> we did. we came to a pretty good agreement. i saw the report very much in the way. i appreciate the work we did to highlight the areas we need to focus on. >> they have a number of great recommendations. they are working on those hopefully we will get by on this committee and work with you on that. also i recognize that the white house tied the department's hands through the fiscal

responsibility act. as soon as the deal was made we knew that the budget request for fiscal year 2025 just was not going to cut it. we all agree that the defense spending is not sufficient. let me say that we meet those threats that this country faces with your department and this administration do not even acknowledge those threats in the president's budget request that he sends us. our adversaries don't constrain themselves like this. china has announced it would increase the defense budget by 7.2%. this is despite significant challenges the chinese are now facing in their economy. secretary austin and chairman brown, do you agree that the

threats from china, russia, and other adversaries are likely to increase in severity? i assume that you do so i would ask when will you step forward and appropriately offer your concerns in order to meet those problems, those x essential -- existential threats that this country faces? >> thank you, senator. again, the budget request is linked to our strategy. we look at our adversaries over a period of time and not just in the moment. we know that they will continue to evolve in the challenges will increase. given the constraints that we are faced with we had to make

some tough choices. we made those to invest in near- term readiness and to take care of our troops and families. i think, based upon where we are that their needs are outlined in the strategies >> going beyond what the budget was from president biden to this committee, it is the responsibility of congress. i'm also on the appropriations committee and as we advocate for what we need but you also have to be an advocate there. you also have to bring forward

a sincere, thoughtful, and reasonable budget from this administration that addresses the threats this country faces. we hear it from you, from others within the department on those threats and classified briefings. this country needs to realize that as well. >> thank you. secretary austin, i recently returned from a bipartisan delegation to asia where we met with key allies and partners and u.s. forces in the region. i can say that each of the countries where we met with leaders we are very grateful for the posture and the indo pacific and very eager to grow it, expand it, and deepen it. i want you to know the feedback

is very appreciative. can you tell us about strategic posture in the pacific and what are we losing by failing to get this bill. >> the supplemental not only provides the ability for a security assistance in ukraine, but also partners in the indo pacific, specifically taiwan. there are provisions in this supplemental request to continue to help taiwan to continue to be able to defend

itself. it is important to press forward and get the supplemental. >> military representatives from the u.s. and the pacific command met with military representatives for this consultative agreement working group in honolulu on april 3 and fourth. this was the first meeting of its kind since the virtual working group meetings in 2021. what is the goal of the military maritime consulting agreement and what progress is being made to point in time.

so i think that is really up for them. we've seen aggressive behavior in the region by the prc. we continue to raise these issues. this form allows military professionals to meet and really talk in detail about those issues and talk about things we can put into place to prevent accidents from happening. >> thank you. secretary austin, over the last two cycles i've created the cyber security program to provide free education for postgraduate service. as you look at the cyber and digital needs, how does this scholarship help dod meet its mission. >> it will help in a significant way. this is

working with some 420 institutions providing 100 scholarships this year alone. that increases the pool of qualified youngsters that can come on board and contribute to the efforts in the cyber domain. >> you may not have this data, but do you know if we are on target to fill the 1000 slots that are provided for this program this year? this was the first year students can apply and i think that it concluded in march. do you have any information about whether we are on target? >> i do not have the specific information but i will get that for you. >> do you have additional information about how many schools have applied to be part of the program? >> the number that we have is

really impressive. that will continue to grow. >> thank you. the military services have started to look at privatizing barracks to address those that are outdated and needed and repair. how will the department ensure that those problems are not re-created in the barracks? >> we have to invest in making sure that we create the right kind of unaccompanied housing for our troops. number two, we have to be sure that we invest in the resources required to supervise the maintenance of these facilities. we are doing both of those. we are asking for $1.1 billion for unaccompanied housing, $2 billion for family housing and $171 million for housing

oversight. i think -- there is a lot of work we do need to do going forward. i think we are investing in the right things and will continue to maintain and emphasis on this. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> secretary austin, thank you for acknowledging in response that hamas committed war crimes on october 7 and has been committing them ever since by using human shields. i want to address what the protesters raised earlier. is israel committing genocide in gaza? >> senator cotton, we do not have any evidence of genocide. >> that is a no. >> we do not have an answer to that. >> that was better than last month when they dodge the

question. you stand accused of green lighting genocide. would you like to respond to back? >> what i would say from the very beginning is we are committed to help israel in defending will its territory and people by providing security assistance. i would remind everybody that what happened on october 7 was absolutely horrible. numbers of israeli citizens were killed and a couple of hundred were taken hostage. >> american citizens as well. >> so you deny the act -- accusation that you are tolerating genocide. >> for the record i don't believe israel is committing genocide either. he talked a lot about providing

aid in gaza. why does israel have the responsibility to provide aid to gaza. they were the victim of the attack. why should they up provide aid to the aggressor? we did not provide aid to germany and japan in world war ii. >> we did provide aid and assistance to many of the countries we have operated in recently. >> i think if they want to provide lasting stability something needs to be done to help the palestinian people. >> i get that but they are in the middle the war. we believe that for after. we have the marshall rule that we did in japan but that was

after. it is not israel's responsibility. we are spending our tax dollars to build this giant peer. who will accept the aid who will be taking aid from american forces. >> that is still being worked out but there will be ngos to help distribute the aid. >> hamas is in charge of gaza. when aid goes to gaza hamas does not divert it, commandeer it, or steal it. they accept it. anybody operating in gaza is under the thumb of hamas. i think it is very well considered and i don't think it will and very well. let me move on to ukraine. the biden administration has discouraged ukraine from watching refinery strikes against russia. why is the biden administration discouraging ukraine from some of the most effective attacks on russia's warmaking

capabilities? >> certainly those attacks could have an effect in terms of the global energy situation. quite frankly i think ukraine is better served in going after tactical and operational targets that can directly influence the current fight. >> so the biden administration doesn't like gas prices to go up and election-year after all the other action they have taken to drive gas prices up further. one final point about the recruiting crisis that we face. i have spoken to numerous recruiters, front-line recruiters and recruiting battalions. two of the most common things that i hear is genesis and a lack of medical providers to process new recruits.

do you have a memo to place a policy on genesis? have you received that? my sources tell me you have received a request to pause genesis. >> i spoke to the service secretaries about genesis and have also's talked to service chiefs about genesis. i do not have knowledge of that memo but what i will tell you is we are doing everything we can to improve the number of healthcare providers available and to streamline the operations. genesis is something that we had to work through but it is not the sole cause. >> i know it is not the sole cause. for those listening at home it is not just the first book of the bible. it is a

giant medical record system that catches everything that has ever happened to you. every drill sergeant accuses them of lying to recruiters to get into the service. now genesis catches all that. if you broke your arm when you were 12 genesis knows it. if you are prescribed an ssri because you are depressed when you are 13 genesis knows it. we cannot have psychotics joining the military if you broke his arm when he was 13 you can't have it degenerative bone condition. no that you say that there is a waiver. it takes a long time. a few are a super gung captain america kid that wants to serve you will wait that time but if it will take 120 to 150 days and you can get a job at amazon you

will lose those people. you really need to look at the way genesis works and the approval authority whether it is on the front lines, at the mall or lieutenant colonel at the headquarters, they might see some serious personal risk that does not have a lot of her word. my time is over but i do think that you should look at it and take action sooner rather than later. >> i do not disagree with you. what we need to do is upgrade what requires a waiver and make sure that we are doing everything we can to provide enough medical professionals to shorten the time it takes to get that. i think there are a number of things we can and should do and we are doing some of those

things and will continue to press on this to shorten the time that it takes for recruiters to get these through. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary mccord, secretary austin, general brown, thank you for your service. secretary austin i want to thank you for your leadership involving redhill and hawaii. it was the right decision to close this massive fuel storage facility. the joint task force has worked diligently alongside the state and federal partners to safely remove all of the fuel from this facility in recent months. of course, more work remains. what is your view regarding the department long-term responsibility for the environmental restoration and remediation efforts following the closure to ensure that no contamination of the aquifer

that the people of the law who rely on for drinking water occurs now and in the future attributable to military installations or actions. >> thank you, senator. protecting public health and the environment in the communities promise to the citizens of hawaii to conduct any and all necessary environmental remediation around the facility. as you just pointed out last month, they completed the fueling so the work has transitioned to the department of the navy for the redhill closure. we will stay focused

on that. i will be sure to be briefed on this routinely and make sure we are doing the right things to meet our timelines but most importantly make sure that we do the right things in terms of environmental restoration. >> thank you for your continuing commitment. there will be long-term requirements as to monitoring. that brings me to another question i have for you. i'm concerned about the department's ability to hold senior officials accountable following major incidents such as the fuel leak at redhill and the fire on board the u.s. rayshard. i'm including a provision that would create a new investigation category to provide consistency when there is a catastrophic incident

resulting in a significant loss of life or billions of dollars in taxpayer money to ensure those responsible are held accountable for their actions. would you be amenable to changes in this area, especially for catastrophic incidents such as the ones that i cited so that the investigation and responsibility are before the department as opposed to the services that are involved? >> thank you. i have seen your correspondence on this issue. i have asked my people to take a look at this and certainly we will do so. we will analyze it and come back and have a discussion with you on where we are. i really appreciate your continued focus. >> thank you very much. i have talked about how important infrastructure is to

readiness. i know that during last year's hearing you agree that military services need to invest in infrastructure to make sure servicemembers have a facilities they need to execute their mission. however, even in those priorities there are billions in infrastructure projects and hawaii alone and the rest of the region either on the unfunded priority list. secretary austin, how does the department ensure that infrastructure maintenance and modernization needs are met if there are multiple projects and hawaii and throughout the region that are not being funded in the budget? >> as you know, we have invested a lot into infrastructure throughout the region. the pdi, the admirals

request for the specific initiatives this year with some $9.9 billion including infrastructure projects, that is on top of the $20 billion that we have requested over the last couple years in support of the pdi. we continue to invest in the sand again in terms of specific projects they will have to continue to rank order based on the specific and what is available to the budget. this is important to us and something we will continue to work on. >> you testified today that tough choices need to be made in your term readiness making sure infrastructure is maintained. i just want to know one more thing. i am concerned about the cost for the biggest infrastructure project within the dod,

replacement at joint base pearl harbor. despite the lessons learned from the portsmouth naval shipyard, the cost of the drydock recently increased by over $800 million. no sooner did i go and give a speech about how important this is that i am confronted by what i consider to be a massive cost overrun. i just want to note that i would like to hear from you. i am out of time right now but we need to be a lot more accurate in planning for infrastructure projects from the beginning to enable us to better estimate how much these costs will be. to go from one week to say that this is great and then two weeks later it is $800 million

more. secretary austin, i would like to be insured that we will keep track of what is going on with this drydock infrastructure project. i have a feeling that i may be confronted with even more costly increases. it is a statement that i'm making and i expect to be apprised as we go forward. >> you mentioned that this is important. it is absolutely important. one of the things that happened here was we did not fully appreciate the impact of covid on the supply chains and some other things. those effects have lasted longer than we anticipated. that is part of what is going on. >> thank you. >> thank you to your service in

the nation in such a time in history. close coordination between congress and the administration is critical to making sure troops are resourced and postured in a way that deters concorde and is able to dominate enemies of deterrence fails. mr. secretary, secretary austin, the assessment of the dod led study on the electromagnetic spectrum which was completed last fall was that the adoption of dynamic spectrum sharing is the only way the dod can share portions of the critical bands it uses to defend the country and the forces. developing that capability is one of my highest priorities. i'm aware of the coordination between this committee and the

d.o.t. which is centered around a demonstration project to investigate dynamic sharing to be investigated sometime at the end of 2025. i applaud the effort, but i am also aware of the simultaneous transmit and receive capability or star that is ready for test and evaluation right now. can you give me your commitment that you will investigate the star capability and accelerate testing and evaluation if you discover it is promising? i assure you i would work with you and the committee's in the jurisdiction to address any hurdles that need to be overcome for acceleration? >> you have my commitment that we will investigate and make sure there is capability there. we will work to take advantage

of it. i just want to reemphasize the point that you made which is it is really important to access the spectrum so we can continue to provide security for this country and we have the ability to enable all of the platforms here. i understand there will continue to be a demand from the commercial sector to access more of the spectrum we need to be sure that we have the provisions to protect this country. i'm also committed to working with the secretary of commerce and anybody else that can enable that sharing. >> i think this new capability

may very well be a key to addressing this issue on an expedited basis. i appreciate your agreement to work with us on that. general brown, the be 21 rater and nexgen platform are critical in the fight against in your adversary. can you briefly share with these platforms are so essential to the joint force when it comes to finding a capable enemy in a contested environment? >> we have an advancing threat. we think about the areas we have been operating over the course of the past several decades, that was mostly violent extremists or other countries without advanced threat. when i see going forward is we have to modernize and bring in capabilities. that is why these platforms are so important. >> i think it is important that both of these need to move

forward fully funded. we will purchase a minimum of 100 be 21's. i think we suspect that number may have to go up if we appropriately. >> we did discuss the aspect that we may need to go over 100. we can ensure we have joint capabilities working closely with all the services to bring that capability forward. >> how important is it that they be fielded as a full program of record. >> as you are aware, the forces also looking at colman aircraft as well to increase capacity at a cost and create more dilemmas for our adversaries. >> thank you. i see my time has expired.

>> thank you to our witnesses for your service. i want to return to the heartbreaking tragedy of israel and gaza. israel must defend itself against those that would annihilate it. nobody asked whether the united states had a right to defend itself after 9/11. israel has that right. in the days after the october 7 attack, i offered this advice to the israeli ambassador to the united states. learn from our mistakes and confine your vigorous defense to a defense against hamas and don't let it look like a war against gaza or palestinians who are not the same as hamas and often are under the thumb of hamas. i gave advice to the ambassador than that the world would be watching to see what happened. there's various bits of evidence you look at to determine whether this is defense against hamas or a war

against gaza. first, the extent of civilian casualties. the civilian casualties in this war have been heartbreaking. yet because hamas chooses to embed within civilian populations it is extremely difficult to defend without that heartbreak. second, talking about it as a war against hamas or more broadly talking about it as a war against all gazans and palestinians in the weeks after the october 7 attack there was trauma. you do not necessarily say the most precise thing when you are traumatized but there were too many statements from israeli leadership, the president, the defense minister suggesting we will shut off all water, all food, all everything into gaza effectively punishing people that are not necessarily part of hamas. that was unfortunate. third, the allowance of humanitarian aid, 500 trucks a day for these 2 million people

into gaza was throttled off immediately. water was turned off. just two days ago the amount of aid into gaza hit 300 trucks. yesterday it got near 500 trucks six months into this. if you are not allowing what you were allowing before, food and medicine to get to a civilian population you are making the situation worse and not better. there's no reason we should have to build a peer or airdrop supplies, often endangering people that have to go to the water to get them. i applaud the president for convincing finally the prime minister to open the crossing after it took months to get them to open the other crossing. the pace of humanitarian aid is insufficient. the widow of our former chair said two days ago that we are on the verge of a catastrophic famine in gaza and we may not

be able to recover. if you wanted to maintain a vigorous war against hamas but not palestinians you would protect palestinians from violence on the west bank. it was shocking to hear reports from our own officials that violence against palestinians on the west bank is not only increasing but in many instances the violence is accompanied by escorts from idf and border officials who are protecting settlers committing violence against palestinians. my understanding is that the phenomenon has abated but the violence against palestinians has not. finally, if you want to make plain that it's a war against gaza and not palestinians you would hold out some hope that they might have some future of autonomy. the world made a promise to two people that there would be estate of israel and palestine living side-by-side peacefully.

one promise the world has kept and one promise the world has not kept. there is 1 million reasons for that but the fact is, 75 years later one promise has been captain one has not. it's important for palestinians to believe they might have a future. instead, israeli leadership has essentially closed that off. it is so very important that we provide assistance to israel to allow them to defend themselves against to would be annihilated. it is so important we take dramatically more steps to encourage israel, push israel, urge israel and other nations to make plain that a war against gazans or palestinians will make this worse. cindy mccain predicts there will be a mass famine in gaza. if that were to occur, if women and children who are already dying start to die in great numbers because of lack of

access to food and medicine, will that de-escalate the violence in the region? or will that accelerate violence in the region? >> it will accelerate violence and have the effect of ensuring that there is a long-term conflict. the palestinian people have been disadvantaged to such a great degree. i think to your point, i think we should continue to do everything we can and we are doing this to encourage the israelis to provide humanitarian assistance and open up more land routes and separate the palestinian people from hamas. failure to do so i think we -- >> we are in dangerous escalation. 460 strikes firing into the red sea. they were not really doing that

at any until the war in gaza started. u.s. has put our own personnel on high alert in the middle east because there is the expectation that i ran for an israeli attack on iranian positions and syria. the world is depending on us to do so. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr.. i appreciate the discussion on the supplemental and i would encourage you to continue to talk about it not as a ukraine aid package but as a package that actually builds our own industrial base to protect our own country. that is what it is. it is actually closer to 60% goes directly into the. when you look at the dollars, it actually unlocks about $6 billion to build the web system

that she's in pain is about. i would encourage you to talk about it in not regard and the amount that it focuses on israel in taiwan. that is important this week with the house. i want to get to the defense budget which is what you are testifying. would you both agree, mr. chairman and mr. secretary, that we are facing one of the most dangerous times in our history since world war two? >> this is one of the most complex times that i have seen. >> general? >> in the 39 years, this is probably been the most complex i've seen. >> i know these are hard questions but i'm going to ask them. the president has inflation- adjusted cuts to the department

of defense every year. the chairman mentioned while this was the commander in chief leadership who is failing. every year, he puts forward defense department cuts during one of the most dangerous. all. right now the direction the biden administration is pushing will get us below 3% for our defense. we have only done that four times since world war two. do you think being at 3% or below 3% of gdp from the department of defense meets the moment in terms of the dangers we are seeing right now? mr. secretary? >> i think, again, operating within the guidelines of the law -- >> i am not asking about. if i am saying if we go to 3% or below, we have been there four times, it was mostly in the late 90s when we had.

is 3% of gdp for our department of defense what we need during these dangerous times? >> we linked our request to our strategy and again, i think we had to make some tough choices, as i said earlier. >> i am sorry to interrupt you. in your personal opinion, do you think that below 3% of gdp spending is what we need to meet these dangerous times? which we all agree are dangerous times? what i really believe on this is we've got to get a budget on top. for the past 50 years, we've had. >> i agree with that. can you answer my question? it is a pretty easy answer. the answer is no, right? mr. chairman, i would like to submit this chart for the

record. it shows four times since world war ii, we have been at 3% or no. the answer is no. i think we all know that. this committee knows that. it is important. i respect both of you very much. it is important to come before this committee and tell us what you believe. none of you believe going below 3% is good. i know it is hard. the president really thinks it is a good for the department of defense. he cut the budget every year. he's got to make job really tell. let me go to an area that you understand very well, both of you. that is the terms with regards to iran. tom freeman, the new york times columnist that fighting through iran proxies, hamas, and gaza , lebanon, syria. reaping all the benefits in paying virtually no cost of

work of its proxies. i asked general if he agreed with that and he said yes. i think they are not paying the cost. that is your commander with regards to iran. admiral cooper mentioned on "60 minutes" that are being supplied by the iranians, trained by the iranians and very importantly, they are receiving targeting information on american warships in the red sea. the iranians are providing targeting insult to sink the. both of you are very clear eyed on the threat that iran poses. you have seen them killing our troops over the years. mr. secretary, you've seen very up close with the efp's in iraq. why are we not thinking iranian

warships that are providing targeting insult to kill marines and sailors from alaska, north dakota. i find this outrageous. why are we not doing that? why are we not telling the iranians over the next time you send intel to target an american warship, we will sink your ships. why aren't we doing that? that is so basic to me. mr. secretary, you've been very strong against your whole career. please be i maintained the point that iran needs to be held accountable for what continues to do. >> providing intel tequila milliken american sailors in the red sea. when we seek their ships? >> attacking iran is a different issue and -- >> they are attacking us. they are providing intel to

kill americans. general, your advice on this and your personal opinion? >> as the secretary said, we will continue to hold iran accountable . i can talk to you more in a classified section about some of the options that we are working through, should one of our tax ships get an attack. >> this is not an unreasonable position that i am proposing. here's the problem. there was this barrage against. if one of those slipped through and sunk that ship, the president would have pressure to go to war with iran. my view is we should tell them right now enough. operation praying mantis, i know you are both familiar with that. we sank iranian warships when mining the persian gulf. i would like to talk even more

about this in a classified setting. i do not think it is a difficult decision. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the quotes attributed to mark twain which he did, he should have which is that history does not always repeat itself but usually rhymes. in the late 1930s, there was a very deliverance of sophisticated propaganda effort in the united states. up to including members of congress to affect american opinion that political opinion toward the regime in the defense of europe. and it worked until pearl harbor. today, chairman both acknowledged a very sophisticated and concentrated russian misinformation propaganda attempt in the united states to affect our public policy toward ukraine. indeed, both of them

acknowledged that this has up to including members of congress. do you see, mr. secretary, a danger to this country from this kind of concerted, conscious misinformation campaign on the part of the russians? >> absolutely, senator. it increases on a daily basis. to your point, it is sophisticated to the degree that people don't know where the information is coming from and how russia is doing with these kinds of things but again, there is a danger. >> one of the vulnerabilities is the openness of our society in the first amendment and free speech. the vulnerability is that our democracy is based upon information and if the information stream is compromised by a foreign actor

that endangers our country. one of my concerns is that it is very difficult to defend against such attacks. we don't want to be censoring the internet, we don't want to be censoring a free flow of information. a whole defense strategy in every other area is deterrence. the deterrence is the key to our defense strategy and it has been for 75 years. except in cyber and misinformation. i would hope that you would take back the nsa. the necessity of a deterrent that is the adversary. in this case, russia. if you were going to meddle in our politics in our system, our information pool, and a deliberate and conscious way, you will pay a price for that. not necessarily kinetic but it could be sanctions, others.

when my problems is that there does not seem to be a deterrent in this field which is the new frontier of warfare. mr. secretary, i hope you will take that thought back. if deterrence works in nuclear policy and conventional kinetic policy, it also can work in this new frontier of misinformation. i will take it back and we will take it for action. we will drill on the possibilities to create that effect that you are talking about. >> i am afraid if we do not do that, it's going to continue. there is no reason why it should not. it is cheap for them and very damaging to this. with regard to gaza, senator laid out the situation very effectively.

it become apparent. i met with prime minister and dominican yahoo in january. it has become apparent that the current government of israel needs more than encouragement and i was surprised that at the very week the world kitchen attack occurred and the continuing humanitarian crisis that the administration approved the transfer of munitions to israel, particularly. 2000 bound bombs are not defensive, they are offensive. and they are not very precision. why did the administration make that decision? it seems to be the president's hand would be strengthened significantly if he had said we are going to pause this planned conveyance of these offensive weapons until we see some serious attention to the humanitarian crisis and to the civilian casualties.

>> i had the opportunity to speak with my counterpart on this attack and i was very up front in terms of how horrific this was and in fact that it needed to be investigated and people held accountable. we are proceeding some of that activity. in terms of as a president engaged prime minister, i will not speak to the contents of that conversation but it clearly had an effect and we have seen changes in behavior and we have more humanitarian assistance being pushed into gaza. there needs to be more still but again, the president conversation, it did have a positive effect. hopefully that trend will continue but it is left to be

seen. >> again, i think all of us feel israel absolutely has not only a right but a responsibility to defend itself but it is the conduct by which they are doing so that is actually hurting israel. that is what bothers me. i consider myself a friend of israel and by not separating the palestinian civilians from hamas, they are playing hamas's hands. when you kill a civilian child, their parents are not going to be very sympathetic to the people that let loose. my concern is particularly, those bonds are coming from this country and we have a responsibility as well in terms of the way that war is being conducted. because we are engaged in terms of supplying weapons. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me recognize senator kramer please. >> thank you for being here and for your service to our country.

i will start with you. i'm going to follow-up on a number of things my colleagues have brought up. i want to ask you very specifically. is it your best military advice to the commander and chief and secretary of defense to continue to cut the defense budget to now will that we are below 3%. is that your best military advice? >> i get more advice on operational capability. i will tell you one of the things we will do is continue to advocate the resources required. this is an area that can be worked only with my boss, the secretary, but also with this midi. >> mr. secretary, senator asked you about striking energy assets in russia, particularly refineries. you said maybe there is a better place. better places for them to

strike. hasn't energy become a weapon in ukraine and quite frankly, iran. regarding iran , somebody said the position of the administration is to make iran a for what they have done in we will talk about what some of those options in the other section but are sentient waivers, that doesn't seem like a great way to make them pay. they've been able to use oil to build the reserves from 4 billion, which is what they had at the end of the trump administration, to 75 billion today. isn't energy assets almost like hitting a military site? >> they can and will eventually have an impact on the country's ability to produce military capabilities. there is no question. the question is if you are in a

fight and you are fighting for your life, is that most important to you or is something else -- can something else be addressed that can affect the current battlefield more effectively? >> okay. if i buy that, couldn't we be doing at least more on our part to provide some of those cleaner energy resources rather than wedding iran continue to sell to china and other and build up their reserves? i will leave that for a minute. i want to get to something even more specific and something i was planning on saying before all this came up. i continue to be concerned and your commanders are sounding the alarm about the air force continually not only eliminating legacy assets but future isr assets with the hope that are going to solve the day

and i know you will say, because we always hear commanders never have enough isr, they will always say they don't have enough their concern is escalating along with deterioration of our airborne isr assets. i know about priorities and we need to do more. now that you have this broader responsibility than just the air force, maybe you could speak to that a little bit and help me feel better about it? and again we can talk in more detail later. >> i appreciate the question. having been the deputy commander, as well as a service and now a chairman. i do think about all. isr is one of these. it's one of the more contentious issues that we have across. the things that we are going to have to do is not only look at the isr that we do have to keep that moving but at the same time, look at opportunities.

you mentioned space capabilities. that is going to give us assets into areas we cannot get with some that we have today. it is a combination of things in how we work together with joint forces. an area that i am focused on with the joint chiefs in commands to make sure we are making best use of the resources that we do have, the capabilities of isr and all the other capabilities that we provide for the joint force and how we balance that out to make sure we are in the right place at the right time to provide those capabilities. i am having a pretty deep conversation with commanders and the joint chiefs on these very topics about how do we ensure that we are identifying areas like isr that we need to continue to resource and how do we best do that across the service? >> earlier, i can remember who was asking the questions but you brought up cca as a force multiplier. i think it was in response to. i just want to wrap up with

this. whether we are talking about cca or something new in space, we have got to find a way to move at the speed of china. we talked a little bit about that with regard to procurement. we've got to knock down some of these barriers. please ask us for help if we need to do something from a policy standpoint so that our innovators are in the fight with you rather than the primes that have the same your credit traditions that the military has. we've got a become. with that, thank you. >> thank you very much. senator warren, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary austin, under your leadership of the united states has made preventing civilian power a top priority. you have repeatedly said that it is a moral and eight strategic imperative. i have pressed the dod to take this more seriously for years

and in 2022, dod issued its civilian action plan which directs the department systematically take steps to prevent, mitigate, and respond to civilian harm. policy makes clear that we expect our military partners to prioritize civilian harm prevention as well. since october, israeli strikes have killed over 30,000 palestinians. the majority of them are women and children. rocco has become the latest refuge of palestinian civilians and is now home to more than 1.4 million people. given the number of civilians there, the biden administration has repeatedly urged israel not to attacked. saying so that doing so would be a disaster. secretary austin, do you think an attack on rafah that kills

another 30,000 civilians would enhance u.s. or israeli security? >> thank you, senator. there is no question that there have been far too many civilian casualties in this conflict. far too many. what we continue to emphasize to the israelis is that civilians in that battle space need to be not only evacuated but properly taken care of once they are evacuated out of that battle space before anything is contemplated. this is a point that i have stressed with my counterpart on a number of occasions. as recently as yesterday. again, it cannot be, going forward, what we have seen in the past in terms of the type of activities that we have seen in gaza city.

far too many civilians have been killed as a result of a combat operation and they need to get civilians out of the battle space and around rafah. >> the united states has an important response ability because we are the ones giving the bombs that they are using to destroy homes and hospitals and refugee camps. at the president's direction through his february national security memorandum, the department of defense and state department are currently assessing whether israel is in compliance with international humanitarian law. there are serious concerns that israel is not complying with humanitarian law. according to recent investigations, and israeli intelligence officials allege that the idea deliberately

prefers to wait until its targets are at home among their children and neighbors to launch a strike. secretary austin, i understand that civilians are often at risk in a time of war but united states systematically choose strikes that are more likely to kill civilians including children? >> absolutely not. just the opposite. we routinely go out of our way to make sure that we do everything we can to minimize civilian casualties. even with extraordinary efforts, that will be collateral damage in casualties from time to time but it's something that we really work hard to prevent. >> thank you, mr. secretary. u.s. policy explicitly states that we respect our allies to meet the same standards that we do to prevent and mitigate harm. israel is failing to do that.

under your leadership, dod has made significant progress in putting policies in place to protect civilians but we also need to push our closest allies to meet the same standard and cut off u.s. support if they refuse to do so. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. senator scott, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here, thank you for your service. i am from florida. we watch what china is doing. in latin america, we watch what rush is doing. we know we have a chinese spy station in cuba. i have talked to chairman brown, general richardson about the air force base. from the standpoint of power projection and the need to have. i think all of them have agreed the importance of homestead. secretary austin, do you believe that homestead is important for power production to latin america, should we?

>> instead reserve base is strategically located in it provides valuable contributions to our efforts. we continued to be grateful for your support for homestead. i know there have been questions about whether or not we are going to close homestead and i can tell you that that is not under consideration right now. >> all right. number two. china is. we finally got through the nda, the ability to buy bistro. i do not understand how the department of defense would ever buy anything made in china. specifically, secretary austin, do you believe that we are

buying chinese lighter systems to use on our vehicles were chinese systems that are connected to networks? >> i do not. we will work hard and are working hard to make sure that our supply chains are not vulnerable to manipulation by adversary. it is important to us to make sure that we don't have elements from our adversaries that are included in our weapon systems and repair parts. this is something we pay attention to. >> if we oppose things, were going to prevent our federal government to buying chinese products. you will be supportive. i just got back from israel. he met with the prime minister and went to the film festival.

i talked to families. i went to bed i went to in 2019. people were murdered by hamas. about a half a mile away from there. i listened to a video of a young lady that was about to be murdered by hamas. i went to a house where a mother was burned alive. i went where babies were killed. it was disgusting. what i found in my conversation is that in contrast, what some of my colleagues said committed to the safety of palestinians. they have zero interest in killing civilians and they put a lot of effort into making sure that that does not happen. my take away of this was that they don't understand why the biden administration does not try to hold accountable. everybody believes that can get hostages out today. with american hostage families

and i met with. some have families live in some have bodies still in gaza. there is not a lot of understanding of what the biden administration has done to get our american hostages home. the last is that a lot of people i have talked to don't understand why the biden administration would attack israel for the civilian deaths which were horrible on humanitarian effort that was done. we are including where the kitchen program was done. at the same time, the biden administration has been nothing to hold anybody accountable for the for you at the death of the airport and the in the drone strike during the withdrawal. questions. do you believe that we ought to demand accountability by?

should the biden administration do more to get hostages home? and why does the biden administration demand accountability which actually israel did do an investigation but to my understanding, we've never done an investigation or held anybody accountable for the drone strike that killed an afghan family or done anything about the 13 service members that died. >> regarding our recovery of hostages in israel, this has been a priority for the united states since the beginning. the president and all the senior leaders been focused on this and doing everything possible to try to get these hostages released. that war continues. i know you've seen director go back and forth, working with his counterparts on this issue. we remain hopeful that we will see movement at some point in

the future but this is very, very important. again, hamas is responsible, ultimately, for the beginning, the start of this war. this brutal attack on israel in killing israeli citizens and americans was unthinkable, quite frankly. there have been far too many civilian casualties and i think there is a wait to be successful operationally and tactically. i can also protect civilians. the two are not mutually exclusive, senator. i think we just need to see a better job in terms of being more precise in protecting the civilian population. >> how about qatar? >> i'm sorry? >> how about qatar? holding them and demanding accountability. the leaders living in luxury.

the biden administration, as far as i can tell, has done nothing to hold them accountable. we have a military base. >> we do have a military base there and it is very important to us. has done a lot to help get hostages released and they continue that work. i have talked to the leadership, i know the leadership there and i can tell you they are intentionally focused on making sure that we can get hostages released as soon as possible. >> thinking. senator peters, please. >> this is not coming out. >> there we go. thank you, mr. chairman.

secretary austin, general brown, as you know very well, the air force plans to field several different types of collaborative combat airport with capabilities including surveillance and deception. combined the fifth and sixth generation fighters will certainly play a significant role in disrupting as well as defeating our adversaries counter air operations in any future conflict. however, maintaining air superior is going to require that all components including the national guard train in real world training environments. these training opportunities found at locations like we have in michigan will likely play a key role in realizing that potential. my question for both of you, secretary austin and general

brown. with this in mind, how can active-duty reserve and guard components best prepare for eca integration and training given the acquisition of these autonomous systems were going to see in the future? secretary austin, if you would answer first, please. >> i remain focused on making sure that we have the right capabilities to execute our strategy. i will speak to the point that the cca capability is really, really important. ensure that we maintain in the future. this is something that our air force has been working on for quite some time. we are asking to invest in this and continue to invest in this budget. your specific question about the training of reserve pilots, perhaps, i will let the chairman speak on that because he is a pretty good f-16 pilot and he understands the training

requirements very, very well. what i would emphasize is that this is a tremendous capability. we are investing in the right and a total force needs to have that capability. >> thank you, general brown? >> thank you for the question. as i think about the joint forces, address the total force. in my role or previous role as the airport air force chief, we look at it total force perspective and where we apply the capability to make sure it is in all three components across the united states air force. as we go down the path of on crude system, how we leverage with all aspects of our force being important in making sure we have the full capability.

not only from our active force but from as well. >> general, as a former fighter pilot, you know better than anyone that aerial refueling is a foundation of global mobility and power production for u.s. air force. and is really michigan will continue to support this mission as we welcome a squadron of 12 to air national guard base. the capabilities will support our current and future fighter and bomber missions for decades to come. . what two indicates playing in the end of? how will that contribute to our national security goals? >> as you have, our strength is

our strategic assets. it allows us to be able to move combat power around the world like around the country to include the indo pacific. when increases our combat effectiveness with these tankers and have them the 46, it is an outstanding airplane. as you highlight mobility, a great opportunity. potential conflict in the indo pacific. >> think you, senator peters. the first of two has begun. let me recognize. >> think you. good morning. how are y'all? secretary austin, good to have you back. you look like you are in good shape. i know you have had a tough

couple of months but we are glad you are back. secretary mike mccord , don't go to sleep on us. i'm going to ask you a question. it is my understanding the work that we have done, my staff, we have spent $300 billion since 2014 in ukraine. does that sound about right to you? >> i know that is before your time. please be that doesn't sound high to me. we did about 300 million a year for ukraine and just in the last two years, we have done about 40. if you are talking whole government, it might be that i went to check for dod, that doesn't sound high. >> my staff looked into it. about 300 billion at their best estimate. right now we are printing or borrowing 80,000 per second. $4.6 million a minute. we cannot sustain that much longer. the dod inspector general said

that there is 50 criminal investigations going on right now for money sent to ukraine. by the way, one of the most corrupt countries in the world. are you familiar with that, secretary austin? >> what i am familiar with is we have given our inspector general the access that he needs to be able to exercise oversight and increased his authorization in terms of number of people to have forwarded there. that is really important. in terms of monies that are being invited to ukraine, as you know, we don't provide money, we provide security assistance in a way of equipment munitions and that staff.

we replenish. when we replenish the things we've taken out of our own stocks to provide to ukraine, that wart comes through our industrial. our buddies in alabama that are helping to create the weapon systems to replace those systems that we provided to ukraine. >> in terms of specific cases that may be referring to, i do not. i also want to remind you, we are building munitions in our country. we do build quite a few votes in marines, missiles, those things. we do spend a lot of money on the country because we earned and it's not what it used to be. general, can ukraine win ? >> yes, yes. >> what does that look like? >> we have said all along, if we want to see ukraine remain

sovereign, independent, democratic state, it has the ability to defend its territory and does her aggression. that has been our aim from the very beginning and remains our aim. yes, they can be successful. >> i heard secretary blinken say last week in brussels that ukraine will soon be a nato. do you agree with that? >> that is the goal of nato members to come at some point, bring ukraine into nato. that is certainly something that ukraine want to see. you >> if you are russian, would you want that? i am just asking. we are playing games with russia. i just want to understand my would do that. >> certainly, if i was russia, i would not want that. i would also not want england and sweden to be a part of nato and they are. the reason that they are is

because putin. without justification. that is why we are where we are. instead of making things better for himself, in large, he had the effect of. which obviously create worse conditions for him. >> do we have in ukraine? >> cia basis? >> i got this out of the new york times which i don't read very often. i will deter that question to. >> okay, thank you. general brown, just a quick question. i have the opportunity to travel places all over the world since i have had this job three years. our morale is not very good. our recruiting has really dropped. what are you doing to help solve that album? we need a strong military. a lot of them tell me basically

coach, listen. we are taking all these classes that have nothing to do with killing adversary. it is about getting along with each other. we are also in need of a killing machine. what is your answer for that? >> as i stated my opening statement, war fighting skills. and part of that war fighting team is being able to build a team. i know you are fully aware of that based on your background. it is the work that we do with each one of those servicemembers to give them all the opportunities for potential to make this the most lethal in the world. >> had we stop people from getting out of the military? >> i will tell you. i can give you the numbers. our retention across all the service is really good. our recruiting -- >> i would love to see that. >> our recruiting is also. the past several weeks, i sat down with recruiters from all the repair services and went to talk to them about their processes as well.

it is a system. there are some things that we can do better and i gave him some feedback while i was there. recruiting is on the ups. the last thing i will close on. we need to talk about the value of service. we talk about what it is. a great opportunity whether you spend four years or four decades. really important. serving in our military are serving it all with the impact it can have. >> and i totally agree with you. our military is about people, it is not about machines, it is about people. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you chairman. thank you and we thank him in his absence. i want to think secretary austin, charles brown and mike

mccord for your service and hard work. i want to start to talk a little bit about israel and defending against iran . the attack on israel must never be allowed to take place again. the u.s. security assistance to israel must therefore continue unimpeded. israel's security has only become more complicated in recent weeks and months as a not only works to defeat hamas and free the hostages but also faces frequent threats and attacks by iran and its proxies like has blood and others. secretary austin, be on the house passing the senate security package which i am fighting for, what more can be done to help israel defend itself, including a reportedly imminent threat from iran? >> we are doing a lot, senator and first of all, thank you for your support.

like you, i sincerely hope that we can get this across the goal line in the near future. the chairman and i talk to our counterparts frequently and assess what additional things we could be doing to help israel try to understand what their priorities are and the direction of travel. again, we do in those conversations, talk about the necessity to protect civilians, as you would expect, and provide humanitarian assistance. we are doing everything we can to make sure that we get them what they need as quickly as possible. and again, i would expect that as the nature of this fight begins to change to become a more precision fight, their requirements should change a

bit. we will stay to their needs and continue to provide security assistance as quickly as we can. we remain committed to helping israel defend itself but we expect that they would execute operations responsibly and again, these are conversations that we have. >> thank you. i wanted to move on to secretary mike mccord and talk about remote bases and incentive pay. you know about air force is a little bit outside of las vegas but mike mccord, i want to ask you about this issue at naval air station. everyone who is stationed at other remote installation to have to commute many, many miles to get to the base from where they live. have very limited housing nearby so the vast majority live in las vegas or the reno region respectively. each are both about one hour away. and even longer commute to drop

off their kids for childcare, utilize other services which is on the opposite end of town. secretary mike mccord, given the long travel distance and that have to face when they travel these distances between their home and duty station. is the department considering to alleviate the cost and if not, how can congress ensure that it does? we have a lot of challenges on a remote basis. >> senator, i will need to consult with my colleagues who often make the final recommendations on where we might go on benefits that we are authorized to do. we need to work with committee if it is not something that we have the authority to do. the first things we can look at our housing costs in the area where you are stationed and in some cases,. your issue is a little more unique to a couple basis and i

don't know if we have a particular puzzle on the table working but i will check with my colleagues and get back to you. >> thank you. look forward to that. i want to continue with you, secretary austin, on some of these challenges that our servicemen and women have with affordable housing and childcare. in order to build a resilient military force, we have to meet the critical needs of servicemembers families. two of the greatest barriers they face in these areas are affordable housing and affordable childcare. what additional authorities or funding -- this is the department of defense, need to approve access to affordable housing and affordable childcare. those drones go 24 hours a day 365 days a year. they need childcare. how do we ensure that our servicemembers can focus on their duties? >> regarding housing, as you may have heard me say earlier,

senator, in terms of family housing, we are investing -- asking to invest $2 billion in his budget and $1.1 million in unaccompanied housing. it is important to note that $171 million is being carved out for oversight of our housing efforts. this is very important. we are also increasing the basic allowance for housing. we've increased 20% since 2023 and i think that is material that is meaningful to our troops. when i go and talk to them about it, they really appreciate that. thanks for your support in that regard. your comments on childcare, i absolutely agree with. i just had our senior enlisted leaders together and we meet on occasion to talk about what is

important to the force. this is one area that they continue to raise at that we need to work together to improve and we have made some improvements. we have provided additional assistance in terms of childcare fees. we are investing in childcare facilities. some $4 billion or so that we are asking for for new childcare facilities in the 25 budget. also, we are investing in the quality of the workforce. we've seen that the more we can do to recruit a better quality of workforce is going to continue to help us. we have invested in that.

paying dividends. can do more. >> think you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you gentlemen for being here. mr. secretary, in your written testimony, you state that the department continues to prioritize investments in activities and infrastructure to reinforce security and stability in the end of pacific region. i am all about prioritization but it is hard to square that when the department has done so and properly prioritized in the end of pacific. when we are told that there is at least $11 million in unfunded requirements, they come. over the weekend, this committee received a letter from secretary mike mccord in fulfillment of your to submit a report that prioritizes matters identified as unfunded priorities by the senior military officers of the servers in combat and command.

mr. secretary, is there a reason why you chose not to rank and prioritize the list of submitted to this committee? >> pressing currently. try to get the supplemental path. if we can get that through, that will help us in a number of ways. i certainly appreciate the senate help in terms of the bill that you passed and i would hope that we see some progress on this going forward. our commanders are required by law to submit unfunded priority list. we encourage and require commanders and service chiefs, secretaries to invest in their base budget what is needed to make sure that we can maintain a credible fighting force.

this year, we chose to invest in readiness. also, in taking care of our people. that caused us to have to make some choices about modernization for a longer term but those are choices that with a higher top line in the future, we can certainly recover from. >> thank you, mr. secretary. i want to cut in. you mentioned that it is required by law. i would like to point out that it requires rank prioritization. that was not ranked with priority. the letter that this committee received further states that he, meaning you, mr. secretary, has determined it is not necessary to fund these programs in 25 to execute the defense strategy at an acceptable level of risk. my question to you is what is an acceptable level of risk to you as described in this

letter? >> as you may have heard me say earlier, senator, we go through great pains to link our budget requests directly to our strategy. we are confident that we can execute a strategy with the things that we have asked for even though we've had to make some tough choices because of a top line that has been mandated. again, we have every ability to execute strategy. certainly in the out years, were going to need an increase in topline. we certainly would appreciate hunger since support. >> thank you, mr. secretary. thank you for being here. would you agree that ships aircraft munitions form the basis of military capacity

capability? >> senator, thanks for the question. i think there's two parts to that. yes, that capable is important but it's important to have our servicemembers. >> thank you for including them. i appreciate that. here is what is concerning me about that first part. ships, aircraft, munitions. of course in addition to our all-important servicemembers. i am a little bit confused because the budget request simultaneously divests ships and aircraft while making smaller than expected buys of newer platforms. another concern is that it leads slack in the production lines of critical munitions. if i had to take our best and perhaps, in general, you are one of those and we had to put him up against our adversaries vest aviators, i would take our guys, our men and women 10 out of 10 times. at some point, eddie conflict

becomes a number skin and mass. if china were to decide to invade taiwan next year instead of 2027 or 2035, are you concerned at all that we are leaving ourselves with a massive capacity gap? >> senator, one of the things i focus on is as a war fighter, to be ready at all times. no matter what, you cannot predict the future but we have shaped the future and that is why we are here to testify on his budget. it is also the reason why, for example, the procurement was put out. to be able to continue that with consistent funding and demands to industrial base so we don't have that slack in the system. getting the budget on time helped to decrease the slack, increase the trust, and bring down the cost. much faster than we do today. >> think you. just briefly, the committee heard, and even i have talked about -- the kitty committee

heard from the commander that there is a role for strike equals in the scenario. the head of northcom told this committee just recently that in many ways, the strike eagle is and is in many ways, unmatched air to air. it has a phenomenal radar that can pick out low, slow moving and low radar cross-sections such as drones or other threats like cruise missiles. do you agree with their assessment, general? >> it was a very capable platform. i think i would agree. >> chairman, thank you. i keep highlighting these issues because the air force plans to divest 26 of these strike equals at the same time, buying less than expected. meanwhile, china is rapidly expanding their air force. i am seriously concerned about the fighter gap. thank you for the additional time. thank you, gentlemen, for being

here. >> to the five minutes, it would be much appreciated. >> i will. senator, fantastic question. i'm going to have some follow ones to your question with general brown. number of munitions that we need even to replenish our stores. if we had a conflict we would expend munitions at possibly a higher rate than they might be able to be replaced it is clear that more needs to be done to

prepare for a possible future conflict. last year i asked your predecessor about the importance of impacting multiyear procurement in replenishing our munitions stockpiles. how have the multiyear procurements impacted munitions stores to date? >> they will have an impact. the challenges, we did not get a budget for 24 until 170 days in. but i do see the opportunity going forward in the future of how multiyear procurement will assist us first, get the facilities and the workforce and give us some consistency which builds trust and brickstone cost and then a steady stream of munitions. these are the things we need to work on in addition to getting

the budget on time. all of those together will help us increase our stocks. the last thing i would add to that is the supplemental that has been talked about, that does not only help our partners in ukraine. it helps to build the defense industrial base that will help us in the future to be sure we have the capacity for any future contingency. >> beyond what you just mentioned on the supplemental is there anything else we could be doing to be sure we have the right types and quantity of munitions going forward? >> the other piece i would talk to about is, having gone out to visit some industry partners recently one of the things we talked about is the workforce. that can be a item to make sure we have the skilled engineers and workforce to bring in that capability with consistent funding. once they have that workforce they can maintain that workforce to continue to move forward as well. >> thank you. on a separate subject, the

drone problem. incursions on military installations have gone up and is a real threat to national security. i think some of it is hobbyist but there are also foreign actors that are certainly involved here. in december we saw a large number of drone incidents at langley. we still don't know who was behind those. we had an f-16 about a year and a half ago in the barry goldwater range strike a drone. not a lot of damage to the f- 16. if it would've gone down the intake that could've been catastrophic for the airplane and possibly the crew member on board. we see consistent incursions around sensitive government facilities. general, why are the current drone detection and defeat systems that we currently have, why are they failing?

and could you maybe going to why we need to continue to field these outdated measures? >> one of the things we need to continue to work on is to continue to understand that technology, is moving at the same pace but we do have to move faster. if you go down to what happened in december one of the things i did as a chairman is establish a cross functional team not just for military but also in her agency to work on this particular problem set. it's a combination of factors. not only detection but the defense systems you use and how those may impact civil litigation and other areas. so it is something that we have to continue to work on not only here in the united states but also in foreign locations where we have many of our service members deployed. >> we are prepared to work with you on that to be sure we have the right technology moving forward that we can do more to

solve this problem. thank you, general. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. right on time. senator smith, we are trying to adhere to five minutes. >> that is what happens when your last. secretary austin, the united states has appropriated $112 billion a previously for ukraine eight. $60 billion in the supplemental is being considered. based on this budget am i to assume that as of september 30 there will be no more ukraine aid from the united states? >> this request takes us out through the end of the month in september. >> but there is no money. i can only be left to assume one of three things. one, the war is over. two the united states will not

be allocating any more dollars. or c, this is a dishonest request. i guess the question is, it's not in this but we will get another supplemental because members of this committee have been told there could be another request for $100 billion. i guess i'm just trying to understand the totality of the request to the american people for this war that does not seem to be represented in this request. >> i assure you that the request is not dishonest. it is based upon for this fiscal year what we see ukraine needs and our ability to provide security assistance and replenish our stocks. again, this goes through our industry. >> i understand the argument. i would also make the argument that the weapons that are being procured for ukraine are not necessarily the weapons our

industrial base would produce to defend the united states or even in the indo pacific. those are more long-range fires. that is not what ukraine needs. with an industrial base that does not have the capacity to do all of these things, we are making decisions about what is produced and what assault. those may not be in the interest of the united states. you can understand the point? >> i do. i think you are right. there are munitions we will need for a pure competitive fight that we are not using in ukraine right now. having said that, ukraine needs air defense capabilities. weapon systems and interceptors. it needs artillery munitions. of course, our industrial base produces all of that. we have worked to expand our capacity to produce antitank weapons systems.

>> i appreciate the point. i don't mean to cut you off. i just want to get through a couple more questions. so what does victory look like for ukraine? how do you define victory? >> you may have heard me say this earlier. we have said from the very beginning that what we want to see is a ukraine that is a democratic country that is independent and has the ability to protect and defend its sovereign territory and deter aggression. >> does that mean crimea is part of ukraine? >> in order for the war to be over does ukraine have to control crimea? >> in terms of how things transition going forward, i

would not want to predict what will be decided. >> i think part of the problem with all due respect is that this administration has not articulated what an exit strategy is. this is a blank check for a that without any clearly defined goals will be endless. the skepticism among -- i did not vote for the supplemental because i don't think we have adequate controls on how the money is being spent. victory has not been defined. for america's interest, we are continuing to head down this road and now we are getting a budget request that is not reflective of however long it takes. that is part of the objection. i guess one of the issues -- i want to be sure that i'm clear. is at the position that ukraine should be admitted into nato? >> it is nato's position overall work >> the united states of america. what is the united states

position on ukraine and mission to nato? >> nato has an open door policy. all of the countries have worked -- >> i'm not trying to put you in a weird spot. i just heard secretary antony blinken -- maybe it was a mistranslation so i'm just looking for clarity. if it is the position of the united states of america that ukraine should be admitted to nato, -- >> >> is it a question that they should be admitted right now or in the future? >> right now they are in a war. >> that would be a disastrous is result. let's say the war ends tomorrow or september 30 based on this budget. is it the position of this administration that ukraine should be admitted to nato? >> it's unlikely that the war will end september 30.

again, it is the goal of the alliance to bring ukraine into the alliance at some point in the future. >> thank you. >> senator duckworth. >> think you. let me just say that a free independent democratic ukraine that can defend itself is in america's national interest. in fact, should russia overrun ukraine it will not stop with ukraine and then article 5 of nato will be invoked bringing u.s. troops. this is about keeping u.s. troops out of the war in europe. secretary austin, i want to applaud your engagement in the indo pacific. your visits the deep commitment to our allies and partners. it is so important that the department of defense continues to make the region a priority for investments including in guam, hawaii, and addressing logistics in that region. next month i am meeting with my

colleagues and we will engage on a range of national security issues. secretary. i've long been an advocate for these partnerships in southeast asia. what investments do you plan to make to implement this comprehensive strategic partnership and how can congress help you in that effort? >> i the way, i will see you at the dialogue. as you know, the u.s. secretary of defense has supported that every year. again, i think we have made great progress in strengthening our relationships with partners in the region. in terms of that, we have continued to develop our relationships with those members. every year we attend the defense ministerial meeting , members plus.

so i think we have gained a lot of ground and reassuring our partners in the region. we also recognize. i think relationships are strong as they have ever been based on the continued efforts of not only the department leaders like yourself who continue to go to the indo pacific. i suspect you have more than my nine visits to the indo pacific since you have been in office so thank you for everything you are doing. >> thank you, esther secretary. i have discussed the need to improve medical readiness in the indo pacific with every chief and commander who comes before this committee. it's our collective responsibility to ensure that the dod has adequate treatment facilities for service members and their families during peacetime and in the event of a

conflict. i would like to discuss a proposal for fy 25 that is a priority for me. the golden hour for saving lives will be rarely achievable due to the great distances should there be conflict in the region. would like the dod to address current gaps in the medical capacity that is also creating strategy in the region. dod already does a version of this in korea. we need to expand this concept across the region. the dod helped to set up a trauma center which is designed to be exactly like the san diego trauma center. the doctor there was trained by u.s. surgeons. that is where the north korean dictator defector was sent in 2018 and his life was saved

because he was able to be operated on at that center. secretary austin, the dod has a limited number of treatment facilities west of the international dateline. do you think working with allies and partners in the indo pacific can help improve medical readiness both in peace time but also in the event of a large-scale conflict where we cannot medevac service members back to the united states. >> i do. i agree with you. i think it is a great example from talking to troops and family members they really appreciate having the ability to do what you describe and take advantage of existing capabilities. there is no doubt possibilities to do those types of things in other places and i think we should explore them. >> thank you. >> secretary austin can you work with my staff to refine this proposal with the goal of

establishing this program in fy 25? >> we will. >> think you. i yield back. >> thank you very much, senator duckworth. senator blumenthal will be recognized. he will terminate the hearing. we will reconvene at 12:30 for the closed session. we will see you again in the closed session . i will recognize senator blumenthal as the last member and he will adjourn the open session. senator blumenthal. >> thank you. i will be brief. i want to thank you all for your services. i am sure my colleagues have not apologized i have not been here for the full hearing. i want to ask about navy ship

holding in the industrial base. as you know, the navy recently released 45 day ship and review offered a pretty sobering look into the future of procurement efforts by the navy. according to this assessment every major program faces multiple years of delays including the columbia and virginia class the marines which give the navy an essential edge in undersea warfare over our competitors. russia and china are trending in the opposite direction. they are building more, developing more. the decision to fund the production of just one virginia class submarine seems highly alarming. in

addition, it sends a signal that the united states may not fulfill its commitment to providing a key capability. so i am troubled that this decision seems to undermine procurement stability, the workforce, and our credibility in this area with some of our key allies. i would appreciate your comments, mr. secretary, on how we are going to correct any potential loss of capability, loss of progress and the kind of respect from our allies that we need to continue in this area of superiority. >> thank you, senator.

undersea praise -- supremacy is a strategic advantage that no country in the world can match. we will work to keep it that way. the current issue is one of capacity. there is currently a backlog in terms of the industry ability to produce submarines on time. we could increase the backlog or we could choose to invest in the industrial base to expand capacity so that they can speed production up. that is what we are doing. in fy 23 and 24 we requested some $1.9 billion to invest in the submarine industrial base. in this budget we are asking for a total of $4 billion. in addition to that, the supplemental that we have spoken so much about today includes a $3.3 billion request to also invest in the

industrial base. that will help us strengthen supply lines and will also help industry recruit and retain the workforce it will need to produce these really sophisticated platforms. i just met with the ceos of general dynamics and huntington ingalls. we talked about the challenges they were facing and what we are going to do with the resources we are providing them to expand their capability capacity. it is a good discussion and they are investing some of their own capital to do that as well. in terms of australia and the signal it sends to australia, i remain in contact with my counterpart, the australian minister of defense. we have talked about this issue and they get it.

by the way, australia is investing in our submarine industrial base as well. we are doing the right things and investing in the industrial base and hopefully, that will get us on the right path in the mid to longer-term. increasing the backlog is probably not the right thing to do at this point in time. investing in capacity and capability is the right thing to do. >> i respect that answer because it recognizes the realities of what we face. 5300 more people in the next year or so need to be hired. skilled welders, pipefitters, electricians, not just people hired off the street. i know that on paper you could easily say we are going to build two summary and see her but it

would not happen. i think that the candor and realism are very much to be respected. my urging would be that we make the investment of sufficient size to meet the reality of the challenge. as you have said so well, our undersea war fear capability is important and i hope congress would support you in this effort took i will respect the five-minute role even though there is nobody to discipline me. thank you for your testimony on behalf of the committee and i adjourn the committee. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir.