thank you very much . Mr . Chairman ,
thank you to both of you for being here
today . Uh Secretary Austin , I want to
commend you want to commend the work
that you have done so far to get
Ukraine the equipment and support ,
they need to fight back against
Russia's unforgivable attack on their
country . And at the same time , I'm
glad we're starting to provide more
capable systems . And I really urge you
to increase those deliveries and
provide all the necessary training . So ,
Ukrainian forces do have everything
they need . Now , I have heard
repeatedly from people on the front
lines and those involved in the
logistics system in Ukraine about
equipment um , that we deliver not
reaching frontline units that most need ,
the weapons , weapons and ammunition
and body armor . There there seems to
be a number of logistical and
institutional issues , including some
diversion and hoarding which are
standing in the way . So I wanted to
ask you today , what is your assessment
of those issues and how are you working
with the Ukraine to make distribution
of international assistance more
transparent and effective . So the
units on the front lines actually get
the equipment that they need . Well ,
thank you , Senator , This is something
that's very important to us at at the
Department and to me and General Milley
specifically , and we we talked to our
counterparts on a weekly basis and
without fail . This is a question that
I ask about . We don't have people on
the ground to be able to provide
accurate feedback on how this equipment
is moving and whether or not it's
getting to where it's needed most . But
the report that we get back from the
senior leadership routinely is that
it's getting to where it needs to go .
But you know , I won't stop , I'll
continue to engage and make sure that
we emphasize that uh that it's
important that all the stuff we're
giving them gets to the right place so
that they can be successful . And in
addition to that , you know , when I
engaged the Senior leadership in Kiev
last week , I emphasized the importance
of accountability as well . And and uh
and they acknowledge that this is
something that's important and
something that they're focused on again
without without people on the ground to
be able to confirm or deny . Its very
very difficult to do at this point .
Okay , I appreciate that . Um Turning
to Home Secretary Austin in january , I
and many of my colleagues sent you a
letter regarding D . O . D . Oversight
of privatized housing after belle for
beauty communities pled guilty to
defrauding the government . The
department's response provided few
meaningful answers on how oversight is
actually going to improve and that
really needs to change . And on top of
that , as you probably know , just a
few days ago , the Senate permanent
subcommittee on investigations released
a report showing that after the period
covered by the doj investigation
Balfour . Beatty continued to fail to
remediate mold failed to make critical
repairs and falsified information in
the database . D . O . D . Uses to
calculate their incentive fee . That is
really outrageous and really completely
unacceptable . In my home state of
Washington Balfour . Beatty continues
to obstruct building sufficient housing
at Fairchild and along with the
shortage of housing in the community
where BH fails to keep up with rent
prices . That means that military
families are left without housing .
Some have been stuck living in out out
of RVs for months now . Um , and at
joint base lewiS mcchord dozens of
families have sued Lincoln military
housing over really deplorable living
conditions . Our service members should
have access to the best or at least
decent housing , not the worst . Now .
We all want to fix this as soon as
possible . This budget requests almost
$168 million
$45
million dollars more than last year .
Can you tell me first what our military
families getting out of this funding
increase ? And secondly , what is your
assessment of the private housing
companies compliance since the plea
agreement ? And will you hold them
accountable for such horrendous abusive
conduct uh , to your last question
first , Yes , I will hold them
accountable and uh , I expect the
service secretaries to hold them
accountable as well and , you know ,
they , the health and welfare of our
troops . Our families is very , very
important to us . Um , and , you know ,
we put a great deal of emphasis on this ,
but , you know , obviously , this is
something that we can never take our
eyes off of and we're not there yet .
We put more more resources into into
the budget so we can provide more and
higher quality housing . But we're
gonna have to hold the contractors
accountable and we we intend to do that .
I intend to do that . So what what are
the military families getting out of
the funding increase that's being
requested ? It will be of course it's
spread out over a number of different
projects but it will be more in better
housing . So our quality has okay well
we've been told this for a long time
and we're still seeing these deplorable
conditions in the ongoing um really
substandard housing and the challenges
that our families are having . So this
needs a lot of work and oversight and
we have got to stay up on top of it . I
want to know that you're gonna be doing
that . I will thank you . Mr . Chairman
Senator Moran . Thank you . Mr .
Chairman thank you both for your
service to our nation . In your recent
written testimony you both mentioned
that our adversaries are rapidly
developing hypersonic missiles as
hypersonic become more commonplace . It
seems we can't rely upon nuclear
deterrence alone to prevent hypersonic
attacks . Once and once hypersonic
interceptors are developed how do we
plan on deploying these defensive
capabilities around the globe to make
certain that our deployed troops are
sufficiently protected from attack and
what shifts do you expect to see in
missile and interceptor investment in
future years . The US company , as the
US as US competes with china ,
Hypersonic is important to us . And in
this budget , I think you've seen
senator that we're investing some $7.2
billion dollars in long range fires .
$4.7 billion dollars of that is focused
on hypersonic . And so we're , we
continue to develop capability for
ourselves . But what's important is
that we need to consider the mix the
range of capabilities , the mix of
capabilities that we're gonna , we're
gonna bring on board to support our
warfighting concepts . So hypersonic is
an important capability . But there are
other things that add to this equation
as well in terms of defending ourselves ,
this is a , a priority for me . And as
soon as uh , we came on board , I
tasked my staff to make sure that we
pulled uh , the right elements together
to make sure that we were pressing
forward rapidly to increase our , our
efforts in developing a , our defenses
against the hypersonic threat . You've
seen us engage industry on this issue
and will continue to press . But you
know , we've made some progress , but
we have a ways to go yet . What what
concerns do you have about the
hypersonic weapons workforce ? What do
we need to do to be training and
preparing ourselves ? What kind of
investment in our work force is
necessary in our , in
our private sector workforce . Well ,
certainly , you know , we've ,
engaged the , um , engaged
industry and asked them to pick up the
pace . Uh , and in terms of what they
need specifically in their workforce
elements . Uh , that's something that
we haven't discussed . But uh , but
again , I I think the issue to to this
point has been , you know ,
we've we've not pushed to the degree
that we we can push and we've not
invested to the degree that we can
invest . And so we invested in this
last year . We invested in it this year .
And we're going to continue to press .
Thank you . Let me let me shift . Uh ,
natures of my question , I had the
opportunity to review and sit down with
staff from the Inspector General's
office To discuss their November 21
report evaluating the department's
implementation of suicide prevention
resources for transitioning members .
We know from our work on the Veterans
Committee that the most vulnerable time
for many members of our military as are
their leaving active duty and becoming
veterans . That Inspector general's
report demonstrates a lack of
compliance with executive order 138-2
regarding mental health screenings and
the warm handoff to mental health care
for transitioning service members . It
continues to be troubling to me , uh ,
that this does not seem to receive the
attention that it deserves within our
military community . Can you share with
me either one of you what progress the
department is making in implementing
the inspector general's recommendations
from that 21 November 21 report .
What I can tell you senator is that and
you've heard me say this a number of
times that this is important to me .
This is important to our department and
this is why we've invested in in
suicide prevention in mental health in
in a major way . This year . We've
invested invested in it last year as
well . But this year uh we're investing
$1.4 billion in uh in mental health
efforts . Uh We continue to uh to
liaise and engage with our counterparts
in the V . A . To ensure that we can
close as much as possible . Close the
gap as as troops transition from uh
from active duty to to leaving the
service or going or going in any
direction . So , um I've also stood up
an independent independent review
committee uh to uh to address this
issue and give us further insights and
mental health issues and also uh
prevention of suicide . Uh and uh and
so we're investing in this in in a
major way I intended to pursue this
further in in India . And I look
forward to your cooperation as we
figure out what language instructions
might be valuable to the department to
see that that gap that you just
described is closed . Thank you .
Before I get to Senator Durbin , I just
want to add to Senator Moran's question
on on the transition , we have work to
do . And I know you guys aren't
necessarily in the position to deal
with pushing people out . You want to
keep them in . But it is apparent that
this is a pretty massive problem and
it's both active military . And so I
want to thank Senator Moran for that
line of questioning . Senator Durbin ,
thank you Mr Chairman , thank you both
for being here . General Milley and as
well as Secretary Austin , thank you
for what you're doing today and your
years of service to our country . And
so those of us who have been in the
business of military politics over a
period of time are considered to be
wise forecasters of what's going to
happen . And sometimes we are and
sometimes we aren't . I can recall the
early briefing on what we might expect
in Ukraine when the Russian troops were
all poised at the border . And if I
remember it correctly , the prediction
was that the city of Kiev would fall in
a matter of days and that major parts
of Ukraine would fall to the Russians
as well . Then they would find find
that the maintenance of order in
conquered territory would be extremely
difficult and they would face a
resistance for a long period of time .
I remember that prediction as we all
watched reality unfold Kiev today ,
thank goodness is still not in the
hands of the Russians . Those under
attack , I'm sure , and most of
Ukraine has not been conquered by
Russia , thank goodness . Uh and they
are apparently having a difficult time
hanging on to what they currently have
and are fighting to extend their reach
every day . And I just wonder we can
assess it in many different ways , but
certainly the courage and resilience of
the Ukrainian people first and foremost
is the reason for what we see , at
least . I think so . Uh and I wonder
what we've learned about Russia's
military strength and what we
anticipated they would deliver in the
field and what they actually delivered .
And I know it's been asked earlier by
Senator baldwin , but a declaration of
war , what would that mean in terms of
Putin's capabilities in extending his
military reach in Ukraine Secretary ,
with your permission , I'll take a I'll
answer first . And if you want the
chairman to respond as well sir ,
certainly we offer that .
We , I have learned a lot about
Russia's leadership at the lower levels ,
which I think has been very , very
key in this in their efforts here .
They have modern equipment , they have
lots of it , they have , they have a
doctrine that that really wasn't
followed . Uh And uh and so as we
saw things unfold on the ground , we
saw them , um , not
uh , not able to support themselves ,
logistically , we saw them make some
bad assumptions at the very beginning
of this . Uh , we saw them fail to
integrate aerial fires with their
ground maneuver uh in just a number of
missteps and and I attribute a lot of
that too , lack of leadership at the
lower level . Uh , and then we saw
Russia pushed its senior officers
forward as a result of that , and many
of those were killed from being forward
on the battlefield . We'll see some of
the same mistakes , some of the same
weaknesses as a , as a prosecute the
fight in the don boss and , and , and
uh , and in the southern part of the
country . Uh , but they will learn from
the lessons uh , that , uh , learn from
the what they did in the early stages
of this fight . Uh , and uh , we'll see
them improve their logistical efforts ,
uh , and we'll see them improve their
massing of fires and that sort of
business , but some things they won't
be able to correct . So we , we've
learned a lot about their leadership at
the , at the lower levels and their
level of training . I'd like General
Miller to respond . But there was a
suggestion that if declaration of war
took place , that something would
happen automatically under Russian law
of the conscription . And that suggests
to me as a civilian that a lot of
untrained men in this circumstance
might be called into training and
exercises that they aren't prepared for .
They haven't been conditioned for .
That doesn't seem like it would be an
immediate boost to their effort .
That's exactly right senator . He would ,
he would be able to mobilize more
people , but to adequately train those
people to be more effective than what
we've seen on the battlefield thus far ,
that's questionable . Gentlemen . If
you'd respond to that question I've
asked earlier , if you'd also add to
your comments and I'm running out of
time . I have a particular concern
about Poland and the Baltics and they
worry every step of the way of
extension of Russian aggression into
their region . I hope you will address
that in your comments just very , very
briefly , center uh Declaration of War
does have some implications inside
Russian society legally would , as the
secretary said , it would allow them to
mobilize additional forces , but again ,
training etcetera , how long it would
take for them to get to the front in
terms of the lessons learned leadership
is clearly the key from Zelensky on
down to the lowest private and as
napoleon taught us a long time ago ,
you know , moral is the physical as
three is to one . So they are capable .
That is probably the most important
difference right now between the
Russians and the Ukrainians is the
leadership throughout the levels . In
addition to that is what the Western
nations NATO and particularly United
States taught their leaders Since 2014
about Mission Command . The Ukrainians
are practicing a decentralized intent
based set of tactics , the Russians are
practicing a top down very , very top
heavy directive in nature , a sort of
set of orders coming from the top ,
which is not necessarily the best thing
to do in a dynamic battlefield . The
second thing is the effective use of
antitank weapons is being phenomenal on
the part of the Ukrainians . Third is
the denial of the airspace air
supremacy . There's superiority to the
Russians by the Ukrainians and the
effective use of , of air defense ,
ground air defense systems . Uh ,
terrain has played to the terrain to
the Ukrainian favor uh , intelligence
is really important . The Ukrainians
have a built in intelligence system
being the people . So , uh , the
Russians have walked into an area that
is clearly unwelcome to them and the
people who provided a massive amount of
intelligence . Plus we have opened up
the pipes , which I'm not gonna go into
detail here at an open hearing . But
there's a significant amount of
intelligence flowing to Ukraine from
the United States , all of that in
combination and many , many more are
some of the early lessons learned that
have made the difference as what you've
seen in terms of predictions . Those
were early assessments . Uh , and war
is a dynamic interaction between
competing wills . So between those
predictions that you heard in early
february and in january , a lot of
things happened on that battlefield In
preparation prior to the invasion on
the 24th , not the least of which is an
intelligence flow from the United
States and that made a significant
difference in outcomes . And then
Poland and Balk . It's so Poland is
Baltics . Yeah , Poland , Poland is
clearly , you know , these are all NATO ,
Article five allies . As you know the
United States Under the direction of
President Secretary Defense . We went
ahead and directed us troops . So right
now you have U . S . Troops in Estonia ,
Latvia , Lithuania Poland Romania ,
Hungary . The whole the whole all the
entire belt has US troops in there .
And that was done immediately in order
to reinforce the NATO Article five
deterrence posture of the United States
and to assure our allies That they're
not going to be left alone . So that is
a critical component . As the president
has said many many times as members of
Congress has said many many times .
Article five matters . It's a Senate
ratified treaty uh in the United States
will not give up we will protect every
inch of NATO territory . Senator Graham .
Thank you . Mr Chairman thank you both
for coming . General Austin uh this
budget request . Is it a 4% increase ?
Yes . From last year's . Okay . What's
the inflation rate Current current
inflation rate is uh well above that .
Okay , so this budget doesn't keep up
with inflation number one uh percentage
of GDP spent on defense . What
percentage does this budget represent ?
I think it's 3.1 . Okay . How many
times have we been below 3%
since World War II ? Mhm . I
don't know senator . Well you need to
look it up in 1940 ,
2000 2001 ? And the 10 year
window the fiscal year defense plan In
year 10 2032 what percentage
of GDP will be spent on defense
In the 10 year window FY 32 .
The trajectory on where will we be in
Fy 32 ? We should be
a bit above where we are right now .
What ? 2.4% . If the numbers I've been
given ? All right . So over time we
spend less historically than we've ever
spent And given the 10 years that I'm
looking at . I don't see it . Real
peace dividend out there . How many
current battle for ships do we have in
the Navy ? So
We have 296 . We have 11 aircraft
carriers . How many ships does china
have ? I think the latest number was
around 400 . Yeah . 355 . They're going
to 422 by the end of Well for 60 by
2030 . Where will we be in terms of
ships by the end of 2032 .
Us ships It's 280 .
So the bottom line is we're on the
wrong path here . From my humble
opinion we're spending below inflation .
The chinese are increasing their navy
By 2032 . We'll have these numbers .
All right . We'll have 280 ships below
what we have today . Uh GDP spent on
defense will be at 2.4% . I don't know
what kind of world we're looking at out
there . But you're seeing a different
world than I am . And I hope we in a
bipartisan way , you can correct this
because I think in really many ways
this is dangerous . Afghanistan ,
General Milley . Um , I think you and
uh Secretary Austin said last year That
we could expect in the next 2-3 years
threats to the american homeland
emerged from Afghanistan . Is that
still accurate ? I still believe that
to be a correct assessment as it moved
one way or the other . We're saying
initial indications as you have seen in
the media as well and you're privy to
some of the intelligence which I won't
go over here . But ISIS and other
groups are trying to put themselves
back together . They have not succeeded
yet and they have not yet presented a
threat to the U . S . Homeland . But
we're watching that very , very closely
and if they raise their head and do
present a threat , then we'll take
appropriate actions are over the
horizon , capability to monitor
Afghanistan sufficient . I think we
have room to improve to be sure we do .
I don't want to do anything classified
here , but r I . S our presence in
Afghanistan , I think you'll be shocked
to know what it is and where it's
headed to both of you . You advocated
for a troop troops to remain in
Afghanistan , Is that correct ? It's
the President's decision , but that was
the position of both of you . Is that
correct ? That's correct ? To be clear .
Senator . I support the President . I
know , but the recommendation you gave
want to be clear was it would be better
off to have a residual force . Is that
accurate ? And and so , you know , I I
will never . Well , the records replete
with the fact that it was and I just
want to compliment you both trying to
compliment you . Hear that ? I thought
that was the right decision that that
pulling everybody out of Afghanistan uh
was a mistake . Do you believe that our
withdrawal from Afghanistan made it
more likely that Putin would invade
Ukraine ? I think that President Putin
made his decision to invade Ukraine
long before we pulled out of
Afghanistan . To be very , very candid .
Why didn't he do it before ? Why didn't
he do it before ? Um I think he was
preparing the force last year . He ran
a very , very large exercise and
getting the force ready . Why did they
invade Crimea when they did in 2014 ?
I can't answer that question right now .
I think it's because I've got a theory
here that that with all due respect
that Afghanistan sent the worst
possible signal to our adversaries and
our allies , President biden and
Secretary Blinken have said they have
no regrets regarding our withdrawal
from Afghanistan . Secretary Austin .
Do you have any regrets ? Senator ? As
I said , I support the President's
decision . And uh and again , um
What about you ? General Milley , I
deeply regret the loss of 13 11 marines ,
one sailor . And yeah , I do too . I
really regret the loss of everybody we
we've lost over there and all the
wounded . But do you have any regrets
in terms of our national security that
maybe we made the wrong decision ?
Senator ? I'm a soldier and I execute
the decisions that I'm told to make .
Um and I don't think at this point it's
helpful for me to express regret or not
enough . So I want to work with you
both . Um Chairman Durbin has been
great on Ukraine . We want to do more ,
not less . We're gonna send a signal ,
we're in it to win it . And uh I
appreciate the robust response is
getting better every day . So thank you
both . In terms of the budget , the
budget before us is inadequate to the
threats we face and over time it's a
disaster and I'd like to fix it . Thank
you . Senator Hovan , Thanks Mr .
Chairman , question for both of you .
Uh what weapons systems uh does Ukraine
need uh and
most need the most and need the soonest
that they don't have . What what
they've asked for , Senator is uh long
range fire capability . And uh we're
providing that as you've seen with
Most recently 9155
systems and they're able to capable of
using them or do they need to be
trained and they're using them now .
They're using them as we speak , As you
may know . We we took a number of
troops out and uh and trained them up
very quickly on 155 put them back into
into action and they are employing
those weapons systems now they have the
ammunition That we're providing them
and other countries are providing on
155 capability as well . They've also
asked for armored capability , tanks
and armored vehicles , uh and countries
in the region are providing that . And
as we witnessed in our meeting
that we held in Ramstein a week ago ,
countries like Canada and Germany are
stepping up providing armored vehicle
capability and so their their
capability overall is increasing . And
then again they put the put the stuff
that we provided them to very good use
in addition to the U . A . V . S that
were also provided general same
question , same thing . Uh Senator I
talked to my counterpart literally
every other day um and we worked very ,
very hard to get him what he thinks he
needs long range fires , specifically
cannon artillery And rocket artillery .
They were used to using the old Soviet
Model 152 artillery ammunition became a
problem . So we're moving to a NATO
standard . So the United States and
many of our allies and partners are
providing him with multiple battalions
worth of 155 cannon and the ammunition
to go with it . Plus the radars plus
the fire direction center the entire
package for effective use of fire .
That's the most important thing right
now in the current fight secondly , is
to continue to sustain him on anti tank
weapons , very effective anti aircraft
weapons , ground based either SAm's and
or manpads . Those are probably the top
three . And the number four would be
his ground maneuver capability of tanks
and mech infantry vehicles , which many
countries are now helping to contribute
as well . So those would be the top
four , There's a whole laundry list
below that , but those are the top four .
Looking at what the Ukrainians have
done to the Russian tanks with our
javelins . Do we have something that is
going to ensure that the tanks we
provide are able to defeat that same
type of shoulder mounted threat and
truly be effective ? The tanks that
we that we that have been provided to
them . Senator have been uh , tanks
that they are accustomed to using and
that they have the the the maintenance
capabilities to maintain . So , um ,
we've seen tanks , uh , a number of
tanks being provided by countries like
Poland and others that are in the
neighborhood . And and again ,
Russians don't have something that
approaches the javelin . So that's a
All right . So then , uh , next
question , have we fully utilized the
funds that we've already provided such
that you need this ? And when do you
need this supplemental ? And have we
really focused on the lethal aid versus
getting other things in this ? 33
billion supplemental ? Yeah , we
absolutely have focused on the lethal
aid Senator and we're at the very end
of our drawdown capability here . Uh so
um , you know , we're very quickly
going to run out of out of fun .
General . Did you have anything to add
to that ? No , I think it's clear to me
that the monies that congress has
provided is overwhelmingly in support
of lethal aid . There's no question
about it . It's almost all lethal aid .
Actually , I'm switching gears here
more along the lines of Senator Graham .
Um are you both this question for both ?
Are you both fully committed to
upgrading , updating and modernizing
our nuclear triad ? And is the funding
in this budget adequate to do that ?
$34 billion allocated to
that ? Uh that effort in this budget .
Uh and yes , Senator , I am absolutely
fully committed to modernizing the
triad . 100% . It's the number one
priority to in this budget and it'll
have to be sustained over time and
future budgets . But that will ensure
the protection of the United States for
many , many years and we need to
reinvest and recapitalize it . No one .
Thank you . I appreciate that . And
agree 100% . Final question , are you
familiar with um sky range for
developing the sky range system to test
hyper sonics as a way to actually do it
rather than lining up naval ships and
trying to do it . And do you support it ,
including using the global hawks for
that purpose . I am familiar with it ,
Senator . And yes , I do support it .
And uh and again the Air Force will
continue to work to make sure that the
right capabilities are in place to to
support that effort . Thank you . I
appreciate Senator murkowski . Thank
you . Mr Chairman , gentlemen , thank
you both for your leadership . We
appreciate it at all times . But
certainly at these very , very
difficult and challenging times . I
want to just follow on Senator Hogan's
comments about hyper sonics . Um we are
in a unique position as you know in
Alaska and providing the only location
of supporting both short and long range
hypersonic weapons testing within the
country just because of of where we are
with the unique geographic location .
Um nobody in the way down there for the
most part and I know that this is
something that General Milley , you
have you have spoken a lot about with
regards to china china's hypersonic
weapons testing ability just
very briefly whether or not you're
looking at the illusions for for this
in terms of opportunity for testing Yes .
In conjunction with our spaceport there
in kodiak as as the short short answer
is yes . And hypersonic are an
important weapon in in a in an entire
array of weapons systems . As you know ,
the Russians have already fired
hypersonic weapons in in Ukraine . I do
want to caveat that though . But but it
is the key to it is in its name . It is
very , very fast and there is no
effective defensive weapon against it
per se to shoot it down . So the key is
sent him ran and asked earlier the key
is to shoot the archer , not the arrows
and to get at the system at its launch
sites . The other key from protection
standpoint is not only the integrated
air missile ballistic defense system
but it's also the tactics of the units .
So units are going to have to be as we
move into the changing character of war
in the future , units and organizations
and equipment are gonna have to be
smaller , faster . Uh much more hidden
in the sense of not quite totally
invisible , probably never get there .
But uh we we need to be very very
difficult to find on a battlefield . So
a constant state of moving in motion
invisible to the extent that's possible
smaller in general and speed will
matter on future battlefields because
so far what we've seen with hypersonic
says they're very effective against
fixed targets , much more difficult
against moving targets . Let me let me
ask about the javelins . He was just
speaking about that with Senator
Senator Hovan Mr . Secretary and we've
been working with a constituent of mine .
He's an army special forces that he's
been in Ukraine training ground forces
for the past couple of months . He has
facilitated several requirements
letters from the Ukrainian Ministry of
Defense verifying the need for javelin
training kits including the head of
Ukrainian defense Intelligence . I
understand these documents have been
pushed to your office . Obviously the
javelins have the ability to
significantly help Ukrainian forces .
But what we're hearing is that the new
Ukrainian troops are not provided
adequate training to operate these
$200,000 weapons
systems . And they're looking at an
article that came out um just just a
few uh a week ago now with regards to
to the training aspect of it . So the
question to you is is whether or not
they they have enough of the javelins
that they need . But what we're doing
to help facilitate then the training
so that they can most effectively
deploy these weapons . And and what is
d . O . D telling the Ukrainian
Ministry of Defense in response to
their ask for more trainers , how are
we doing on that side ? First of all ,
thank you Senator . I would highlight
that we have taken at this point ,
several 100 troops out of out of
Ukraine train them in other countries
on artillery , operation of U . A . V .
S . Uh and other things and and they've
been reintroduced into the fight . So
training is something that that we're
doing . Uh But the issue is that in my
engagements with the Minister of
Defense and I think also with the Chief
of Defense and the Chairman , the issue
of uh specific issue of training on
javelins has never come up . But if if
if they raise that issue , certainly we
stand ready to to train them if it is a
requirement . And since you brought it
up , no doubt it is , we'll go back and
check with them again and the people
that they need to train , we stand
ready to train them and we're pushing
training kits into into the country as
well . I will be happy to follow up and
and provide you with the information
that we have on this and I thank you
for that . Um then just very lastly ,
and this doesn't require a response .
But this is with regards to arctic
operations . You'd be disappointed if I
didn't raise it with you . But I am
thankful that you have stressed the
importance of supporting arctic
operations , the training , the
equipment of our joint forces in this
important region . I know you've got uh
good progress that we have made with
regards to the Ted stevens Securities
Arctic Security Studies Center in in
Alaska , the first Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Arctic Affairs .
You've got North com tasked with an
arctic security assessment . So there's
a lot coming on in in this way . I
understand there's a report coming up .
We'll look forward uh to to reviewing
that and and being there to support you
in all those efforts , but truly
appreciate the heightened level of
engagement in this very important part
of of our responsibility . Thank you Mr
Chairman , thank you Senator murkowski .
Um I'm gonna take my question time now ,
fellas , we've been at this for about
an hour and 37 minutes , which is a
little longer than I had anticipated ,
but it's a big budget and it's worth
every question to be asked . And I just
want to start by thanking you guys for
what you're doing . I mean , the truth
is , is $773 billion . Um You're gonna
have people come in saying it's too
much , you're gonna have people coming
in saying it's too little , as you've
already pointed out , secretary , you
have to snap the shock line somewhere .
That's a good analogy , And and I just
appreciate the work that you've done
because anybody can pick holes in it ,
anybody can pick holes in it and to
talk about where we're gonna be in the
next decade , 10 years from now is
pretty interesting because you have to
have people around you nimble enough to
know whether we're even gonna need
ships or tanks or if it's gonna be
fought in outer space , or if it's
gonna be fought in the cyber realm
wherever it's going to be fought . And
the truth is , if you screw up , we're
all gonna have opinions and we're gonna
beat the out of you . And so you've got
to do what's best for this country and
best for the people who are super into
you . And I just want to thank you for
that . Talking about the area of um
Decommissioning divesting . Um
It's always a challenge . You've always
got people in the Senate that don't
want to see certain things go away . Um ,
but , but I want to talk about a
proposal to get rid of ships that quite
frankly , we just put into service . In
fact , some of them aren't even totally
put into service yet . The littoral
combat ships . Um , how much confidence
do you have in the analysis that that
these things just aren't fit for the
fight ? I'm very , very confident
Chairman . I again , I think you hit
the nail on the head . There were
looking to acquire capabilities that
are relevant in the future fight and
survivable . The earlier variants of
this , of the ship that you mentioned ,
uh , did not live up to expectations .
It's very expensive to maintain . And
so we've made the decision that could
be uh better to
decommission those ships and invest
those resources and in acquiring
capabilities that are more agile and
more relevant to the future . Fight
more survivable . Um ,
and those those ships have been
on the books for , um , like I said ,
they're not , I think there's still
some in process , But they were
designed what , 20 years ago , 15 years
ago do you do , you know offhand ? I
think it was about 20 years ago , about
20 years ago and it's already changed
In 20 years . Uh , and pretty
dramatically , I might add , I want to
talk a little bit about something it's
already been visited . And that's ,
that's accountability . There's been
$3.7 billion
16.4
uh projected to go out . You had said
with earlier questions that um ,
you're reasonably confident that the
that the that the weaponry is getting
to the to the Ukrainians and I get it ,
you don't have people on the ground
there to be able to monitor everything .
But but the the question is , and is is
that are we making sure that
number one , none of these weapons are
falling into the wrong hands . Is there
any way to even do that ? And then
number two , are we making sure that
the taxpayer dollars that are being
spent um are are actually
um , making a difference . And I'm
talking a significant difference . Well ,
first of all , I I think they are
making a difference , chairman . And ,
you know , just look at the battlefield
today versus what we're looking at a
couple of weeks ago , we see that the
Russians , uh , the Ukrainians have
defeated the Russians around Kiev and
they've they've moved back . They're
focused on the south and east now . Uh
And uh we expect that to be a bit of a
different flavor of fight that employs
more long range fires , a bit more
maneuver , uh and the Ukrainians have
asked for what they believe is relevant
in that fight . And uh the department
and the joint staff under Chairman , uh
Chairman's leadership . They're really
hustled to get the capabilities that to
them as quickly as possible . And we've
engaged other other countries to do the
same to provide additional capability .
But in terms of accountability , uh we
we have to depend on the Ukrainians at
this point to uh to do the right thing
and and and make sure that they are
prudent and careful about how they
issue these weapons out and account for
these weapons . Again , I I engaged a
very senior leadership in the country
on this issue and they assured me that
this is something that's important and
they'll they'll continue to focus on
for for resupplying . Um There's a
lot of stories about coal production
lines , about the fact that we have
supply chain issues when it comes to
replacing everything that we're
shipping in the Ukraine and and our
allies are shipping into Ukraine to you
said you thought , and don't let me put
words in your mouth that the weaponry
could be replaced within the next year
with this budget . It's all of it won't
be replaced within a within a year . I
it will see production lines operate
at at different speeds just based upon
what they are . We were optimistic
about the javelin being
the industry being able to increase uh
the production rate in a very
meaningful way and uh and their
decisions to be made about the on the
on the Stinger going forward . But in
every case , uh the , you know , the
industry has leaned into this and is
willing to work with us to increase
production as much as possible and the
dollars in this budget accomplish
accomplish getting those production up
lines up and it and it accomplishes
getting what we need to replace what's
being utilized and the supplemental
that we've asked you for right senator
um in the opening statement um
and this is for you , General Milley I
believe asking for 100 and 30
billion in R . And D spending . That's
10 billion over 2020 to 12 billion over
the previous year . Procurement
conversely is flat at about 144 billion
for years . R . And D . Has been used
in mature and prototype technologies
like a I like hyper sonics um which
are important . Um
if we're gonna if we're gonna compete
particularly with china . So
when when will they become real
programs and and and wildly feeling my
concern is is that we're prototype and
everything to death and it never gets
to the field . Is this a concern you
have number one General and number two ,
can you give me any sort of
expectations when we might see some of
this stuff come to reality . And I
think the time window and again , I
agree with your comment about
predicting 10 , 15 years out but we do
know the broad outlines or at least we
think we know the broad outlines well
the future operating environment in
this changing character of war and
these programs will need to be online
fielded in the hands of The force in
the in the hands of the joint force
inside of 10 years . If we are going to
have an opportunity to be superior
to our adversaries specifically China .
The programs . I'm specifically talking
about our artificial intelligence ,
robotics , hypersonic . There's a wide
variety of these technologies that are
coming online . But in addition to that
it's more than just the technologies ,
the Joint warfighter concept . We have
to get that on the street . We've got
to make sure that our organizations are
doctrines and our talent management are
all adjusted . We've got to shift this
military from its current state That
we're in and we have to bias the future .
We have to make some predictions as as
as risky as that can be as to what
warfare will look like in the 20s 30s
and 2040s . And we've got to move this
organization in that direction . If we
fail to do that , we'll be condemning
generations to come to be on the losing
side of the war . We can do it . We
were capable of doing it . This budget
puts us on that path . Okay . And so is
that's good to know that's that's good
enough . Um One last question then I'll
let you guys go Mr Secretary of the
2022 National Defense Strategy . It
does continue to highlight china's are
most consequential strategic competitor
and pacing challenge is the Russian
invasion of Ukraine caused you to
rethink the department's priorities
laid out in the N . D . S . And uh and
we will that have budget implications
if if the answer is yes . Mhm . It is
not chairman . As you look at the
strategy you see , we we characterize
the Russian Russia as an acute threat
in the capabilities that we're going
after and to support our our
competition with with china uh are
very , very relevant to what we're
seeing . And potentially we'll have to
do uh in an extreme case with with
respect to Russia . Uh and and we , you
know , we're part of a the strongest
alliance in the world with with NATO .
It's not only our capability that's
relevant there but it's also the
capability of our all of our allies .
So what we're going after is relevant
to both both areas of competition .
Thank you both . I just want to
acknowledge that Senator Shelby's
statement will be a part of the record
and uh and let him know that we
missed him here today and and we look
forward for him to return very very
soon . Um
Everybody has theories . Everybody has
2020 hindsight . And I can tell you
um just as a statement for the record ,
the some can say that the pullout of
Afghanistan was a mistake . I think it
was a decision that had to be made that
quite frankly it could be questioned
either way if we left troops there
would have been questioned if we had
pulled out troops , we could be
questioned . But to say that Putin
invaded Ukraine because of the pull out
Afghanistan is the most bizarre thing
I've ever heard . It was just his
theory . So I got mine . I think the
reason Putin invaded Ukraine is because
president trump empowered him to do
such . I don't expect a response from
you guys on that , but this is
absolutely ridiculous . Um I want to
once again appreciate your guys
testimony here today . Senators may
submit , submit additional written
questions and we ask that you respond
to them in a reasonable period of time .
In other words , as quick as you can .
This defense subcommittee were
reconvene on Tuesday May 10th At 10 a.m .
to hear from the Secretary of the Army
and the Army Chief of Staff . This
committee stands in recess .