FULL HEARING: Tim Kaine, Duckworth, Kelly, Gillibrand, Slotkin Grill US Generals Over Iran War — AC1G

[0:00] funding terrorism? Senator, this has been a significant priority from the outset, and as we [0:05] sit here today, there are no resources and equipment that are flowing from Iran to Hamas, [0:12] Hezbollah, or the Houthis. Those transfer paths and methods have been cut off. [0:18] To the extent that that source of support has been cut off, what are the other sources of support [0:26] that these terrorist groups can look to? I think some of those pieces are best discussed in a more [0:34] classified environment, but I think the key element of this is the main supplier of resources [0:40] and training for decades and billions of dollars, and we've seen all this before our very eyes. [0:46] Those pieces have been completely cut off today. Thank you very much. We'll take another round, [0:50] but at this point, I recognize the ranking member. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Admiral Cooper, [0:56] is Iran militarily still able to inflict significant damage on infrastructure of the [1:06] surrounding countries in the Persian Gulf? Senator, in this environment, what I would [1:11] tell you is their capabilities have been dramatically degraded. That certainly doesn't mean that they [1:16] don't have anything left, but the large-scale volleys that we've seen over the last couple of [1:20] years, Iran is no longer capable of executing those. This would be less large-scale volleys than [1:28] directed attacks on critical infrastructure, which would set back petroleum production, [1:35] even if the Strait or petroleum distribution, I would say, even if the Strait of Hamuz is open. [1:40] Does that capability still exist? Capabilities across the board inside Iran still exist at a [1:47] degraded scale. We've also planned accordingly for each of these scenarios, if necessary, to deal with [1:52] them from a defensive perspective. So, would you characterize Iran as no longer a threat? [2:01] Iran has a significantly degraded threat, and they no longer threaten regional partners or the United [2:08] States in ways that they were able to do before. Across every... [2:13] ...threaten their partners. [2:15] It's a very large country. They have... partners. [2:17] It's a very large country. They have... they have... they retain some mineral capability. [2:22] That's correct, and that's accurate. [2:23] Thank you, sir. [2:24] And, of course, we've accounted for that from a defensive perspective. [2:26] General Anderson, what's happened is that the administration recalled over 30 career ambassadors [2:35] in Africa, including... excuse me, over 30 career ambassadors overall, 12 in Africa. [2:41] In the United States, there's only 14 confirmed ambassadors. In other words, 40 ambassadorial [2:49] posts in Africa are vacant or filled by charge affairs. Is it essential to your work to have [2:57] fully functioning embassies with ambassadors? Senator, we work very closely with all the [3:04] embassies across the continent to pursue and further American interests, and so that relationship [3:09] with these embassies is critical for AFRICOM's effective engagements. [3:13] But what about the ambassadors? [3:15] Yes, sir. So the ambassadors do enjoy access. I think that that's important to have ambassadors [3:22] in place because the hierarchical nature of many of the African countries is that if you're not an [3:28] ambassador, you don't always get access, and so there is obviously benefit to that, and we coordinate [3:35] with them quite closely when we engage. [3:37] Thank you very much, sir. You are combating one of the most sophisticated [3:45] information warfare operations we've seen in a long time from Russia. What can we do to improve your [3:55] ability to withstand this information operation and also to engage in something on the same level [4:02] by the United States? [4:03] Yes, sir. I appreciate the recognition of this concern because our adversaries are very active [4:10] in the information domain. As you highlighted, Russia, I'd also say China is also very active in [4:15] these domains. They use this to undercut not only our interests, but undercut and disrupt the [4:22] democracies that are in Africa. This is an area that I've talked to several of the leaders across, [4:27] especially coastal West Africa, that are very concerned about the Russian propaganda that is [4:32] destabilizing their democracies. For me, we have a limited budget that we are mostly in a reactive mode [4:40] to respond to issues. What would be beneficial as one of the few entities that looks across the entirety [4:45] of the continent is a consistent budget that would allow us to campaign in the information space. [4:53] We coordinate very closely with State Department and others on this and work with the embassies, [4:57] but our ability to look across the continent and highlight these things, I think, is an area [5:01] where we could be of benefit to the American interest. [5:03] Thank you, sir. Admiral Cooper, one more question. Do we still maintain a relationship with the Syrian [5:10] Democratic Forces? [5:11] Senator, we do have a nascent relationship with them in the context of evacuating the more than 5,700 [5:21] ISIS prisoners from predominantly northeast Syria to Iraq. A small number of prisoners, mostly chronically [5:28] ill and with multiple amputees, stayed in the primary prison known as Hasakah, and SDF is today serving as the guards. [5:35] Senator, just a follow-on question. Do you detect any kind of resentment to our rapid departure from SDF? [5:48] I think, Senator, we've had a long-standing relationship with the SDF. The ceasefire [5:54] that they have in place today with the Syrian government remains in effect, and we remain engaged. [5:59] Thank you very much, sir. Thank you. [6:01] Thank you. Senator Fischer. [6:03] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Admiral. [6:07] General, thank you for your service. [6:10] Admiral, what did the Iranians' attempted missile attack on the island of Diego Garcia [6:20] tell us about the ballistic missile program and their intent to use it? Did it come as a surprise? [6:30] Senator, appropriate to talk in this forum, because there's clearly a classified component of this. [6:36] I think we've all heard publicly what Iran described as their self-imposed limitations on their missile [6:42] force. The execution of that particular attempted strike, which failed, was twice the distance of [6:49] what they previously advertised that they said that they would self-constrain themselves to. [6:54] Thank you. And as you look at the total operation, the conflict there, what lessons have you learned [7:02] from that? And how have you used those lessons thus far to ensure that your command is prepared for the [7:10] fight that we have today? [7:11] Admiral G. Yes, Senator. Thank you very much for this. It's fair to say that we have captured [7:16] thousands of lessons, mostly tactical. I think there's no military in the world that makes adjustments as [7:22] well as the United States military does, and whether they were in stride tactically with a lot of support [7:28] from organizations back in the United States, or they're more at the operational level. We took a [7:33] very hard look inward to see where can we improve our defenses. Force protection and protecting our [7:39] people is my number one priority. We focused on that first, made a significant number of adjustments [7:45] to enhance what was already a very effective air defense umbrella. And that's where we are predominantly [7:51] focused, as well as putting ourselves in a position to meet a wide range. [7:55] Admiral Anderson, ISIS is on the rise in Africa, and you've been very, very clear about that. [8:06] How is your command working with our partners in order to address that? [8:10] Admiral Anderson, you are correct. ISIS is putting a concerted effort in this establishment on the [8:19] continent. We have been working very closely with willing partners who have been willing to address [8:24] this threat. So two examples of that in northern Somalia, working with the Somali and the Putlan [8:30] forces there to go up into those mountains. What has been key there to putting pressure and isolating the [8:37] ISIS leadership there is the partner's ability to stay in those mountains. And so our partnership to [8:42] provide them the intelligence, some training, and some limited logistics that allow them to stay, [8:46] is helping isolate that leadership node in Somalia. We've also been working very closely with Nigeria, [8:52] who is in the last few months opened up with a very positive engagement with intel sharing and [9:00] ability to go after and target some of these terrorist threats that are in northern Nigeria. And so that [9:06] has been a positive area that we've seen as well. We would like to reestablish some pragmatic [9:11] relationships in the Sahel, where ISIS also has a stronghold, where they are currently holding an American [9:16] hostage in order to gain better access. And that's an area we need to continue to improve to work with [9:22] those partners for a intel sharing and understanding of what that threat is there. But we are working [9:27] very deliberately with our partners to address these common threats. Do you feel that you're [9:32] appropriately resourced to address these threats? We have the minimum necessary resources in order to [9:41] address the threats in order to do this because of the size of the continent and the complexity of [9:46] those attacks or of those threats. In order to thwart these, we have to shift resources and that entails [9:52] taking some risk in those other areas in order to address the primary efforts. [9:57] I'd like to have you address some of the connections that we see with the drug cartels, [10:07] with the terror groups. Can you elaborate on those, especially with regards to the [10:13] Central and South American cartels? Yes, Senator. That's an area that is emerging that is causing us [10:20] great concern. So two points to that. Recently, there was a interdiction based on some intelligence that [10:27] we were able to provide that the Spanish interdicted a shipment of cocaine that was 35 tons [10:33] of cocaine. We believe that's about a billion dollars of street value. We believe that's [10:38] the largest interdiction in history. That came out of South America. It was transiting along the west [10:43] coast of Africa towards another location that I could talk about in a classified environment. [10:50] And so we're seeing more of that drug trafficking coming in and the terrorist organizations are helping [10:56] transit that. They're getting payments through that and there's a symbiotic relationship that that [11:00] money then comes back to our hemisphere to those drug cartels, but also helps provide fuel for those [11:07] terrorists. Another area that I think is important to highlight is that in the last 18 to 24 months, [11:14] we have assisted in or at least tipped off many partner nations to drug activities and labs in their [11:20] country. In this time, 11 of the 12 drug labs that have been interdicted have had Mexican cartel members on [11:29] site to include the largest drug lab that had ever been disrupted in South Africa, that there were [11:35] Sinaloa cartel members on site. And so they are actually doing production now in Africa as well as the [11:40] transit of that across the continent. So we're watching this develop and it's of concern as this fuels both [11:47] the terrorists and the cartels. What's the destination of those drugs? Those drugs are destined for [11:54] the Middle East, for Europe, but we're also seeing them then come in through the northern route [11:58] back into America as we have applied pressure on the southern border. They're finding other means to [12:03] bring those drugs into our nation. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Fischer. Senator Blumenthal. [12:10] Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both for being here. Thank you for your extraordinary service [12:16] in a difficult time. General Anderson, I want to express my condolences to you and your team and the [12:23] families of Lieutenant Kendrick Lamont and Specialist Maria Collington. The Army's lost two young patriots [12:35] and dedicated man and woman. And I'm certain that the recovery mission was difficult. And I want to [12:45] commend your team for bringing closure to their families. Admiral, there has been public reporting [12:53] that Iran continues to have as much as 70 to 75% of its missiles and launchers available to threaten [13:05] shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Does that reporting conform roughly with your estimate as to Iran's [13:15] continuing strength? Senator, thank you for the question. And first, thank you for your time these [13:22] past few days. It's been meaningful and very much appreciated. I think it's appropriate in this forum, [13:28] my perspective is the numbers that I've seen in open source are not accurate. I've seen in open [13:34] source are not accurate. I think what also is not taken into consideration is more than just the [13:39] numbers. It's the command and control that's been shattered. It's a significant degradation and [13:45] capability. And it's the lack of any ability to then produce any missiles or drones on the back end. [13:52] I think we have to take a holistic look at that. That's what we've done. But regardless of what the [13:57] numbers are, Iran continues to pose a significant threat to shipping because it has missiles and [14:06] fast boats and other assets that are available to attack shipping in the area, correct? Senator, [14:13] all in each of those cases, their capability have been significantly degraded. If I just use my own [14:19] professional experience in 100 transits through the Strait of Hormuz, you would typically see [14:24] 20 to 40 fast boats and lately we've seen two or three. So the degradation means it's been super, [14:33] it's been significant, but some residual capability does exist. With respect to the threat that remains, [14:43] your forces were successful in Project Freedom in enabling ships to go through the strait, correct? [14:50] Oh, that's correct, sir. And Project Freedom was stopped for what reason? [14:57] Senator, I think I'll look back a couple of days ago on the Chairman of the Joint Chief's testimony [15:03] before the Senate Appropriations Committee. I think he characterized it well. The situation in the [15:08] Strait of Hormuz is rather complex these days, and I would offer just these quick points. First and [15:19] foremost, the United States controls via our blockade, which I'd be happy to talk about, the overall [15:25] flow of commerce going into and out of Iran. The Iranian capability to stop commerce has been [15:32] dramatically degraded through the straits, but their voice is very loud. And those threats are clearly [15:38] heard by the merchant industry and the insurance industry. Those are factors. They're certainly [15:43] factors in energy. And on top of all that... But Project, and I apologize for interrupting, [15:47] but I'm going to run out of time as you understand. I think the point that I want to make here is that [15:55] Project Freedom could be started again and the voices of the Iranians, large as they are, could be [16:05] contradicted or reduced in impact if Project Freedom were ongoing and the world could see that shipping [16:16] was going through the straits. Am I off base in that view? Senator, there's a wide range on anything [16:25] having to do specifically with the Strait of Hormuz, particularly during this time of sensitive [16:31] negotiations where it's front and center in the negotiations. And have you seen any progress in [16:39] those negotiations? Senator, I'd refer to the diplomats and the team engaged in the negotiations. [16:46] Let me ask you, in the time that I have left, one of the objectives that President Trump articulated at [16:55] the beginning of this war, which in my view could not be accomplished with bombing, was to secure the [17:02] enriched uranium. Would you agree that taking possession of that uranium would require boots on [17:14] the ground and significant casualties for United States forces? Senator, in this particular forum, [17:20] I think it would be highly inappropriate, given the classified nature of any contingencies, to talk [17:26] about the nuclear program. Well, let me just finish by making the observation that you have, I think, [17:34] sought to be forthcoming to the committee in the classified setting where we had an earlier [17:42] conversation that the vast majority of what you told us, the vast majority of what you told us, [17:51] should also be told to the American people. They deserve to know. And our adversaries know a lot of what [17:59] we know. The ones who really don't know are the American people and they deserve more information, [18:08] which is not a criticism of you. It is of the system which causes the withholding of this information [18:18] and the administration, which has refused to provide figures as to the costs of the war and other [18:27] details that are relevant and important for the American people to know. So I'm hopeful that we can [18:36] have a way to make more information available to the American people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [18:42] Admiral Cooper, during the brief time of Project Freedom, before it was closed off again, [18:54] did we – can you say in this setting whether or not our – Senator, thank you for this very much [19:08] appreciated. Senator, thank you for this very much appreciated. As has been publicly highlighted, [19:14] the first two ships to flow from the Arabian Gulf, from the western part into the east, [19:20] through the Strait of Hormuz, were U.S. flagged vessels that was successfully executed. [19:27] And U.S. Navy destroyers then came into the Arabian Gulf, operated for a number of days, [19:32] and then as you subsequently saw, float out of the Arabian Gulf. Okay, so Senator Blumenthal's question [19:38] presumed that you could give in public your judgment as to whether the United States is [19:48] capable of doing that again. Senator, there's a military component of this, [19:53] and then there's also a policy component that I believe to the policy makers. [19:56] But from the military standpoint, we could do that again, could we not? [20:02] We just did it last week. Thank you. Senator Ernst, I believe. [20:08] Thank you, Mr. Chair. And gentlemen, thank you for being here today and to your teams as well. [20:13] We truly appreciate your service and dedication to our nation. And I also want to acknowledge the loss [20:20] of the two individuals in Morocco and thank our Moroccan partners as well for their contribution [20:28] in the recovery efforts. I do want to recognize Admiral Cooper, those that we have lost during this [20:35] current operation or the former operation, Epic Fury, as well as the two Iowa National Guardsmen that [20:42] we lost in Syria this last December. We have also more than 380 who have been wounded in this fight. [20:50] So for all of those service members that have given so much and to their families, they will not be [20:56] forgotten. The operations that have been conducted against Iran and its proxies across the central [21:02] command AOR wouldn't have been possible without some really tremendous partners in that region. [21:10] And we have seen a large burden borne by Israel and Jordan. We've seen assistance coming from Bahrain [21:21] and UAE, who has taken a significant amount of incoming fire. Saudi Arabia, Qatar. They haven't all been [21:30] passive bystanders. They've been actively engaged. So they have contributed to every line of effort and [21:37] we appreciate them contributing to our successes. We can't overstay cooperations have meant operationally [21:47] to us, so operationally to us. So, Admiral Cooper, what is the one, maybe two things, that you want [21:56] all of us to understand as we walk out of this hearing knowing about what our allies have assisted [22:03] with in this fight? Senator, first, thank you for the question and thank you for your leadership and [22:10] thank you for all that has been done by the great men and women from your state. They've played an outsized [22:16] role, so thank you for that. In terms of our partners, I think a key feature is we have enhanced [22:22] middle-to-mill relationships across the board in the Middle East. As we sit here right now, we have [22:28] five specific partner nations who are not just conceptually side-by-side, but literally side-by-side [22:35] with the United States in defense. The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. [22:43] Over the course of ethic fury, they defended themselves and they defended Americans. In addition [22:49] to those key allies, everything that we've accomplished would have been impossible without [22:54] the Kingdom of Jordan, and clearly we were operating very closely with the State of Israel. I think that [22:59] group in particular should be commended. They didn't just execute missions, they served side-by-side [23:04] with Americans and protected Americans. Thank you. And this takes years to develop those [23:10] friendships, those relationships, the mill-to-mill work that you do. Is that correct? [23:15] It does. There's the mill-to-mill work. There's the friendships. It's all about bringing these [23:20] together. And the air defense umbrella that's been created has been in concept for the better part of [23:25] a decade and a half, now fully realized. And again, I just want to reiterate that we have such tremendous [23:31] partnerships with so many of those nations, and we thank them for that. I'll move to AFRICOM now, General [23:39] Anderson. Over the past couple of years, the U.S. has been withdrawing forces from a number of countries, [23:46] including Niger, Mali, and Chad. And Russia's African Corps has moved in to fill that vacuum. [23:55] Where we don't exist, others will. But just a few weeks ago, they retreated from Kidal Mali under fire. [24:03] They had surrendered to the very militants that they were sent to defeat. So we have some really [24:11] interesting dynamics going on in that region. And AFRICOM is left with the responsibility for a lot [24:19] more high-risk, high-threat posts than any other combatant command in the world. So walk us through, [24:26] just very briefly, what AFRICOM cannot do today that it could five years ago. [24:33] Well, Senator, I think there's one very poignant example that I can use very quickly is that five [24:41] years ago, as a commander of Special Operations Command Africa, Philip Walton was taken hostage in [24:45] Niger and transported by bandits who were being prepared to be sold to terrorist organization. [24:51] We were able to identify him in 24 hours. We were able to pinpoint his location within 48. He was [24:55] rescued in less than 96. That was largely due to the access that we had, also the partnerships [25:01] and the relationships that we enjoyed. Today, Kevin Rideout is on day 205 of captivity, [25:08] largely because we don't have the access that we had before and the relationships that are necessary. [25:13] And that posture reduction has been difficult. And he was also taken out of Niame. Unfortunately, [25:18] he was then sold by the bandits to ISIS and is being held there today. [25:22] And thank you for that. And Mr. Chairman, I just want folks to understand [25:28] the lack of presence that we have in AFRICOM and that exact difference. So thank you, [25:34] General Anderson, for a very, very specific example of what a lack of presence has meant. [25:41] Thank you, Senator Ernst. There's a proposal for substantially more funding for your command. [25:49] Is that right, General Anderson? Senator, that is correct. The [25:53] presidential budget significantly increases our budget and addresses some of these key concerns. [25:59] Well, that one example you just gave, would that be addressed by these proposed additional? [26:06] So not entirely, Senator, because the access and relationships are what were key there. But we do, [26:12] because of this, because of that lack of posture, need more investment in expeditionary capabilities. [26:18] And that is being addressed in the proposed budget. But those that those relationships that [26:24] the center highlight and maintaining those relationships are absolutely critical, [26:27] because you cannot surge trust in the time of need. [26:30] Okay, well, you and I have gone back and forth about unfunded requirements. And so I guess your [26:35] testimony is, is that that's not a matter of funding. It's just a matter of relationships. [26:43] Senator, that is a matter of relationships. The funding that we would ask for, [26:49] that would encourage, that would help us is the contingency response ability expeditionary, [26:54] but also some targeted programs to work with key partners who are willing and able to address the [26:59] threat to increase their capability and capacity to do that. So those are the investments. Those are all [27:05] included in the proposed budget. So right now, I don't have many. [27:09] Very well, very well. Senator Cain. [27:13] Thank you, Mr. Chair. And to our witnesses, President Trump's decision to unilaterally take the United States [27:19] into a war with Iran is deeply unpopular in Virginia. We are a very pro-military state, [27:26] a very pro-military state. And as I've traveled around Virginia and talked to Virginians, the [27:31] unpopularity sort of gets crystallized into, have we learned nothing from 25 years of war [27:37] in the region? 14,000 American troops and contractors died in the war on terror in Iraq and [27:43] Afghanistan, more than 65,000 injured, $8 trillion spent. And Virginians who've watched their friends [27:49] and family repeatedly deployed over the last quarter century have grave concerns about what was [27:55] accomplished and was the sacrifice worth it? Our troops sacrificed so bravely. Chief Warrant Officer [28:03] Robert Marzon, one of the 14 who have died in Epic Fury, Spotsylvania County, Virginia. [28:09] Our Ford Carrier Strike Group just returned the longest post-Vietnam deployment of any carrier. [28:16] Our folks sacrifice. They want civilian leaders to make the right decisions about whether and when [28:22] and how they should sacrifice. And there's deep concern that in this instance, the decision is a [28:27] wrong one. Part of it is a failure to really grapple with history. In the hearings in this committee, [28:35] I've heard over and over again, and I've heard the President and Secretary of Defense talk about [28:39] Iran's bad actions since 1979. And everything that's been said about Iran's bad actions are true. [28:46] But there's a lot of the story that folks don't talk about. History didn't begin in 1979. Iran and [28:52] the United States were allies in World War II. One of the pivotal events in World War II was the Tehran [28:57] Conference, where President Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin met in Tehran [29:02] to guarantee Iran independence, stable borders, and sovereignty. Iran loved the United States. [29:10] The United States led a coup to topple the democratically elected government of Iran in [29:16] 1953 during the Eisenhower administration. The United States propped up a dictatorship, [29:22] the Shah of Iran, trained the secret police, the Savak, that tortured, exiled, [29:28] imprisoned, killed Iranians by the thousands. And 26 years after that, there was a revolution in 1979. [29:37] And yes, then it was death to America. The U.S. funding a dictatorship and toppling a democratic [29:43] elected government led to an Iran that has been very hostile. And all the events my colleagues have [29:49] talked about since then are accurate. But just as Iran seized our embassy in violation of international [29:56] law, then the United States funded Saddam Hussein for Iraq to wage war against Iran in the 1980s, [30:03] killing hundreds of thousands of Iranians. And just as Iran-funded proxies that bombed a marine barracks [30:09] on our embassy in Beirut in 1989, killing 290 civilians, and the U.S. invaded Iran's next-door [30:20] neighbors to topple their government. And then, yes, Iranians attacked U.S. troops arrayed near their border, [30:26] and we've attacked and killed their leadership. I'm not saying that Iran is good. Iran is horrible, [30:34] horrible to its neighbors, horrible to people outside its borders, and even worse to its own [30:39] people. But if you ignore the history of the back and forth between the U.S. and Iran, you will not [30:45] get this right. If more war between the U.S. and Iran were the answer, we would have found the answer [30:50] sometime between 1953 and now. Here's something I think it's important for my colleagues to know. [30:59] We did look for a path, a diplomatic path, to end this hostility that's been going on since 1953, [31:06] and President Trump tore up a diplomatic deal over the advice of his Secretary of Defense [31:12] and Secretary of State. And many of us said at the time, if you do this, it is likely to leave [31:21] inevitable. And I believe the troops who have been killed in Epic Fury would be alive today [31:27] if the United States had not decided to abandon a diplomatic deal. [31:32] Admiral Cooper and to my colleagues on the committee, here's something that's pretty amazing [31:36] that we shouldn't settle for. The administration is refusing to allow members of this committee [31:43] to see the OLC opinion stating the legal case for war. We've always had the ability. We're armed [31:50] services members. We're being asked to fund a $1.5 trillion budget, but our request to the DOJ [31:57] to see the OLC opinion justifying this war, they have refused to allow members of the armed [32:02] services committee to see it. U.S. senators, appropriators, we're not allowed to see it. [32:09] What are they hiding? If they will not allow us to see the legal rationale for the war, [32:16] what are they hiding? And Mr. Charles just concluded and say, I hope we might as a committee, whatever [32:23] our agreements about the wisdom or the legality of the war, I hope we might as a committee agree [32:28] that we should at least in a classified setting be able to read the legal opinion upon which this [32:35] entire 76-day war is based. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. Thank you, Senator. You have made a statement [32:48] that raises questions that these two witnesses are unable to answer because you've asked, [32:55] you've raised policy questions. And so just for the benefit of those listening in, [33:01] we have had the civilian leadership before this committee to answer questions like that. And [33:09] these two gentlemen would have to decline. If you had formed that and stated that in the form of a [33:16] question, they would have to decline to answer because that is a matter of policy. Who is next? [33:24] Senator Moody, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for being here today, [33:34] Admiral Cooper, General Anderson. Thank you for your leadership to the men and women of CENTCOM and [33:38] AFRICOM. Thank you for everything that you have have done over the course of your careers and are [33:44] continuing to do to serve our country. And I see there are so many men and women with you, [33:48] behind you to support these efforts today, to speak with us, to meet with us, to answer our questions. [33:54] I know a lot of preparation goes into that. And so I thank you as well. [33:58] Admiral Cooper, the fight you're leading, certainly with CENTCOM under your command. [34:05] I'm always proud to say that that is from my home, based in my home county in Florida, Hillsborough County, [34:11] Florida. That's where I was born and raised. It's been there since 1983, 43 years of [34:18] commanding operations like we're involved in today. So proud to have you here, sir. Florida is so involved [34:26] from SOCOM, Space Forces Central, Patrick Space Force Base, Cape Canaveral. We're both the command hub [34:32] and launch pad for most all conflict. So we are proud to be that, proud to be a stakeholder and everything [34:40] that's done within the military. And so on behalf of all the service members in Florida, civilian, [34:46] and their families, we want to say thank you to them. You know, I am the newest member of this [34:52] committee. It's always interesting to me to hear the different perspectives from other members on this [34:57] committee. You would think from some of the questioning previously that the United States [35:02] willy-nilly abandoned all diplomatic efforts. Didn't think through that. There was no justification. [35:08] And I'm wondering, I know, if you could tell me, Admiral Cooper, what is your background working [35:16] with CENTCOM and all of the leadership positions you've held? Senator, first, thank you for the [35:23] question and thanks for your time yesterday and thanks for your leadership. Thousands of Floridians [35:28] are serving in the Middle East today and they're serving honorably as well. And what specifically have [35:32] been your roles with CENTCOM? I've been focused on the Middle East for the last five years, [35:37] three years of which we're serving in Bahrain as the fleet commander and then about 16 months as the [35:43] deputy commander prior to my current position. And how long have you been familiar with [35:48] Iran and its leadership and its attacks against the United States? I've studied or been a part of it for [35:56] the better part of three decades, particularly acutely in the last five years. And leading up to [36:02] February 28th, months prior to that, what was jarring to you that you saw different than what had been [36:11] for those many decades that you've been involved? I think it's important to note just in the 30 months [36:17] before Epic Fury commenced, Iran and its proxies had been attacking US service members and diplomats [36:23] about 350 times. Can you repeat that? About every third day, Iran and its proxies [36:29] attacked American service members 350 times in the Middle East. I don't think that [36:33] Americans were aware of that, that in the 30 months that they had attacked Americans or their [36:39] service members 350 times. Does that surprise you that I would say that? That I don't believe [36:45] that everyday American going to work knew that? It's disappointing, but between the actions of [36:51] proxies in Iraq and Syria as well as the Houthis, that's simply the fact of what happened. [36:57] And the months leading up to that decision, that very serious decision on February the 28th, [37:04] what were your concerns regarding the proliferation of missiles or the ability of the United States [37:09] to do anything if that nuclear threat escalated? Senator, in this venue, what I would say is, [37:15] since our number one priority is to prevent a nuclear capable Iran, I always, every day, [37:22] focused on that problem. But what we saw in the weeks and months leading up to Epic Fury was an increase [37:28] in the production capability of ballistic missiles, which presented a very significant risk, both to [37:33] the partners and ourselves. And this is why it was part of our military objectives to eliminate those [37:39] missiles and equally, if not more importantly, eliminate the ability for Iran to generate any more- [37:43] And those couple of months leading right up until that, you saw a dramatic escalation in that ability [37:48] on Iran's part? That's correct. Between starting in about November and December, you started to see an [37:53] increase in Iran's capability and intent to produce more ballistic missiles. And if we couldn't have [38:01] neutralized that threat diplomatically, does there come a point where that's not an option anymore, [38:06] where there may be a slippery slope where we can't get back to our ability to be effective to [38:11] quell that threat? Without crossing into classified lanes, the short answer is yes. Iran has a large, [38:18] large scale capability to produce ballistic missiles beyond which could potentially be defended. I [38:25] think that's a very important point. The second point is that capability has been virtually eliminated. [38:30] And I believe I heard you say at this point, you believe Epic Fury has satisfied its mission? [38:34] Senator, we met every military objective for Epic Fury. And what is the difference between [38:40] where we were on the 28th of February and right now? If I used a couple of examples, [38:44] the Iranian Navy went from harassing throughout the region and being a regional power to having no [38:51] Navy. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Moody. Senator King. [38:57] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral, you mentioned you use the word myth busting a few [39:02] minutes ago. And I have to do a little myth busting. It's sort of a common rhetoric today that no [39:09] administration prior to this one has confronted the threats of Iran. In fact, the most effective [39:14] confrontation with the threat from Iran, the nuclear threat was during President Obama's administration [39:20] with the JCPOA. I would point out that at the time that President Trump tore up, unilaterally tore up [39:28] the nuclear agreement with Iran, Iran had zero highly enriched uranium. As you know today, one of the [39:37] focuses of this whole enterprise is 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium that's in place in Iran [39:45] that was produced since the unilateral dissolution of the JCPOA. The idea that nobody ever confronted [39:53] this problem is just not true. And we're now confronting a problem that was created by the abandonment of [40:02] the JCPOA, which is the most comprehensive nuclear control agreement ever and the most highly inspected [40:09] by the International Atomic Energy Agency in world history. So we're confronted with a problem now that [40:18] in many ways this administration created in 2018 by abandoning this agreement. [40:27] Let me move on. Do we have any clarity now as to who's in charge in Iran? [40:32] Do we know who has the power to negotiate and make agreements? [40:37] Senator, the negotiations themselves are held via diplomatic channels, and I would really refer [40:45] to the diplomats to address that. But clearly, from a military perspective, their command control [40:50] was significantly fractured as a result of our strikes in Operation Epic Fury. [40:53] And command and control is another way of saying their leadership. There's a communications difficulty. [41:00] Is the IRGC in charge at this point? [41:03] The IRGC is exercising significant authority. [41:09] General Anderson, talk to me about the loss of soft power in Africa, our abandonment of USAID, [41:18] and what's happened with the Chinese and the Russians that, my understanding is, are now filling [41:25] that gap in addition to the other aggressive actions that they're taking. [41:30] Senator, I would say that we look at all facets of national power and how to bring those to bear on [41:38] the continent in order to provide security outcomes. Oftentimes... [41:42] We've taken one facet of our national power off the table, unilaterally, for no apparent reason. [41:49] The whim of Elon Musk. [41:52] Senator, we work very closely with state, with commerce, and energy in order to look at the [41:58] security requirements on the continent. I have a Foreign Service Commercial Officer joining my staff [42:03] this summer along with a liaison from Department of Energy in order to look at economic opportunities. [42:07] Is it not that we have essentially left all of the role that USAID played on the continent, [42:14] that's gone? Isn't that, that's a yes or no question? [42:18] Senator, there are still aid programs that are active on the continent. They are much reduced [42:23] from what they were before. [42:25] Much, much reduced. That's a fair way of stating it. You mentioned earlier that the [42:30] Al Qaeda and ISIS have resurged in Africa. The term epicenter has been used several times of world [42:38] terrorism. You used the term, you said they have the will and intent to attack the homeland. My [42:46] question is, do they have the capacity? Are they developing weapons, strategies, other ways to [42:55] to take that will and intent and turn it into something of imminent danger to the American [43:01] people? Senator, that is the exact issue that is my top concern is for being able to provide, [43:07] they have the assets necessary to provide the indication warnings to know and be able to identify [43:12] when they shift that will intent to have to have the capacity and capability. That is something that [43:17] is very difficult for us to ascertain in the Sahel right now, given our limited posture. [43:21] That was, that was going to be my follow-up question is, do we have the capacity to determine [43:26] their capacity? It sounds like you just said we have, we don't have the capacity that we should have [43:33] or need. Senator, we are, that's why in the president's budget we have asked for additional [43:38] intelligent surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities and why we're also looking at [43:43] a layered approach to look at everything from surface to space, to look at commercial assets, [43:47] to look at emerging technologies, open source as well, and use these technologies, especially [43:52] artificial intelligence in order to fuse these multiple different types of layered ISR in order [43:57] to gain that understanding and illuminate this black hole of intelligence in the Sahel. We cannot [44:03] sustainably afford to do that solely with airborne ISR, so we have to look at a multifaceted approach. [44:09] There are some very promising emerging technologies that we are looking into and that are affordable and [44:15] sustainable and that also can work with our partners, because one of the key points to this [44:19] is this is not necessarily ours to action, so having that tech, the intelligence that we can share with [44:25] partners so they can then action those on a mutual threat is going to be key to our future, but being [44:31] able to understand that is the number one priority of the command and where we are looking at investing [44:36] with emerging technology. And I think as you testified, if they take over the capital of Bali, [44:40] that's a very dangerous moment. That would be a game changer, I believe, in how they would [44:47] be viewed internationally and what attraction they would be then, I think, to other adherents. [44:52] Thank you. Thank you. How would that affect Americans, General? [44:55] Well, I think that would then give momentum to these terrorist organizations that have the will [45:00] and intent, and it would allow them to then start moving towards the capability and capacities that [45:04] Senator King just mentioned. And so that then, I think, poses a threat in the long term to the United [45:09] States as they continue to develop this. We know that they have not given up this intent, [45:14] and it's just a matter of having the time and space to develop them. [45:18] And it would be Vladimir Putin that would be happiest about this. Is that correct? [45:22] The prudent at what, sir? [45:24] It would be President Vladimir Putin who would rejoice at such a contingency. Or would it be Xi Jinping? [45:35] I can't speak for what either one of those leaders would believe, but I think that [45:40] that they would be able to parlay that to their interest. [45:44] Well, who's financing this contingency? [45:46] If it were... [45:47] They're gaining... They're through lots of illicit materials. So it's not lots of illicit [45:53] materials. So it's not necessarily directly from a state actor. They're working with, [45:57] as I mentioned earlier, the narco-terrorist trafficking. They're doing this through [46:02] kidnap for ransom. They're doing this for other legal smuggling. They even do have their own taxation [46:07] networks in the territories that they control where they generate millions of dollars. [46:10] And before I turn to Senator Scott, with regard to the funds that we're not spending anymore on USAID, [46:20] but have been supplemented elsewhere, in terms of dollars, let's talk in terms of U.S. dollar [46:30] equivalents. How does the food aid, health aid, and development aid that we're currently delivering [46:43] in your jurisdiction compare to what China and Russia are doing? [46:50] Senator, I don't have those exact numbers. I'd have to get back to you on those, as those are often in other [46:58] departments, other agencies within the government. But we can look into that for you and look at what [47:02] that comparison is. Okay. Well, if you would, then [47:06] supplement that on the record for us. Because I don't know the answer either. Senator Scott. [47:13] Thank you, Chairman. Thank both of you for your service and all the men and women that work for you. [47:19] Admiral Cooper, can you... I know this is not a classified setting, but can you talk a little bit about [47:24] what other countries have done to help us either with intelligence or with military capabilities? [47:30] And I don't know whether you want to do this or not, some that you would like to have done more? [47:35] Senator, I think the most prominent seven countries that have been most helpful and serve side by side [47:43] are five of the six GCC countries. UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Also indispensable in our [47:51] effort has been the Kingdom of Jordan and clearly Israel, with whom we conducted the strikes. [47:56] We're always eager to expand partnerships. There's a couple that I think I could address [48:01] in a classified setting that were less than stellar. And do you feel like we've been a great [48:06] partner to them in helping them build up their capabilities over the last 20 years or so? [48:12] Senator, I think it's been an excellent two-way street. And if I look at mill-to-mill relationships, [48:17] it's been very strong. I'd simply highlight the result of years of effort and collaboration and [48:23] partnership put our partners literally side by side with Patriot defenses, with our partners [48:28] defending Americans. I think that sends a lot. I think that sends a good signal and says a lot. [48:33] So I think Senator Wicker asked you some questions about drones. We had a meeting the other day and [48:40] the individual came in and said that Ukraine is building five million drones a year. [48:44] And so they probably are ahead of most people because they've had to because of war they're in. So [48:52] can you talk about are we where we need to be with drone technology? Are we using it everywhere we can? [48:59] Are we where we need to be with regard to drone defense capabilities? Can you talk a little bit [49:06] more about that? Yes, Senator. First, I would say that the secretary and the department's focus on [49:13] drone domination, drone dominance, has really kickstarted our capabilities and flowed more [49:20] capabilities into the region much faster than we had seen before. And many of those capabilities have [49:25] now been proven in combat. I think in a classified setting, I'd like to tell you what that looked like. [49:29] But as we sit here today, we have drone capabilities in the air, on the sea and under the sea as a result [49:34] of this initiative. Do you have any feel for whether the impact you've had on Iran has impacted their [49:42] ability to help Russia in their war against Ukraine? So I think best to discuss that in a classified [49:48] setting. Clearly, Iran and Russia have had a years long relationship, particularly when it comes to drones. [49:56] So what are you most proud of? What do you what do you what are you most proud of that you've [49:59] accomplished since you've had this role? Absolutely. Number one, two and three, [50:04] I'm most proud of the men and women who executed an extraordinarily complex mission. The first major [50:10] combat operations that the United States has seen in a generation establishing, in my mind, the latest, [50:15] greatest generation of American warriors. Same question, General Anderson. What are you most [50:20] proud of that you've accomplished so far? Senator, I think the I would agree with Admiral Cooper, [50:28] that's the men and women of the very small footprint and very small amount of resources [50:34] punch way above their weight class and have outsized impacts on the continent. [50:38] What we just did in African line in Morocco was significant in our largest exercise on the [50:42] continent of bringing over 40 nations together to include over three dozen African countries and [50:48] nations as far away as Brazil and Japan. That ability to convene is one of the great powers of the United [50:54] States and it differentiates us from many others. So I am proud of the fact that we can do that and [50:59] that we cannot just pursue our own readiness, but actually bring multiple nations together to [51:04] address common threats. Thanks both of you. And thanks to all the men and women that work for you. [51:09] Thank you very much, Senator. We have Shaheen and then Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, [51:17] thank you to both of you for being here and for your service. I wanted to pick up on Senator King's [51:24] questions about the closing of so much of our foreign assistance in Africa, General Anderson. And [51:32] Senator Wicker asked what we're seeing in terms of China. I have a couple of examples that I think [51:38] are worth pointing out how much that has meant in terms of China's ability to make inroads because [51:47] China has actually eclipsed Russia as the largest weapons exporter to sub-Saharan Africa, which I'm sure [51:53] you're aware of. And 70 percent of all African armies now operate vehicles from the PRC as opposed to [52:01] the United States. Beijing is looking to expand military grants, training and joint exercises between [52:07] the PRC and African countries. And we don't have the kind of foreign assistance soft power that we did [52:18] before the elimination of USAID. But you mentioned, General Anderson, that you've taken on a foreign [52:26] commercial service officer, which I think is a really interesting idea. And as you're aware, [52:31] I'm sure, at Indopaycom, Admiral Paparo has really used this to good advantage, coordinating with the [52:38] State Department, with the Development Finance Corporation, with the U.S. Trade Development Agency, [52:43] the Millennium Challenge Corporation, to identify potential projects to work on in that AOR. So, [52:51] can you talk a little bit more about how you're identifying development projects and whether you [52:56] need any other authorizations from Congress or support for this effort from us so that you can [53:03] help implement the kind of coordination that's going on in Indopaycom? Senator, yes, I very much [53:10] appreciate your interest here because this is an area I think is emerging on the continent. [53:15] With just the demographics of the continent and the growing economies, being able to identify these, [53:20] the intersection of security and economics is absolutely vital. All of the agencies you mentioned [53:25] are ones that we are coordinating with to make sure that those investments go into the continent and [53:29] have the greatest effect. But they're also informed by what are the security implications. So, [53:34] sometimes it may not have the same economic return, but that return may come in security. And that's [53:38] where we come in, is being able to convene some of these different agencies as well as private [53:43] industry to be able to articulate what those security concerns are, what those implications are, [53:48] and then also the fact that we are able to execute exercises and other things around the continent [53:53] helps go into the calculus of those investments and buy down some of that risk. So, that is what we're [53:57] looking to develop. So, do those agencies routinely check with you if there's a major project that [54:04] they're looking to fund in Africa? So, historically, no. And that's why we're standing up a very small [54:09] unit within the headquarters in order to have that point where they can help facilitate these [54:14] discussions because often they didn't know where to have them. And is that something that Congress [54:19] can be helpful with in terms of trying to encourage that sort of coordination? I think there is, [54:25] there are ways that encouraging that coordination would be very helpful and being able to articulate [54:30] this across the committees that oversee these various agencies and understanding how that interrelation [54:35] of national power can come together that it's not always the military lever that produces a security [54:40] outcome. But being able to have that dialogue I think would be critical. The other area that I [54:44] think would be very helpful also is incentive structures that help energize our industrial base to help [54:50] produce the equipment that our partners want. They would much prefer to buy U.S. equipment, but often our [54:57] systems take so long and are so long to deliver because often the incentive structure's not there [55:03] that they go to, they turn to China out of necessity, not because of desire. They often see that as inferior [55:09] equipment and they would much prefer to buy American. We need to incentivize our industrial base to meet [55:15] that demand. I agree. And as you know, it's an issue not just in that, in that respect, but in a whole lot of [55:22] other areas in terms of the challenges with the industrial base. Admiral Cooper, one of the things [55:30] that's gotten a fair amount of attention in recent weeks has been President Zelensky's working with [55:36] some of our allies and partners in the Middle East in response to the war in Iran on their, the expertise [55:45] that the Ukrainians have developed to address counter-drone responses. Can you talk a little bit about what [55:52] you're seeing with respect to that and whether our allies and partners find that kind of support [56:00] helpful from the Ukrainians? Senator, I think most significantly we adopted a large number of tactics, [56:06] techniques, and procedures that the Ukrainians have passed us that have helped us defend Americans, [56:12] and all of our partners are working with Ukraine in some way, shape, or form. I'd really defer to them [56:16] and talk about it, but are they more effective as a result? Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator [56:22] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I give my questions, I want to again take a moment to highlight the true [56:31] costs both for the military and everyday Americans of the President's illegal war with Iran and summarize [56:38] how we got here. 13 brave U.S. soldiers have been killed and more than 400 have been wounded. The DOD [56:47] is now estimating that this war has cost over $29 billion and costing more every single day. [56:54] The continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which somehow caught the President by surprise, [56:58] is directly contributing to the growing affordability crisis that Americans are facing. [57:04] And negotiations are at a stalemate, but it's becoming clear. This President's plan is to attempt to [57:12] secure an agreement that looks very similar to the 2015 JCPOA, which my colleague, Senator King, [57:19] referred to, which this President recklessly tore up in 2018. As you recall, the JCPOA, which was an [57:27] agreement that also included countries, not just us. It included France, the UK, Germany, China, [57:35] and Russia. And the JCPOA put limits on Iran's nuclear program with a rigorous inspection and [57:44] monetary program run by the IAEA, all of which was tossed out by President Trump. And while that [57:52] agreement did have a sunset clause, what we should have done was work diplomatically with our allies to [57:58] extend a war in the Middle East, no end in sight, that is driving up costs, undermining military [58:08] readiness, and alienating our allies with neither a clear rationale for starting the conflict, which [58:15] the President originally said, oh, well, then maybe there'll be reduced regime change. And now he [58:19] seems to have landed on preventing a nuclear nuclear capable Iran, which was exactly what the JCPOA [58:28] was intended to do. Admiral Cooper, did the President ever explain to you why he tore up the JCPOA? [58:38] Senator, that's a policy matter that I would have expected anyone to discuss with me. [58:42] He never explained to you why he tore up the JCPOA. He either explained it to you or he didn't. I'm [58:48] not asking you for the actual conversation, but did he happen to explain to you why he did something [58:56] which led to the very nuclear crisis that we're now confronting regarding Iran and their enriched [59:03] uranium? Senator, I was in a completely different assignment when this occurred eight years ago. [59:08] So apparently the President didn't have a discussion with anybody. In fact, it was a [59:15] unilateral decision that he made. Now, you have vast experience, Admiral and the Navy, et cetera. And [59:25] before we went into, before we attacked Iran, did it cross your mind that Iran may close the Strait of [59:32] Hormuz? Senator, as you know, one of my responsibilities as a combatant commander is to generate a wide range of [59:38] options with associated risks and opportunities, present those to the Secretary and the President. [59:44] I think it'd be inappropriate to talk about what those specifically are, but we always make them [59:49] very comprehensively. Excuse me. I'm asking whether with your experience, the thought that should we [59:56] attack Iran that they would close the Strait of Hormuz, did that cross your mind? Senator, I've [1:00:03] transited through the Strait about a hundred times. I think of the Strait of Hormuz virtually every day. [1:00:07] So is that a yes? That you are very aware that the Strait of Hormuz, the very thing that happened, [1:00:16] that that is something that you contemplated happening. I hope that is the case because [1:00:21] with your experience, I have to conclude that you contemplated that possibility. So you did mention [1:00:30] that our diplomats are engaged in the negotiations. Well, who are those diplomats? Senator, I really would [1:00:38] refer to the White House who specifically is engaged. Well, apparently the diplomats are [1:00:43] Jared Kushner, Kushner, who I don't think even works for our country, and Mr. Whitlock, Steve Whitlock, [1:00:50] who happens to be a, I don't know, I don't think he has a lot of experience engaging in these kinds of [1:00:58] negotiations. So here we are. The JCPOA, which was a very intense, the results of very intense [1:01:06] negotiations among many countries. And for us to act as though the idea of a nuclear Iran is just [1:01:12] something that occurred to President Trump. And in fact, we had in place a regime that had in place a [1:01:21] regime that was intended to do that, that very thing, which was to prevent a nuclear Iran. Mr. Chairman, [1:01:29] thank you. Thank you, Senator Hirono. Senator Cotton. Gentlemen, thank you for your appearance and [1:01:35] your service to our nation. And many thanks to all the troops that you represent. Admiral Cooper, [1:01:43] some critics of Operation Epic Fury have referred to it as another forever war. In your opening statement, [1:01:51] in the third sentence, in fact, you say, since 1979, the Iranian regime has terrorized the region. [1:01:57] Is it fair to say the only forever war here is the war of terror that Iran has waged against [1:02:04] the United States and the civilized world for 47 years? I would agree that that was a sustained effort [1:02:11] by the, by Iran. Okay. Let's take a look in context, since my Democratic friends have wanted to talk so [1:02:18] much about the JCPOA, about not just Epic Fury, but about Midnight Hammer as well. So where we stand today [1:02:25] in mid-May versus where we were not even a year ago, 12, 11 months ago. Based on your extensive [1:02:34] military experience, do you believe that Iran posed a significant threat to the United States 11 months [1:02:40] ago before Operation Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury? Senator, they attacked U.S. forces 350 times in the [1:02:47] 30 months preceding Epic Fury. Do you believe that it, absent Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury, do you believe [1:02:53] that threat was likely to continue to grow? Yes. Microphone, please, so we can use the record. [1:02:59] Yes, sir. I do. Is Iran now less of a threat than it was 11 months ago? They are significantly less of [1:03:07] a threat. Is it fair to say that the Iranian regime is still a revolutionary terrorist regime, [1:03:14] even after all the deaths of their senior leaders? They are. Yeah. Is it fair to say the [1:03:21] revolutionary terrorist regime no longer has nearly as much military capability to act on its [1:03:26] revolutionary terrorist intentions? That is fair. And I think it's also fair to say across [1:03:32] every element of national power, they've been significantly degraded. You state in your opening [1:03:39] statement that CENTCOM forces systematically dismantled what Iran spent four decades and tens [1:03:46] of billions of dollars building. How long do you assess that it will take them to get back to where [1:03:53] they were in terms of their military and other capabilities just 11 months ago before CENTCOM [1:03:59] dismantled it all? Senator, I would assess that the drone and missile force will take years [1:04:04] to reconstitute. The Navy likely will not get back to its previous size for a full generation. [1:04:11] Is that why you say in your opening statement that CENTCOM assesses Iran can no longer project [1:04:16] power across the region nor pose a persistent threat to the United States or our partners than it [1:04:22] did prior to Operation Epic Fury? They certainly cannot do it at the level of mass that we all saw [1:04:29] with hundreds of missiles and drones raining across the Middle East. That doesn't mean they don't have [1:04:33] any capability, but that broad power projection capability no longer exists. And the whole world [1:04:41] saw that just in a number of days after the beginning of your operation, correct? And the number of, [1:04:47] I think it was a near 90 percent decline in Iran's attacks on the United States and its neighbors in the [1:04:54] region? That's correct. Early on, the attacks were in the hundreds and they went to the teens. [1:05:00] Okay. I know that there's been a lot of questions about the Strait of Hormuz. To be clear, [1:05:06] the Strait of Hormuz was never part of our objectives, but we knew, as anyone who looks at a map [1:05:14] would know, that Iran has the power to temporarily close the Strait of Hormuz. Is that correct? [1:05:19] That's accurate, Senator. Is it fair to say that the United States and our partners have the [1:05:24] power to permanently open the Strait? Without getting into specifics, [1:05:28] we have the military power, yes. Could you talk to us a little bit about [1:05:33] what the blockade in the meantime has done to Iran? Yes, sir. The blockade was implemented [1:05:40] within 24 hours of presidential direction based on a plan that we had on the shelf. [1:05:45] The blockade itself is designed to prevent any commerce from leaving Iranian ports going to global [1:05:51] distribution and any commerce from coming around the world going back to global. Going back into Iran, [1:05:57] there's been zero trade going into or out of Iran in the last month. And just finally, [1:06:03] what is Iran's current ability, since it retains its revolutionary terrorist ambitions, [1:06:08] to support its terror proxy network in the region versus where it was just 11 months ago? [1:06:15] As we sit here today, they are unable to resource and supply Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Houthis. Chapter [1:06:23] to be seen of what that looks like in Iraq. New prime minister wants to distance himself from Iran, [1:06:29] but we'll see. That's what it's committed to. We'll see what that looks like. [1:06:32] So they can't support their terrorist proxies. They're years and years away from reconstituting, [1:06:38] if at all, their missile and drone forces and their nuclear program, [1:06:41] and they're a generation away from rebuilding their navy. Seems to me like a little bit better [1:06:47] position than we were relative to Iran under Barack Obama and Joe Biden's disastrous nuclear deal. Thank [1:06:53] you. Thank you, Senator Cotton. Senator Slotkin. Thank you, [1:06:58] gentlemen, for being here. And thank you for what you're doing. I'm going to direct my questions to [1:07:03] General Cooper. I'm sorry, Admiral Cooper, excuse me. And I'm going to give a good pass to my fellow [1:07:10] Michigander from Ipsy, Michigan. We're happy to see you in service. Thank you for what you're doing. And [1:07:17] you're always welcome back home when you retire. I think the, you know, I feel like whatever, [1:07:26] whatever feelings I have about the imminence of the threat from Iran or not, we want our military to [1:07:35] come through this war as successfully and safely as possible. I am interested [1:07:43] in making sure we get out of this quickly and safely. And I have actually no doubt that [1:07:52] with all the firepower we've used in this war, that we've degraded their nuclear capability, [1:07:57] their ballistic missile capability, their terrorism capability. And as someone who served [1:08:02] three tours in Iraq, I saw that terrorism up close and personal. But it is hard to say, sitting here [1:08:10] with the Strait of Hormuz closed and every American feeling a deep, deep spike in the price of gas, [1:08:19] and that we're only in the beginning of that, that we can't say we are overall better off until [1:08:26] that strait is opened. And while I believe we could militarily open the straits, it seems to me that [1:08:36] the Iranians have strategic geography. They have the ability, even though it's degraded, to project power [1:08:43] onto things like the oil infrastructure in places like Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or anywhere they want, [1:08:50] further hurting the world economy, you know, the United States. Do you believe, is that correct, [1:08:57] that while militarily we may be able to physically open the straits, that they still retain the ability [1:09:05] to affect infrastructure in the region and therefore kind of have a veto power over the world economy right now? [1:09:13] Senator, I would, from a military perspective, I would characterize Iran as having a remnant capability [1:09:22] across multiple domains. In terms of veto power, I really would defer to policy makers for that [1:09:30] characterization. But, sorry, can they strike oil infrastructure across the Persian Gulf? [1:09:38] They have a very moderate, if not small, capability to continue strikes. And we, of course, have [1:09:43] accordingly prepared for such a contingency. Okay. But if we could, if we have the power to [1:09:51] militarily open the straits and their threat is, quote, moderate or small, why wouldn't we just do it? [1:09:58] Senator, I really would defer to policy makers in this particular matter. And the strait clearly [1:10:03] is in the middle of the negotiation being undertaken now. Yeah. I mean, it just seems to me that they [1:10:08] still certainly have, it may be diminished power, but if the United States military is not physically [1:10:14] opening the straits right now, it's because the Iranians do have the real capability to affect [1:10:22] strikes in or drone strikes into the Gulf countries, affecting their oil infrastructure and sending the [1:10:28] price of oil worldwide even higher. So, you know, it may be diminished, but it's real capability unless [1:10:34] I'm missing something. You know, can you describe for me, I'm very sensitive about the, the way that [1:10:43] places countries like Russia or China may be enabling the Iranians to target and kill American forces or [1:10:50] to provide intelligence on their locations in real or near real time. Is it fair to say that the, [1:10:59] that the Chinese are providing intelligence to the Iranians to help them target U.S. forces? [1:11:07] Senator, I think best to talk about anything regarding intelligence in a classified manner. [1:11:11] What I can say is the Iranian military is largely made up of Russian and Chinese equipment. [1:11:18] Okay. I, I think, you know, it, it feels like either Chinese government and or Chinese companies [1:11:28] are helping and aiding and abetting the Iranians in, in providing that information. I understand we [1:11:35] don't want to go into the details, but some of this is like out in open press. I would just say, [1:11:39] I personally feel like that crosses a Rubicon. Um, anytime we have another country providing [1:11:46] that kind of intelligence to an adversary, I think that should play very heavily in our calculus [1:11:51] and our conversations. I know the president is with the Chinese government right now. Um, [1:11:57] but I hope that no matter what party we're from, that's just a Rubicon. We all believe once you cross [1:12:02] it, we're in a very different conversation and I hope that's playing out in Beijing. I yield back, [1:12:07] Chairman. Thank you. Senator Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral Cooper, any, [1:12:12] any update at all on activities in Afghanistan? Increased, uh, activity from ISIS or any other [1:12:20] groups that concern you? Anything at all that you can tell us? Senator, just, uh, thank you for the [1:12:25] question. Uh, Afghanistan remains, uh, uh, on the forefront of, of what we're watching in terms of [1:12:30] terrorist activity. I think best to address that in a classified forum, uh, for right now, our [1:12:34] partnerships in the region are suppressing that threat. Can you give any update at all, uh, for [1:12:39] the record? Uh, no, no. Remain, remains, uh, area of concern for CENTCOM. You're, you're, [1:12:45] you're tracking, paying attention to it. We're not, we're not completely ignoring Afghanistan. [1:12:50] Remains area of concern. We're paying close attention to a variety of partnerships. Uh, [1:12:54] we're suppressing any threat. Thanks. Um, thank you for your leadership. I mean, [1:12:58] I think this is, uh, an incredible moment. You're doing an incredible job when it comes to Iran and [1:13:05] degrading, uh, their military, uh, their defense industrial base. You cite in your testimony that [1:13:10] the U S has quote delivered a longterm rollback of Iran's ability to project power in the region [1:13:15] and beyond end quote damaging or destroying over 85% of its ballistic missile drone and naval defense [1:13:23] industrial base and 82% of its air defense missile systems. That's, that's pretty damn good. Um, [1:13:29] that that's a strong, um, statement and I'm, I'm proud of your efforts. The NDS talks about the concept [1:13:36] of simultaneity in which our adversaries could undertake simultaneous aggression across multiple [1:13:44] theaters. Does Operation Epic Fury's degradation of the Iranian military and defense industrial base [1:13:51] reduce the problem of simultaneity? Senator, I think there's, uh, it remains to be seen what happens, [1:13:59] uh, uh, going forward with Iran. Uh, but I, what I think we've seen is a combination of ability [1:14:05] for the United States to project power and influence, uh, and defeat an adversary very quickly, [1:14:09] 38 days, uh, the effects, uh, on other theaters. I think I would really refer to U S European commander [1:14:16] in the Pacific camp command commander, but clearly the United States is agile and we can move from theater [1:14:22] to theater very quickly. Can you unpack this concept of simultaneity? Well, the United States to us, [1:14:28] the United States has significant capacity. We have forces, uh, deployed around the world addressing [1:14:33] a variety of issues. We're focused today largely on Iran, but, uh, clearly, uh, General Anderson, [1:14:39] uh, is actioning, uh, key and critical, uh, matters in Africa. We're doing it in Europe, [1:14:44] we're doing it in Asia and we're doing it in South America. And we're, we're, we're, we're able to do that [1:14:49] at the same time effectively. That's how the United States military roles. You also write in your [1:14:53] testimony that Iran's ability to reconstitute its military capability will quote, depend in large [1:14:58] part on decisions we and our partners make. What should we be doing to press our advantage? [1:15:05] I think there's a policy component, uh, to this Senator and potential, potentially a legislative component. [1:15:12] Uh, then there are a restricted number of countries. There's a finite number of countries that, uh, [1:15:17] historically, uh, had trade with Iran, uh, addressing those countries and what they are trading, [1:15:24] how they're doing it, what that looks like, uh, I think is something we should take a look at. [1:15:27] Yeah. Uh, because if they don't have the parts, they're not going to build the weapons. [1:15:31] Well put. I was very proud to see the Lucas drones deployed and used in CENTCOM. Uh, the Indiana [1:15:38] National Guard played a really important role in testing the Lucas drone at Camp Atterbury in my [1:15:43] state. What, if anything, can we extrapolate from the performance of our Lucas drones and other [1:15:48] conflicts? Yes, Senator. So the Lucas drones were the United States' first opportunity to use our own [1:15:54] one-way attack drones against an adversary. I remember well the training that happened at Camp Atterbury. [1:15:59] I was watching it like a hawk. That training has produced, uh, additional capability that we've now [1:16:04] employed against an adversary very effectively. What else can we learn from it? Well, there's a lot more to be [1:16:10] learned from it. Uh, I'd love to take it in a classified setting and particularly given where [1:16:14] we are right now, vis-a-vis Iran, I think I would just like to keep that in the classified setting. [1:16:17] For more than a month, our war fighters in the Middle East were hammered by small drones. [1:16:22] How can we ensure that doesn't happen again if combat operations resume? [1:16:26] Yes, Senator, a little bit of a myth buster on this. Uh, Iranian drones, uh, are, uh, significantly [1:16:33] capable, uh, in the days of $35,000 Walmart-like drones. Those, those things are behind us. [1:16:38] Iran is, has a very capable drone force. We have very capably defeated it. [1:16:43] Good. Uh, well put. Thank you very much. Uh, that's all I have. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. [1:16:48] Thank you, Senator Kelly and then Senator Gillibrand. [1:16:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Admiral Cooper, General Anderson. Thank you both for being here today. [1:16:58] Admiral Cooper, I want to start with you. I've got questions for both of you, but, um, I want to [1:17:03] talk a little bit about the civilian harm mitigation team, uh, at CENCOM. My understanding [1:17:09] is that you've gone from 10 down to one as part of a department-wide reduction in Chimer, that their [1:17:20] role is to try to minimize harm to civilians when we're conducting combat, combat operations. Is that [1:17:28] correct? You've gone from 10 to one? Yes, sir. That's the bill. There's a larger component to this over, [1:17:34] over a course of years. We've gone from, uh, compliance to, uh, civilian casualties and risk [1:17:40] mitigation being just part of the culture. There are dozens, if not hundreds of people who are [1:17:44] involved in this process. What did those nine individuals do who were, um, removed from their, [1:17:51] from their jobs? They're now, uh, integrated in other capacities. They retain other capacities in [1:17:55] the joint, what we would call joint. But what were they doing when they were part of the civilian harm [1:18:01] mitigation team? They're paying, playing a key role in, uh, helping us move from compliance [1:18:07] to culture, uh, on, on CIFCAS, focusing on it every day, which they continue to do. [1:18:13] So by your estimates, how many civilians have been killed or injured over the course of this war? [1:18:19] The investigation on, uh, on the one incident that we've had after more than 13,000 strikes is still [1:18:25] underway. Uh, we'll, uh, certainly be transparent release that when we can. This is a matter that I'm, [1:18:31] I'm, I'm passionate about. I'd like to use the occasion, uh, to invite you, [1:18:35] other members of the committee and your staffs to Tampa to take a look at what our targeting process [1:18:39] looks like. If you were to find out that there was an error in the targeting process, would you [1:18:44] reinstate some of those people that were removed from that team? Sir, it's, uh, hypothetical. I think [1:18:49] we, we, I'm, I'm always looking to organize to purpose, uh, and we'll just see it with the investigation. [1:18:54] Are you taking any additional steps now because of the civilian, civilian casualties to date? [1:19:00] We have taken additional steps. Our additional steps have been very proactive throughout Epic [1:19:04] Fury. Uh, our staff specifically warned the Iranian people more than a hundred times [1:19:08] about the threat of them being, being used as human shields. I personally warned the Iranian [1:19:13] people on March 8th, 11th, and the 23rd that they were, had the potential to be human shields. [1:19:18] Uh, and that, that measures to minimize. All right. Well, thank you for doing that. [1:19:24] Uh, thank you for doing that. Uh, general Anderson. So China and Russia continue to expand their [1:19:30] influence across Africa. We discussed this with misinformation, uh, disinformation, [1:19:36] uh, across many African countries. You requested $94 million for information operation activities. [1:19:44] You were promised, and this is in fiscal year 26, you were promised 25 million from the department. [1:19:50] You ultimately received only 19 million. Can you talk about the difference between having 19 million [1:19:56] to do that job and 94 million? Like, what are you able to do if you were fully funded? General Anderson, [1:20:03] I, I, I get it. I mean, we see this stuff all the time, the amount of misinformation that comes from [1:20:08] the Chinese and the Russians. It is a huge problem. But if you could just explain to us a little bit about [1:20:14] what you could do if you had the full request. Senator, I think the, the key point there is right [1:20:20] now we are in a reactionary mode to propaganda and to other information operations to what we can do [1:20:27] at the moment. What the fuller funding would do, especially if it's consistent over time, [1:20:32] would allow us to build an information campaign and address these issues across the continent. [1:20:36] We're one of the few organizations that looks across the entirety of the continent and can understand [1:20:41] how these, uh, propaganda and misinformation play across borders. We work very closely with the [1:20:47] State Department and U.S. embassies on this to make sure our messaging is key. But this would allow [1:20:51] us to do is help coordinate that messaging across regions and across the continent to highlight the, [1:20:57] the issues that come with this misinformation, especially as much of it is destabilizing the [1:21:01] democracies across the region. Do you ever feel like we should be countering some of their [1:21:06] disinformation with disinformation of our own? Sir, I think the most powerful tool we have is the truth. [1:21:12] What America brings is very unique. We're still a beacon of hope and light in the world. And I think we [1:21:17] should be willing to talk about who we are. This is America's 250th anniversary. There's a long [1:21:22] history on the continent that is, I mean, it's good and bad, but there's a lot of good that we can talk [1:21:27] about of what America brings. The fact that John C. Robinson founded the Tuskegee Airmen, two years [1:21:33] later founded the Ethiopian Air Force, and then went on to found Ethiopian Airlines, which is now the pride [1:21:38] not only of Ethiopia, but Africa, is not a story that's well known. But that is a tie that we have had [1:21:43] between the aviation communities for years. There are multiple stories like that across the continent. [1:21:47] That we need to propagate and talk about. So I would say we should focus on the goodness and [1:21:51] the positivity of engaging with America and worry less about the disinformation that our partners [1:21:56] put out. But we have to engage in this environment. We have to be active in the information space. [1:22:00] So you got about 25 percent of the requests. So if you got the full amount, you could put [1:22:06] more out there positive stuff that the United States is doing. And I know these are, you know, [1:22:11] challenging times with resources, even beyond what DOD has, USAID and others. But do you think that [1:22:22] that would be sufficient to counter Chinese and Russian misinformation? Senator, I think [1:22:30] information operations is one of the lower cost investments that we can make that have outsized [1:22:36] return and help amplify the limited resources we have in the military side and highlight the benefits [1:22:42] benefits that those provide. And being able to talk about that broadly, I do think, has outside [1:22:45] proportion. So small investments can have a large impact. And this is an area of information where [1:22:51] I think we can make a lot of gains, even despite our smaller physical presence that can highlight the [1:22:57] totality of what the United States brings. I 100 percent agree with you, General. And we should really [1:23:02] look into getting you the resources you need to do this job. Thank you. Thank you. [1:23:06] General Anderson, I 100 percent agree with you. Senator Gillibrand. [1:23:14] Admiral Cooper, we had Secretary Hegseth here a week or so ago, and we did not get satisfactory [1:23:23] answers about Iran. So what is your mission in Iran right now? [1:23:30] Senator, with Epic Fury now formally ended per the president's notification, we shifted our mission [1:23:37] to a blockade mission in the following day, and we're implementing that mission in accordance with [1:23:42] the international armed conflict. That's our main mission today, as well as to be ready for a broad [1:23:46] range of contingencies. And do you feel that President Trump's declaration that we have obliterated [1:23:55] all of Iran's capabilities and their nuclear program, is that accurate? Senator, I speak from a military [1:24:03] perspective. We have significantly degraded their drone, missile and naval capabilities. We've [1:24:08] fractured their command and control. We've eliminated the large preponderance of their space program. [1:24:15] They, by every measure, are degraded significantly across all measures of national power. [1:24:21] So what's your exit strategy to end the conflict with Iran? Senator, that's a policy decision. [1:24:26] And don't you have to offer the president various exit strategies so he knows how to get from A to B? [1:24:32] Senator, consistent with my statutory obligations, I've provided a broad range of options along with [1:24:38] risks and mitigations through the secretary. So given your current mission, how many more days, [1:24:44] weeks, months, years, are we going to be at war with Iran? Well, as we sit here today, we are in a [1:24:50] ceasefire, and the way ahead will be determined by our policymakers. Well, currently, we are still [1:24:56] spending a billion dollars a day on this war with Iran. And I can tell you from my New York constituents, [1:25:02] they're furious about it because a billion dollars a day could be lowering their housing costs, [1:25:07] lowering their food costs, lowering their healthcare costs, lowering the cost of everyday [1:25:11] expenses that continue to go up because of the war in Iran. With the price of gas as high as it is, [1:25:16] the price of diesel as high as it is, it means everything that they have to buy for their families [1:25:21] is more expensive. So we expect from our military leaders a plan about why and how long we are going to [1:25:29] be spending a billion dollars a day. And I have not seen that plan or the why from President Trump [1:25:35] or Secretary Hegseth. So I'm hoping, as the military person in charge of operations, that you have a plan [1:25:42] to end this war and to stop spending a billion dollars a day. Senator, we have a broad range of [1:25:50] plans and contingencies consistent with my obligation to provide that advice, both the secretary and the [1:25:56] president. We've done so. Decisions will be made by our civilian leadership and my job will be to execute [1:26:01] them. The second concern I have, Admiral Cooper, is how we've prosecuted this war to date. We have [1:26:09] data and information publicly available in publications like the New York Times that 22 schools [1:26:15] have been hit. Hospitals, dozens of hospitals have been hit. We have regulations. We have the law of war [1:26:22] targeting requirements to avoid civilian harm and death, to avoid civilian harm and death. Have you [1:26:31] been implementing all the laws that are required under current law to minimize civilian death? Senator, [1:26:39] we have executed every operation consistent with the law of armed conflict. The subject of civilian [1:26:44] casualties is a particular passion of mine. We pay attention to it. We follow all the procedures [1:26:49] and have gone above and beyond to, in my case, personally warn the Iranian people of several [1:26:55] instances during conflict where they were being potentially used as human targets. If they've been [1:26:58] warned, how did we then bomb 22 schools? There's no indication that we have that that has been [1:27:04] corroborated. How many schools have we bombed? There is one active civilian casualty investigation [1:27:10] from the 13,629 munitions. So how do you explain the publicly available information that 22 schools have [1:27:17] been hit and multiple hospitals? There's no way that we can corroborate that. No indication of that [1:27:22] whatsoever, Senator. There's no way you can corroborate or no indication of it. Which one? [1:27:26] No indication. Well, the indication is what's publicly available. There is indication. [1:27:32] Have you investigated those claims? We have not. Why have you not? If this is a passion of yours, [1:27:38] if you believe that the civilian casualties are not consistent with the law of war and not consistent [1:27:43] with human rights obligations that our military regularly follows with great pride and great [1:27:49] diligence, why have you not investigated those allegations when they're publicly being made on [1:27:53] the cover of the New York Times? I'll be happy to take a look at each instance. [1:27:58] I would like a report. I would like a report from you, from your team, about whether there have been [1:28:08] attacks that have resulted in the destruction of schools and hospitals. And if so, why? And how then, [1:28:15] last, have you managed the 90% cut to the personnel who are supposed to avoid civilian targets? [1:28:22] Happy to provide any report. And I would invite you and every staff member here to come to Tampa to [1:28:27] look at the process to see exactly how it works. Thank you. Thank you, Admiral. Senator Duckworth. [1:28:38] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, gentlemen, for being here. Admiral Cooper, the Senate received [1:28:42] a letter from President Trump on Friday, May 1st, stating that hostilities with Iran have ended. And you [1:28:48] just stated here that we are no longer operating under Operation Urgent Fury. Would you say that [1:28:56] we are still engaged in hostilities with Iran, or have they ended? Consistent with the President's [1:29:02] letter, international armed conflict rules and the implementation of the blockade. [1:29:11] So are we engaged in hostilities with Iran, yes or no? We are not. We're in a ceasefire. [1:29:15] The Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, right? You're engaged in a blockade, are you not? [1:29:21] The blockade is against Iranian ports, commerce going in and coming out. It is the last thing we [1:29:26] would want to do is blockade the Strait of Hormuz. And as we've seen in the last week, [1:29:31] there have been instances of ships coming in and out, including our own. [1:29:34] But under international law, a blockade is an act of war. So are we, if you're blockading, [1:29:40] actively blockading Iran, then you are engaged in an act, we are currently in an act of war with Iran, [1:29:46] under international law. That blockade is one of the definitions of an act of war, [1:29:50] under international law. Consistent with the direction we've been given, [1:29:54] those characterizations are best done through the department's legal counsel. [1:29:58] It's not, it's not characterization. It's international law. It's listed. A blockade [1:30:01] is an act of war. So let's, we've now engaged in the United States, and the United States and [1:30:11] Iranian forces are trading fire as they continue to launch missiles, drones from our boat stacks. [1:30:15] President Trump himself says the ceasefire is on life support, and he repeatedly threatens [1:30:19] to renew U.S. military strikes. And to be clear, no one is disputing the valor and professionalism [1:30:25] of our military. But the civilian leaders are abdicating their responsibility to craft a clear [1:30:31] strategy, and service members and American people are the ones who will suffer under this leadership [1:30:35] vacuum. Admiral Cooper, before Operation Epic Fury began, what desired end state for the operation were [1:30:42] you given by your civilian leadership? Senator, I was given crystal clear guidance. Our military mission [1:30:48] was to degrade Iran's ability to project power on its neighbors and U.S. interests. It included three [1:30:53] specific objectives. Degrade Iranian ballistic missiles and their defense, uh, defense industrial base. [1:31:00] Degrade their drones and the defense industrial base. Degrade their navy and the defense, uh, [1:31:04] industrial base. All of those were achieved, uh, as, uh, as I've discussed. And because they were [1:31:10] achieved, that's why the operation ended? Or did the operation end because the president said, [1:31:14] let's end operation? Operations commencing and ending are made by our civilian leadership, uh, and not [1:31:22] a military decision. Okay. Well, that civilian leadership president Trump has provided many [1:31:26] possible end states in only two months, including in just two months, he said, unconditional surrender [1:31:32] and regime change in Iran, which have not happened. Um, he's talked about, okay, operations will end when [1:31:37] there's destruction of Iranian nuclear sites allegedly already accomplished last summer under [1:31:42] operation midnight hammer. Um, he's, he's also said that Iran will never have nuclear weapons, [1:31:48] which cannot be accomplished with only a bombing campaign. He said that his goal is to destroy the [1:31:53] Iranian military forces and infrastructure completely, which the intel intelligence community [1:31:58] assesses has not happened. And now, uh, he said that it's a reopening of the strait of Hormuz, [1:32:03] which is a reminder was open before the war began. So if we don't know what we're fighting for, [1:32:08] we certainly don't know how long we'll be fighting. Admiral Cooper, [1:32:11] what have you been given? Have you been given any timeline for how long our forces will be [1:32:16] in the strait of Hormuz or near Iran or blockading Iran? Um, whether by a timeline or a condition and [1:32:22] end state for how long you'll be blockading Iran? Senator, I think it's important from a military [1:32:28] perspective that, uh, my advice, uh, related to options, uh, be provided to both the secretary and [1:32:33] the president. We've done that. The decisions on timeline and execution are up for our civilian leadership. [1:32:37] Okay. Um, so you mentioned the secretary of defense who only talks tactics. [1:32:42] And a president who changes his strategy on social media multiple times a day. This is who's [1:32:47] giving you the orders. Secretary Hexeth has touted the destruction of tens of thousands of targets [1:32:51] across Iran. He said that Iran's air defenses are flattened, his words, and its industrial base [1:32:57] overwhelmingly destroyed and claims that Iran's Navy is at the bottom of the sea. Every metric that the [1:33:02] secretary offers is one of destruction and destruction alone is not an end state, especially [1:33:07] not with new public reporting that U.S. intelligence officials believe Iran has operational access to [1:33:12] most of its missile capacity, and that Iran is clearly still capable of controlling the strait of [1:33:17] Hormuz. Americans are not safer. Our service members are at risk. Prices at home are higher, [1:33:22] and Iran has more control over the strait and global economy than it did before this whole thing started. [1:33:27] American people, our service members, deserve clear answers. What does done with the war look like, [1:33:31] and how do we get there? We have no strategy. As we saw in Afghanistan, if you don't have a sound [1:33:35] strategy, you keep doing tactics forever. This is not your fault, but this is where we are. And [1:33:40] Admiral Cooper, have you been asked for your advice, and under what conditions would you advise [1:33:45] deploying ground troops for any purpose in Iran? Senator, I think it would be inappropriate to [1:33:51] talk about any contingency planning in this particular forum. It's my obligation as a combatant [1:33:55] commander to provide a broad range of options through the secretary and to the president. [1:34:00] Can you answer that question for me in the SCIF at a later time? I'd be more than happy to talk about [1:34:04] anything classified. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Kelly. [1:34:13] No further questions. Mr. Chairman. Sorry, I didn't mark off. Senator Peters. [1:34:22] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you both for being here. I speak for myself, [1:34:28] and I thank everybody on this panel. We appreciate the incredible professionalism of men and women in [1:34:33] uniform and the job that they do every day with professionalism and heroism, and thank you for doing [1:34:39] that. But we do have a number of questions about how we win this war and end it going forward. And [1:34:47] those are usually political questions related to political leadership. The men and women in uniform [1:34:52] execute those orders, and they have demonstrated that they're certainly the best in the world. [1:34:58] But, Admiral Cooper, you mentioned that the current mission right now is basically the U.S. blockade of [1:35:06] Iranian ships or ships that are transiting the Straits of Hormuz to Iranian ports. That's in response to [1:35:13] Iran basically effectively shutting down the Strait of Hormuz before that. As you know, [1:35:19] experts across the political spectrum and multiple administrations, political administrations, [1:35:24] have all agreed that a war against Iran, Iran's first moves would be to mine the Straits of Hormuz to [1:35:32] prevent tanker traffic. But despite these known risks and repeated claims that the DOD has planned, [1:35:40] I'm sure you have plans. I've been to the War College. I've served in the Navy. There are no shortage of [1:35:44] plans that we have, that you have plans to deal with the closing of the strait. We had four minesweepers that [1:35:52] were stationed in the Middle East, were just retired last year, and our remaining minesweepers were either [1:35:57] stationed in Japan or not prepositioned in the region. This is despite public reporting that we [1:36:04] currently already have limited unmanned mine clearance capacity. And reports from the New York Times and [1:36:12] Reuters has also indicated that Iran still has hundreds, if not thousands, of small boats that can lay [1:36:19] mines or perform hit-and-run attacks on top of their existing land missiles and drones, which I'm sure [1:36:25] they're building at a furious pace right now to restock what they have. And this is on top of [1:36:32] existing land missiles and drones. The American people, as we all know, are already paying higher [1:36:39] prices in the United States. Inflation is up as a result of chaotic tariffs that President Trump has [1:36:45] put into place. And now, thanks to this war and the Straits closure, they're paying high gas prices [1:36:51] that continue to rise as well, putting a strain on family budgets. So my question for you is, [1:36:56] if there was advanced planning, and I'm sure there was advanced planning about the Straits closure, [1:37:02] why were the minesweepers not prepositioned in the region when it had been publicly reported that we [1:37:07] publicly reported that we already have limited unmanned mine clearance capacities? When you have a plan, [1:37:13] usually before you execute the plan, you make sure that all your assets are in place [1:37:16] to actually execute that plan. So it's curious that those assets were not there. Why? [1:37:22] Senator, I think best to talk specific tactics and operations in a classified environment. What I can [1:37:27] say here is we did have sufficient and continue to have sufficient mine clearance capability in the [1:37:32] theater because it happened to not be in those four vessels that were decommissioned after decades of [1:37:37] service. I think it's an interesting point. The support and the ability to conduct counter mining comes [1:37:43] in a lot of different flavors, best to discuss in a classified environment. [1:37:46] And I don't mean to get into that. I understand that totally you don't want to do it. But [1:37:50] it's clear that there is a concern about mines. We aren't seeing ships go through there. Commercial [1:37:54] companies do not want to go through the Straits. They're not going to put their ships at risk so [1:37:58] they don't feel safe. To me, that speaks volumes as to whether or not it's safe, that there is a real [1:38:04] concern there. And we know that the Iranians have significant capabilities to deal with that. [1:38:09] You know, I asked a previous question related to strategy and really talked about von Klauswitz [1:38:15] on war, which is, as you know, the seminal text on strategy that is taught in all the war colleges. [1:38:21] And you know it better than I will ever know it. The concept of that is that in order to win a war, [1:38:28] you've got to know the center of gravity of your enemy and you have to be focused on able to neutralize [1:38:33] that. What is the center of gravity in Iran? What would you, how are you planning? And that's a military [1:38:40] decision as to what is the center of gravity. That's the kind of advice you would give a [1:38:44] president. What is the center of gravity? So I really would defer to our policy makers to [1:38:49] determine what they view from a policy perspective as a center of gravity. From a military perspective, [1:38:53] we're focused on achieving military objectives, which is exactly what our men and women have done, [1:38:58] and they've done it extremely well. Well, you do, as you know, and every, every war plan has a center [1:39:04] of gravity that you identify and then you work around that. So, so there is the war plan that we have for [1:39:10] Iran would have the center of gravity. Why can't you share what that is? That's in the past it's been [1:39:15] before we knew the center of gravity in the Persian Gulf War for Iraq. Colin Powell said it was the [1:39:22] Republican Guard troops, Iraq's elite unit there. Obama administration in Afghanistan, Admiral Mike [1:39:29] Mullen defined the center of gravity as building Afghan government support. They made this public. [1:39:35] They weren't hiding the center of gravity and our enemy knows what our center of gravity is and [1:39:40] we know what theirs is. There's no reason to keep that secret because the American people have a [1:39:44] right to know what, what, what is it that we're trying to accomplish? And that's outlined very [1:39:48] clearly in that term, a part of every military plan that is put forward. Yes, sir. I, I agree. [1:39:55] Every war plan has a center of gravity and those war plans are classified. I'd be more than happy to [1:39:59] talk about in a classified environment. Fair enough. Um, Senator Rosen. Thank you, [1:40:07] Chairman Wicker. And thank you, Admiral Cooper, General, General Anderson for your service and, uh, [1:40:12] your willingness to continue to serve our nation. Um, Admiral Cooper, I want to talk about the [1:40:17] International Stabilization Force. Um, it's been publicly reported that CENTCOM is going to play [1:40:23] a role in the, in the proposed International Stabilization Force in Gaza. Uh, we'll just call [1:40:28] it ISF going forward through many questions remain, though many questions remain on what the ISF is, [1:40:35] when it will be deployed and how it will operate. So can you clarify the roles of the U.S. and CENTCOM in the [1:40:41] ISF? Specifically, is the vision for CENTCOM to retain command and control? Or is there a timeline [1:40:47] of mechanism, mechanism for transitioning oversight to a multinational or civilian-led, uh, structure? [1:40:56] Senator, uh, first, great to see you again, and thank you for the question. Uh, our role, uh, can be [1:41:00] simply defined as one of support right now. The International Stabilization Force Commander, [1:41:06] who's been designated, is also dual-hatted as the Commander of Special Operations Command Central. [1:41:11] He has about 45, uh, members of the Joint Force presently working for him. We're really at the [1:41:17] infancy of forming that International Stabilization Force. Thus far, there have been four countries who [1:41:22] uh, could, uh, committed to provide forces. And so I think as we look to the future, I'd be happy to come [1:41:26] back to you on what that looks like, uh, later on. Uh, we're heading in the right direction, but we're [1:41:31] just at the infancy of the process. Thank you. And speaking of, uh, heading in a direction, we need [1:41:36] to talk about munitions, uh, sustainment. Because Admiral Cooper, according to publicly available [1:41:41] resources, the U.S. has fired at least 45 percent of its Patriot missile interceptors and more than [1:41:46] half of its THAAD interceptors so far in Operation Epic Fury. And it's had to move air defense from other [1:41:53] theaters. So can you talk to me about how this constrains our air and missile defense and those of [1:41:59] our regional partners and allies like the Israel, UAE, and others who are also, um, under attack? [1:42:04] Senator, I have all the munitions necessary, uh, uh, to both defend our forces as well as conduct [1:42:11] a broad range of contingencies. Our partners also, uh, have, uh, the sufficient munitions, uh, necessary [1:42:18] for defensive operations. Do you have estimates about how long it would take us to replenish or [1:42:22] rebuild or stockpile? I would, I would really defer to the folks who do this on an everyday basis, [1:42:26] both in the department and the services. Thank you. I'm going to continue on you, [1:42:30] and then we'll move over to General Anderson in a minute, because I want to just take a moment to talk [1:42:34] about Lebanon, because I do appreciate that you've applauded the Lebanese Armed Forces for their [1:42:40] efforts to disarm Hezbollah. While the current effort, uh, in conflict has demonstrated the extent [1:42:46] to which Hezbollah is rearmed, a strong Lebanese Armed Forces remains the best pathway for Lebanon [1:42:52] through which Hezbollah can be disarmed once and for all, and we know that needs to happen. So what [1:42:56] can the U.S. do to support the Lebanese Armed Forces to ensure that they have the necessary capacity [1:43:02] to disarm Hezbollah while also holding them accountable? Senator, taking on the disarmament [1:43:09] of Hezbollah is a tall order. They've been, uh, funded by Iran for decades with billions of dollars, [1:43:14] and Hezbollah is, is inculcated into every fabric of the Lebanese society. I think right now, [1:43:20] our continued commitment with modest dollars, uh, to the Lebanese Armed Forces is helpful. Uh, they have, [1:43:27] in particular, several units who can do more. Uh, we have to be, I believe our commitment could be, [1:43:33] uh, to provide the funding necessary so that they can do more. Thank you. I'm going to move [1:43:38] over to, uh, AFRICOM now, General Anderson, because ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliates, uh, well, [1:43:44] we know they've spanned the African continent. And so understanding, of course, this is an open setting. [1:43:50] Can you talk about the extent to which these franchises, that they work cross borders within local [1:43:56] settings to coordinate with one another and the threat that this poses to our priorities in the [1:44:01] regions? And do you think there's a need for a comprehensive CT strategy on the continent? [1:44:06] And if so, um, could you outline again, considering it's a open setting, uh, broadly what that strategy [1:44:12] might include, please? Senator, I appreciate the, uh, highlighting of the, the transnational, [1:44:19] uh, threat that both Al Qaeda and ISIS pose. I can say in this setting that, uh, ISIS has several [1:44:26] affiliates across the continent that are coordinating more and more, whether that's in the [1:44:30] Golis mountains of Somalia or the Lake Shad basin of Nigeria or in the Sahel as well as Mozambique [1:44:36] and others. So the, this terrorist network has to be addressed holistically. They have to look at [1:44:42] the entirety of the network. It's not any single node anymore. And so as we look at this, I work [1:44:46] coordinate very closely with Admiral Cooper because ISIS still has a strong presence in [1:44:51] CENTCOMS, AOR, as well as Al Qaeda. Uh, as we look at this, partners enable them first and foremost to [1:44:59] take on this threat and foremost to take on this threat when they are unable, uh, to do that, then [1:45:05] bringing in only the unique capabilities that the U S can bring in order to address those threats. [1:45:10] We've seen that in the Golis mountains where we've been able to bring intelligence, limit ISR, [1:45:15] some limited strike capabilities as they've been able to disrupt, uh, their leadership network. [1:45:19] Uh, this needs to be applied across all of these areas. So investments in additional ISR investments [1:45:26] in expeditionary capabilities, such as in a float forward staging base, like the Herschel Woody Williams [1:45:31] that allow us to move to the point of need at the time of need, and then the force protection [1:45:36] requirements that are necessary to protect that force in the expeditionary area. And I would add [1:45:40] not just the force protection as in the counter UAS and the integrated air missile defense, [1:45:44] which are critical, but also investments in emerging technologies that allow austere medicine, [1:45:49] forward medicine, remote medicine, uh, automated, uh, CASAVAC. These types of things allow us to [1:45:54] become more expeditionary in order to get after these critical threats and only the critical threats [1:45:59] that pose a threat to us and then enable partners as able to address these common threats. So it is a [1:46:05] multifaceted strategy. I could even go into more, I won't in this detail, but really maintaining the [1:46:10] relationships and the engagements are equally important and having that pragmatic approach, [1:46:15] opening dialogue with the AES states and the Sahel again, addressing this with, uh, places like [1:46:20] Algeria and Morocco and Libya, even who share these concerns, building those relationships are [1:46:25] absolutely vital because you cannot surge trust. If the chairman would indulge me, can I have a follow [1:46:30] up question on the Sahel since he brought it up? Uh, yes. Why don't you do that? Thank you. Um, [1:46:35] we know since you brought up the Sahel, but last month, the JNIM and local, uh, militias in Mali [1:46:40] executed coordinated nationwide offensive attacks, attacking Mali's capital, seizing the key towns, [1:46:47] killing the Malayan defense minister. Though these attacks were greater in scale, intensity than any [1:46:52] other since 2012 and to clearly demonstrate the attacker's ability to, uh, strike against an [1:46:58] expansive geographical area. So you're talking a little bit about the, uh, Sahel, but the permissive [1:47:04] environment in the Sahel that's making these attacks possible. And, uh, what, what more can you do? [1:47:10] Would you like to add if you want to speak a little bit more about instability there? [1:47:13] Senator, I would, uh, there are a few things I would like to add in this setting. I can talk [1:47:16] to you more in a classified setting that would be, uh, highly appropriate to this. But to your point, [1:47:21] there is no effective, uh, external counterterrorism effect or effort in the Sahel right now. The [1:47:27] Russians have claimed to do that, but we saw that they had to withdraw from Qadal. Uh, we're unable to [1:47:31] defend against that threat there. They are providing some limited support, but we do not see the same [1:47:36] Western presence because of that. Then how do we enable the partners, uh, the other nations that [1:47:41] are there? How do we look at expeditionary capabilities again, that we can result in this? [1:47:45] One of the key areas that we would need some assistance with is the authorities and ability [1:47:50] to bring in an experiment with emerging technologies, whether that's in the surveillance [1:47:54] and ISR type of technologies or in other over the horizon type capabilities, like I mentioned with the, [1:48:00] uh, uh, medicine and others in order to reach, uh, when there is a threat that threatens the homeland [1:48:05] to be able to reach it and, and take care of it, but more importantly, continue to enable the [1:48:10] partners to address the threats in their, uh, local areas. And a lot of that's through intelligence [1:48:14] sharing. I, I would be happy in a classified environment to talk in more depth. Thank you. [1:48:18] I appreciate that. Thank you, uh, Admiral General. Thank you, Chairman Wicker. Uh, [1:48:23] thank you very much, Senator Rosen. And I'm glad you brought up, um, Lebanon and, and Hezbollah. [1:48:31] Um, so I'm going to take another round, um, Admiral Cooper and stop me when I'm wrong. Um, [1:48:40] on March 2nd of this year, Hezbollah attacked Israel in response to Operation Epic Fury. Is that correct? [1:48:49] Uh, that's correct, sir. Um, according to Israel's foreign minister, Hezbollah has fired 10,000 [1:49:01] missiles, rockets and drones at Israel during the past two months. Is that correct? [1:49:05] I believe that's correct, sir. [1:49:08] And in response to these attacks, Israel initiated a ground offensive in southern Lebanon, aiming to [1:49:15] create an uninhabited buffer zone along its northern border and border and to push Hezbollah [1:49:21] north to the Latini River. Is that correct? That's correct, Senator. Um, to enable this operation, [1:49:34] the Israeli military ordered the evacuation of southern Lebanon, um, displacing over one million [1:49:42] people, nearly 20% of Lebanon's population. That is also correct. I don't know that that number [1:49:49] specifically is correct, but the, but the concept of, of, uh, of the evacuation is correct. [1:49:53] While governments of Israel and Lebanon declared a ceasefire in April of this year, [1:50:04] Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qasim announced that his organization would not recognize the ceasefire [1:50:12] and would never agree to disarm. Is that correct? [1:50:15] Uh, his statement, that statement is correct. [1:50:18] Yeah, he made that statement. Uh, Hezbollah then continued to fire projectiles into Israel and [1:50:23] Israel has continued to strike Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon. That's also correct, isn't it? [1:50:28] That's correct, sir. Um, and I think Senator Rosen would wholeheartedly agree with me that peace between [1:50:42] Israel, and I, I can't ask questions to my, my friend and colleague, but I think we would both agree [1:50:49] that peace between Israel and Lebanon would be a wonderful development and a wonderful development, [1:50:55] um, for, um, America and for Israel. Um, but peace between Israel and Lebanon depends on the Lebanese [1:51:06] government having both the capability and the will to disarm Hezbollah. Has the United States [1:51:15] provided the Lebanese armed forces with approximately $3 billion since 2006? [1:51:20] So I'd, I'd have to take that specific volume, that, that's a lot of money number of, uh, for the record [1:51:26] and follow up. But we have been providing aid for two decades. Is it fair to say that the primary [1:51:32] goal of U.S. support for the LAF, the Lebanese armed forces, was to counter Hezbollah? Yes, sir. [1:51:41] And from 2006 until 2023, is it accurate to say that Hezbollah's rocket and missile arsenal grew [1:51:50] from 2006 to 2023 from approximately 9,000 rockets and missiles to 150,000? [1:52:01] As a result of decades and billions of dollars in Iranian support, that's correct. Um, Israel's foreign, [1:52:10] foreign minister, um, alleges that Hezbollah fired more than 10,000 projectiles at Israel since the [1:52:20] beginning of March of this year. In light of, um, the Lebanese armed forces in action, was Israel, [1:52:29] um, was Israel's offensive into southern Lebanon, military, militarily necessary, if Hezbollah's [1:52:39] attacks were going to be countered? Was there another way to do that? Senator, I would really defer to [1:52:45] Israel on intent and effectiveness, but just as a general statement. [1:52:49] Militarily necessary, though. There are, uh, it is an option among options, uh, of which there are few, [1:52:56] to deal with the Hezbollah problem. Yeah, I, I just, I appreciate, uh, uh, [1:53:01] Senator Rosen bringing this up, um, and, and, uh, just would go back to the central point. It would, [1:53:09] it would be a tremendous achievement, uh, for Israel, Lebanon, um, the United States and the Middle East, [1:53:21] if, uh, if, uh, if Hezbollah could be eliminated and allow the Lebanese people and the Lebanese [1:53:29] government, um, to resume the happy relations that, that we once had and, and, um, um, strive for, [1:53:40] um, between the United States and Lebanon. Would, um, Senator Rosen have any further questions? [1:53:47] Uh, that, then this concludes today's hearing. I want to thank our witnesses for, uh, their testimony, [1:53:56] and, and, um, I would acknowledge that many, um, many of the arrows, um, aimed at these two witnesses, [1:54:05] um, uh, were, were better aimed at people in the civilian leadership who, according to our great [1:54:16] constitution and our principles dating back to George Washington, uh, um, are in control of policy, [1:54:25] and I would, um, commend these two military, um, veterans for adhering to that constitutional [1:54:34] principle. And with that, we are, uh, uh, I would inform members that questions of the record be due [1:54:40] to the committee within two business days, and we are adjourned.