Sec. Pete Hegseth Testifies Before The Senate Amid War With Iran

[32:28] All right, the hearing is in order. [32:30] We completed a productive classified session [32:33] down in the skiff, [32:34] and now we will begin the public portion of this hearing. [32:37] I welcome back Secretary Hegseth, General Cain, [32:40] and our Acting Controller, Mr. Jay Hurst. [32:43] I thank all of them, including their families, [32:46] for their service. [32:48] For the dozens of Americans [32:49] that regularly watch our hearings, [32:51] my next remarks will be no surprise, [32:53] but for new viewers, [32:55] I want to reiterate some context from our remarks. [32:59] I've said this at almost every hearing. [33:01] We live in the most dangerous security environment [33:04] since World War II. [33:07] Every uniformed officer who has come before this committee [33:11] has agreed with that statement. [33:13] First and foremost, we're locked in a competition [33:15] with Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. [33:20] The competition is high stakes, [33:22] and it is about whether this will be an American-led century [33:26] or a century defined by authoritarian, autocratic regimes [33:31] that care little for the needs of their citizens [33:35] or those in neighboring countries. [33:37] The Chinese Communist Party has accelerated [33:39] its historic military buildup [33:41] and its predatory economic practices [33:44] against Americans and countries the world over. [33:47] Xi Jinping leads not only China, [33:49] but also an axis of aggressors. [33:52] This growing alliance cannot be denied. [33:56] It includes China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. [34:00] They're united around this goal to oppose America's interests [34:05] and the interests of other like-minded democratic countries [34:08] across the globe. [34:10] Vladimir Putin's war of choice in Ukraine [34:13] has now entered its fifth year. [34:15] In Putin's objectives, [34:17] we hear echoes of the imperialistic ambitions [34:20] of World War II's aggressors, including Adolf Hitler. [34:26] Vladimir Putin has suffered 1.2 million casualties, [34:31] and failed miserably in his military objectives. [34:34] Along the way, he has transformed Russia's economy [34:37] into one fueled by war, [34:40] raising the prospect of an even more aggressive Moscow [34:44] for the foreseeable future. [34:46] Most of Iran's leaders are now deceased, [34:50] but they and those who survived them [34:52] have consistently sought violence against America, [34:56] Israel, our Gulf allies, and the Iranian people. [35:01] We saw this during the October 7th massacre, [35:05] during their continued support for Hezbollah and Hamas, [35:09] and in their desire to engage in nuclear blackmail. [35:12] Iran's ayatollahs have consistently represented a threat [35:15] to American interest. [35:18] Kim Jong-un has joined Mr. Putin's war of aggression. [35:24] He continues a military and nuclear buildup [35:26] that threatens South Korea, Japan, and the United States. [35:29] Ties have never been closer among these four dictators, [35:34] among these four dictatorships. [35:36] They support each other's aggressive endeavors, [35:40] they prop each other up financially, [35:43] and they scheme to undermine America's objectives. [35:45] We should expect them to continue this behavior. [35:48] This context plays out across every dimension [35:52] of national power, the economy, technology, [35:55] diplomacy, and more. [35:57] But today we're here to talk about the military dimension [36:00] of this competition. [36:02] These regimes have regularly tried to take force, [36:06] take by force, what they cannot secure [36:08] through the political process. [36:11] For that reason, we must be ready to deter conflicts, [36:16] and if necessary, to win them. [36:18] President Trump has used the U.S. military appropriately [36:22] and effectively for American interests. [36:26] He has viewed our adversaries as a united bloc [36:30] and has taken action in light of that reality. [36:33] In Operation Absolute Resolve and Associated Statecraft, [36:37] the president removed an aspiring dictator off the board [36:42] and set up Venezuela for a future aligned [36:46] with democratic interests. [36:48] In Operation Midnight Hammer, [36:50] he sought to eliminate the Ayatollah's nuclear program. [36:53] When the Ayatollah chose to double down, [36:55] the president launched Operation Epic Fury. [36:59] In that mission, he has worked to remove the regime's [37:01] conventional military capabilities [37:04] and force it back to the table for a permanent solution. [37:10] While we all mourn the tragic loss of the 14 service members [37:14] who've lost their lives in this conflict, [37:17] we do so knowing the world is safer without a nuclear Iran. [37:21] All of these actions are part of a peace through strength strategy. [37:26] In this approach, we seek first to avoid war, [37:29] but we take military action when necessary [37:31] to achieve U.S. interest. [37:33] And so, Mr. Secretary, I'm pleased that you are here [37:36] testifying today in support of President Trump's [37:39] historic $1.5 trillion defense budget request. [37:45] That sum will go a long way toward rebuilding [37:48] our military capabilities for a generation. [37:50] I should say up front that this may be a long hearing. [37:54] There's much to discuss. [37:55] This $1.5 trillion request is chock full of important programs [38:01] and initiatives that are absolutely necessary [38:04] to secure American interest in the 21st century. [38:08] I think this funding underpins and accentuates [38:11] three comparative advantages the United States possesses [38:14] over the axis of aggressors. [38:16] The first comparative advantage America enjoys [38:19] over our adversaries is that we have the best innovation [38:22] and industry in the world. [38:25] So I hope our witnesses today will cover the progress we've made [38:28] in just the past year rebuilding the American arsenal. [38:34] Last year, our reconciliation bill combined [38:37] with bipartisan appropriation bills achieved [38:41] about a trillion dollar defense budget. [38:43] This year's request would represent a near 50% increase. [38:50] Every penny of it should be money well spent, [38:53] making down payments on crucial transformational capabilities [38:58] such as drone warfare, low-cost munitions, and missile defense. [39:06] Also last year, Congress and the executive branch achieved [39:09] historic acquisition reforms. [39:11] Consequently, we are well positioned to make huge gains [39:14] on efficiency this year and in the years to come, [39:19] making it much more flexible and a more timely process. [39:25] I look forward to discussing how we might accelerate [39:29] implementation of these actions. [39:30] In particular, I'd like to see the Pentagon do more this year [39:35] to drive competition in the defense industrial base. [39:39] Competition absolutely drives better outcomes [39:44] for our service members and taxpayers. [39:46] Of course, our people are the final comparative advantage [39:50] we have over our adversaries. [39:52] We've enjoyed significant improvements [39:54] in recruitment and retention, [39:55] but we need to solidify a merit-based environment [39:59] that fully cares for our personnel. [40:01] I commend you, Mr. Secretary, [40:03] for your efforts over the past year to do just that. [40:06] That task will never be finished, of course, [40:09] but we embrace it gladly and we salute the progress. [40:12] We will always be striving to care for [40:14] and equip American service members as much as possible. [40:19] I look forward to more work between this committee [40:22] and the department this coming year. [40:24] With that, I turn to my friend and colleague, [40:27] Ranking Member Jack Reed. [40:29] Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, [40:30] and Secretary Hegseth, General Kane, Mr. Hurst, welcome. [40:35] And please convey my appreciation, all of our appreciation [40:40] to our military service members and defense civilians. [40:44] We owe them our deepest sense of gratitude. [40:47] Mr. Secretary, this is your first public appearance [40:50] before this committee in nearly a year. [40:52] Since your last public testimony, [40:54] you and President Trump have unwisely taken [40:58] the United States to war with Iran. [41:00] You ordered an attack on Venezuela. [41:03] It is like Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Portland, [41:07] to police American citizens. [41:09] And you have personally intervened to end the careers [41:12] of dozens of military leaders without explanation. [41:16] These actions will have significant [41:18] and long-term consequences. [41:21] Now you appear before us to ask for a $1.5 trillion budget, [41:28] a 45% increase above last year. [41:32] I must say I'm skeptical, and such a request [41:36] demands intense scrutiny. [41:39] Sixty-one days ago, President Trump unilaterally [41:42] began the war in Iran. [41:44] He had no coherent strategy. [41:46] He refused to make a case to the American people [41:50] or consult Congress. [41:51] He failed to present any evidence of an immediate threat, [41:56] and he ignored the advice of military and intelligence experts [41:59] who warned him of the consequences. [42:02] Today, our nation is in a war strategic position. [42:06] The Strait of the Moves was open. [42:08] Now it is closed. [42:10] Thirteen service members have tragically lost their lives, [42:13] and more than 400 have been wounded. [42:16] We have lost dozens of aircraft, sustained significant damage [42:20] to our bases in the area, and expended an alarming amount [42:24] of our missile inventory. [42:26] Morale and readiness across the force, [42:28] especially among over-deployed units and vessels, [42:31] like the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, have suffered. [42:36] Gasoline and fertilizer prices throughout the world have surged. [42:41] American families are bearing the cost of a war they wanted [42:44] nothing to do with and have gained nothing from. [42:48] And yet, Secretary Hedges, you declared victory a month ago. [42:52] On April 8th, you said, in your words, Operation Epic Fury [42:56] was a historic and overwhelming victory. [42:59] By any measure, Epic Fury decimated Iran's military [43:03] and rendered its combat forces ineffective for years to come. [43:09] Let me be clear. [43:10] Tactically, the United States military performance against Iran [43:14] has been remarkable. [43:16] And I salute the service members who have executed this mission [43:19] with skill and bravery. [43:21] The problem with your statements, Mr. Secretary, [43:23] is they are dangerously exaggerated. [43:26] Iran's hotline regime remains in place. [43:30] It still retains stockpiles of enriched uranium. [43:34] And its nuclear program remains viable. [43:36] Iran's military retains enough combat effectiveness [43:41] to keep the conflict at an impasse. [43:43] Its missiles and drones remain a far greater threat [43:46] than you have acknowledged. [43:48] And the regime has demonstrated it can effectively control [43:51] the threat of a moose when it chooses. [43:53] Mr. Secretary, I am concerned that you have been telling [43:56] the President what he wants to hear, [43:58] instead of what he needs to hear. [44:01] Bold assurances of success are a disservice [44:04] to both the Commander-in-Chief and the troops [44:06] who risk their lives based on them. [44:09] Our military has performed heroically, [44:12] but military force without Assad's strategy [44:15] is a path to long-term defeat. [44:18] I'd like to know what options you're considering now, [44:21] given the course from this war [44:22] and the stalemate President Trump has put us in. [44:26] More broadly, Mr. Secretary, [44:28] too often you have made dangerous statements [44:31] that are counterproductive to the mission. [44:34] You boasted about, quote, [44:36] no stupid rules of engagement. [44:38] Just days after hundreds of Iranian schoolers [44:41] were tragically killed in a missile strike. [44:44] You have made troubling statements [44:46] about showing no mercy and no quarter to the Iranians, [44:50] orders that would constitute war crimes. [44:53] As importantly, while our men and women [44:55] are fighting and dying overseas, [44:57] you have focused unduly on your own personal agenda. [45:01] In the past two months alone, [45:03] you have taken it upon yourself [45:04] to overhaul the Chaplain Corps, [45:06] cancel flu vaccine requirements, [45:09] repeal firearm restrictions on military posts, [45:13] and bar service members [45:14] from attending certain universities. [45:17] Just this week, [45:18] you brought performer Kid Rock [45:20] to an army base to go for a joyride [45:22] in an Apache helicopter [45:24] after dismissing an earlier investigation [45:27] into the pilots [45:29] who recklessly chose to hover above his home. [45:33] That runs directly counter to the chain of command [45:36] and maintaining good order and discipline. [45:39] Most disturbingly, during your tenure, [45:40] you have fired dozens of our most senior military leaders [45:44] and personally intervened to block the promotions [45:47] of many others. [45:48] That is a betrayal of the merit-based system [45:51] that forms the foundation of our military. [45:54] You are hollering out the military's bench of experience [45:58] and highest performing senior officers [46:01] while making young officers wonder [46:03] if they should continue to serve. [46:06] My colleagues and I have heard [46:07] from countless service members throughout the ranks, [46:10] many of whom will be watching right now, [46:13] who are confused and disturbed by your actions. [46:16] Hopefully, you can explain them today. [46:19] Additionally, this committee expects a fulsome update [46:22] on Operation Southern Sphere. [46:24] This ongoing campaign [46:26] against suspected drug trafficking boats [46:28] has resulted in nearly 200 fatalities. [46:31] The administration has failed to explain [46:34] the long-term objectives of this mission [46:36] or provide any evidence of reduced drug flows [46:40] into the United States. [46:42] I would ask for a credible answer [46:43] to this most fundamental question, [46:46] what is the operation actually meant to accomplish? [46:49] Mrs. Exery, you are here to promote [46:53] the President's $1.5 trillion defense budget. [46:57] While this budget provides funding for necessary programs, [47:00] including shipbuilding and drone manufacturing, [47:03] many other critical programs like barracks repair [47:06] and aircraft procurement would rely [47:09] on the passage of a party-line reconciliation bill. [47:13] Further, this budget slashes research and development, [47:16] provides no funding for Ukraine, [47:19] and includes no funding for losses [47:21] incurred from the Iran war. [47:23] Yesterday, Mr. Hurst testified that [47:26] Operation Epic Fury has cost $25 billion. [47:31] If nothing else, that help clarifies [47:33] that we certainly do not need a supplemental [47:36] anywhere near $100 billion, [47:39] much less $200 billion. [47:42] And in this record-breaking budget, [47:44] there is no pay adjustments for the civilian workforce, [47:47] and with inflation, that is a pay cut. [47:50] After a year of doge layoffs [47:52] and a hiring freeze across the Department, [47:54] this is an insult to the 800,000 men and women [47:57] who support our war fighters every day. [48:00] I cannot imagine a faster way to erode readiness [48:04] and distract from our abilities to deter our adversaries. [48:09] Ultimately, Mr. Secretary, [48:10] I believe you are causing lasting harm to the military. [48:15] Like many members of this committee, [48:17] I had the opportunity and the privilege [48:19] to serve in the military. [48:21] And every officer knows they are duty-bound [48:24] to give their best professional advice, [48:26] even if it is not what their superiors want to hear. [48:30] Because when leaders fear to speak honestly, [48:33] people die, missions fail, wars are lost. [48:37] The Americans' people's trust in our military [48:40] took 250 years to build. [48:42] You are dismantling it in a fraction of that time. [48:46] And trust, once long, can take generations to rebuild. [48:50] Mr. Secretary, today I hope you'll take a step forward [48:54] toward rebuilding the trust that has been lost. [48:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [49:00] Mr. Secretary, you are now recognized [49:03] for your opening statement, sir. [49:08] Well, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Reid, Senators, [49:11] thank you for the opportunity to testify in support [49:13] of President Trump's historic, as you said, Mr. Chairman, [49:17] $1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget [49:20] for the Department of War. [49:22] The President's budget request reflects the urgency [49:25] of the moment, addressing both the deferment [49:28] of longstanding problems as well as positioning our forces [49:32] for the current and future fights. [49:34] I'm honored to appear alongside General Dan Cain, [49:36] Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [49:38] and Jay Hurst, our Chief Financial Officer and Comptroller. [49:42] I'd like to start by thanking this committee and Congress [49:45] for your partnership in securing the investments needed [49:48] for a stronger, prouder, and more secure military. [49:52] Your focus on acquisitions, your focus on efficiency, [49:55] are the reflection in our department as well [49:57] and in this budget. [50:00] A nation's ability to build, to innovate, [50:03] and to support the critical needs of its war fighters, [50:05] at speed and at scale, is the foundation upon which [50:09] its deterrence and survival rests. [50:12] However, upon taking office on January 20th, 2025, [50:16] President Trump inherited a defense industrial base [50:19] that had been hollowed out by years of America last policies, [50:23] resulting in a diminished capacity to project strength. [50:28] Under the previous administration, we were offshoring, [50:30] outsourcing, beset by cost overruns and degraded capabilities. [50:36] But under the leadership of President Trump, [50:38] our builder in chief, we are reversing this systemic decay [50:42] and putting our defense industrial base [50:43] back on a wartime footing. [50:46] Urgency informs everything we do. [50:49] We're rebuilding a military that the American people [50:51] can be proud of, one that instills nothing less [50:54] than unrelenting fear in our adversaries [50:56] and inspires historic morale and recruiting in its ranks. [51:02] We fight to win in every scenario. [51:05] The $1.5 trillion budget put forward by the President [51:08] will build upon a previous $1 trillion FY26 top line [51:13] and will continue to reverse the four years of underinvestment [51:16] and mismanagement of the Biden administration. [51:19] The $1.5 trillion budget will ensure that the United States [51:23] continues to maintain the world's most powerful [51:26] and capable military as we grapple with a complex threat [51:29] environment across multiple theaters. [51:33] Not to mention, the budget also includes [51:35] a historic troop pay increase, 7% for junior enlisted, [51:40] and the budget eliminates all poor or failing barracks. [51:44] Quality of life for our troops is front and center [51:47] in this budget. [51:49] By supercharging our defense industrial capacity [51:52] and transforming how the department does business, [51:54] we are restoring American commercial dominance [51:57] at a pace unseen in generations, [51:59] transforming the defense industrial base [52:02] from the broken, slow-moving systems of the past. [52:06] We have flipped the Pentagon acquisition process [52:09] from a bureaucratic model to a business model, [52:13] decisively moving from a acquisitions environment paralyzed [52:17] by bureaucratic red tape into an outcomes-driven organization [52:21] focused on delivering the most for taxpayer dollars. [52:25] Over the past year, through historic multi-year procurement [52:28] agreements that this committee supported, [52:31] we've cut smart business deals that have sent unambiguous demand [52:36] signals to industry to build more and build faster. [52:40] The result has been a surge, a revitalization of our great American factories [52:46] and a massive reinvestment in the skilled American workers [52:49] who serve as the industrial muscle behind our warriors. [53:07] Further interruptions of our hearing will be treated in like manner. [53:14] We appreciate the First Amendment rights of Americans to express themselves, [53:20] but disruption of this hearing will not be tolerated. [53:24] So, Mr. Secretary, you may continue. [53:27] I'll briefly provide some concrete high-level metrics [53:30] of what we've accomplished over just the past few months. [53:34] These are announced new facilities and investments to support American warfighters. [53:38] The department has helped stimulate more than 250 private investment deals [53:43] in 39 states, 180 cities, and 150 companies [53:47] worth more than $50 billion. [53:51] It's resulted in 280 new or expanded facilities, [53:54] more than 18 million new square feet of American manufacturing, [53:58] and more than 70,000 new jobs. [54:01] These $50 billion in investments in new plants, new assembly lines, [54:06] and new factories are private investments, not taxpayer dollars. [54:11] By completely transforming our department's business model, [54:14] American companies are investing in America with their own dollars, [54:19] a historic demonstration of American manufacturing and defense revitalization, [54:24] all with their money, not Uncle Sam's. [54:27] This has never been done before and is long overdue [54:31] from a bureaucratic model to a business model. [54:35] These investments equal great things for America, [54:38] for American families, and American workers [54:40] to ensure that our warfighters have everything they need, [54:43] all American-made. [54:46] Together with the help of the policy updates and appropriations [54:49] passed by Congress, President Trump's War Department [54:51] has begun to turn the lights back on in our manufacturing towns [54:55] across this country, forging a lethal arsenal of freedom. [55:00] Every policy we pursue, every budgetary item we request, [55:03] serves to ensure that this department remains laser-focused [55:06] on increasing lethality and survivability from the front lines to the factory floor. [55:12] This is a historic budget, as you said, Mr. Chairman. [55:16] This is a fiscally responsible budget, and this is a warfighting budget. [55:22] Speaking of warfighting, the topic of Iran, I'm sure, will come up often today, [55:27] which I welcome. [55:28] I look forward to sharing the incredible success of our military effort [55:32] achieved in a matter of weeks. [55:35] President Trump has the courage, has had, unlike other presidents, [55:39] to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon [55:42] and that their nuclear blackmail never succeeds. [55:47] We have the best negotiator in the world driving a great deal. [55:51] Unfortunately, as I said yesterday, and I'll say it again today, [55:56] the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers [56:01] and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans. [56:06] Defeatists from the cheap seats who, two months in, [56:10] seek to undermine the incredible efforts that have been undertaken [56:13] and the historic nature of taking on a 47-year threat [56:18] with the courage no other president has had, [56:20] to great success and great opportunity for preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon. [56:27] Despite this, under President Trump, we are restoring the unbreakable might [56:30] of American manufacturing. [56:32] We're providing for our warfighters, [56:34] and we are putting the people and interests of this country first. [56:39] May Almighty God continue to watch over our troops wherever they are, [56:44] and may we honor the legacy of those brave Americans that we have lost. [56:49] This is our sacred mission, and this is what we will continue to execute on. [56:54] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [56:55] Thank you for that statement, Mr. Secretary. [56:56] General King, you're recognized. [56:58] Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, members of the committee, [57:02] and your staff who we never get to say thanks to. [57:05] Thanks for having me today. [57:06] I'm honored to be here alongside the Honorable Pete Hegseth [57:10] and the Honorable Jay Hurst to testify on the President's fiscal 2027 budget. [57:16] I'm grateful for the opportunity to testify today, [57:19] and I'm thankful for your continued partnership and support of our warfighters [57:24] defending the homeland and our interests around the world. [57:27] It's a privilege to speak with you today about the foundation of America's strength, [57:32] the 2.8 million members of our joint force, [57:36] and I am continually inspired by the soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, [57:42] guardians, Coast Guardsmen, and civilians standing the watch for the nation, [57:47] supported always by their families. [57:49] They could have chosen a much easier path, any other path, [57:53] but they volunteered for a life of purpose and passion and service. [57:58] And every single day, they rise to meet the nation's challenges, [58:02] from combat operations to critical support roles, [58:06] with the courage, tenacity, and grit that keeps our nation strong and secure. [58:12] I would also like to express my deep gratitude for the 39 members of the joint force [58:20] who've passed in operations, combat, and training during my time as the chairman, [58:26] and specifically highlight the 14 who've passed in Operation Epic Fury. [58:32] The Secretary and I are deeply grateful for each of them and their families, [58:37] and their names will never be forgotten. [58:40] As the chairman, my duty is to ensure our civilian leadership [58:44] has a comprehensive range of military options and the associated risks [58:50] required to make the nation's hardest and most complex decisions. [58:55] I owe the President, the Secretary, and the Congress the truth at every turn, [59:00] and my blueprint for this role has always been that of General George C. Marshall. [59:06] His firm commitment to civilian control and a nonpartisan military remains my constant standard. [59:14] And I strive to emulate his candor, delivering the facts leaders need to hear, [59:20] not always what they want to hear. [59:22] And once a decision is made, executing it with the absolute dedication, [59:28] while keeping the joint force precisely where it should be. [59:31] That's the demand of our profession. [59:34] As I sit before you today representing our incredible joint force, [59:38] I want to emphasize my commitment to this committee and to the Congress. [59:42] I will always follow General Marshall's steadfast example [59:46] by providing clear and candid nonpartisan military advice, [59:50] working together to ensure the military remains squarely focused on one thing, [59:55] being prepared to deter and, if called upon, fight and win our nation's war. [1:00:01] And that is our mission. [1:00:02] America's Joint Force is operational at its core, purpose-built for the realities in a complex world. [1:00:10] We're organized, trained, and equipped to execute the most demanding missions across the globe [1:00:16] with unrivaled precision. [1:00:18] And over the past year, our warfighters have consistently demonstrated exactly what it means [1:00:25] to be the most capable and most professional force on Earth. [1:00:30] Our shared goal is to ensure the joint force remains the strategic, sustains the strategic initiative [1:00:39] and advantage and ability to project power to respond to the global challenges on our nation's terms. [1:00:47] During Operation Rough Rider, Midnight Hammer, Southern Spear, Absolute Resolve, and Epic Fury, [1:00:54] the joint force executed globally integrated missions alongside our interagency [1:01:00] and international partners. [1:01:02] And once our leaders made a decision, our forces demonstrated the unmatched ability [1:01:07] to seamlessly synchronize actions and activities from the seabed to cislunar space. [1:01:14] We're able to accomplish these complex things that we are asked to do because we draw from [1:01:20] a deep reservoir of training, professionalism, and commitment. [1:01:25] Our operational tempo is high, but we're designed to sustain it, rebuilding readiness every day, [1:01:32] training professionals every day, and sharpening our edge every day. [1:01:36] And I am incredibly proud of this joint force team and the leaders at every echelon who command it. [1:01:43] As the chairman said, we are living in a complex environment. [1:01:47] Today, I look forward to discussing how we can sustain America's military advantage. [1:01:53] And I know this committee recognizes the challenges and the urgency in the environment that we face. [1:02:00] We're operating in delicate and dangerous times where risk is scaling. [1:02:05] And the complexity of the modern battlefield demands America's constant adaptation, innovation, [1:02:13] and partnership with Congress. [1:02:15] As a joint force, we're up to the challenge. [1:02:17] We're built for this environment. [1:02:19] However, our continued success is not guaranteed by our past achievements. [1:02:25] We must continue to be forward-looking and innovate together with the Congress. [1:02:30] To drive the pace of change and maintain our superiority requires timely, predictable, and sustained [1:02:38] investment. [1:02:39] And the resources we're going to discuss today are critical to modernizing the joint force [1:02:45] and ensuring whatever threats might emerge, we are prepared to defeat them, to protect our [1:02:50] interests and defend the nation and win. [1:02:53] This president's budget for 2027 supports the secretary and the department's goal of reinvigorating, [1:03:01] recharging the defense industrial base and the national industrial base, enhancing our readiness [1:03:07] and securing our military advantage. [1:03:09] To ensure that our war fighters are properly armed, globally integrated, and ready while always [1:03:16] taking care of our people. [1:03:18] And that is what truly sets America's joint force apart from each other, especially the [1:03:24] 1.8 million members, enlisted members of our joint force. [1:03:29] It is them, the character, the competence of that force that transforms our capabilities [1:03:35] into a decisive advantage. [1:03:38] And our enlisted force is represented today by the senior enlisted advisor to the chairman, [1:03:44] United States Navy Fleet Master Chief Dave Isom sitting behind me, a teammate who I greatly [1:03:50] appreciate and many of you on this committee know from his time in the Indo-Pacific. [1:03:55] While we face dynamic and dangerous times, I have absolute trust and confidence in the extraordinary [1:04:04] men and women within our joint force who every day execute the missions we ask them to quietly [1:04:11] and with precision. [1:04:13] And coupled with the American spirit to outthink, outcompete, and relentlessly innovate, we will [1:04:19] maintain our decisive edge. [1:04:22] But doing so requires your continued partnership. [1:04:24] We stand ready today to answer the nation's call. [1:04:27] I humbly ask that as we're here today in this hearing, we remember those deployed service [1:04:33] members who are out there right now doing our nation's work. [1:04:38] And may we always forget or remember our fallen and never forget them or their families who continue [1:04:45] to show us what courage looks like. [1:04:47] Thank you for your enduring support, and I look forward to your questions. [1:04:50] Thank you very much, General. [1:04:51] We appreciate your service. [1:04:52] Let's jump right in. [1:04:54] Secretary Hegseth, let's talk about the money from Reconciliation 1.0 last year. [1:05:02] There have been some complaints about the speed, but not everything we hear is actually accurate. [1:05:09] How much of the $154 billion from Reconciliation has the Pentagon put on contract? [1:05:16] My understanding, Mr. Chairman, first I'd like to say what an important vehicle reconciliation [1:05:22] was for us and how it gave us a chance coming out of FY25 to advance the president's priorities, [1:05:28] whether it's drone dominance, Golden Dome for America, shipbuilding, the defense industrial [1:05:33] base. [1:05:33] It was a critical vehicle for us. [1:05:35] The number you're looking for is about what I'm looking at, about $26 billion right now. [1:05:39] But we've got the floodgates about to open and apply to those priorities. [1:05:44] Okay. [1:05:44] So, unfortunately, you're starting a bit late through no fault of your own because the money [1:05:51] was not sent timely by the Office of Management and Budget to the department until last month. [1:05:58] That's over and done with, but it should be mentioned. [1:06:00] Mr. Secretary, where are we on the obligation rates as far as a normal appropriation bill? [1:06:10] Are we a little behind, a little ahead, or what? [1:06:13] I would say probably a little bit behind as it pertains to reconciliation, but part of [1:06:17] that is, as you know, this is a new funding vehicle for the department. [1:06:22] And twofold. [1:06:23] One, you've got to make sure you do it right and do it in a fiscally responsible way in [1:06:26] conjunction with the Congress to ensure that we meet congressional intent. [1:06:30] But also that we've been using it to energize our ability to exercise new pathways, to get [1:06:36] at problems in different and more dynamic ways that don't get stovepiped or stuck in the [1:06:40] bureaucracy. [1:06:41] So, yes, there's been some delays, but ultimately, I think it's all goodness on the other side, [1:06:47] given the new nature of this funding vehicle. [1:06:50] Right. [1:06:51] Yes. [1:06:51] And things have been done differently, and we appreciate that. [1:06:55] But, Mr. Secretary, will you commit to us that you'll keep the committee informed frequently [1:07:00] of your efforts to get all this money out the door so our industrial base can start building [1:07:06] as you have described in this new flexibility that we've provided them? [1:07:11] Absolutely. [1:07:12] And you mentioned a few things in reconciliation that you think have been game changers. [1:07:23] We've – I do – I don't think we've talked enough about some of the game changers. [1:07:29] For years, we failed to take action on rebuilding America's drone industrial base and critical [1:07:36] mineral supply chains. [1:07:38] After the last reconciliation bill and the National Defense Authorization Act, we're [1:07:44] in a very different position on drones and critical mineral supply chains, are we not? [1:07:52] Very much so. [1:07:53] Mineral supply chains, drones – we went from JIAT-401 to an autonomous warfare group. [1:07:58] We're looking at the concept of a subunified command, and you're looking at $54 billion in [1:08:03] the FY27 budget dedicated to drone dominance – UAS, counter-UAS, ensuring we can scale [1:08:10] not just exquisite drones, but also the attributable ones that are proliferating on the battlefield [1:08:15] today. [1:08:15] We need to be ahead. [1:08:16] Are there any other initiatives from last year's bill that you want to point out? [1:08:22] And you only have a minute and a half. [1:08:24] No, the investment in Golden Dome for America, the ability to get running on that, and we are [1:08:28] on schedule to deliver capabilities inside this administration. [1:08:31] Minerals and shoring up supply chains on minerals. [1:08:34] The Office of Strategic Capital, which its ability to loan, gives 10x to new entrants into [1:08:41] the department, the opportunity to fund things that wouldn't normally meet the threshold [1:08:45] for the department, but give them the running room to invest in those capabilities, and we've [1:08:50] already seen fruit from that as well. [1:08:51] And briefly, General Kaine, there's no question that Vladimir Putin's Russia is taking serious [1:08:59] action to undermine our efforts for success in Iran. [1:09:02] Is there any question about that? [1:09:06] Senator, I think there's actions and activities that are mindful of the hearing room we're [1:09:11] in, but there's definitely some action there. [1:09:14] Thank you very much. [1:09:16] Senator Reid, you're recognized. [1:09:19] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [1:09:25] Mr. Secretary, you recently fired the Honorary Chief of Staff, General Randy George, who's [1:09:30] one of the most distinguished and decorated officers of this generation. [1:09:34] General George's nomination came before us. [1:09:39] We reviewed it thoroughly, and we concurred. [1:09:42] Why did you fire General George? [1:09:46] Well, as I did then, and I'll say now, we thank General George for his service. [1:09:51] And out of respect to him and other officers, we never talk about the nature of why certain [1:09:57] officers are asked to step down. [1:10:00] But we all serve at the pleasure of the president. [1:10:02] And ultimately, my view in coming into this department, as I stated in my confirmation hearing, [1:10:08] was to change the culture of the department. [1:10:11] And it's ultimately challenging to change the culture of a department with the same people [1:10:16] who are a part of or in that department. [1:10:18] So I have made many changes with general officers. [1:10:21] We will continue to make changes as necessary with general officers. [1:10:25] And they will be in keeping with the trajectory of where we would like to take the department. [1:10:29] But it doesn't take away from the service of those. [1:10:31] And I think you will note that every officer that's been asked to leave has been treated with respect. [1:10:39] Interesting. [1:10:39] Of the two dozen officers that you have fired for reasons unrelated to performance, since [1:10:47] you have not indicated any cause, 60 percent are black or females. [1:10:53] Now, did the president direct you to single out female and black officers to be dismissed? [1:11:02] Senator, of course not. [1:11:04] And as we've emphasized at this department from the beginning, the only metric is merit. [1:11:09] But this this members on this committee and the previous leadership of this department [1:11:14] were focused on hype, you know, social engineering, race and gender in ways that we think were [1:11:19] unhealthy for the department, focusing on those things, making decisions based on those things. [1:11:24] In President Trump's War Department, we make decisions based on only one thing, merit. [1:11:29] And that's how we've made decisions going forward. [1:11:31] That's how we've made them. [1:11:32] And that's how we'll make them going forward. [1:11:33] Well, let me go back to General George. [1:11:35] What did he fail in terms of his lack of merit to continue serving? [1:11:42] As I as I said, I don't talk about the nature of dismissal. [1:11:46] No, you use it. [1:11:47] You use it as an excuse. [1:11:48] For these officers. [1:11:48] But ultimately, we want to take the department in a particular direction, certain services [1:11:52] in a particular direction. [1:11:53] And we want leadership that's running as fast in that direction as possible. [1:11:57] And in some cases, we make changes accordingly, but do so out of respect to those officers. [1:12:01] Well, I think that direction from your behavior is an intense interest in Christianity, in [1:12:10] nationalism, and in not recognizing the talents of women and non-white gentlemen. [1:12:22] And that's the wrong direction. [1:12:24] I don't know what you're insinuating, Senator, but I am not ashamed of my faith in Jesus Christ. [1:12:28] Well, you shouldn't be ashamed. [1:12:30] And if you want to shame me for it, go ahead. [1:12:32] I'm not ashamed of you. [1:12:33] But are you critical of other faiths? [1:12:38] I am a believer. [1:12:39] I'm quite open in that. [1:12:41] And our department allows for a multitude of faiths. [1:12:43] So I don't know what you're suggesting. [1:12:44] I've heard the likes of things that people like you suggest to try to smear my character. [1:12:49] And I won't give into it. [1:12:51] No, I'm sorry, Mr. Secretary. [1:12:56] But broadcasting before the national religious broadcasters stressing the need for more Christianity [1:13:04] and the military forces doesn't seem like a neutral position in which you tolerate and accept all religions. [1:13:11] Let me move on. [1:13:13] The strategic aspects of this operation in Iran. [1:13:19] The president declared that we're going to destroy their missiles and raise their missile industry to the ground. [1:13:26] And after more than 13,000 strikes, unclassified assessments conclude that Iran retains more than 40% of its drone arsenal and 60% of its ballistic missile launches compared with pre-war levels. [1:13:41] That's one of his objectives. [1:13:44] The second objective was regime change. [1:13:49] To the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. [1:13:54] And we will finish, take over your government. [1:13:57] Well, when we finish, we'll take over your government. [1:13:59] That has not succeeded. [1:14:01] And then one of his other things is the onset of the law of the president said, [1:14:06] we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon, military operations since Iran have not achieved that goal yet. [1:14:14] And it also seems to indicate that his pronouncements about Operation Midnight Hammer obliterating the nuclear policy and structure of the Iranians was false. [1:14:28] So you have not achieved any of the objectives yet that the president mentioned. [1:14:32] Well, in this setting, I won't talk about the nature of metrics, which are classified, as you know, Senator. [1:14:39] But I can say that looking at the objectives we set out to achieve from the beginning, some of which you laid out, [1:14:46] our military objectives have been stunningly effective. [1:14:51] Take, for example, their defense industrial base. [1:14:54] They're completely incapable at scale at any level of reconstituting the capabilities you referred to, [1:14:59] which is a devastating result for any country, especially one whose ambitions are as wide as Iran's. [1:15:06] So we've put the president in a very strong position to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. [1:15:12] That's the takeaway that's been underneath every single aspect of this. [1:15:15] For 47 years, Iran's trying to blackmail its way to a nuclear weapon. [1:15:20] They were closer than ever before because of bad deals under previous administration. [1:15:23] President Trump was willing to do something about it and not allow their conventional missile shield. [1:15:28] That's the North Korea strategy. [1:15:30] That's, to be clear, what Iran was pursuing, hiding their nuclear ambitions, revealing them over time, [1:15:36] and then building a conventional shield of missiles so powerful that no country would challenge them [1:15:42] for fear of what would happen if they unleashed that arsenal. [1:15:45] Weekend after the 12-day war and Midnight Hammer, which did obliterate their sights, [1:15:50] President Trump saw an opportunity because their ambitions continued to ensure that umbrella of nuclear blackmail [1:15:57] did not allow them to get to a nuclear weapon. [1:16:00] And the world is safer because of his bold and historic choice. [1:16:05] Mr. Secretary, I think that's rhetorical but not factual. [1:16:10] Thank you. [1:16:10] Thank you, Senator Reid. [1:16:14] Mr. Secretary, Mr. Hurst, General Cain, welcome. [1:16:19] Over the last several months, I've worked closely with some of the new direct reporting program managers, [1:16:25] and I've been encouraged by how they're approaching the department's most complex acquisition systems. [1:16:34] General White's pulled forward the next milestone for the Sentinel program by at least six months. [1:16:40] General Guttlein has completed the initial blueprint for the Golden Dome architecture [1:16:45] and is beginning to build it out. [1:16:47] For years, this committee has known that we must improve our ability to defend our homeland [1:16:54] against a wider variety of threats. [1:16:57] And we finally have a partner with the full backing of the department to lead the charge. [1:17:04] Mr. Secretary, what's the advantage of this new type of program management structure? [1:17:10] Well, thank you for the question, Senator. [1:17:12] It's acquisition authority, technical authority, contracting authority. [1:17:18] It's consolidating decision-making in one place under a highly screened, highly capable general, [1:17:24] General White and General Guttlein, who know that terrain extremely well [1:17:27] and understand what mistakes have been made in the past in programs of that magnitude [1:17:32] and then are given the authority to cut through the red tape. [1:17:36] That's the key. [1:17:39] Success or failure lands with them, and they know it. [1:17:41] And as a result, they're incentivized to ensure that program [1:17:44] and then given every dollar and authority needed to move it as quickly as possible. [1:17:48] So whether it's Sentinel, whether it's F-47, whether it's Golden Dome for America, [1:17:52] these critical strategic assets, the direct report construct, [1:17:58] along with Deputy Secretary Feinberg, who is a national treasure [1:18:01] and is changing the way we do business at this department, [1:18:04] is giving us a chance to ensure these critical systems are delivered. [1:18:07] Thank you. [1:18:08] And General Cain, can you give us your thoughts on why the Golden Dome received the, [1:18:15] why they must receive that requested $17 billion in funding for the fiscal year 27? [1:18:22] Well, Senator, it's, as you know, it's an essential part of our Homeland Security layered defense. [1:18:28] And as General Gutlein begins to do the work that you're asking about [1:18:33] and, frankly, helping to advance, you know, the insurance around that down payment, [1:18:40] charging the defense industrial base with those capital allocations [1:18:44] will allow them to get after it much, much quicker. [1:18:47] We appreciate the help. [1:18:49] And if there's a delay in that funding? [1:18:52] Well, hopefully there won't be, Senator. [1:18:54] Hopefully there won't be. [1:18:55] Because we've got a leader on that account, 24-7, 365. [1:18:59] But if we do, we'll always, of course, come back and talk to the Congress, [1:19:04] but also figure out what has to be true to help that constraint get removed in that production system. [1:19:11] And that's really what we're asking these leaders to do, [1:19:14] is to be able to get past the theory of constraints. [1:19:17] Okay. [1:19:17] Thank you. [1:19:18] Secretary Hegseth, I agree with your statement on nuclear deterrence. [1:19:23] When you said nothing else matters if we don't get this right, so we will. [1:19:29] We need a modernized nuclear triad and NC3 architecture [1:19:34] that can credibly deter multiple adversaries [1:19:38] instead of an insufficient nuclear force structure [1:19:42] based on fundamentally flawed assumptions made 16 years ago. [1:19:48] Our presidents must also have a more diverse set of options [1:19:52] so that they can effectively manage more complex nuclear escalation dynamics. [1:19:59] So, Mr. Secretary, how does this budget request achieve those objectives? [1:20:05] Well, thank you for your leadership on this issue for a very long time. [1:20:10] First and foremost, it invests in it. [1:20:13] $71 billion in our nuclear triad and NC3, [1:20:16] understanding that if you get that wrong, you get everything else wrong. [1:20:21] Frankly, it's why the Iran effort is so important. [1:20:24] Imagine what the situation in the region would look like [1:20:26] if Iran also wielded a nuclear weapon [1:20:29] and the limits it would put on our capabilities in those situations. [1:20:34] Our adversaries have to deal with that dilemma [1:20:36] because of the strength of our nuclear triad. [1:20:38] So, that $71 billion investment, [1:20:41] the derpums that have been put over top of it [1:20:42] to move those systems left, as you acknowledged, [1:20:46] it's just been a priority since we came into the building [1:20:50] and we're funding it accordingly. [1:20:53] And Chairman Cain, Secretary Hague said, [1:20:58] whoever would like to answer this, [1:21:00] should our nuclear command control and communication systems [1:21:04] like the SAOC be given the same level of priority [1:21:08] as Congress considers the department's budget request [1:21:13] as our triad? [1:21:17] I think so, but I'd defer to the chairman. [1:21:21] Yes, ma'am. [1:21:21] We've got to be able to see to anything. [1:21:24] So, yes, ma'am. [1:21:25] Thank you. [1:21:26] Senator Shaheen, you are recognized. [1:21:29] Thank you, Madam Chair. [1:21:32] Secretary Hague, Seth, [1:21:34] Congress enacted $400 million [1:21:35] to provide security assistance to Ukraine in January. [1:21:40] Now, the committee received a notification just yesterday [1:21:43] confirming only that the funding would go toward Ukraine. [1:21:48] It contained no details about the type of equipment, [1:21:51] no delivery timelines, [1:21:52] nothing that is typically included in these notifications. [1:21:56] And when asked about the delay in funding, [1:21:59] the committee was told that Bridge-Colby [1:22:00] was developing a spend plan, [1:22:03] but we've received nothing. [1:22:05] So, when can we expect the full spend plan [1:22:08] for this appropriation? [1:22:10] And, Madam Chair, can I, [1:22:11] if this is not already part of the record for the committee, [1:22:15] can I enter it into the record? [1:22:17] We acknowledge and are executing [1:22:23] on the European capacity-building amount [1:22:25] of $400 million that you referred to. [1:22:28] Undersecretary Colby's done a great job [1:22:30] looking at options [1:22:32] and worked very closely with our European commander, [1:22:36] General Krenkiewicz. [1:22:36] So, his requests of what makes the most sense [1:22:39] will inform what ultimately is invested in. [1:22:42] Well, this notification says that UCOM coordinated [1:22:46] on the spend plan in March, [1:22:49] but General Krenkiewicz told this committee on April 16th [1:22:53] that he had not yet been asked to review any spend plan [1:22:57] for this appropriation. [1:22:58] So, General Kain, [1:23:00] have you received the spend plan for funds in Ukraine, [1:23:03] and have you asked the UCOM commander [1:23:05] for his concurrence? [1:23:09] I do not believe so, [1:23:11] but I will find out, Senator, [1:23:12] and get back to you by the end of the day. [1:23:15] Thank you. [1:23:15] And yesterday, Mr. Hurst, [1:23:19] you told the House [1:23:20] that you needed to seek legal review [1:23:23] to appropriate the funds as Congress intended. [1:23:26] So, can you share with us [1:23:27] what the nature of that legal review is? [1:23:31] And it seems to me the law was pretty clear. [1:23:33] I saw it. [1:23:34] It was part of the defense appropriations bill [1:23:37] that we passed in January. [1:23:39] And as you know, [1:23:40] violating congressional intent on appropriating funds [1:23:43] is a violation of the Impoundment Control Act. [1:23:46] So, what's the nature of the legal review [1:23:48] that you have to get? [1:23:50] Thanks for the question, Senator. [1:23:51] What we're looking at [1:23:52] is if we could use the funds [1:23:53] in the same manner as USAI, [1:23:55] and we had our council look at that. [1:23:57] And so, they provide us a legal opinion [1:23:59] on how the funds could be used [1:24:00] to support European capacity building. [1:24:02] And can you share with this committee [1:24:04] what that legal opinion is? [1:24:07] Ma'am, I don't have a copy of that, [1:24:09] but we can ask the OGC office [1:24:10] if they can supply it to you. [1:24:12] Madam Chair, [1:24:13] can we ask that that legal opinion [1:24:15] is shared with the committee officially? [1:24:18] Thank you. [1:24:20] Also, I don't know who can answer this, [1:24:24] but it says that [1:24:27] consistent with the president's priority [1:24:31] to shift the financial burden [1:24:33] of Ukraine support to European partners, [1:24:36] the United States will seek [1:24:37] commensurate financial contributions [1:24:40] via the prioritized Ukraine requirements list, [1:24:44] or PERL, [1:24:45] from the European partners for this program. [1:24:47] So, what's the justification [1:24:50] for using PERL [1:24:52] when there's $400 million [1:24:54] in appropriated funds? [1:24:57] Can somebody answer? [1:24:58] PERL is a reflection [1:24:58] of the president's priority [1:24:59] and the belief that [1:25:00] any weapons that are supplied [1:25:02] are paid for by European partners [1:25:04] and used as they see fit, [1:25:06] whether it's Ukraine [1:25:06] or somewhere else. [1:25:07] But that was not [1:25:07] the intent of Congress [1:25:09] in providing that $400 million. [1:25:11] As I understand, [1:25:12] the PERL program, [1:25:13] the Europeans purchase those weapons [1:25:17] from the United States [1:25:18] and they pay for them. [1:25:20] But this appropriation [1:25:21] was $400 million [1:25:22] that Congress expected [1:25:24] to be provided to Ukraine, [1:25:27] not paid for by the Europeans, [1:25:30] but provided from the United States [1:25:33] to support Ukraine. [1:25:35] So, again, [1:25:36] I don't understand [1:25:37] what the justification is [1:25:39] for using PERL [1:25:40] when that's not the intent [1:25:41] that Congress provided. [1:25:44] We're following the intent [1:25:45] of European capacity building [1:25:47] but at the same time [1:25:49] recognizing that [1:25:50] wherever PERL can be utilized [1:25:51] so that the Europeans [1:25:53] contribute to that fight [1:25:54] per the burden-sharing approach [1:25:56] that this president takes [1:25:57] is important. [1:25:57] Congressional intent. [1:25:59] And that's what I'm asking you. [1:26:01] Why are you using PERL [1:26:03] to do something [1:26:04] that Congress intended [1:26:05] to go directly to Ukraine? [1:26:07] Mr. Hurst, [1:26:08] can you answer that? [1:26:09] What was the legal opinion on this? [1:26:12] Did you ask the attorneys [1:26:14] if the $400 million [1:26:17] could be used [1:26:17] for the PERL program? [1:26:19] Let's get back to you. [1:26:20] We'll take it for the record, ma'am. [1:26:22] Thank you. [1:26:23] And what portion of the funding [1:26:25] that's committed [1:26:26] from the Europeans [1:26:26] under PERL [1:26:27] is being used [1:26:28] to assist Ukraine [1:26:30] rather than restocking [1:26:32] our own shelves? [1:26:33] Can you answer that? [1:26:35] That's up to Europe. [1:26:37] Ultimately, [1:26:37] Europe pays for [1:26:38] any weapons [1:26:40] that we provide [1:26:40] and they can utilize them [1:26:42] as they see fit [1:26:42] whether it's Ukraine [1:26:43] or otherwise. [1:26:45] Thank you, Senator Shaheen. [1:26:47] There have been [1:26:48] a number of times [1:26:49] when our witnesses [1:26:50] have stated [1:26:52] both in the closed hearing [1:26:53] and up here [1:26:54] that they will get back to us. [1:26:55] And we certainly hope [1:26:56] that will happen [1:26:58] very expeditiously. [1:27:01] So thank you very much [1:27:02] and thank you, [1:27:02] Senator Shaheen. [1:27:03] Senator Cotton. [1:27:05] Thank you, gentlemen, [1:27:06] for your appearance today. [1:27:07] Mr. Secretary, [1:27:08] you provided us [1:27:09] with a chart here [1:27:10] entitled [1:27:11] The Arsenal of Freedom, [1:27:12] which includes [1:27:13] a lot of sites [1:27:14] that you've visited. [1:27:15] My favorite one [1:27:16] is down here [1:27:16] in South Arkansas, [1:27:18] Camden, [1:27:19] where you and I [1:27:20] had a chance to visit [1:27:21] just a couple months ago, [1:27:23] highlighting the great work [1:27:24] that the people [1:27:26] there are doing [1:27:26] to help rebuild [1:27:27] our arsenal of freedom. [1:27:32] Thank you, [1:27:33] first off, [1:27:33] for being there [1:27:34] and for your kind words [1:27:36] for the workforce [1:27:36] of the people [1:27:37] of South Arkansas. [1:27:38] Isn't it fair to say [1:27:40] that the war in Iran, [1:27:43] just like the Ukraine war [1:27:44] before it [1:27:46] and still today, [1:27:48] hasn't caused [1:27:49] any challenges [1:27:49] with our munitions [1:27:51] the way some [1:27:52] of our Democratic [1:27:52] colleagues would say, [1:27:54] but it's exposed [1:27:55] to a decades-old [1:27:56] problem of brittleness [1:27:57] and fragility [1:27:58] in our defense [1:27:59] industrial base [1:28:00] before you [1:28:01] and General Cain [1:28:01] took over [1:28:02] and that we're trying [1:28:02] to address right now? [1:28:05] In many ways, [1:28:05] that's precisely [1:28:06] what we're trying [1:28:07] to address. [1:28:07] We also have a situation [1:28:09] where President Trump [1:28:10] rebuilt our military [1:28:11] in the first term [1:28:12] and a lot of those munitions [1:28:14] and a lot of those capabilities [1:28:15] were sent to Ukraine [1:28:16] under the previous administration [1:28:17] to the point [1:28:19] where when we ask [1:28:19] our commanders [1:28:20] or when we look [1:28:21] at O plans, [1:28:22] the answer often is [1:28:23] that was sent to Ukraine. [1:28:25] So the recognition [1:28:25] of those two things [1:28:27] has, [1:28:27] as the president [1:28:28] gave us a charge [1:28:29] from day one [1:28:30] to rebuild [1:28:31] the arsenal of freedom [1:28:32] to fast forward, [1:28:33] not to provide [1:28:33] a little bit more [1:28:34] of each thing, [1:28:35] but 2x, 3x, 4x, [1:28:37] the number [1:28:38] of exquisite munitions [1:28:39] that we need. [1:28:40] The expenditures [1:28:41] that we've seen [1:28:41] under this administration, [1:28:42] we can account for them [1:28:44] and we ensure [1:28:44] that other O plans [1:28:45] and elsewhere [1:28:46] are well taken care of. [1:28:47] So on the munitions front, [1:28:48] we're in really good shape, [1:28:50] but we need to accelerate [1:28:51] and that's exactly [1:28:51] what we're doing. [1:28:52] And I think [1:28:52] that's an important point [1:28:53] you make [1:28:54] is that we're not just [1:28:55] trying to fill a hole [1:28:56] that was created [1:28:57] by Epic Fury [1:28:58] or by support [1:29:00] for Ukraine. [1:29:01] We're going to fill that [1:29:02] and then go much beyond [1:29:03] that for our needs [1:29:04] in the future. [1:29:05] So we're never caught [1:29:06] where we were [1:29:06] over the last [1:29:08] several years [1:29:09] with these worries [1:29:11] about munitions [1:29:11] running short. [1:29:12] Is that right, [1:29:12] Mr. Secretary? [1:29:13] That's exactly right. [1:29:14] The president [1:29:14] has charged up [1:29:15] with not just [1:29:16] replacing anything [1:29:17] but filling it up [1:29:18] as he might say [1:29:19] to the tippy top [1:29:20] and make sure [1:29:20] that the remainder [1:29:22] of this term [1:29:23] and future presidents [1:29:24] have all the munitions [1:29:25] they need [1:29:25] for any level [1:29:26] of contingencies, [1:29:27] especially considering [1:29:28] the dangerous world [1:29:29] we live in. [1:29:30] I want to turn now [1:29:30] to Operation Epic Fury. [1:29:31] It's been a smashing [1:29:32] military success. [1:29:34] Unfortunately, [1:29:35] we have suffered [1:29:36] casualties [1:29:37] to include soldiers [1:29:38] killed in the line [1:29:39] of action. [1:29:41] Obviously, [1:29:41] our military takes [1:29:42] the greatest steps [1:29:44] possible to protect [1:29:45] our troops, [1:29:46] whether they are in action [1:29:47] or whether they are [1:29:48] on bases in the region. [1:29:50] No war, [1:29:51] though, [1:29:51] is antiseptic. [1:29:52] Mr. Secretary, [1:29:53] could you explain [1:29:54] some of the steps [1:29:54] we've taken [1:29:55] to try to minimize [1:29:56] to the greatest extent [1:29:56] we can [1:29:57] the number of casualties [1:29:59] we've taken [1:29:59] in the Middle East? [1:30:01] First of all, [1:30:01] every day [1:30:03] we live to ensure [1:30:04] that we follow through [1:30:05] on the legacy [1:30:05] of those who gave everything. [1:30:07] So that's front [1:30:07] and center for us. [1:30:08] But I can also say, [1:30:09] and the chairman [1:30:10] may want to weigh in, [1:30:11] from the beginning [1:30:12] of looking at [1:30:12] the possibility [1:30:14] of this contingency, [1:30:15] setting the defense [1:30:16] and ensuring [1:30:17] that Admiral Cooper [1:30:18] and everyone [1:30:18] throughout CENTCOM [1:30:19] had every possible [1:30:20] measure they could [1:30:21] to ensure [1:30:22] that our troops [1:30:23] are protected [1:30:23] and force protection [1:30:24] was maximized [1:30:25] was the top priority. [1:30:27] Moving assets [1:30:27] to the region, [1:30:28] we integrated [1:30:29] our air defenses [1:30:30] with local Gulf [1:30:31] Gulf countries [1:30:32] to ensure [1:30:33] our shot doctrine [1:30:33] was maximized, [1:30:34] whether it's [1:30:35] ballistic missiles [1:30:36] or on drones. [1:30:38] Flowing in [1:30:39] the most recent [1:30:40] capabilities [1:30:41] to ensure [1:30:42] we can intercept drones. [1:30:43] Moving troops [1:30:44] off the X. [1:30:45] I think what people [1:30:46] mostly don't know [1:30:47] is that a massive effort [1:30:49] was undertaken [1:30:49] before this conflict [1:30:51] to move as many humans [1:30:52] off of targets [1:30:53] to other places [1:30:54] and maintain [1:30:55] operational security [1:30:56] about where they might be [1:30:57] to minimize the space [1:30:59] with which Iran [1:31:00] could hit. [1:31:01] We always knew [1:31:02] something getting through [1:31:03] was a tragic possibility. [1:31:05] But I can assure you [1:31:06] from our perspective [1:31:07] that was priority number one [1:31:09] as it was Admiral Cooper's [1:31:10] to ensure that [1:31:11] fortification [1:31:12] and missile defenses [1:31:13] were right there [1:31:14] when we went on offense [1:31:15] if we had to. [1:31:17] General Cain, [1:31:17] do you have anything to add? [1:31:19] Well, in addition to [1:31:20] just again [1:31:21] mourning our fallen [1:31:22] from the 103rd, [1:31:23] what I'll add [1:31:24] to the Secretary's comments [1:31:25] is after every tragic loss, [1:31:28] commanders at every echelon [1:31:29] within our Joint Force [1:31:30] are going to go back [1:31:32] and look at [1:31:33] what was our plan [1:31:34] and what lessons [1:31:35] we can learn from this [1:31:36] so that we protect [1:31:37] and defend [1:31:38] our soldiers, sailors, [1:31:40] and other members [1:31:41] of the Joint Force [1:31:42] the next time. [1:31:43] Thank you. [1:31:43] And I know you do [1:31:44] and I just wanted [1:31:44] to give you the opportunity [1:31:45] to speak to what you've done [1:31:46] to try to prevent [1:31:47] casualties [1:31:49] and minimize them. [1:31:50] Obviously, again, [1:31:51] no war is antiseptic. [1:31:52] One final question. [1:31:52] I understand you've been accused [1:31:53] of lying to the president [1:31:54] of the president. [1:31:55] Mr. Hexeth, [1:31:56] have you lied to the president [1:31:56] at all about what's happening [1:31:58] in Iran or Epic Fury? [1:32:00] No, only tell the truth [1:32:01] to the president. [1:32:02] General Cain, [1:32:03] have you lied to the president [1:32:04] about what's happening [1:32:04] in Iran or Operation Epic Fury? [1:32:06] Never. [1:32:07] I suspected that would be [1:32:08] your answer, [1:32:08] but since you were accused of it [1:32:09] and deep staters are leaking [1:32:10] to the media about it as well, [1:32:12] I just wanted to give you [1:32:12] a chance to answer on the record [1:32:13] that, of course, [1:32:14] you've always given the president [1:32:15] a completely accurate picture [1:32:16] of what's happening. [1:32:17] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:32:18] Thank you very much, [1:32:18] Senator Cotton. [1:32:19] Senator Gillibrand [1:32:20] and then Senator Rounds. [1:32:22] Thank you, gentlemen, [1:32:22] for appearing before this committee [1:32:24] and thank you [1:32:25] for the closed session [1:32:26] prior to this. [1:32:27] I don't know [1:32:28] if you fully appreciate [1:32:29] how much the American people [1:32:31] do not support this war. [1:32:33] It is an unauthorized war. [1:32:35] Normally, [1:32:36] when you come to Congress, [1:32:37] it's a way [1:32:37] for the American people [1:32:38] to be part of that discussion. [1:32:42] The American people, [1:32:43] particularly in my state of New York, [1:32:45] are upset [1:32:46] for a lot of reasons. [1:32:47] First of all, [1:32:48] this war is costing [1:32:49] so much money, [1:32:51] over $25 billion already, [1:32:53] estimates $1 billion a day, [1:32:55] and they're feeling it [1:32:56] every single day [1:32:57] at the gas pump [1:32:58] with higher prices [1:32:59] for both fuel, [1:33:01] for diesel, [1:33:02] for gasoline, [1:33:03] for their cars. [1:33:04] They're also feeling it [1:33:05] with higher grocery costs [1:33:07] and they're exhausted. [1:33:08] They are truly exhausted. [1:33:10] On top of that, [1:33:12] on top of that, [1:33:14] they have so many grave concerns [1:33:16] about how this war [1:33:17] is being prosecuted. [1:33:19] They read in the paper [1:33:21] that 22 schools have been hit. [1:33:24] They read in the paper [1:33:26] about a girl's school, [1:33:28] hundreds getting killed. [1:33:30] We have a debate going on [1:33:32] in this country about AI, [1:33:35] a serious debate about AI. [1:33:38] And I haven't heard yet from you [1:33:39] that you will not allow AI [1:33:41] to make final targeting determinations [1:33:43] even when nuclear weapons [1:33:45] are being used. [1:33:46] That's a huge issue [1:33:47] that we need to discuss. [1:33:49] So I want to start [1:33:50] from the top, [1:33:51] Secretary Hegseth. [1:33:53] Why do you continue [1:33:54] to prosecute a war [1:33:54] that the American people [1:33:55] aren't behind? [1:33:56] First of all, [1:34:00] I appreciate the opportunity [1:34:02] for that closed session [1:34:03] where we had a unsurprisingly [1:34:04] very different discussion [1:34:05] than we have here [1:34:06] with the cameras on. [1:34:08] We support this. [1:34:09] Because my job [1:34:10] is to represent New Yorkers [1:34:11] and I can tell you [1:34:12] when I talk to them [1:34:14] all across my state, [1:34:16] they are furious [1:34:17] and they expect me [1:34:19] to explain to them [1:34:20] why they are furious. [1:34:22] And Senator, [1:34:23] when I talk to Americans [1:34:24] and especially when I talk [1:34:25] to the troops, [1:34:26] they are grateful [1:34:27] for a president [1:34:27] who has the courage [1:34:28] to take on this threat [1:34:29] after 47 years [1:34:30] of what Iran has done [1:34:31] targeting and killing Americans [1:34:32] and what it would mean [1:34:34] to the world [1:34:34] if Iran's nuclear ambitions [1:34:36] were actually achieved. [1:34:38] So the question [1:34:38] I would ask to you [1:34:39] and to others is [1:34:40] what is the cost [1:34:41] of a nuclear-armed Iran? [1:34:43] What is the cost [1:34:43] to the American people [1:34:44] if the world's most dangerous regime [1:34:46] has a nuclear weapon? [1:34:48] But the truth is [1:34:49] they don't want war [1:34:49] coming to this shore [1:34:50] and when you do [1:34:51] a decapitation operation, [1:34:53] the likelihood is going [1:34:54] to be exchanged [1:34:55] in the United States. [1:34:56] There's no evidence [1:34:57] that we are safer [1:34:58] because of this war. [1:34:59] We did not have any evidence [1:35:00] that Iran intended [1:35:02] to imminently attack [1:35:03] this country [1:35:04] in any way, shape, or form. [1:35:05] So I disagree [1:35:07] with your assessment [1:35:07] that we are under threat. [1:35:09] Do you not believe them [1:35:10] when they say [1:35:11] death to America? [1:35:12] Listen, [1:35:13] our adversaries [1:35:14] use rhetoric all the time. [1:35:16] What I'm concerned about [1:35:17] is we are not safer [1:35:19] and I would just like to know [1:35:20] why you have not sought [1:35:22] the support [1:35:23] of the American people [1:35:24] and three out of five Americans [1:35:26] are against this war today. [1:35:29] I believe we do have [1:35:31] the support [1:35:31] of the American people [1:35:32] and we have briefed regularly [1:35:34] what this mission looks like [1:35:35] and why it's critically important [1:35:37] that we undertake it. [1:35:37] And I would remind you [1:35:38] and this group [1:35:39] that we're two months in [1:35:41] to an effort [1:35:42] and many congressional Democrats, [1:35:44] as I pointed out, [1:35:45] want to declare defeat [1:35:46] two months in. [1:35:48] Iraq took how many years? [1:35:50] Afghanistan took how many years? [1:35:51] And they were nebulous missions [1:35:52] that people went along with. [1:35:54] This is different. [1:35:55] This is a defined mission set [1:35:57] that we have had great success [1:35:59] in pursuing [1:35:59] against a determined enemy [1:36:01] who seeks nuclear weapons. [1:36:03] And I'm proud of the opportunity [1:36:05] to remind the American people [1:36:06] because they believe in it as well [1:36:07] that they can't have it. [1:36:09] You don't care [1:36:10] whether the American people [1:36:11] support this war. [1:36:11] And the American people [1:36:12] are quite smart. [1:36:14] They understand [1:36:14] and see through spin. [1:36:16] They know that a regime [1:36:17] that says death to America [1:36:18] that seeks nuclear weapons [1:36:20] and the ability to deliver. [1:36:21] Did they lie about [1:36:22] the range of their missiles? [1:36:23] Because I saw a 4,000-kilometer missile [1:36:26] get shot at... [1:36:27] How much more were you asking [1:36:28] American people to pay [1:36:28] for this war? [1:36:29] Diego Garcia. [1:36:30] Right now, do you want it [1:36:30] a billion dollars a day? [1:36:31] Do you want it two billion dollars a day? [1:36:33] You're asking for $200 billion more [1:36:35] to fund this war [1:36:36] and to make sure we have... [1:36:37] We didn't ask for $200 billion. [1:36:38] I don't know where you got [1:36:39] that number from, Senator. [1:36:40] I think you got it from the news, [1:36:41] which you should be careful [1:36:42] what you read in the news. [1:36:44] Okay, Mr. Hegseth. [1:36:45] Here, Secretary Hegseth. [1:36:46] Here's a few more. [1:36:47] Let's talk about [1:36:48] how you're prosecuting the war. [1:36:50] What is your response [1:36:51] to targeting that has resulted [1:36:54] in the destruction of schools, [1:36:57] hospitals, civilian places? [1:36:59] Why did you cut by 90% [1:37:01] the division that's supposed [1:37:02] to help you not target civilians? [1:37:05] And do you know the impact [1:37:07] of a strategic failure at a war [1:37:09] when you have so many [1:37:10] civilian casualties? [1:37:12] You may have tactically [1:37:13] completed a mission well, [1:37:14] but strategically is not [1:37:16] meeting your goals [1:37:17] because of the harms to civilians. [1:37:18] What is the cost of that? [1:37:19] Let's leave time for an answer. [1:37:22] No military, no country [1:37:24] works harder at every echelon [1:37:26] to ensure they protect [1:37:27] civilian lives [1:37:28] than the United States military. [1:37:30] And that is an ironclad commitment [1:37:31] that we make, [1:37:32] no matter how, [1:37:33] no matter what systems we use. [1:37:34] And why did you cut [1:37:35] the department by 90%? [1:37:37] Thank you, Senator Gillibrand. [1:37:38] There'll be other rounds [1:37:39] of questions. [1:37:41] Senator Rounds, [1:37:41] you are now recognized. [1:37:43] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:37:45] First of all, [1:37:46] thank you to all of you [1:37:47] for your service to our country. [1:37:48] Let me just allow you [1:37:52] to finish the answer [1:37:53] a little bit [1:37:53] with regard to the senator [1:37:55] from New York. [1:37:57] Does the United States military [1:37:59] ever target a civilian center? [1:38:03] Well, thank you, Senator. [1:38:04] Unlike our adversaries, [1:38:06] unlike radical Islamists, [1:38:09] unlike those that target civilians [1:38:10] or use civilians as shields, [1:38:13] the United States military [1:38:14] never targets civilians [1:38:17] and puts constructs in place [1:38:19] to ensure that [1:38:20] the maximum extent possible, [1:38:22] we do not harm [1:38:23] or hit civilians. [1:38:25] Is war a difficult place [1:38:27] with a lot of complexities? [1:38:28] Absolutely right. [1:38:29] But no country does more [1:38:30] and no department does more [1:38:31] than our department. [1:38:33] Do you still have [1:38:34] all of the resources necessary [1:38:35] to assure that [1:38:36] every opportunity [1:38:39] to eliminate that as a threat [1:38:41] in terms of that happening, [1:38:43] do we still have the resources [1:38:44] available in the department [1:38:45] to make sure [1:38:46] that we do the best we can [1:38:48] never to hit a civilian target? [1:38:49] Every resource necessary [1:38:51] at every echelon [1:38:53] is available, [1:38:54] legal, intel, and otherwise, [1:38:56] to ensure that we minimize [1:38:57] at every extent possible [1:38:59] civilian casualties. [1:38:59] And the suggestion was made [1:39:01] that somehow AI might be used [1:39:03] without a human in the loop, [1:39:04] which is a classic [1:39:05] anthropic talking point, [1:39:07] which is half of what [1:39:08] we talked about previously. [1:39:10] There is a human in the loop [1:39:11] on decisions that are made. [1:39:13] And the suggestion otherwise [1:39:15] is to suggest that somehow [1:39:16] AI is running targeting. [1:39:18] Thank you. [1:39:21] Right now, [1:39:23] part of what we're also [1:39:23] talking about is [1:39:24] not just are we engaged [1:39:26] right now in terms of [1:39:27] trying to eliminate [1:39:28] the threat from Iran [1:39:29] in terms of being [1:39:30] a nuclear-armed country, [1:39:32] but we've also got, [1:39:33] staring with us as well, [1:39:34] the fact that we have [1:39:35] an ongoing principle threat [1:39:37] with regard to [1:39:38] a pacing threat with China. [1:39:40] The dual-capable B-21 raider [1:39:42] will be a critical part [1:39:44] of both our conventional [1:39:45] and our nuclear deterrence [1:39:47] against China and Russia. [1:39:49] As you know, [1:39:50] the Air Force's program [1:39:50] of record includes [1:39:51] plans to procure 100 B-21s, [1:39:55] but many national security [1:39:56] experts and leaders, [1:39:57] including STRATCOM commander [1:39:59] Admiral Corral [1:40:00] and Indo-PACOM commander [1:40:02] Admiral Paparo [1:40:03] are calling for a greater [1:40:05] number of B-21s. [1:40:05] Admiral Paparo testified here [1:40:08] last week that he would [1:40:09] favor buying 200 B-21s. [1:40:13] Secretary Hegseth [1:40:14] and Chairman Cain, [1:40:16] could you speak to the progress [1:40:18] and the importance [1:40:18] of the B-21 program? [1:40:20] And if you agree [1:40:21] with the growing sentiment [1:40:22] that the U.S. needs [1:40:23] to revisit the B-21 program [1:40:25] of record and assess [1:40:26] the requirement [1:40:27] for at least 200 B-21s [1:40:29] to match the global threat, [1:40:31] would you speak just to [1:40:33] exactly what that would mean [1:40:34] and what the probability [1:40:35] of that is? [1:40:37] Thank you for the question, [1:40:38] and I appreciate the fact [1:40:40] that you're listening to [1:40:41] and hearing from [1:40:42] combatant commanders [1:40:43] because that's who [1:40:43] we listen to as well, [1:40:44] who are looking at [1:40:45] the operational plans [1:40:46] and what would be required [1:40:47] to ensure we deter [1:40:48] and, if necessary, defeat. [1:40:50] Assets like the B-21 [1:40:51] or the F-47 [1:40:52] are critical to that. [1:40:53] That's why we're funding them [1:40:54] and increasing the funding, [1:40:56] and where necessary [1:40:57] would increase the allocation. [1:40:59] And I think you see [1:41:00] a budget that reflects [1:41:02] the reality that we have [1:41:04] to invest in more capabilities [1:41:06] to include the B-21, [1:41:08] which is ahead of schedule, [1:41:10] and we will be funding [1:41:12] to the tune of $6 billion [1:41:13] and we believe [1:41:13] will require a lot more [1:41:15] over $100 in the future, [1:41:17] but I'll defer to the chairman. [1:41:18] Hey, sir, [1:41:19] thank you for the question. [1:41:20] Working through the JROC [1:41:22] and the vice chiefs, [1:41:24] I'll absolutely stack hands [1:41:26] around assessing the requirement, [1:41:28] and we're glad to see B-21 [1:41:30] on the flight path, [1:41:32] no pun intended, [1:41:33] that it's on [1:41:34] through operational testing. [1:41:37] On the specific numbers, [1:41:39] the one sort of [1:41:40] big picture strategic thing [1:41:42] I want to say [1:41:43] is we want to make sure [1:41:45] as we think through [1:41:46] what does air power [1:41:46] of the future look like [1:41:48] based on the evolving threat [1:41:49] that we're staying [1:41:50] well in front of it. [1:41:52] And so that's the only thing [1:41:53] we'll look at in the assessment, [1:41:54] but I'm on board [1:41:55] with assessing the numbers. [1:41:57] I want to make sure [1:41:58] we're buying ahead [1:41:59] of the technology development curve [1:42:01] so that we give [1:42:02] all those young war fighters [1:42:03] out there [1:42:04] the capabilities [1:42:05] that we need [1:42:06] well into the future. [1:42:07] Is there any question [1:42:08] at all that we're going [1:42:09] to need more than 100 B-21s? [1:42:13] I want to go back. [1:42:14] Here's how I'll look at it, [1:42:15] Senator. [1:42:16] I want to go back [1:42:16] and look at the O plans [1:42:17] right now that we have [1:42:19] to make sure [1:42:20] that we allocate those numbers. [1:42:22] So I don't believe so, [1:42:23] but I do want to take [1:42:25] the due diligence time [1:42:26] if you'll allow me [1:42:27] to look at that, Senator. [1:42:28] I appreciate the opportunity [1:42:30] to visit with you [1:42:31] and to clarify [1:42:32] what that number [1:42:33] should look like [1:42:34] in the near future. [1:42:35] Yes, sir. [1:42:35] Thank you. [1:42:36] Thank you very much, [1:42:36] Senator Brown. [1:42:37] Senator Blumenthal. [1:42:38] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:42:40] Thank you for being here today. [1:42:43] I want to talk [1:42:44] about the costs of war. [1:42:47] The costs of war include [1:42:48] caring for our veterans. [1:42:52] We've had an estimate [1:42:53] from Mr. Hurst yesterday [1:42:55] that the cost to date [1:42:58] in dollars for this war [1:43:00] has been $25 billion, [1:43:01] which I believe [1:43:03] is well below [1:43:04] the actual cost [1:43:06] based on everything [1:43:07] that I've heard, [1:43:08] everything available to us [1:43:10] in various kinds [1:43:12] of settings. [1:43:13] And I'm going to ask [1:43:14] for a more accurate assessment. [1:43:17] But we also know [1:43:18] that about 400 service members [1:43:20] have been wounded [1:43:21] as a result of this war. [1:43:24] When they retire, [1:43:27] when they come home, [1:43:29] their retirement pay [1:43:30] will be docked [1:43:31] dollar for dollar [1:43:32] for every disability benefit [1:43:38] dollar they receive. [1:43:40] Secretary Hegseth, [1:43:41] I'd like your commitment [1:43:43] that you will support [1:43:45] the Major Richard Starr Act [1:43:47] that will eliminate [1:43:48] this wounded warrior tax. [1:43:51] I'm sure you're familiar with it. [1:43:53] Tens of thousands [1:43:54] of servicemen and women [1:43:56] now are reduced [1:43:59] in their retirement pay [1:44:00] literally for every dollar [1:44:02] of disability benefits [1:44:04] they receive. [1:44:06] Well, I appreciate [1:44:07] your focus on this issue. [1:44:08] And I will tell you [1:44:09] of the, you mentioned [1:44:10] roughly 400 [1:44:11] that have been injured, [1:44:12] thankfully over 90% [1:44:13] are returned to duty. [1:44:14] But that doesn't mean [1:44:16] they wouldn't have [1:44:16] a residual challenge. [1:44:18] And we're tracking that [1:44:19] at point of injury [1:44:20] to ensure that that is noted [1:44:22] even though they're [1:44:23] returned to duty. [1:44:23] But what I'd like [1:44:24] is your commitment [1:44:25] that you will support [1:44:26] the Major Richard Starr Act. [1:44:28] As I have said [1:44:29] in the past [1:44:29] to other organizations, [1:44:30] we support [1:44:31] the Richard Starr Act. [1:44:32] Thank you. [1:44:33] On the issue of cost, [1:44:38] Mr. Hurst, [1:44:40] does that $25 billion estimate [1:44:43] include all of the costs [1:44:44] in terms of damage [1:44:46] to our bases, [1:44:50] the need to replace planes [1:44:53] and munitions, [1:44:55] and the costs of injuries [1:45:00] to our servicemen and women? [1:45:03] Senator, so for the [1:45:05] Milcon facilities [1:45:05] replacement cost, [1:45:07] that's probably the hardest [1:45:08] thing to estimate right now [1:45:09] because we don't know [1:45:09] what our future posture [1:45:10] is going to be [1:45:11] or the future construction [1:45:12] of those bases. [1:45:12] Well, you owe it to us. [1:45:13] You're here to ask [1:45:16] for appropriations. [1:45:18] Of course. [1:45:18] And I would like [1:45:20] a more accurate estimate [1:45:23] of what has been done [1:45:25] that will require replacement [1:45:27] and renovation [1:45:29] as well as the other costs. [1:45:32] And I think $25 billion [1:45:33] is probably less than half, [1:45:37] maybe less than a quarter [1:45:38] of the total cost of war, [1:45:39] which is the reason why [1:45:40] the supplemental request [1:45:43] is much higher. [1:45:44] So I think you owe it [1:45:45] to the American people [1:45:46] to give us the straight talk [1:45:49] about what the costs have been. [1:45:51] Mr. Secretary, [1:45:53] I know you have characterized [1:45:56] this war as a astonishing [1:46:01] military success, [1:46:02] to use your words yesterday, [1:46:04] but the American people [1:46:07] aren't buying it. [1:46:08] And I know you feel [1:46:12] the American people [1:46:13] are seeing through [1:46:14] the abstruse stuff [1:46:17] that is thrown at them. [1:46:19] But one point is irrefutable, [1:46:22] which is America [1:46:23] never succeeds in war [1:46:25] unless the American people [1:46:26] are behind it. [1:46:28] And if what you're seeing [1:46:31] as success now is winning, [1:46:34] I would hate to see [1:46:36] what losing looks like, [1:46:38] because none of the shifting [1:46:40] and contradictory objectives [1:46:41] of the war so far [1:46:42] have been achieved. [1:46:44] Likewise, let me ask you, [1:46:46] yesterday, [1:46:47] the president said [1:46:48] that Ukraine has been, [1:46:50] quote, [1:46:50] militarily defeated. [1:46:53] I assume you don't agree [1:46:55] with that assessment. [1:46:59] The negative nature [1:47:01] in which you characterize [1:47:02] the incredible [1:47:03] and historic effort [1:47:04] in Iran [1:47:04] is part of the reason, [1:47:06] Senator, [1:47:06] why the American people [1:47:07] view it the way they do. [1:47:08] It's why I looked out [1:47:09] at our press corps, [1:47:10] the Pentagon, [1:47:10] and called them [1:47:11] the Pharisees [1:47:11] and the press. [1:47:12] It's because they look [1:47:13] for every problem. [1:47:14] Well, I'm asking you [1:47:14] about Ukraine. [1:47:15] You believe Ukraine [1:47:17] has been militarily defeated. [1:47:20] You missed the plank. [1:47:20] I would submit, [1:47:21] based on my nine trips [1:47:23] to Ukraine, [1:47:25] that is a false narrative [1:47:27] that the president's buying [1:47:28] from Vladimir Putin. [1:47:29] We are two months [1:47:29] into a historic military [1:47:30] success in Iran, [1:47:31] and you want to call it [1:47:32] a defeat, [1:47:33] and it's defeatist [1:47:34] Democrats like you [1:47:35] that cloud the mind [1:47:36] of the American people [1:47:37] and would otherwise [1:47:38] fully support [1:47:39] preventing Iran [1:47:40] from having a nuclear weapon. [1:47:41] administration, [1:47:43] and they are bravely [1:47:44] fighting our fight, [1:47:47] and that is the reason [1:47:47] that I'm pursuing [1:47:48] the Russian sanctions bill, [1:47:50] which is bipartisan, [1:47:51] along with Senator Graham, [1:47:52] and why I hope [1:47:53] we will recognize [1:47:54] our obligation [1:47:55] to release that $400 million, [1:47:57] which we've appropriated. [1:47:58] Thank you, [1:47:58] Senator Blumenthal. [1:48:00] Senator Ernst. [1:48:02] Thank you, [1:48:02] Mr. Chair, [1:48:03] and thank you, [1:48:03] gentlemen, [1:48:04] for being here today. [1:48:05] I really do appreciate [1:48:07] your time to be with us. [1:48:09] Before I begin, [1:48:11] some of my questions, [1:48:12] I do want to start [1:48:13] with something personal, [1:48:14] and both to you, [1:48:15] Secretary Hegseth, [1:48:17] and to the chairman, [1:48:19] I want to thank you both [1:48:20] for the time that you take [1:48:22] to recognize our fallen [1:48:24] and those that have given, [1:48:27] of course, [1:48:27] during this administration, [1:48:29] given their all. [1:48:30] You have traveled to Dover [1:48:32] and have been there [1:48:33] to greet those families [1:48:34] and to welcome home [1:48:35] the fallen. [1:48:36] I've been there with you, [1:48:38] and Iowa has been hit, [1:48:40] in particular, [1:48:41] very hard. [1:48:42] We lost two of our [1:48:43] Iowa National Guardsmen [1:48:45] from the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, [1:48:47] 34th Infantry Division, [1:48:49] Secretary Hegseth, [1:48:50] you know full well, [1:48:51] the 34th, [1:48:52] but we also lost six members [1:48:55] from the 103rd Sustainment Command [1:48:57] Expeditionary [1:48:58] based out of Des Moines, Iowa, [1:49:01] during this current conflict, [1:49:03] and again, [1:49:04] your presence there [1:49:05] meant a lot to the families. [1:49:07] It also meant a lot to me, [1:49:09] so thank you very much [1:49:11] for taking the time [1:49:12] to do that. [1:49:13] Secretary Hegseth, [1:49:15] you and I have had [1:49:15] many discussions [1:49:16] over the course [1:49:19] of many months now [1:49:20] regarding general officer positions, [1:49:22] and, you know, [1:49:24] I believe that we were [1:49:26] operating in good faith [1:49:27] as we talked through [1:49:28] a couple of those [1:49:29] in particular, [1:49:30] two Iowans, [1:49:31] General Mingus [1:49:32] and General Randy George. [1:49:34] I was disappointed [1:49:36] to see that [1:49:37] their retirements [1:49:38] were hastened [1:49:39] over what I believed [1:49:42] had been set out [1:49:44] by you [1:49:44] and the administration. [1:49:46] So I just want [1:49:47] to take the time [1:49:48] to list out [1:49:49] some of General Randy George's [1:49:51] accomplishments [1:49:52] as Army Chief of Staff. [1:49:54] He pulled the Army [1:49:56] out of its worst [1:49:56] recruiting crisis [1:49:57] since the Vietnam era, [1:50:00] exceeding fiscal year 2024 [1:50:01] recruiting goals, [1:50:03] and welcoming more [1:50:04] than 61,000 new soldiers. [1:50:07] Recruitment numbers [1:50:08] that both you [1:50:09] and the president [1:50:09] talk a lot about [1:50:11] and rightfully so. [1:50:12] He cut 5% [1:50:14] of general officer positions, [1:50:16] 12 positions [1:50:17] that were deemed [1:50:17] as non-essential [1:50:19] in the Army, [1:50:20] and he reduced [1:50:21] the Army headquarters [1:50:22] by 1,000 personnel. [1:50:24] He co-authored [1:50:25] the Army Transformation Initiative, [1:50:28] which is a comprehensive [1:50:29] response aligned [1:50:30] with your directives, [1:50:32] and he testified here [1:50:34] in front of Congress [1:50:34] and took a lot of heat [1:50:36] defending that Army transformation. [1:50:40] He was suddenly let go [1:50:41] at the beginning [1:50:42] of April 2026. [1:50:45] General George's merits, [1:50:47] which I firmly believe in, [1:50:49] he enlisted [1:50:50] at the age of 17. [1:50:52] He is a West Point graduate. [1:50:54] He had four combat deployments. [1:50:56] He served in Desert Storm, [1:50:58] Iraq, and Afghanistan. [1:51:00] He had 38 years [1:51:01] of honorable service. [1:51:03] He achieved [1:51:04] the greatest Army recruitment [1:51:05] and modernization effort [1:51:07] in a generation. [1:51:10] So I want to thank him [1:51:11] for his service, [1:51:13] and I would like to enter [1:51:15] into the record, [1:51:16] Mr. Chair, [1:51:17] the speeches that I did [1:51:20] honoring General Randy A. George [1:51:22] on his retirement [1:51:24] and General James J. Mingus [1:51:26] on his retirement as well. [1:51:28] Without objection, [1:51:29] they'll be admitted. [1:51:30] Thank you very much. [1:51:32] I'd like to talk [1:51:33] a little bit about the audit, [1:51:35] Mr. Secretary. [1:51:37] I saw the video [1:51:38] that you posted this week [1:51:39] calling on the department [1:51:41] to pass a clean audit, [1:51:43] and thank you for doing that. [1:51:44] It's something that we talked [1:51:46] about during your confirmation hearing. [1:51:48] Fiscal responsibility [1:51:49] at the department [1:51:50] has been a priority of mine [1:51:52] for a very long time, [1:51:54] and I think it's time [1:51:55] that we build on that momentum. [1:51:57] It's extremely important, [1:51:59] and that's why I'm pushing [1:52:01] for my Receipts Act [1:52:02] in this year's NDAA. [1:52:04] It's focused on improving [1:52:06] financial traceability [1:52:07] and accountability [1:52:08] across the department, [1:52:10] and if you could talk [1:52:11] a little bit more [1:52:12] about the efforts [1:52:14] in making sure [1:52:15] that we are being [1:52:16] much more accountable [1:52:17] to our taxpayers. [1:52:18] What is that effort [1:52:19] going to entail? [1:52:20] When will we see [1:52:21] a clean audit? [1:52:23] As I said, Senator, [1:52:24] thank you for your work [1:52:25] on the audit. [1:52:26] That has been a priority [1:52:27] of our department [1:52:28] from day one, [1:52:30] and we put in place [1:52:31] goals and benchmarks [1:52:32] to get to FY28, [1:52:34] get to 28 for a clean audit. [1:52:36] The Joint Task Force audit, [1:52:37] which we announced, [1:52:38] was a reflection [1:52:38] of even more capabilities [1:52:40] we want to push forward [1:52:41] and centralize authority [1:52:42] to make sure it happens. [1:52:44] Jay's been involved [1:52:45] from the beginning. [1:52:46] We also have a new IG [1:52:47] who, the new IG's focus, [1:52:49] one of his focus points [1:52:50] is precisely this, [1:52:52] and he's prepared [1:52:53] to work with us [1:52:54] to ensure we reach it. [1:52:55] So I think at every level [1:52:56] and through this budget, [1:52:57] it's a focus. [1:52:58] Okay, thank you. [1:52:59] We look forward [1:53:00] to seeing a clean audit. [1:53:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:53:02] Thank you, Senator Ernst. [1:53:02] Senator Hirono. [1:53:05] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:53:06] Before I begin my questions, [1:53:08] I'd like to take a moment [1:53:09] to highlight the true costs [1:53:12] of this war, [1:53:13] both for the military [1:53:14] and everyday Americans [1:53:16] and the true costs [1:53:18] of the president's illegal war [1:53:20] with Iran. [1:53:21] And since the start of the war, [1:53:23] 13, 14 brave U.S. service members [1:53:25] have been killed [1:53:26] and more than 400 have been wounded. [1:53:29] We've burned through [1:53:30] over $25 billion in taxpayer money [1:53:32] with no end in sight. [1:53:34] And the fiscal year 27 budget request [1:53:37] is a massive 42% increase [1:53:39] from last year. [1:53:42] Hundreds of critical munitions [1:53:43] have been expended [1:53:45] and deployments [1:53:46] have been extended [1:53:47] directly impacting [1:53:49] service members' quality of life, [1:53:52] military readiness, [1:53:53] and our ability [1:53:54] to deter our adversaries. [1:53:58] The relationships [1:53:59] with our allies, [1:54:02] some of our closest allies [1:54:03] and partners, [1:54:04] have been fractured. [1:54:05] And the closure [1:54:06] of the Strait of Hormuz, [1:54:08] which somehow caught [1:54:10] the president by surprise, [1:54:12] even though he had [1:54:13] to have been warned, [1:54:15] is directly contributing [1:54:16] to the affordable crisis [1:54:18] that Americans are facing. [1:54:20] Energy costs are skyrocketing [1:54:22] with the price of gas [1:54:23] now at its highest level [1:54:25] in almost four years. [1:54:28] Instability has driven interest rates [1:54:30] to its highest level [1:54:31] since September of last year. [1:54:34] The cost of fertilizer [1:54:35] is spiking, [1:54:36] which will have a direct impact [1:54:38] on the cost of food. [1:54:40] This illegal war [1:54:41] is driving up costs, [1:54:43] undermining readiness, [1:54:44] and alienating our allies [1:54:46] with neither a clear rationale [1:54:49] for starting this war [1:54:51] nor an exit strategy. [1:54:54] And when the president was asked [1:54:55] how long he'll let this war continue, [1:54:59] he said, [1:55:00] do not rush me. [1:55:02] I have a question [1:55:04] for General Kane [1:55:05] relating to women serving [1:55:08] in combat. [1:55:09] And I'd like to hear [1:55:11] your best military advice. [1:55:13] Does the mere fact [1:55:14] of women being [1:55:16] in combat armed units [1:55:17] lower standards [1:55:19] or readiness [1:55:20] if they meet [1:55:21] the physical standards? [1:55:24] Well, ma'am, [1:55:25] the standards are set [1:55:27] by the civilians. [1:55:28] We have examples [1:55:29] of women leading well [1:55:31] across the joint force. [1:55:34] I'll highlight [1:55:35] some of our current commanders [1:55:37] engaged in the fight [1:55:38] in Epic Fury, [1:55:40] specifically one [1:55:41] of our bomb squadrons [1:55:42] are led by [1:55:43] an extraordinary female leader [1:55:45] who's doing great work. [1:55:46] But those standards [1:55:48] are set by... [1:55:49] I'm sorry. [1:55:49] I didn't mean to step on you. [1:55:50] I think your answer [1:55:51] is that in fact [1:55:52] it does not lower [1:55:53] standards of readiness. [1:55:55] Second question, [1:55:56] should every service member, [1:55:57] regardless of gender, [1:55:58] be permitted [1:55:59] to serve in any role, [1:56:01] including the combat arms, [1:56:02] if they meet [1:56:03] the standards established? [1:56:07] Yes or no? [1:56:07] Is that to me, ma'am? [1:56:09] Over the last decade [1:56:10] since combat arms [1:56:12] have been open to women, [1:56:13] have you personally [1:56:14] seen any instance [1:56:17] where the standard [1:56:18] resulted in a degradation [1:56:20] in combat effectiveness? [1:56:23] Apologies, [1:56:23] I didn't hear [1:56:24] your first question. [1:56:26] The, you know, [1:56:27] people policies [1:56:28] are all set [1:56:28] by the civilian leaders [1:56:30] in the government. [1:56:31] Could you repeat [1:56:32] the question again? [1:56:33] I'm sorry, ma'am. [1:56:33] Over the last decade [1:56:35] since combat arms [1:56:36] have been open to women, [1:56:37] have you personally [1:56:38] seen any instance [1:56:40] where the standard [1:56:41] resulted in a degradation [1:56:42] in combat effectiveness? [1:56:45] Again, I'll highlight [1:56:46] that the standards [1:56:47] are set by our civilian leaders. [1:56:49] Women continue [1:56:50] to perform well [1:56:53] across a range [1:56:54] of MOSs [1:56:55] and jobs [1:56:56] and AFSCs [1:56:57] that are out there. [1:56:58] I do need to get [1:56:59] to a question [1:57:00] for Secretary Hickson. [1:57:01] Prior to your nomination [1:57:03] hearing, [1:57:04] you said women [1:57:05] shouldn't serve [1:57:06] in combat arm units. [1:57:07] At your confirmation hearing, [1:57:10] you reversed course [1:57:11] and, excuse me, [1:57:14] and you basically said [1:57:15] as long as the women [1:57:16] meet the standards, [1:57:18] they should be able [1:57:19] to serve. [1:57:19] But recently, [1:57:20] you ordered a review [1:57:21] of the effectiveness [1:57:22] of women in combat roles [1:57:24] and I am concerned [1:57:25] you are laying [1:57:26] the groundwork [1:57:27] to reverse the policy [1:57:29] allowing women [1:57:30] to serve [1:57:30] in these units [1:57:31] because right now [1:57:33] current law, [1:57:33] if you want to change [1:57:34] this policy, [1:57:36] a current law requires [1:57:37] you to submit [1:57:37] a report to Congress [1:57:38] justifying such a change. [1:57:42] So, did you order [1:57:43] the review [1:57:44] to support [1:57:44] a potential decision [1:57:45] to overturn [1:57:46] the policy [1:57:47] of having women [1:57:48] in combat roles? [1:57:51] We are laser-focused [1:57:52] on standards. [1:57:53] The highest male standard [1:57:54] for every combat arms position [1:57:55] should be the standard [1:57:57] and 10 years into this, [1:57:58] we are reviewing it [1:57:59] which is what [1:58:00] the American people [1:58:00] would expect. [1:58:01] Also, there is nothing [1:58:02] illegal about a war [1:58:03] that defends [1:58:04] the American people [1:58:05] and prevents Iran [1:58:06] from having a nuclear bomb. [1:58:07] You know, [1:58:08] you didn't answer [1:58:08] the question [1:58:09] because the reason [1:58:10] that you are asking [1:58:11] for this review [1:58:12] I think has to do [1:58:13] with your earlier position [1:58:15] that you don't think [1:58:16] women should serve [1:58:17] in combat roles. [1:58:18] So, now we have [1:58:19] this study [1:58:19] and I would like [1:58:20] to ask you [1:58:20] will you reveal [1:58:23] this study [1:58:24] to the public, [1:58:25] to the American people, [1:58:26] will you make [1:58:27] the study public? [1:58:29] Will you make [1:58:30] that study? [1:58:31] Yes or no? [1:58:32] We're doing the study [1:58:33] for that very reason [1:58:34] to ensure that real science [1:58:36] is applied to this question [1:58:37] and not social engineering [1:58:39] like the previous administration. [1:58:40] We appreciate your assurance [1:58:42] that that will be made public. [1:58:44] Yeah, I think it's really [1:58:45] critical that the study [1:58:46] be made. [1:58:47] Thank you, ma'am. [1:58:49] Senator Scott. [1:58:49] Thank you. [1:58:50] Well, first, [1:58:51] thank each of you [1:58:52] for being here. [1:58:53] Secretary Hitchfick, [1:58:54] you can talk about [1:58:54] you've had the job [1:58:55] for a little bit. [1:58:56] What are you most proud of [1:58:57] and what are your [1:58:58] biggest challenges? [1:59:01] Well, I appreciate [1:59:01] the question [1:59:02] and what I'm most proud of [1:59:05] is the incredible men [1:59:07] and women [1:59:08] who serve in our nations [1:59:09] in uniform [1:59:10] and what they are capable of [1:59:12] when they're given [1:59:12] a clear mission [1:59:13] and unleashed to do it. [1:59:15] And I think the best reflection [1:59:17] of the success [1:59:18] of President Trump [1:59:19] and this War Department [1:59:21] is the historic [1:59:22] recruiting success [1:59:23] and the historic morale [1:59:25] amongst our ranks. [1:59:26] I would encourage [1:59:27] every member of this committee, [1:59:29] Democrat or Republican, [1:59:31] go into the formations. [1:59:33] Go into the Air Force formations, [1:59:34] the Army formations, [1:59:35] the Marine Corps formations [1:59:36] and talk to corporals, [1:59:37] talk to sergeants, [1:59:38] talk to lieutenants, [1:59:39] talk to captains, [1:59:41] talk to colonels. [1:59:42] And what you will find [1:59:43] are men and women [1:59:45] more inspired to serve [1:59:46] in the military [1:59:46] than they have been [1:59:47] in a generation. [1:59:48] And you see that [1:59:49] in the young Americans [1:59:50] who are rushing [1:59:51] to recruiting stations [1:59:52] at historic numbers, [1:59:55] 30-year highs [1:59:56] across the force. [1:59:56] We're hitting our [1:59:57] recruiting numbers [1:59:58] halfway through the year. [2:00:00] Why is that? [2:00:01] Because the American people [2:00:02] look at what we're doing [2:00:03] at the War Department [2:00:05] by getting back to basics [2:00:06] and they're attracted to that. [2:00:08] Same with our retention rates, [2:00:10] which are now merit-based. [2:00:11] Our best sergeants, [2:00:13] our best leaders [2:00:14] are staying. [2:00:15] That's exactly what we want. [2:00:16] So we've made changes [2:00:17] to change the environment. [2:00:20] The renaming of the department [2:00:21] to the War Department [2:00:22] is not just a name. [2:00:23] In fact, it's restoring it [2:00:25] to the original name [2:00:26] of the department [2:00:26] set by George Washington, [2:00:28] but it's an ethos as well. [2:00:30] That warrior ethos [2:00:31] lives inside the heart [2:00:32] of each one of these men [2:00:33] and women [2:00:33] and we're unleashing it. [2:00:35] I'm proud of the, [2:00:36] I mean, you name it, [2:00:37] the border, the missions, [2:00:38] yes, those are all [2:00:38] incredible demonstrations [2:00:39] of that, [2:00:40] but it's the people [2:00:41] and the urgency [2:00:42] of Americans [2:00:43] to want to be a part of it [2:00:44] that is the best [2:00:44] affirmation, Senator. [2:00:46] Thank you. [2:00:47] So we've talked about [2:00:48] the importance of not [2:00:49] relying on Chinese drugs [2:00:51] for our military. [2:00:52] Can you just talk about [2:00:53] what you're doing [2:00:55] to make sure [2:00:56] that we don't continue [2:00:57] to rely on China [2:00:58] for anything, [2:00:58] including our drugs? [2:01:01] Oh, drugs. [2:01:02] Yeah. [2:01:03] Absolutely. [2:01:04] We can't be dependent [2:01:05] on China on anything [2:01:06] that's critical [2:01:07] to our supply chain, [2:01:08] even if it's [2:01:09] the national industrial base [2:01:10] and not just [2:01:11] the defense industrial base. [2:01:13] And you've been [2:01:13] a leader on that. [2:01:14] This committee's been [2:01:15] a leader on that. [2:01:15] Onshoring, [2:01:16] bringing manufacturing here, [2:01:18] bringing critical capabilities here, [2:01:21] is central to the interagency [2:01:24] and the NSC, [2:01:24] but also our department. [2:01:26] If any critical weapon system [2:01:28] is reliant upon something [2:01:29] China could change [2:01:31] at a moment's notice, [2:01:31] then we have a true challenge [2:01:35] to our ability to produce [2:01:36] for the American people. [2:01:37] And so we're finding [2:01:38] all of those, [2:01:38] changing them, [2:01:39] onshoring it, [2:01:40] reviving the defense industrial base [2:01:43] allows us to ensure [2:01:45] we're separated from China [2:01:46] on anything that's critical. [2:01:48] Thank you. [2:01:49] Can you talk about [2:01:49] the importance [2:01:50] of foreign military sales [2:01:51] to our allies [2:01:52] and our partners [2:01:52] and what you're doing [2:01:53] to make sure that, [2:01:55] whether it's [2:01:57] what you're doing right now [2:01:58] in Iran [2:01:58] or any potential conflict [2:02:00] in Asia, [2:02:01] our partners have the best [2:02:02] assets to be, [2:02:05] it'll be a great partner. [2:02:07] Absolutely. [2:02:08] Foreign military sales [2:02:09] has been a huge problem [2:02:11] for a long time [2:02:11] because the department [2:02:12] didn't prioritize it [2:02:13] and organize to deliver [2:02:14] efficiently on it. [2:02:16] So we're working [2:02:16] with the State Department. [2:02:17] We've changed the way [2:02:18] we do business internally. [2:02:19] The executive order, [2:02:20] the America First [2:02:21] armed strategy, [2:02:22] prioritizes what we sell [2:02:24] and to whom, [2:02:25] a catalog approach. [2:02:26] But it took us, [2:02:27] this committee would be [2:02:29] astonished to know [2:02:31] how long it took us [2:02:31] just to get our arms [2:02:32] around who we're selling [2:02:33] to what [2:02:34] and by what processes, [2:02:35] which means there was [2:02:36] no strategy behind [2:02:37] ensuring we're sending [2:02:38] the proper demand signal [2:02:39] to industry [2:02:40] and delivering those systems [2:02:41] on time [2:02:42] and under budget [2:02:43] to those countries, [2:02:44] which you can imagine [2:02:45] is frustrating to partners [2:02:46] who are relying on those [2:02:47] to be able to step up [2:02:48] and burden share. [2:02:49] So foreign military sales [2:02:51] is critical [2:02:52] to our own defense [2:02:53] industrial base. [2:02:53] More customers. [2:02:54] More customers [2:02:55] for our companies [2:02:56] that employ more [2:02:57] American workers [2:02:57] to ensure our allies [2:02:58] are properly armed [2:02:59] for the fights [2:03:00] and they can stand [2:03:01] alongside us. [2:03:01] So FMS is a big one [2:03:03] for us, Senator. [2:03:04] General Cain, [2:03:05] I just want to commend you [2:03:06] and everybody in the military [2:03:07] for what you did [2:03:09] in Venezuela [2:03:11] and then what you've done [2:03:13] in Iran. [2:03:13] Can do the willingness [2:03:16] of the American military [2:03:17] to fight and win, [2:03:19] do you think it's changing [2:03:20] the calculus [2:03:20] for Beijing and Moscow? [2:03:24] Well, Senator, [2:03:25] I know they're watching [2:03:26] and I'm incredibly proud [2:03:28] of the joint force [2:03:31] and their ability [2:03:32] to integrate [2:03:33] and synchronize [2:03:34] a range of activities [2:03:35] and I suspect [2:03:36] that my counterpart [2:03:38] in China [2:03:39] is watching very closely [2:03:41] and envious of [2:03:42] what our joint forces [2:03:45] is capable of doing [2:03:46] if ordered to do so. [2:03:48] Well, thank each of you [2:03:49] and thank everybody [2:03:49] that serves under you. [2:03:51] Thank you, Senator Scott. [2:03:52] Senator Cain. [2:03:53] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [2:03:54] Mr. Hurst, [2:03:55] I want you to just confirm [2:03:57] something for me [2:03:57] about the President's [2:03:58] submitted budget. [2:04:00] $1.5 trillion [2:04:02] is about a 40-plus percent [2:04:04] increase from FY26. [2:04:06] Am I right [2:04:07] that not a penny [2:04:08] of that [2:04:09] is to go to [2:04:10] a pay raise [2:04:12] for the 800,000 civilians [2:04:14] who work [2:04:15] for the Department of Defense? [2:04:17] We have 4.2 percent [2:04:20] of a civilian salary [2:04:21] set aside for bonuses [2:04:22] to make sure [2:04:23] we can recognize [2:04:24] high performers [2:04:24] in the civilian workforce. [2:04:26] But you have guaranteed [2:04:27] pay raises [2:04:27] for the active duty [2:04:28] in the Guard and Reserve [2:04:29] component [2:04:30] but no guaranteed raises [2:04:31] for civilians. [2:04:31] There are guaranteed raises [2:04:33] for the military [2:04:33] but in the last year [2:04:35] this Department's [2:04:35] given out more [2:04:36] civilian bonuses. [2:04:37] Well, if we're going [2:04:38] to increase [2:04:39] the defense budget [2:04:40] by that much [2:04:41] I would hope [2:04:41] the committee [2:04:41] would take a look [2:04:42] at this. [2:04:43] Chairman Cain, [2:04:45] and I like the sound [2:04:46] of that, Chairman Cain. [2:04:48] General Cain, [2:04:49] I want to ask you [2:04:50] a question [2:04:50] about Southern Spear. [2:04:52] It's an operational question. [2:04:53] I know from your background [2:04:54] that you carefully act [2:04:56] to keep military actions [2:04:58] within the rules of war. [2:05:01] What legal justification [2:05:02] could there possibly be [2:05:05] that would allow [2:05:07] the U.S. military [2:05:07] to strike boats [2:05:09] in international waters [2:05:10] and kill the occupants [2:05:12] of those boats [2:05:12] without a showing [2:05:14] of evidence [2:05:15] that there's narcotics [2:05:16] on those boats? [2:05:18] Well, sir, [2:05:19] as you know [2:05:20] our job is to [2:05:21] show the range [2:05:22] of options [2:05:23] the associated risks [2:05:25] and then take [2:05:26] those execution [2:05:27] orders [2:05:28] transmit them [2:05:29] down to the COCOMs [2:05:30] on legally appropriate [2:05:32] and legally [2:05:33] backstopped actions. [2:05:35] Could you give me [2:05:36] a legal justification [2:05:38] that would authorize [2:05:40] striking boats [2:05:42] that do not have evidence [2:05:43] that they're carrying narcotics? [2:05:45] I don't have, [2:05:46] I apologize, [2:05:46] I didn't mean to interrupt you. [2:05:47] I don't have a copy [2:05:48] of the order issued [2:05:51] to Southcom with me today. [2:05:52] It's classified [2:05:53] in its own right [2:05:54] which clearly articulates [2:05:56] based on a variety [2:05:57] of criteria [2:05:58] what constitutes [2:05:59] a valid military [2:06:01] and legally valid target [2:06:03] in that theater. [2:06:05] And I know, [2:06:06] I just want to say [2:06:06] I know and trust [2:06:07] that our commanders [2:06:09] at Echelon [2:06:10] are rigorously following [2:06:12] that legal opinion [2:06:14] and those legal boundaries [2:06:15] upon which we've been [2:06:17] issued those orders. [2:06:18] And General Cain, [2:06:20] I would encourage again [2:06:20] my colleagues, [2:06:22] I am at a disadvantage. [2:06:23] I've seen the legal opinion [2:06:24] but I can't talk about it [2:06:26] because it's classified. [2:06:27] I've seen the targeting criteria [2:06:29] but I can't talk about them [2:06:30] because they're classified. [2:06:32] I've seen the secret list [2:06:33] of DTOs [2:06:35] against whom we have [2:06:36] declared war [2:06:36] that even they haven't [2:06:38] been informed of [2:06:38] but I can't talk about it [2:06:40] because it's classified. [2:06:42] But I would urge [2:06:42] all of my colleagues [2:06:43] to go to the SCIF [2:06:45] and read the targeting criteria [2:06:48] and get briefed about it [2:06:49] and then also look [2:06:50] at all of the files [2:06:51] of all the strikes [2:06:52] that have taken place. [2:06:53] I've done that [2:06:53] with the first 46 strikes or so. [2:06:57] And I think there's [2:06:58] a profound mismatch [2:07:00] between what is occurring [2:07:02] and the underlying assumptions [2:07:03] in the legal opinion. [2:07:05] And I would just encourage [2:07:06] my colleagues [2:07:06] to dig into this [2:07:07] to Secretary Hegseth [2:07:08] and General Kaine. [2:07:10] The War Powers Resolution [2:07:11] specifies that a war [2:07:12] initiated by a president [2:07:14] without congressional approval [2:07:15] must be concluded [2:07:17] within 60 days. [2:07:18] It can be extended [2:07:20] by an additional 30 days [2:07:22] if, quote, [2:07:23] the president determines [2:07:24] and certifies to Congress [2:07:25] in writing [2:07:26] that unavoidable military necessity [2:07:28] respecting the safety [2:07:30] of the U.S. Armed Forces [2:07:31] requires the continued use [2:07:33] of such armed forces [2:07:34] in the course of bringing [2:07:36] about a prompt removal [2:07:37] of such forces. [2:07:39] We're right at the 60-day deadline. [2:07:41] Is the president intending [2:07:43] to either seek [2:07:44] congressional authorization [2:07:46] for the war in Iran [2:07:47] or send us the legally [2:07:49] required certification [2:07:51] that he needs [2:07:52] an additional 30 days [2:07:53] to remove U.S. forces [2:07:55] from the war? [2:07:57] Just briefly [2:07:58] on the previous question, [2:07:59] we do know [2:08:00] that these are designated [2:08:01] terrorist organizations, [2:08:02] so we treat them [2:08:03] like the al-Qaeda [2:08:03] of our hemisphere, [2:08:04] just as a note. [2:08:05] But that was not [2:08:06] the question I asked. [2:08:07] I know there's more [2:08:08] to that question. [2:08:09] I just think it's important [2:08:10] for the public [2:08:10] to understand that. [2:08:11] There's no willy-nilly [2:08:12] targeting of drug boats. [2:08:14] We know exactly [2:08:14] who these people [2:08:15] are affiliated with. [2:08:16] I was asking about [2:08:16] what's on the boats. [2:08:17] On Iran, [2:08:19] ultimately, [2:08:20] I would defer [2:08:21] to the White House [2:08:21] and White House counsel [2:08:22] on that. [2:08:22] However, we are [2:08:23] in a ceasefire right now, [2:08:25] which our understanding [2:08:25] means the 60-day clock [2:08:27] pauses or stops [2:08:29] in a ceasefire. [2:08:30] So you're not in. [2:08:31] It's our understanding, [2:08:32] just so you know. [2:08:33] Okay, well, [2:08:33] I do not believe [2:08:34] the statute would support that. [2:08:36] I think the 60 days [2:08:37] runs maybe tomorrow, [2:08:38] and it's going to pose [2:08:39] a really important [2:08:41] legal question [2:08:42] for the administration. [2:08:44] We have serious [2:08:45] constitutional concerns, [2:08:46] and we don't want [2:08:47] to layer those [2:08:48] with additional [2:08:48] statutory concerns. [2:08:50] I yield back, [2:08:51] Mr. Chair. [2:08:52] Thank you very much. [2:08:53] Senator Sullivan. [2:08:54] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:08:55] Thank you, gentlemen, [2:08:56] for your testimony. [2:08:58] Mr. Secretary, [2:08:59] I mentioned in the [2:09:00] classified hearing today, [2:09:01] but I do think [2:09:02] the $1.5 trillion [2:09:03] top line is historic. [2:09:06] It meets the needs. [2:09:08] And the other thing, [2:09:09] as I mentioned [2:09:09] in our earlier meeting, [2:09:11] you know, [2:09:12] the President's done [2:09:12] a really good job [2:09:13] of getting other allies, [2:09:16] NATO and Asian allies, [2:09:17] to step up, [2:09:18] meet a 5% GDP [2:09:20] of defense spending, [2:09:22] and in many ways, [2:09:24] that's what this [2:09:24] is doing as well. [2:09:26] So isn't that important [2:09:27] as well in terms [2:09:28] of our global leadership, [2:09:29] what you and the President [2:09:30] are providing? [2:09:31] Is that example as well? [2:09:34] I think the more [2:09:35] we step up, [2:09:36] the more the world [2:09:37] should look at [2:09:37] the American leadership [2:09:38] and example [2:09:39] and step up as well. [2:09:40] And they're going [2:09:40] to do that. [2:09:41] It helps. [2:09:42] We will, [2:09:43] it remains to be seen [2:09:44] whether some of our allies [2:09:45] actually step up [2:09:46] to their commitments, [2:09:47] but that is the hope. [2:09:48] Let me go to [2:09:49] an element of that budget [2:09:51] that I mentioned [2:09:52] in the classified hearing. [2:09:53] You know, [2:09:54] I always like to put [2:09:54] this chart up [2:09:56] in different hearings. [2:09:56] We have the examples. [2:09:58] So we have a lot [2:09:59] of our adversaries, [2:10:00] the Chinese, [2:10:01] the Russians, [2:10:02] in my AOR, [2:10:04] in the Arctic, [2:10:05] in the North Pacific. [2:10:06] These are the numbers [2:10:06] just recently, [2:10:07] eight incursions, [2:10:09] easy incursions [2:10:10] by the Russians, [2:10:11] by the Chinese. [2:10:13] By the way, [2:10:13] the green ones [2:10:14] are joint Russian-Chinese [2:10:15] strategic bomber task forces, [2:10:18] joint Russian-Chinese [2:10:20] naval task forces. [2:10:22] This is America, right? [2:10:23] This is a really important [2:10:25] part of our national defense. [2:10:28] So I was pleased to see [2:10:30] that one of the elements [2:10:31] in the budget [2:10:32] was what's referred to [2:10:35] by the Air Force [2:10:35] as the J-Bear [2:10:36] Fighter Town recapitalization, [2:10:40] given how strategically important [2:10:42] that Air Force base is. [2:10:45] General, [2:10:46] can you talk a little bit [2:10:47] about that recapitalization? [2:10:49] It's for building out [2:10:54] what is a very strategic base [2:10:56] but old. [2:10:57] A lot of these facilities [2:10:59] are from the 1950s. [2:11:02] The goal in the Air Force's language [2:11:04] was to have a recapitalization [2:11:06] to provide a new [2:11:07] state-of-the-art fighter facility [2:11:09] capable of supporting [2:11:10] multiple platforms now [2:11:12] and well into the future. [2:11:14] $6.9 billion total authorization, [2:11:17] $2.2 billion appropes [2:11:20] for this year. [2:11:20] Can you talk about the importance? [2:11:22] I was glad to host you [2:11:23] at J-Bear recently. [2:11:25] Can you talk about the importance [2:11:26] of this element [2:11:27] of the president's budget? [2:11:28] Yes, Senator. [2:11:28] Thank you for that. [2:11:30] Our investment up at J-Bear [2:11:33] is essential to modernizing [2:11:35] the nation's ability [2:11:36] to project power [2:11:37] and capabilities [2:11:38] and really bolsters [2:11:40] our effort [2:11:41] in not only the Indo-Pacific [2:11:43] but also in the high north [2:11:45] in the Arctic, [2:11:45] which I know is something [2:11:47] that's passionate to you. [2:11:49] The Arctic is certainly [2:11:50] becoming more operationally [2:11:52] and strategically valuable [2:11:54] and we need to be thinking [2:11:56] proactively around [2:11:58] how we're going to set [2:11:59] the conditions for us [2:12:00] to offer a range of options [2:12:02] to the secretary [2:12:03] and the president [2:12:04] about power projection [2:12:05] across a range of capabilities [2:12:08] and fighters is certainly [2:12:09] one of them [2:12:10] and the recap effort [2:12:11] that's there. [2:12:12] You know, it is, [2:12:13] it is our ability [2:12:15] to protect that flank [2:12:16] is a national imperative [2:12:17] and something that we want [2:12:18] to keep focused on [2:12:20] and we appreciate the efforts [2:12:22] across this committee [2:12:23] and the rest of the Congress [2:12:25] to help us with that. [2:12:26] Thank you. [2:12:27] Mr. Secretary, [2:12:28] one of the things [2:12:28] that I've been talking about [2:12:30] and I think is really important now [2:12:32] is American energy [2:12:34] and us being energy dominant. [2:12:36] The president put [2:12:37] a recent executive order out [2:12:40] highlighting the need [2:12:42] to accelerate [2:12:43] the ability to produce LNG [2:12:46] in America. [2:12:49] We have a huge LNG project [2:12:51] that we're getting close [2:12:52] to getting off the ground [2:12:54] in Alaska [2:12:54] would be huge [2:12:55] for our military [2:12:56] in terms of energy [2:12:58] for our military, [2:12:59] huge for our allies [2:13:00] and can I get your commitment [2:13:02] to work with me [2:13:03] and this committee? [2:13:04] You mentioned in your testimony [2:13:06] the Office of Strategic Capital. [2:13:09] This to me [2:13:10] is one of these projects [2:13:12] that I think would be [2:13:14] absolutely critical [2:13:15] for our national security. [2:13:16] We talked about this [2:13:17] just in Admiral Paparo's testimony [2:13:20] last week. [2:13:21] He was talking about [2:13:22] the Alaska LNG project [2:13:23] is hugely strategic, [2:13:25] kind of a private sector, [2:13:27] American counter [2:13:28] to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. [2:13:30] I think it would be [2:13:31] a great opportunity [2:13:31] to work with the Office [2:13:32] of Strategic Capital. [2:13:33] Can I get your commitment, [2:13:35] Mr. Secretary, [2:13:35] to do that on this project? [2:13:37] Yes, very aware [2:13:38] of that project [2:13:39] and I think it's [2:13:40] the Office of Strategic Capital [2:13:41] is a great place [2:13:42] to look at partnering. [2:13:44] Great. [2:13:44] I appreciate that. [2:13:45] Finally, [2:13:46] I'm just going to ask [2:13:47] 47 years of war [2:13:49] that we've had with Iran. [2:13:52] My colleagues [2:13:52] on the other side [2:13:53] of the aisle, [2:13:54] you know, [2:13:54] they talk about [2:13:55] these civilian casualties. [2:13:59] These are all horrible, [2:14:01] horrible, [2:14:02] whenever there's [2:14:02] any civilian casualties, [2:14:03] but just general, [2:14:05] do our forces [2:14:07] target civilians ever? [2:14:11] Sure, [2:14:12] never intentionally [2:14:13] and I don't know [2:14:15] in any particular case [2:14:16] of unintentional, [2:14:17] but we don't do that. [2:14:18] That's not core [2:14:19] to our American values [2:14:20] or how we approach things. [2:14:21] Do our adversaries [2:14:23] target civilians? [2:14:24] Yes, sir. [2:14:25] Like the Kudz Force? [2:14:26] Yes, sir. [2:14:27] I think it's really important [2:14:28] as we keep bringing [2:14:29] this topic up [2:14:30] to remember who we are [2:14:32] and who our adversaries are. [2:14:33] Thank you, Senator Sullivan. [2:14:33] Senator Sullivan, [2:14:34] do you ask unanimous consent [2:14:37] to have the two exhibits [2:14:38] added to the record? [2:14:39] Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. [2:14:40] Without objection, [2:14:41] that will be done. [2:14:42] Senator King. [2:14:44] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:14:45] We've had a lot of discussion [2:14:46] about Iran. [2:14:46] I'd like to talk about [2:14:47] several other aspects [2:14:48] of the budget. [2:14:49] The first is [2:14:50] the way the budget's [2:14:51] been constructed. [2:14:53] Ever since I've been here [2:14:54] until last year, [2:14:56] we've had bipartisan budgets [2:14:58] and bipartisan [2:14:59] National Defense Authorization Acts [2:15:01] and passed by majorities. [2:15:04] I voted for all of them. [2:15:06] And all of a sudden, [2:15:07] in this year, [2:15:08] 25% of the budget [2:15:09] is essentially [2:15:11] out of the process [2:15:12] and will be passed, [2:15:14] presumably, [2:15:15] through some kind [2:15:15] of reconciliation, [2:15:16] which is, by definition, [2:15:18] a partisan exercise. [2:15:20] Mr. Secretary, [2:15:22] why not all those items, [2:15:24] housing or Golden Dome, [2:15:25] whatever, [2:15:26] why aren't they [2:15:27] in the regular budget? [2:15:28] Why do we suddenly [2:15:29] have a two-part budget [2:15:31] where this committee [2:15:32] and the Congress [2:15:33] generally has oversight [2:15:35] and input [2:15:36] to a process [2:15:38] where a quarter [2:15:39] of the budget [2:15:40] is essentially [2:15:41] a slush fund? [2:15:42] Well, Senator, [2:15:44] I appreciate the question. [2:15:45] I wouldn't characterize [2:15:45] a quarter of it [2:15:46] as a slush fund, [2:15:47] but I recognize [2:15:48] that we see it [2:15:49] in totality [2:15:50] as a $1.5 trillion budget. [2:15:53] But why the separation? [2:15:54] Why the two pieces? [2:15:55] Why not just a regular budget? [2:15:56] As you know, [2:15:57] there are multiple dynamics [2:15:58] that play into [2:15:59] why there are multiple vehicles, [2:16:00] but we are fully committed [2:16:02] with working [2:16:02] to the committee [2:16:03] to ensure [2:16:03] that the right vehicles [2:16:04] are utilized [2:16:05] to get precisely [2:16:06] this amount, [2:16:06] $1.5 trillion. [2:16:07] Why should we? [2:16:08] You didn't answer my question. [2:16:10] Why are there two pieces? [2:16:11] Why not? [2:16:12] For time immemorial, [2:16:13] we've done budgets here. [2:16:15] To my knowledge, [2:16:16] we've never used [2:16:17] this reconciliation process [2:16:18] for a defense budget before. [2:16:20] What's going on? [2:16:22] Why not? [2:16:23] My understanding [2:16:23] of the reason [2:16:24] for the vehicles [2:16:25] is to ensure [2:16:26] we actually get [2:16:28] to $1.5 trillion, [2:16:29] which is the most [2:16:30] important bottom line. [2:16:31] The most important bottom line [2:16:32] is that top line [2:16:33] of $1.5 trillion [2:16:34] to fund what we need, [2:16:35] and we think this process [2:16:36] is the most effective way [2:16:37] to get there, Senator. [2:16:38] Well, what you're really saying [2:16:41] is we don't want to deal [2:16:42] with that pesky Congress [2:16:43] and their appropriation process. [2:16:45] I think this is significant, [2:16:47] Mr. Chairman, [2:16:48] that we're basically abdicating [2:16:50] a quarter of our responsibility [2:16:52] in terms of this budget. [2:16:53] Let me move on. [2:16:56] One of the factors [2:16:57] of this budget [2:16:58] that hasn't gotten [2:16:58] any publicity [2:16:59] is that there's zero funding [2:17:02] for Ukraine. [2:17:02] That's correct, [2:17:03] isn't it, Mr. Hurst? [2:17:05] That's correct. [2:17:05] There's no USAI funding [2:17:07] in this budget. [2:17:07] And there was $400 million [2:17:11] that was appropriated [2:17:12] last year [2:17:13] by a bipartisan, [2:17:14] bicameral act of Congress. [2:17:17] What's become of that money? [2:17:18] My understanding is [2:17:19] not a dollar of it [2:17:20] has been dispersed. [2:17:24] It was released [2:17:25] very recently, [2:17:26] and again, [2:17:27] we got these funds, [2:17:28] I believe, in March, [2:17:29] and it takes time [2:17:30] for funds to flow [2:17:31] through the department, [2:17:31] but it's going to get [2:17:32] put to work very shortly. [2:17:34] We're going to work [2:17:34] to make sure [2:17:35] we use these funds [2:17:36] in the most appropriate [2:17:37] way possible. [2:17:37] I didn't want [2:17:38] Senator Sullivan [2:17:39] to be the only one [2:17:39] with an exhibit. [2:17:41] This indicates [2:17:42] what's happened [2:17:43] to our support [2:17:44] for Ukraine [2:17:44] over a period of years. [2:17:46] The orange bars [2:17:47] are U.S. support. [2:17:49] The blue bars [2:17:50] are Europe. [2:17:51] As you see, [2:17:52] Europe is 99% [2:17:54] in the year 2026. [2:17:56] Same thing [2:17:57] with humanitarian [2:17:58] and other aid [2:17:58] to Ukraine, [2:18:00] and yet this is, [2:18:02] I believe, [2:18:03] an existential struggle [2:18:04] for the future [2:18:05] of democracy [2:18:06] where we had [2:18:07] an aggressive country [2:18:08] invade a neighboring country [2:18:09] without any justification [2:18:11] whatsoever. [2:18:12] And by the way, [2:18:13] that invading country [2:18:14] is the major winner [2:18:16] so far [2:18:16] of the war in Iran. [2:18:18] They've gotten, [2:18:19] the estimates are, [2:18:20] $40 to $80 billion [2:18:21] of additional revenues [2:18:23] from oil [2:18:24] and the relief [2:18:25] of sanctions [2:18:25] as a result [2:18:26] of the war in Iran. [2:18:28] Secretary Hegseth, [2:18:29] why are we [2:18:30] abandoning Ukraine? [2:18:32] Senator, [2:18:32] if you would hold [2:18:33] that chart back up, [2:18:34] I think that's [2:18:36] a beautiful chart. [2:18:37] I think that's [2:18:38] exactly what we want. [2:18:40] We want Europe [2:18:40] stepping up [2:18:41] and funding [2:18:42] and shouldering [2:18:42] the burden. [2:18:43] They are rich countries [2:18:44] worth $20 trillion [2:18:45] versus economy [2:18:46] of $2 trillion. [2:18:48] Europe can step up, [2:18:49] Europe can fund it, [2:18:50] and they have [2:18:50] through our Pearl Initiative [2:18:51] and through our [2:18:52] European command. [2:18:53] That's exactly [2:18:54] what the American people [2:18:55] want to see. [2:18:56] Is other countries [2:18:57] stepping up [2:18:57] and funding that? [2:18:58] If it's that important [2:18:59] to Europe, [2:19:00] which I understand [2:19:00] why it is [2:19:01] and the incursion [2:19:01] of Russia [2:19:02] and the bravery [2:19:02] of the Ukrainians, [2:19:03] then European countries [2:19:04] should pay for it [2:19:05] and that's exactly [2:19:06] what that chart says [2:19:07] and that's the [2:19:08] administration policy. [2:19:09] So we don't have any, [2:19:10] we don't have any interest [2:19:11] in what happens [2:19:11] in Ukraine. [2:19:12] Is that what you're saying? [2:19:13] It's only the Europeans? [2:19:15] I'm saying the threat [2:19:16] is far closer [2:19:17] to rich and capable [2:19:18] countries in Europe [2:19:19] and they should step up [2:19:20] to lead the charge [2:19:21] and that's why [2:19:21] that chart is a good thing [2:19:22] to see. [2:19:22] They have stepped up, [2:19:23] but I think [2:19:25] the American people [2:19:25] should understand [2:19:26] that we've stepped back, [2:19:28] in fact, [2:19:28] stepped back to the point [2:19:29] of abandoning. [2:19:30] This is a war [2:19:31] that never would have [2:19:32] happened under President Trump [2:19:33] and he supports [2:19:33] ending it through a deal [2:19:34] and he's pursued that. [2:19:36] So far it hasn't happened. [2:19:38] I'm out of time. [2:19:39] I want to talk about [2:19:40] DTOs, [2:19:41] who designates, [2:19:42] but we'll take that up later. [2:19:43] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:19:43] Thank you, Senator King. [2:19:47] Senator Schmidt. [2:19:48] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:19:49] I'm following my friend [2:19:51] from Maine. [2:19:52] Missouri and Maine [2:19:53] came into the Union [2:19:54] at the same time, [2:19:54] but we couldn't disagree [2:19:55] more on this particular point. [2:19:57] We may have to separate here. [2:19:59] I actually think [2:19:59] it's interesting [2:20:00] that Ukraine just came up [2:20:02] because we've heard [2:20:03] from my colleagues [2:20:05] on the other side [2:20:05] discussion about the cost [2:20:07] of what the ongoing [2:20:09] American effort. [2:20:11] There was never, [2:20:12] never a discussion [2:20:13] about the $200 billion [2:20:14] we were sending [2:20:15] to a foreign country [2:20:16] that's not even in NATO. [2:20:18] Never. [2:20:18] In fact, [2:20:19] when amendments were offered [2:20:21] for independent audits [2:20:22] of how that money was spent, [2:20:25] there was bipartisan opposition [2:20:27] to that kind of oversight. [2:20:29] So I find it really rich now [2:20:30] that there's a complaint [2:20:32] that we're not spending money [2:20:33] on Ukraine. [2:20:35] And by the way, [2:20:37] $30 billion [2:20:38] for salaries for bureaucrats, [2:20:40] pensions, [2:20:41] and social safety net programs, [2:20:43] and government operations [2:20:44] to keep the state functioning [2:20:46] during wartime. [2:20:47] That's where American tax dollars [2:20:49] were going. [2:20:49] $30 billion [2:20:50] for bureaucrats [2:20:51] in Ukraine. [2:20:52] And we just heard [2:20:53] a speech [2:20:54] for more money [2:20:55] for Ukraine, [2:20:57] yet the $1.5 trillion [2:20:59] for this country [2:21:00] is being balked at. [2:21:03] I mean, [2:21:03] I've seen Ukraine flags [2:21:04] all over this capital [2:21:05] for three years. [2:21:07] At the same time, [2:21:09] the same people [2:21:10] call the president [2:21:11] of the United States [2:21:11] of this country [2:21:13] a Nazi. [2:21:15] So forgive me [2:21:16] if I feel like [2:21:18] we've lost our bearings [2:21:19] a little bit. [2:21:20] So I'm all for [2:21:22] the America First agenda. [2:21:24] I'm all for [2:21:25] us realigning [2:21:26] our priorities. [2:21:27] I'm all for [2:21:28] the national defense [2:21:29] strategy that says [2:21:30] our core strategic interests [2:21:32] are the homeland, [2:21:33] the western hemisphere, [2:21:34] and the rising threat [2:21:35] in China. [2:21:36] And that means [2:21:37] our European allies [2:21:39] should step up. [2:21:41] If Vladimir Putin [2:21:42] is truly some [2:21:43] existential threat [2:21:45] in the next Hitler [2:21:46] that's going to roll [2:21:46] through Europe, [2:21:47] you would think, [2:21:47] by the way, [2:21:48] he can't take Kiev, [2:21:49] so you can't have it [2:21:50] both ways. [2:21:51] He hasn't made it to Kiev. [2:21:52] But they would step up. [2:21:54] And we better start [2:21:55] demanding that [2:21:56] because if we want [2:21:56] to meet the challenges [2:21:57] of the 21st century [2:21:58] in China, [2:22:00] our priorities, [2:22:01] our focus, [2:22:02] has to be somewhere else. [2:22:04] It doesn't mean [2:22:04] abandonment. [2:22:05] It just means [2:22:06] a true partnership [2:22:06] with our European allies [2:22:08] who for a very, [2:22:09] very long time [2:22:10] have not stepped up. [2:22:12] I want to ask you, [2:22:12] Mr. Secretary, [2:22:14] in your first year, [2:22:14] one of the things [2:22:15] I think that's really [2:22:16] gone towards this morale [2:22:17] and recruitment boom [2:22:19] that we've seen [2:22:19] through your leadership [2:22:20] and President Trump [2:22:21] was finally taking [2:22:23] on this sort of [2:22:23] cultural Marxism [2:22:25] that had taken hold [2:22:26] from the highest levels [2:22:28] of leadership [2:22:28] from the President [2:22:29] of the United States [2:22:29] to your predecessor, [2:22:31] this obsession with DEI. [2:22:32] Could you just walk [2:22:33] through maybe [2:22:34] the worst example [2:22:36] that you saw [2:22:37] and a way that you [2:22:38] addressed that [2:22:38] and how it was [2:22:39] affecting morale? [2:22:41] Well, thank you, [2:22:42] Senator. [2:22:42] First of all, [2:22:42] I want to fully associate [2:22:45] myself with the first [2:22:46] two and a half minutes [2:22:47] of your comments, [2:22:47] and I appreciate [2:22:48] that perspective [2:22:48] very much so. [2:22:49] I would note [2:22:50] $30 billion [2:22:51] for bureaucrats [2:22:52] in Ukraine [2:22:52] is more than the bill [2:22:54] that we've talked [2:22:54] about today [2:22:55] for an existential [2:22:57] and critically important [2:22:58] war to ensure [2:22:59] that Iran doesn't get [2:23:00] a nuclear weapon. [2:23:01] That's worth noting. [2:23:02] I haven't talked about it [2:23:04] as much in these hearings [2:23:05] because this is a budget [2:23:07] hearing about $1.5 trillion [2:23:08] that's historic [2:23:09] and significant, [2:23:10] but underwriting the change [2:23:12] that we've seen [2:23:12] in our department [2:23:13] was a laser focus [2:23:14] on getting back to basics, [2:23:16] and the key word [2:23:18] to that is merit. [2:23:19] We had a department [2:23:20] that was obsessed [2:23:21] with gender, [2:23:23] ideology, [2:23:24] and race, [2:23:25] diversity, equity, [2:23:26] and inclusion. [2:23:27] In fact, [2:23:27] the mantra you would hear [2:23:29] dripping from the lips [2:23:30] of generals [2:23:31] with a serious look [2:23:32] on their face [2:23:32] was, [2:23:33] our diversity [2:23:33] is our strength, [2:23:35] which is the single [2:23:36] dumbest phrase [2:23:37] in military history. [2:23:39] Of course, [2:23:40] our diversity [2:23:40] is not our strength. [2:23:41] Our unity [2:23:42] is our strength, [2:23:43] our shared purpose, [2:23:44] the flag we wear [2:23:45] and the constitution [2:23:47] we serve to defend. [2:23:48] And when you clear [2:23:49] that debris away, [2:23:50] whether it's [2:23:51] Marxist ideologies [2:23:52] or social engineering [2:23:54] or political correctness [2:23:56] or quotas [2:23:57] based on gender [2:23:58] and diversity, [2:23:58] you get the best [2:24:00] of the best rising up [2:24:01] regardless of gender, [2:24:02] regardless of race, [2:24:04] motivated by that environment [2:24:05] where merit reigns, [2:24:07] it's accountability, [2:24:08] standards, [2:24:09] lethality, [2:24:10] readiness, [2:24:11] training, [2:24:12] all the debris [2:24:12] wiped away. [2:24:14] That is the secret sauce [2:24:16] of the revival [2:24:17] of the War Department. [2:24:18] And why Americans [2:24:19] are attracted [2:24:19] to serving in it [2:24:20] and why those inside it, [2:24:22] why morale is sky high. [2:24:24] And any insinuation [2:24:25] that it is not [2:24:25] are coming from folks [2:24:27] who haven't been [2:24:27] in our units recently. [2:24:29] Go visit the troops [2:24:29] at every level [2:24:30] and their morale [2:24:31] is at record levels. [2:24:32] And I want to talk [2:24:32] about morale [2:24:32] with the 15 seconds [2:24:34] that I have left. [2:24:34] I want to thank you [2:24:35] for coming to St. Louis [2:24:36] for your Arsenal [2:24:37] of Freedom tour [2:24:38] where the next generation [2:24:39] aircraft, the F-47, [2:24:41] is being built [2:24:41] by the hardworking [2:24:42] men and women [2:24:42] in Missouri [2:24:43] who take a tremendous [2:24:44] amount of pride [2:24:45] for that aircraft [2:24:46] that's going to go further, [2:24:47] see further, [2:24:49] go faster, [2:24:49] have a bigger payload. [2:24:50] And I know [2:24:51] there's another decision [2:24:52] coming with the F-A-X-X, [2:24:53] but really appreciate [2:24:54] your leadership [2:24:54] and thanks for coming. [2:24:55] Thank you, Senator. [2:24:57] Thank you, Senator Schmidt. [2:24:59] Senator King, [2:25:00] do you wish to ask [2:25:01] unanimous consent [2:25:02] to include your exhibit [2:25:04] in the record? [2:25:06] Yes, please. [2:25:06] Without objection. [2:25:07] That will be done. [2:25:08] Senator Warren. [2:25:09] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:25:10] So, Americans are paying [2:25:12] a high price [2:25:13] for Donald Trump's war [2:25:14] with Iran. [2:25:15] We've got 14 service members [2:25:17] who are dead, [2:25:17] over 400 more, [2:25:19] who are wounded. [2:25:21] Prices are rising [2:25:22] for nearly every American family. [2:25:25] But someone is profiting [2:25:27] off Trump's war. [2:25:29] Insiders who know [2:25:30] what's going on [2:25:31] and who place bets [2:25:33] on that inside information. [2:25:35] On March 23rd, [2:25:37] just 14 minutes [2:25:38] before Trump [2:25:39] unexpectedly posted [2:25:41] about, quote, [2:25:43] very good conversations [2:25:44] on ending the war, [2:25:47] traders suddenly [2:25:48] bet $500 million [2:25:50] on the price of oil, [2:25:52] which, once Trump [2:25:54] made his announcement, [2:25:55] immediately dropped. [2:25:57] It happened again [2:25:58] on April 7th [2:25:59] and then again [2:26:00] on April 21st. [2:26:02] A surge in oil bets, [2:26:04] then a Trump post, [2:26:06] and then a huge shift [2:26:07] in oil prices [2:26:09] in just the space [2:26:10] of minutes. [2:26:12] It looks like [2:26:12] insiders have been [2:26:14] making out like bandits [2:26:15] using secret information [2:26:18] about the war. [2:26:19] Now, one U.S. soldier [2:26:21] has been charged, [2:26:22] but that was for betting [2:26:23] on capturing Maduro [2:26:25] months ago. [2:26:26] Not a single person [2:26:27] has been charged [2:26:28] in the many, many, [2:26:30] many trades [2:26:31] over the Middle East war. [2:26:33] So, Secretary Hegseth, [2:26:36] do you have any explanation [2:26:38] for these perfectly timed [2:26:41] spikes in trading activity [2:26:44] other than insider trading? [2:26:48] Senator, all I can tell you [2:26:50] is that everything we've done [2:26:51] in our department, [2:26:52] everything we've done [2:26:53] with information [2:26:53] in working with the White House [2:26:55] and across the interagency [2:26:56] has been completely above board. [2:26:58] Well, so what does it mean? [2:27:00] Do you have any other explanation [2:27:02] other than insider trading? [2:27:04] Do you have a story [2:27:05] for why just minutes [2:27:08] before there's an announcement [2:27:09] there's a surge [2:27:11] in trading activity? [2:27:14] Senator, I'm more than focused [2:27:15] on doing my job [2:27:16] and ensuring we execute properly, [2:27:18] which thankfully, [2:27:18] under this administration, [2:27:20] our troops have done [2:27:21] incredible things [2:27:22] in all these missions. [2:27:23] My job in all of those moments [2:27:25] is to make sure [2:27:26] we're prepared. [2:27:27] And that's part of the reason [2:27:27] why we've been so successful [2:27:29] in these raids, [2:27:30] in these efforts, [2:27:30] is that this joint force [2:27:32] is prepared. [2:27:32] You're saying you're not [2:27:33] paying any attention [2:27:34] to this insider trading. [2:27:35] Is that what you're telling me? [2:27:36] That you've paid no attention [2:27:37] to this? [2:27:38] You haven't noticed it? [2:27:38] You haven't done anything about it? [2:27:41] What I'm saying is [2:27:41] we're focused on our mission [2:27:43] of executing [2:27:43] for the American people [2:27:44] and what happens in markets [2:27:46] is not, in betting markets, [2:27:48] is not something [2:27:49] we're involved in. [2:27:49] What happens in betting markets [2:27:51] doesn't matter to you. [2:27:52] Even if the information [2:27:54] may be coming [2:27:55] from insiders [2:27:56] in your office? [2:27:58] Senator, it's not something [2:27:59] we're involved in at all. [2:28:00] And of course, [2:28:01] we take operational security [2:28:02] at every level very seriously. [2:28:03] In fact, [2:28:04] no one's taken operational security [2:28:05] more seriously than us. [2:28:08] If you look at what it required [2:28:10] to keep secret [2:28:11] Midnight Hammer [2:28:12] and Operation Maduro, [2:28:13] the absolute resolve [2:28:15] with Maduro [2:28:16] and the steps we've taken, [2:28:19] no one's been tighter [2:28:20] about ensuring [2:28:21] that operational security [2:28:22] is insured. [2:28:23] Any steps to deal [2:28:23] with insider trading [2:28:25] out of your office? [2:28:28] We would ensure [2:28:29] at every level [2:28:30] that inside information [2:28:31] is properly safeguarded. [2:28:33] All right. [2:28:34] Well, obviously you're not. [2:28:36] I'm also concerned [2:28:37] about recent reporting [2:28:38] on your own financial dealings [2:28:40] with regard to profiting [2:28:42] from the war in Iran. [2:28:44] The Financial Times [2:28:45] reported that your broker [2:28:46] tried to buy hundreds [2:28:47] of shares [2:28:48] in a BlackRock fund [2:28:50] invested in defense companies [2:28:51] just before the war began. [2:28:53] The law clearly prohibits [2:28:55] the Secretary... [2:28:55] That entire story is false? [2:28:57] Has been from the beginning [2:28:58] and was made up [2:28:59] out of whole cloth. [2:29:00] And anybody that looks at it [2:29:01] sees how it was worded [2:29:03] from the beginning [2:29:03] to make it look like [2:29:04] I was involved in something [2:29:05] I had nothing to do [2:29:06] and never have. [2:29:07] So any insinuation [2:29:08] that I've ever profited [2:29:10] other than serving this nation, [2:29:12] what I give, [2:29:13] what you give, [2:29:14] what others give, [2:29:15] I'm not looking for money. [2:29:16] I don't do it for money. [2:29:17] I don't do it for profit. [2:29:17] I don't do it for stocks. [2:29:18] And that's part of the reason [2:29:19] why I'm able to be effective [2:29:20] in this job. [2:29:21] Because no one owns me. [2:29:22] No one owns this department. [2:29:24] No one owns this president. [2:29:25] And we can execute [2:29:26] for the American people [2:29:27] and we do. [2:29:28] The law clearly prohibits [2:29:30] the Secretary of Defense [2:29:32] from owning stock [2:29:33] in the 10 biggest defense contractors. [2:29:36] Other senators and I [2:29:38] sent you a letter [2:29:38] with detailed questions about this [2:29:40] and you have not given us [2:29:42] a response. [2:29:43] So I'd like to hear you say, [2:29:45] did you, [2:29:46] through your broker [2:29:47] at Morgan Stanley [2:29:48] or otherwise, [2:29:49] seek to invest [2:29:50] in any defense-related funds [2:29:53] right before Trump [2:29:54] started the Iran war? [2:29:57] I'll give it to you [2:29:58] as a big, fat, negative. [2:30:01] Then let me ask you [2:30:02] a second question. [2:30:03] Is your broker [2:30:04] getting your personal sign-off [2:30:07] on any investment [2:30:08] in individual stocks? [2:30:09] Bigger, fatter, negative. [2:30:12] He's not getting your sign-off [2:30:14] before he makes investments [2:30:15] in defense stocks. [2:30:16] Can I refer you to your [2:30:18] ethics agreement? [2:30:18] I'm not making investments, [2:30:20] Senator. [2:30:20] I am asking, [2:30:21] does he know [2:30:22] that he has to get your sign-off [2:30:24] before he does that? [2:30:25] Of course. [2:30:26] I don't know what you're looking for, [2:30:27] but you ain't gonna find it. [2:30:29] Thank you. [2:30:29] Thank you, Senator. [2:30:31] I would like to enter [2:30:32] into the record, [2:30:33] the ethics agreement [2:30:34] that the Secretary of Defense [2:30:36] has signed, [2:30:37] that he will sign off personally [2:30:39] before his broker [2:30:41] makes any attempt [2:30:43] to buy defense stocks. [2:30:44] Is there objection? [2:30:46] Thank you. [2:30:46] Without objection, [2:30:47] it will be admitted. [2:30:50] Senator Banks. [2:30:52] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:30:53] Secretary Hexeth, [2:30:54] you're doing a great job. [2:30:56] I've been in Washington [2:30:57] for 10 years, [2:30:59] several secretaries of defense, [2:31:02] now secretary of war. [2:31:03] You're the best that we've had [2:31:04] since I've been in Washington. [2:31:06] What you've done [2:31:06] to restore readiness, [2:31:08] restore military recruitment, [2:31:10] get the Pentagon focused [2:31:11] on war fighting [2:31:11] is second to none. [2:31:13] I appreciate what you [2:31:15] and President Trump [2:31:15] and General Cain [2:31:16] are doing very much. [2:31:18] In fact, [2:31:19] General Cain, [2:31:19] according to the Department's [2:31:20] 2025 China military power report, [2:31:25] quote, [2:31:25] China believes the next revolution [2:31:27] in military affairs [2:31:29] will occur [2:31:29] when militaries transition [2:31:30] to intelligentized warfare [2:31:33] and fully integrate [2:31:34] artificial intelligence, [2:31:36] big data, [2:31:38] advanced computing, [2:31:39] and other technologies [2:31:40] into the joint force, [2:31:42] end quote. [2:31:43] Can you describe, [2:31:44] General, [2:31:45] in greater detail [2:31:46] how the PLA [2:31:48] is using AI [2:31:49] to enhance [2:31:49] its military capabilities? [2:31:51] You bet, [2:31:53] Senator. [2:31:54] You know, [2:31:55] they are attempting [2:31:56] to integrate AI [2:31:58] across the range [2:31:59] of their war fighting functions, [2:32:01] which extends to [2:32:02] command and control, [2:32:04] information advantage, [2:32:06] intelligence, [2:32:07] certainly kinetic [2:32:09] and non-kinetic capabilities, [2:32:12] and to a certain extent, [2:32:14] sustainment. [2:32:15] I'll note that [2:32:15] so are we, [2:32:17] and in many cases, [2:32:18] we are out in front of them. [2:32:20] I want to commend [2:32:21] our chief digital [2:32:22] and artificial intelligence officers [2:32:25] inside the joint force [2:32:26] at the COCOMs [2:32:28] with the services [2:32:29] who are also leaning [2:32:31] very far in [2:32:32] as we march towards [2:32:34] a digitized joint force [2:32:36] that allows us to cease [2:32:38] and see in a command [2:32:39] and control of force better. [2:32:42] The China military power report [2:32:44] also goes on [2:32:45] to note that [2:32:46] the Chinese AI sector [2:32:48] remains, quote, [2:32:49] constrained by its [2:32:51] limited access [2:32:52] to high-performance [2:32:54] AI chips. [2:32:56] General Cain, [2:32:57] how big of an advantage [2:32:58] is it for the American war fighter [2:33:00] that America's arsenal [2:33:02] of compute [2:33:04] is bigger than China's? [2:33:07] Sure, it's critical to us, [2:33:10] and, you know, [2:33:11] while I acknowledge [2:33:12] there's all kinds [2:33:14] of chip issues in this, [2:33:15] it is important to us [2:33:17] to continue to scale at that, [2:33:19] and I'll highlight [2:33:19] a lot of the work [2:33:20] going on up at Fort Meade [2:33:22] that the committee's helped [2:33:23] to advance [2:33:24] in the cyber capabilities, [2:33:25] so we appreciate [2:33:26] the help of that. [2:33:27] If that advantage [2:33:27] were eroded [2:33:28] and China were able [2:33:29] to develop more advanced [2:33:31] AI capabilities [2:33:32] as a result, [2:33:34] what are some [2:33:34] of the potential consequences [2:33:35] for American war fighters? [2:33:37] Well, sir, [2:33:38] it could certainly [2:33:39] put us at risk, [2:33:40] and that's why [2:33:41] we're leaning in so hard. [2:33:43] There's always a balance [2:33:45] between commerce [2:33:46] and protection. [2:33:49] I acknowledge [2:33:50] those are policy matters, [2:33:51] I think, [2:33:52] is what you're starting [2:33:53] to get towards, [2:33:55] but on a pure [2:33:56] military-only standpoint, [2:33:58] that we would see [2:34:00] some defense in depth [2:34:01] eroded from that. [2:34:02] Secretary Hegseth, [2:34:03] do you agree [2:34:04] that enhanced [2:34:04] Chinese AI capabilities [2:34:06] could put [2:34:08] American service members [2:34:09] at risk? [2:34:11] Senator, [2:34:12] we absolutely [2:34:12] have to stay ahead. [2:34:13] The advantage [2:34:15] that AI provides [2:34:16] applied to any number [2:34:17] of capabilities, [2:34:18] whether it's [2:34:19] domain awareness, [2:34:20] targeting cycles, [2:34:21] you name it, [2:34:22] AI and leveraging it, [2:34:23] and that's why [2:34:24] we've made it [2:34:24] at the forefront. [2:34:25] I mean, [2:34:25] it's AI first [2:34:26] with everything [2:34:26] that we do, [2:34:27] integrating it [2:34:28] at every potential echelon [2:34:30] to ensure [2:34:30] we can respond faster. [2:34:32] If we're better [2:34:34] at that than [2:34:34] any adversary is, [2:34:35] it's going to give us [2:34:36] an advantage [2:34:36] and we have to maintain that. [2:34:37] I agree. [2:34:38] Do you agree [2:34:38] that we should do [2:34:39] everything in our power [2:34:40] to ensure [2:34:41] that American service members [2:34:42] go into battle [2:34:44] with an overwhelming [2:34:45] and fear-inducing [2:34:47] technological advantage, [2:34:49] particularly with AI? [2:34:51] Always. [2:34:52] Overwhelming [2:34:53] is the goal [2:34:54] in every scenario. [2:34:56] Earlier this year, [2:34:56] the Pentagon issued [2:34:57] updated guidelines [2:34:59] that prohibit [2:34:59] department funds [2:35:00] from supporting grants [2:35:01] and contracts [2:35:02] involving fundamental [2:35:03] research collaboration [2:35:05] with blacklisted [2:35:07] Chinese entities. [2:35:09] How important [2:35:09] are those restrictions [2:35:10] to safeguarding [2:35:11] our technological leadership? [2:35:14] Have to have them. [2:35:15] especially when you look [2:35:17] at the power of models [2:35:18] and all of those things. [2:35:19] You have connections [2:35:20] to entities [2:35:20] that could have connections [2:35:21] to your adversary [2:35:22] and you can have [2:35:24] degradation [2:35:24] of your advantage. [2:35:25] Again, [2:35:26] this is where [2:35:26] I appreciate [2:35:27] your leadership, [2:35:28] Mr. Secretary, [2:35:29] which has been [2:35:30] second to none. [2:35:30] I know that [2:35:31] you will work [2:35:32] with Congress [2:35:33] to help codify [2:35:33] those restrictions [2:35:34] and encourage [2:35:35] taxpayer dollars [2:35:36] to never advance [2:35:38] the capabilities [2:35:39] of our enemies [2:35:39] and our adversaries. [2:35:41] I appreciate [2:35:41] both of your leadership. [2:35:43] we've come a long way [2:35:45] in a couple of years [2:35:47] from, [2:35:47] I mean, [2:35:47] the night and day [2:35:48] difference [2:35:49] between the last [2:35:49] administration [2:35:50] and this administration [2:35:51] is apparent [2:35:52] to every Hoosier [2:35:54] that I talk to. [2:35:55] So I appreciate [2:35:55] your leadership. [2:35:56] I yield back. [2:35:56] Thank you very much, [2:35:57] Senator Banks. [2:35:58] Senator Peters. [2:36:00] Thank you, [2:36:00] Mr. Chairman, [2:36:01] Ranking Member. [2:36:02] Gentlemen, [2:36:02] welcome to the committee. [2:36:04] I appreciate [2:36:04] this discussion. [2:36:06] I'll just start off. [2:36:07] The number one question [2:36:08] I get when I'm back [2:36:08] home from people [2:36:09] is basically [2:36:10] very simply [2:36:11] when will this war end? [2:36:13] We know the cost [2:36:14] that the American people [2:36:16] are paying [2:36:16] both at higher fuel costs [2:36:18] or farmers are paying [2:36:19] because of fertilizer cost. [2:36:21] We know that [2:36:22] the whole world economy [2:36:23] is paying a great deal [2:36:25] for this war. [2:36:27] And basically, [2:36:28] as I think that through, [2:36:29] and this is what [2:36:30] I want to talk to you about, [2:36:31] is that we all know [2:36:32] that it's a whole lot easier [2:36:33] to go to war [2:36:34] than it is to get out of war. [2:36:36] That's always [2:36:37] the tough question. [2:36:38] And we've got [2:36:40] to figure that out. [2:36:41] And there are some folks [2:36:42] who've written [2:36:42] quite a bit about this. [2:36:44] One text on war [2:36:45] by Carl von Klauswitz. [2:36:48] Mr. Secretary, [2:36:49] I'm sure you're familiar [2:36:49] with the book. [2:36:51] I know all of the men [2:36:52] and women in uniform are. [2:36:54] It's the most widely read, [2:36:55] most influential [2:36:56] military strategy book [2:36:58] in Western history, [2:37:00] which is pretty, [2:37:01] pretty broad. [2:37:02] And it is the core curriculum [2:37:03] that is read [2:37:05] in all the war colleges. [2:37:07] I read it when I was [2:37:08] at the Navy War College [2:37:09] taking courses. [2:37:11] It's part of [2:37:12] what the U.S. military [2:37:13] thinks about [2:37:14] when to go to war [2:37:15] and then how to get [2:37:16] out of the war. [2:37:18] And one of those [2:37:18] core principles [2:37:19] it starts with [2:37:21] is basically [2:37:22] war is the continuation [2:37:23] of politics [2:37:24] by other means. [2:37:25] That everybody knows [2:37:26] that quote, [2:37:27] who's worn the uniform [2:37:28] and others too. [2:37:29] It basically means [2:37:31] there's two things [2:37:31] about that. [2:37:32] It's politics to get [2:37:33] in the war [2:37:33] and it's politics [2:37:34] to get out of the war. [2:37:35] And in between, [2:37:36] we rely on the men [2:37:37] and women in the military [2:37:38] to carry out [2:37:39] those policies. [2:37:41] So I want to be clear [2:37:41] and I think I speak [2:37:42] for all of my colleagues [2:37:43] is that we know [2:37:45] the military plays [2:37:46] an important part. [2:37:46] They need to do the job [2:37:47] and nobody, [2:37:48] nobody questions [2:37:50] the amazing work [2:37:51] that our men and women [2:37:52] in the U.S. military [2:37:53] have done [2:37:54] and continue to do. [2:37:55] They've performed [2:37:56] absolutely brilliantly [2:37:58] and we applaud [2:37:59] all that they have done. [2:38:01] However, [2:38:01] what we do question [2:38:02] is the politics part. [2:38:04] It's a continuation [2:38:05] of politics. [2:38:05] So it's our political leaders [2:38:07] that get us into war [2:38:08] and our political leaders [2:38:09] who have to get us [2:38:11] out of that war [2:38:12] which falls on you, [2:38:14] Mr. Secretary Hexaf [2:38:15] and others in the administration [2:38:16] including the president [2:38:17] and his commander-in-chief. [2:38:20] So, Secretary, [2:38:20] are you familiar [2:38:21] with the concept [2:38:22] in that book [2:38:23] of center of gravity? [2:38:26] Sure. [2:38:27] So center of gravity [2:38:28] is basically, [2:38:29] as you know, [2:38:30] it's basically [2:38:31] the hub of all the power [2:38:32] and movement. [2:38:34] Everything depends on it. [2:38:35] Colossus will say [2:38:36] if you don't take out [2:38:37] the center of gravity [2:38:38] it's very difficult [2:38:39] to win the war. [2:38:41] You can have [2:38:41] tactical successes, [2:38:43] you can have [2:38:43] military successes, [2:38:44] but if you're not [2:38:45] focused on that [2:38:46] you're not going [2:38:47] to be able to win. [2:38:48] Basically, [2:38:49] he talks about [2:38:50] military strikes [2:38:51] are tactical [2:38:51] and tactical success [2:38:53] doesn't necessarily [2:38:54] create the political [2:38:55] conditions necessary [2:38:56] to get the parties [2:38:58] to the table [2:38:59] to negotiate [2:38:59] and get it done. [2:39:01] So we've got to [2:39:01] focus on that. [2:39:02] So my question [2:39:02] for you, [2:39:03] Mr. Secretary, [2:39:04] what is the center [2:39:05] of gravity for Iran? [2:39:08] Well, [2:39:09] the center of gravity [2:39:10] as the president [2:39:10] has seen it [2:39:11] and as I see it [2:39:12] and he's talked about [2:39:13] for 30 years [2:39:13] is their pursuit [2:39:14] of a nuclear weapon [2:39:15] and what they could do [2:39:16] with that [2:39:16] in pursuit [2:39:17] as an extension [2:39:18] of the radical ideology [2:39:20] they have professed [2:39:21] since the beginning [2:39:22] of their revolution. [2:39:23] So the prophetic ideology [2:39:26] they profess [2:39:27] alongside the most [2:39:28] dangerous weapon [2:39:29] in the world [2:39:29] would be the center [2:39:30] of gravity [2:39:31] of the rationality [2:39:32] of this undertaking [2:39:32] which you understand. [2:39:33] I appreciate it. [2:39:34] I'll ask you [2:39:34] to elaborate more. [2:39:35] I appreciate it. [2:39:35] General Cain, [2:39:37] you know more [2:39:37] about Clausewitz [2:39:39] and strategy [2:39:39] than I will ever know [2:39:40] including all the folks [2:39:41] behind you. [2:39:42] What would you consider [2:39:43] the center of gravity [2:39:44] as defined by Clausewitz [2:39:45] in this type of war? [2:39:47] Well, sir, [2:39:48] you're not going [2:39:50] to love this answer [2:39:51] but I hope [2:39:51] you'll respect it. [2:39:53] War is politics [2:39:54] by any other means [2:39:55] and the political side [2:39:57] of that necessitates [2:39:59] that our political leaders [2:40:00] determine what is [2:40:01] the center of gravity [2:40:02] associated with that. [2:40:03] From a military-only [2:40:04] perspective, [2:40:05] there's a variety [2:40:06] of things academically [2:40:07] that we could look at [2:40:09] for center of gravity [2:40:09] from leadership [2:40:10] to will [2:40:11] to capabilities [2:40:12] to intent [2:40:13] but I'll defer [2:40:14] to our political leaders [2:40:15] to determine what that is. [2:40:16] That's fair. [2:40:17] I don't like it. [2:40:17] You're right. [2:40:18] I know. [2:40:18] I know, sir. [2:40:19] I know you know [2:40:19] the answer to that [2:40:20] and you're just not telling me [2:40:21] but I get why you're doing that. [2:40:22] My inner marshal. [2:40:22] I would say, you know, [2:40:24] other observers say [2:40:25] that basically [2:40:25] it's not the leader. [2:40:27] Usually if you take out a leader [2:40:28] that doesn't necessarily [2:40:29] make the changes [2:40:31] that in Iran's case [2:40:33] it's probably [2:40:33] the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. [2:40:36] That's the center of gravity. [2:40:38] They're the ones [2:40:38] that control the country [2:40:39] and they're very diverse [2:40:40] to do that. [2:40:41] The Americans' center of gravity [2:40:43] is probably our economy [2:40:44] and our ability [2:40:45] to maintain public opinion support. [2:40:47] We already know [2:40:47] the public isn't there. [2:40:49] We know the impact [2:40:49] to our economy [2:40:50] and central to that [2:40:51] is the leverage. [2:40:52] I'm running out of time here [2:40:53] but the central of leverage [2:40:54] is the Strait of Hormuz. [2:40:56] That that is bottom line. [2:40:58] We have to open that up. [2:41:00] We have to take that away from Iran. [2:41:02] The fact that we haven't done that yet [2:41:04] and we're 60 days in [2:41:05] we're just now bringing minesweepers [2:41:08] from the Pacific in there. [2:41:10] We have some unmanned opportunities [2:41:14] but we've got to have the capacity [2:41:15] to do that. [2:41:17] It was clear [2:41:17] even if there was a plan [2:41:18] to keep the Straits open [2:41:20] it was not going to be implemented [2:41:22] because the assets [2:41:23] were not positioned [2:41:24] in a place [2:41:25] to actually open the Straits. [2:41:27] If they were [2:41:28] it would have been [2:41:29] we would have seen those [2:41:30] happening right now. [2:41:31] We're not. [2:41:32] So we're missing the point here. [2:41:34] The center of gravity [2:41:34] is going to be bringing down [2:41:36] the government of Iran [2:41:37] in a way that they will want [2:41:39] to have a peace treaty [2:41:40] so we can protect our country [2:41:42] from having nuclear weapons [2:41:43] pointed our way [2:41:44] but the center of gravity [2:41:46] is going to be [2:41:47] in a lot of ways [2:41:47] is going to be focused [2:41:48] on what happens on the Straits [2:41:49] and Mr. Secretary [2:41:51] we've got to see action [2:41:52] a whole lot sooner [2:41:53] in the Straits. [2:41:54] The world community needs it. [2:41:55] We're not going to bring [2:41:56] this war to an end [2:41:57] until we seize control [2:41:58] of the Straits [2:41:59] in a way [2:41:59] which in part [2:42:00] is why we have a blockade [2:42:01] that has been impenetrable [2:42:02] for the Iranians [2:42:04] because they don't have [2:42:05] a conventional Navy [2:42:06] to contest it [2:42:06] which means we control [2:42:08] the Straits. [2:42:09] The time of Senator Peters [2:42:11] has expired. [2:42:12] Let me observe [2:42:14] that I very much appreciate [2:42:16] the senator from Michigan [2:42:19] suggesting ways [2:42:22] in which our effort [2:42:23] in Iran [2:42:24] could be more successful. [2:42:27] I do appreciate that [2:42:28] and let me also observe [2:42:29] Senator Kane [2:42:30] that civilian control [2:42:31] goes back [2:42:33] well beyond Marshall. [2:42:36] It goes back [2:42:37] to George Washington [2:42:39] who was wise enough [2:42:40] to resign his commission [2:42:42] to the elected membership [2:42:44] of the government [2:42:46] at that time. [2:42:47] Senator Sheehy [2:42:48] you are recognized. [2:42:52] I think it's important [2:42:52] to note that [2:42:53] the objective [2:42:55] is not to get out [2:42:56] of the war [2:42:57] the objective [2:42:57] is to win the war [2:42:58] not to get out of it [2:42:59] and I think [2:43:01] we've allowed [2:43:02] the narrative to shift [2:43:03] so off target here. [2:43:04] President Trump [2:43:05] did not start this war [2:43:07] we did not start this war [2:43:08] these radical [2:43:09] barbarian [2:43:10] savage clerics [2:43:11] who have started [2:43:12] killing Americans [2:43:13] 47 years ago [2:43:14] in a unilateral campaign [2:43:15] of terror [2:43:16] murder [2:43:17] treason [2:43:17] kidnapping [2:43:19] torture [2:43:20] have been murdering [2:43:21] our countrymen [2:43:22] all over this world [2:43:23] almost every single year [2:43:25] hijacking airplanes [2:43:26] hijacking cruise liners [2:43:28] taking our embassies [2:43:28] blowing up our embassies [2:43:29] blowing up our barracks [2:43:30] blowing up our ships [2:43:31] capturing our soldiers [2:43:33] and murdering them [2:43:34] in brutal ways [2:43:34] they started this war [2:43:37] and it would be a lot [2:43:39] easier to beat them [2:43:40] if we didn't have [2:43:41] administrations [2:43:42] shoveling hundreds [2:43:42] of billions of dollars [2:43:43] into their pockets [2:43:44] while they're actively [2:43:45] fighting our own people. [2:43:46] while our own uniformed [2:43:47] service members [2:43:48] have been fighting [2:43:48] this murderous regime [2:43:50] and we have presidents [2:43:51] quite literally [2:43:52] shipping pallets of cash [2:43:54] to pay these terrorists off [2:43:56] it's been a disgrace [2:43:58] it's been an embarrassment [2:43:58] to this country [2:43:59] for far too long [2:44:00] but back to the point [2:44:02] General Cain [2:44:03] I have a specific question [2:44:04] for you [2:44:04] I think in this day and age [2:44:07] we all know that [2:44:08] basically every single [2:44:09] operation that we partake in [2:44:10] whether it's stealth bombers [2:44:11] whether it's a blockade [2:44:13] our special operations forces [2:44:14] are a fundamental [2:44:15] shaping and priority component [2:44:18] to all those [2:44:18] would you agree [2:44:19] yes senator I would [2:44:22] and I think for the last [2:44:24] about 15 years [2:44:25] the special operations [2:44:26] community budget [2:44:27] has been largely flat [2:44:28] even adjusted for inflation [2:44:29] and yet continuously [2:44:32] we call on those warriors [2:44:34] to deliver the impossible [2:44:36] and they pretty much do [2:44:37] we were reminded [2:44:39] just a few weeks ago [2:44:39] even after the amazing [2:44:40] Maduro raid [2:44:41] when we had to rescue [2:44:42] an over F-15 crewman [2:44:43] yet again our community [2:44:45] came up [2:44:45] and did something [2:44:46] that probably most people [2:44:48] thought wasn't possible [2:44:49] and they did an amazing job [2:44:51] but we cannot continue [2:44:53] to call on a tiny fraction [2:44:54] of our military [2:44:55] to carry such a heavy load [2:44:57] and to have such an op tempo [2:44:59] without the appropriate resources [2:45:00] so I'd like to hear [2:45:02] your thoughts [2:45:03] on how we can [2:45:03] not just increase the budget [2:45:05] but make sure [2:45:05] we're shaping their budget [2:45:06] in a way that ensures [2:45:07] that those warriors [2:45:08] are getting the direct support [2:45:10] for training and sustainment [2:45:12] but also the platforms [2:45:13] that they need [2:45:14] from many submarines [2:45:15] to unmanned aircraft [2:45:18] to manned aircraft [2:45:18] and the platforms [2:45:19] that are very unique [2:45:20] for their mission [2:45:20] are furnished [2:45:21] and deployed rapidly [2:45:23] so I'd like to talk [2:45:24] about the percentage increase [2:45:25] of SOCOM's budget [2:45:26] how we affect that [2:45:27] and how fast we can do it [2:45:28] well sir I'll just [2:45:29] I'll just highlight [2:45:30] my gratitude [2:45:31] and appreciation [2:45:32] for the entirety [2:45:33] of the SOCOM joint force [2:45:35] at Echelon [2:45:37] and the work that they do [2:45:38] you know [2:45:39] I'll leave the budget numbers [2:45:41] and the increased percentages [2:45:42] to my civilian leadership [2:45:44] but echo [2:45:45] to your point [2:45:47] the exponential return [2:45:49] on whatever investment [2:45:50] they give [2:45:51] these are incredible [2:45:52] entrepreneurial leaders [2:45:53] at every Echelon [2:45:55] who do [2:45:56] who do great [2:45:57] great things [2:45:58] as the lights dim [2:45:59] as I say that [2:46:01] so hopefully [2:46:01] they'll see that [2:46:02] as a nod [2:46:03] towards them [2:46:04] but I'll defer [2:46:04] on the budget allocation numbers [2:46:06] to the [2:46:06] to the comptroller sir [2:46:08] first of all [2:46:10] I want to second [2:46:12] completely your opening remarks [2:46:13] and that's certainly [2:46:14] our view [2:46:15] as well [2:46:16] on the SOCOM budget [2:46:17] I'm going to say [2:46:18] I think [2:46:19] we need to increase [2:46:21] what's in this budget [2:46:22] and I've heard [2:46:22] from multiple people [2:46:23] about that [2:46:24] in fact that [2:46:25] if there is a supplemental [2:46:26] I actually [2:46:27] I just wrote a note to Jay [2:46:28] about it [2:46:29] I think SOCOM [2:46:30] given the op tempo [2:46:31] given the [2:46:31] given their direct [2:46:33] participation [2:46:34] in so many [2:46:34] of these historic [2:46:35] historic aspects [2:46:36] SOCOM should be part [2:46:37] of that supplemental [2:46:38] as well [2:46:38] makes complete sense [2:46:39] who's been shouldering [2:46:40] a huge part [2:46:41] of the burden [2:46:42] special operations command [2:46:43] so whether it's a supplemental [2:46:45] or this budget [2:46:46] I fully agree [2:46:47] and I think we need [2:46:47] to invest more [2:46:49] great [2:46:50] and I'd ask [2:46:51] that particular care [2:46:52] be given [2:46:52] the era of beards [2:46:54] and guns [2:46:55] and kicking in doors [2:46:56] as much fun [2:46:56] as that was [2:46:57] for all of us [2:46:57] it's coming to a close [2:46:59] and we're going to be [2:47:00] going back to our roots [2:47:01] as specialized commandos [2:47:03] whether it's undersea [2:47:05] arctic [2:47:05] airborne operations [2:47:06] and as we all became [2:47:08] kind of one joint [2:47:09] soft force [2:47:10] during GWAT [2:47:10] quite frankly [2:47:12] that was an easier [2:47:13] problem to resource [2:47:14] for to budget for [2:47:14] and acquire for [2:47:15] it's going to be [2:47:16] a lot harder now [2:47:17] when our operators [2:47:18] go back to their [2:47:19] service corners [2:47:20] and need platform [2:47:21] specific technologies [2:47:22] and training [2:47:22] submersibles [2:47:24] aircraft take years [2:47:25] to acquire [2:47:26] years to specify [2:47:27] it's not just buying [2:47:27] more ARs [2:47:28] and body armor [2:47:29] and ammo [2:47:29] and sending them [2:47:29] down range [2:47:30] so I think we have [2:47:31] to think about [2:47:31] the SOCOM budget [2:47:32] a little different [2:47:33] than we have [2:47:33] for the last 25 years [2:47:34] and make sure [2:47:35] we're programming [2:47:36] in a way [2:47:36] that it's sustained [2:47:37] and is protected [2:47:39] thank you [2:47:39] thank you senator [2:47:40] Schmidt for that [2:47:42] insightful exchange [2:47:44] so to Kelly [2:47:46] thank you mr. chairman [2:47:47] gentlemen [2:47:48] thank you for being here [2:47:49] secretary hegseth [2:47:50] safe to say [2:47:51] that our weapons [2:47:52] like sm3s [2:47:54] tomahawks [2:47:54] patriot missiles [2:47:56] have capabilities [2:47:57] that are unmatched [2:47:58] that's why they cost a lot [2:48:00] take a long time [2:48:00] to produce [2:48:01] your budget requests [2:48:03] 31.8 billion dollars [2:48:05] to expand production [2:48:07] capacity [2:48:08] for critical missile [2:48:09] stockpiles [2:48:10] is that correct [2:48:11] 31.8 [2:48:13] I'm looking at [2:48:15] 53 billion [2:48:16] for munitions [2:48:17] acceleration [2:48:17] over 14 [2:48:18] critical munitions [2:48:19] of which the ones [2:48:20] you listed [2:48:21] are a part [2:48:21] so I believe [2:48:22] more than that [2:48:22] yes sir [2:48:23] more than 20 billion [2:48:25] more [2:48:25] so we've been [2:48:27] working together [2:48:28] to grow the industrial [2:48:29] base because [2:48:30] we're all worried [2:48:31] about how our [2:48:32] stockpiles would [2:48:33] hold up in a conflict [2:48:34] against China [2:48:35] since the start [2:48:36] of this war [2:48:37] you've made [2:48:37] it a point [2:48:39] to highlight [2:48:40] the number [2:48:40] of strikes [2:48:41] the US military [2:48:42] is carrying out [2:48:43] citing [2:48:44] that more than [2:48:45] 13,000 targets [2:48:47] had been struck [2:48:48] as of April 8th [2:48:50] on March 2nd [2:48:51] you said [2:48:51] and this is a quote [2:48:52] this was a massive [2:48:53] overwhelming attack [2:48:54] across all domains [2:48:55] of warfare [2:48:56] striking more than [2:48:57] a thousand targets [2:48:58] in the first 24 hours [2:48:59] on March 10th [2:49:01] you said [2:49:01] yet again [2:49:02] our most intense [2:49:03] day of strikes [2:49:04] inside of Iran [2:49:05] on April 6th [2:49:07] you said [2:49:07] and this is another quote [2:49:08] the largest volume [2:49:09] of strikes [2:49:10] since day one [2:49:12] of this operation [2:49:13] your department [2:49:14] has released video [2:49:15] after video [2:49:16] of things blowing up [2:49:17] none of us doubt [2:49:20] the strength [2:49:20] of the US military [2:49:21] and their ability [2:49:22] to do hard things [2:49:24] I understand that [2:49:25] better than anybody [2:49:26] the questions [2:49:27] we should be asking [2:49:29] and answering [2:49:30] are [2:49:30] what does this [2:49:32] cost us [2:49:33] and what does it [2:49:34] achieve [2:49:35] for the American people [2:49:36] many of these strikes [2:49:38] use our best weapons [2:49:40] and we're using [2:49:41] a lot of them [2:49:42] and a lot of interceptors [2:49:44] open source reporting [2:49:45] has estimated [2:49:46] that the military [2:49:47] has used [2:49:48] an outrageous number [2:49:49] of patriots [2:49:49] I'm not even going [2:49:50] to say the numbers [2:49:50] but a lot of patriots [2:49:52] a lot of thou rounds [2:49:53] jasmine R [2:49:54] tomahawks [2:49:55] very expensive [2:49:56] exquisite [2:49:57] we can't make [2:49:59] these munitions [2:50:00] overnight [2:50:01] and it's clear [2:50:02] from your budget request [2:50:04] that you know that [2:50:05] can you tell us [2:50:07] how many years [2:50:09] specifically [2:50:10] is it going to take [2:50:12] to replace [2:50:13] these systems [2:50:14] senator thank you [2:50:17] for the question [2:50:17] I would defer [2:50:18] to the comptroller [2:50:19] on the amount [2:50:19] because I think [2:50:20] it's a lot higher [2:50:20] than 53 [2:50:21] if you look at [2:50:22] long range fires [2:50:23] jasms [2:50:24] alrasms [2:50:24] tomahawks [2:50:25] we're looking at [2:50:25] 238 million [2:50:26] we're looking at [2:50:27] 40 billion [2:50:27] for hypersonic [2:50:28] so I actually think [2:50:29] it's closer to [2:50:29] 330 billion [2:50:30] in munitions [2:50:31] okay [2:50:32] how many years [2:50:32] to replenish [2:50:33] that's the question [2:50:34] I think that's [2:50:35] exactly the right [2:50:35] question too [2:50:36] senator [2:50:36] because [2:50:37] the time frame [2:50:38] we were existing [2:50:39] under [2:50:39] was unacceptable [2:50:40] and what this budget [2:50:41] does [2:50:42] I mean months [2:50:43] and years [2:50:43] fast [2:50:44] years [2:50:44] we're building [2:50:45] new plants [2:50:45] in real time [2:50:47] so just to [2:50:47] replace what we [2:50:48] have expended [2:50:49] I said months [2:50:50] and then you said [2:50:51] years [2:50:52] it depends on [2:50:53] the weapons [2:50:53] system [2:50:54] but two to three [2:50:55] four acts [2:50:56] we have today [2:50:57] so yes [2:50:57] we're dealing [2:50:58] with the reality [2:50:58] under the previous [2:50:59] administration [2:50:59] of what they [2:51:00] sent to Ukraine [2:51:01] and what else [2:51:02] I got it [2:51:03] so we fired [2:51:04] workers [2:51:04] were [2:51:06] munitions [2:51:07] and [2:51:08] it is clear [2:51:09] that we're [2:51:10] these are being [2:51:11] expended [2:51:12] to try to achieve [2:51:14] some objectives [2:51:16] that was the plan [2:51:17] but [2:51:18] Mr. Secretary [2:51:20] this war is stuck [2:51:21] the Strait of Hormuz [2:51:23] is closed [2:51:24] the Iranian regime [2:51:26] is in place [2:51:28] the nuclear material [2:51:29] still in their hands [2:51:31] Americans [2:51:33] are being crushed [2:51:34] by higher costs [2:51:36] and it's not clear [2:51:37] to them [2:51:38] at all [2:51:40] what the goal [2:51:41] of this war is [2:51:43] so [2:51:45] I've got about a minute [2:51:47] and [2:51:48] I want to go to another topic [2:51:50] I saw your hearing yesterday [2:51:53] and I'm going to give you [2:51:54] one more chance [2:51:55] to address [2:51:56] a question here [2:51:57] it's my understanding [2:52:00] offers of surrender [2:52:01] will be refused [2:52:03] or that detainees [2:52:06] will be executed [2:52:07] is that [2:52:09] your understanding [2:52:10] of the definition [2:52:11] the only entity [2:52:14] that would kill detainees [2:52:16] or target civilians [2:52:17] is the Iranians [2:52:17] and they're the ones [2:52:31] being crushed [2:52:31] is the Iranian military [2:52:34] and military capability [2:52:35] the question is [2:52:36] I disagree completely [2:52:38] with your articulation [2:52:39] no do you understand [2:52:40] the definition [2:52:40] that I just read you [2:52:41] because that's the definition [2:52:43] from your department's [2:52:45] law of war manual [2:52:46] is that your understanding [2:52:48] and I'm going to [2:52:49] I'm going to just [2:52:49] get to the point here [2:52:50] we fight to win [2:52:51] and we follow the law [2:52:52] Senator [2:52:52] okay so [2:52:53] your quote was [2:52:55] we will keep pushing [2:52:57] keep advancing [2:52:58] no quarter [2:52:59] no mercy [2:53:00] for our enemies [2:53:00] and yesterday [2:53:02] you did not clarify [2:53:03] whether you stand [2:53:04] by this statement [2:53:05] so I'm going to give you [2:53:06] another opportunity [2:53:08] to clarify [2:53:09] if that is what you meant [2:53:11] do you stand by that statement [2:53:14] you made on March 13th [2:53:16] we have untied the hands [2:53:19] of our war fighters [2:53:19] we fight to win [2:53:21] and we follow the law [2:53:23] okay so you're not clarifying [2:53:24] so you stand by that statement [2:53:25] so you're the secretary of defense [2:53:27] the things you say matter [2:53:29] and your response here [2:53:32] right now [2:53:33] makes it clear [2:53:35] to the American people [2:53:36] exactly why you are not right [2:53:39] for this job [2:53:39] it makes it clear [2:53:40] to our enemies [2:53:40] senator [2:53:41] thank you Mr. Chairman [2:53:43] thank you [2:53:45] Senator Sheehy [2:53:48] has left [2:53:49] but [2:53:51] it's been whispered [2:53:52] to me [2:53:52] that I just [2:53:53] referred to him [2:53:54] in the last exchange [2:53:55] I don't know [2:53:58] if I consider that [2:53:59] a compliment [2:53:59] or an insult [2:54:01] but I do correct that [2:54:02] for the record [2:54:03] Senator Slotkin [2:54:04] I think you are next [2:54:05] thank you [2:54:06] gentlemen [2:54:09] you're here [2:54:09] to ask for [2:54:10] 1.5 trillion dollars [2:54:12] 40% more [2:54:14] than what we gave you [2:54:16] last year [2:54:17] a trillion dollars [2:54:18] and I agree [2:54:20] with the chairman [2:54:20] of this committee [2:54:21] that the world [2:54:23] has never been [2:54:23] more dangerous [2:54:24] and complicated [2:54:25] and regardless [2:54:27] of whether we disagree [2:54:29] on the reasons [2:54:30] for getting into this war [2:54:31] I think we can all agree [2:54:33] that we want [2:54:34] our military [2:54:35] to come out of it [2:54:35] safely and successfully [2:54:37] and as you know [2:54:38] soon as feasible [2:54:39] the military [2:54:41] has taken [2:54:42] you all [2:54:43] the administration [2:54:44] has taken [2:54:45] military action [2:54:46] in 10 different [2:54:47] places in the world [2:54:48] in 15 months [2:54:50] more than any [2:54:50] president in U.S. history [2:54:52] I think [2:54:54] President Trump [2:54:55] has really become [2:54:55] a foreign policy president [2:54:57] and many of those operations [2:54:59] you know [2:54:59] were on the news [2:55:00] for a couple of days [2:55:01] but then the American public [2:55:02] didn't feel them [2:55:03] and I think the difference [2:55:04] with this war [2:55:05] with Iran [2:55:06] is that [2:55:06] the American public [2:55:08] is feeling it [2:55:08] in their pocketbooks [2:55:10] gas in Michigan [2:55:11] is $4.99 today [2:55:13] the cost of fertilizer [2:55:14] of airline tickets [2:55:16] things that are real [2:55:16] to people [2:55:17] Secretary Haig said [2:55:20] the president said [2:55:21] that you were most keen [2:55:23] on this war [2:55:24] he said that [2:55:25] you were the most [2:55:26] gung-ho about it [2:55:27] and I think [2:55:31] despite us all [2:55:32] wanting to come out [2:55:33] of this successfully [2:55:34] it is hard to miss [2:55:36] that we are at [2:55:36] the stalemate [2:55:37] that we don't control [2:55:39] the Strait of Hormuz [2:55:40] because shipping [2:55:41] is not getting through [2:55:42] and we can block [2:55:45] what they're trying [2:55:46] to get through [2:55:46] but nothing is moving [2:55:47] and it's costing [2:55:48] the American public [2:55:49] and I think [2:55:51] that's a fundamentally [2:55:52] different moment [2:55:53] than the rest [2:55:54] of the military action [2:55:55] we've taken [2:55:56] even in like [2:55:57] Middle East 101 class [2:55:59] we used to talk about [2:56:00] and run war games [2:56:01] on the Strait of Hormuz [2:56:02] it's a strategic geography [2:56:04] that the Iranians have [2:56:05] and I think [2:56:07] it's just concerning [2:56:08] to me [2:56:09] that we [2:56:10] you know [2:56:11] we can try [2:56:12] and tell the American people [2:56:13] that it's going great [2:56:14] and we're killing it [2:56:15] but until the Strait of Hormuz [2:56:17] is open [2:56:17] I don't think [2:56:18] we can credibly say that [2:56:19] with any seriousness [2:56:20] I think [2:56:23] the question I have [2:56:24] for you though [2:56:24] is future looking [2:56:25] and it's our [2:56:27] 2026 elections [2:56:28] the president [2:56:31] has been very clear [2:56:31] he said in the State of the Union [2:56:33] that essentially [2:56:33] if his side doesn't win [2:56:35] then the election was rigged [2:56:36] he said that before [2:56:37] the 2020 election [2:56:39] he's asked for voter rolls [2:56:41] for 29 different states [2:56:43] he just asked for Detroit's votes [2:56:45] or ballots [2:56:46] and we know that in 2020 [2:56:50] he wrote an executive order [2:56:51] that he didn't sign [2:56:53] that said [2:56:54] to the U.S. military [2:56:56] to the Secretary of Defense [2:56:57] you should go [2:56:59] and seize ballots [2:57:00] and voting machines [2:57:01] a few months ago [2:57:03] he said that he regretted [2:57:04] that he ever [2:57:05] that he didn't [2:57:05] sign that executive order [2:57:08] so the U.S. military [2:57:10] has never been deployed [2:57:11] you incorrectly [2:57:12] said yesterday [2:57:14] that they were deployed [2:57:16] during different elections [2:57:17] governors deployed them [2:57:18] under their authorities [2:57:20] but the federal government [2:57:22] has never put [2:57:23] the uniformed military [2:57:24] at our polls [2:57:25] during World War II [2:57:27] right after 9-11 [2:57:28] we've never had to do that [2:57:30] so Secretary Hegseth [2:57:32] if the president [2:57:33] who regrets not signing [2:57:34] that executive order [2:57:35] to the then SECDEF [2:57:37] in 2020 [2:57:37] asks you [2:57:38] to seize ballots [2:57:40] or voting machines [2:57:42] in states [2:57:43] during the 2026 election [2:57:45] will you stand up [2:57:46] for the Constitution [2:57:47] and say no [2:57:48] or will you salute [2:57:49] and do his bidding? [2:57:52] Senator [2:57:53] I didn't get a chance [2:57:54] to answer the front part [2:57:55] of your question [2:57:56] which you know [2:57:57] there was a lot of [2:57:57] deferred maintenance [2:57:58] under the Biden administration [2:57:59] that needed to be addressed [2:58:00] because the world [2:58:01] was in chaos [2:58:02] when President Trump [2:58:03] was elected [2:58:03] just address the election issue [2:58:04] please [2:58:04] well again [2:58:05] it's the most important thing [2:58:06] it's what's happening [2:58:07] it's yet another [2:58:09] gotcha hypothetical [2:58:10] which is your specialty [2:58:11] it's not [2:58:12] that we had an executive order [2:58:13] under the Biden administration [2:58:15] in 2024 [2:58:16] it's not a hypothetical [2:58:18] I refuse to accept [2:58:19] you give that answer [2:58:19] all the time [2:58:20] you and I have done [2:58:21] this dance before [2:58:22] get over it [2:58:23] okay [2:58:23] in 2020 [2:58:24] he's the president [2:58:26] your boss [2:58:26] the guy you're performing [2:58:27] for right now [2:58:28] told the journalists [2:58:30] this year [2:58:31] that he wished [2:58:32] he signed that executive order [2:58:33] to your predecessor [2:58:34] and your predecessor [2:58:35] said publicly [2:58:36] thank God [2:58:37] we didn't actually [2:58:38] go forward with it [2:58:39] what are you going to do [2:58:40] you're the guy [2:58:41] here in the seat [2:58:42] it's not hypothetical [2:58:43] tell the American people [2:58:44] will you deploy [2:58:45] the uniform military [2:58:47] to our polls [2:58:48] to collect voter rolls [2:58:49] or machines [2:58:50] are you accusing me [2:58:52] of performing [2:58:52] because you're performing [2:58:53] for cable news [2:58:54] right now [2:58:54] but Mr. Secretary [2:58:56] it's a hypothetical [2:58:58] by the way [2:58:59] in 2024 [2:58:59] under the Biden [2:59:00] administration [2:59:00] 15 states [2:59:01] did deploy [2:59:02] under their governor's [2:59:03] authority [2:59:03] when their governors [2:59:04] asked for it [2:59:05] what did Joe Biden [2:59:05] say about that [2:59:06] that's fundamentally [2:59:06] I don't think anything [2:59:08] because he needed them [2:59:09] for cyber security [2:59:10] and for COVID [2:59:10] Trump did it too [2:59:12] under Trump [2:59:12] but it was not [2:59:13] the federal decision [2:59:15] it was those governors [2:59:16] of the states [2:59:17] under their authorities [2:59:18] okay [2:59:18] it's never been done [2:59:19] in our history [2:59:20] please stand up [2:59:21] for the constitution [2:59:22] do not send [2:59:23] uniformed military [2:59:24] to our polls [2:59:25] do you have a response [2:59:27] to that portion [2:59:29] of the question [2:59:29] Mr. Secretary [2:59:31] I've never been [2:59:32] ordered to do [2:59:33] anything illegal [2:59:34] and I won't [2:59:35] that goes without saying [2:59:36] thank you for the answer [2:59:37] Senator Duckworth [2:59:38] you're now recognized [2:59:39] thank you [2:59:41] Mr. Chairman [2:59:42] despite his campaign [2:59:43] promise of no new wars [2:59:45] President Trump [2:59:45] has been obsessed [2:59:46] with using the military [2:59:47] any chance he gets [2:59:48] from deploying troops [2:59:50] to American cities [2:59:50] to propping up [2:59:51] Maduro's chosen [2:59:52] number two in Venezuela [2:59:53] to an endless war [2:59:55] of boat strikes [2:59:55] in the Caribbean Sea [2:59:57] and now in an illegal war [2:59:59] with Iran [2:59:59] where hundreds of thousands [3:00:00] of our troops [3:00:01] are in harm's way [3:00:02] every day [3:00:02] with no exit strategy [3:00:04] in sight [3:00:04] this administration [3:00:05] hides bad policy [3:00:07] behind the exceptional [3:00:08] military operations [3:00:09] and the valor [3:00:10] of our uniformed personnel [3:00:11] I've long said [3:00:13] Iran is a malign actor [3:00:14] but the responsible [3:00:15] administration [3:00:16] would have managed [3:00:16] this short of conflict [3:00:18] instead of starting [3:00:19] a war of choice [3:00:20] there was no imminent threat [3:00:22] to the United States [3:00:23] or our troops [3:00:23] the military was not [3:00:24] the most effective tool [3:00:25] to get Iran [3:00:26] to capitulate [3:00:27] as we're already seeing [3:00:28] too clearly now [3:00:29] and using forces [3:00:31] made Americans [3:00:31] in the Middle East [3:00:33] less safe [3:00:33] while spiking costs [3:00:34] for Americans [3:00:34] here at home [3:00:35] all through the tune [3:00:36] of 14 service members [3:00:37] dead [3:00:38] hundreds wounded [3:00:38] billions of taxpayer dollars [3:00:40] and untold costs [3:00:41] to our military readiness [3:00:42] this administration [3:00:43] claims to be focused [3:00:45] on the war fighter [3:00:45] but President Trump [3:00:46] told us [3:00:47] when he announced [3:00:47] a war from his luxury resort [3:00:49] that he expected [3:00:50] service members to die [3:00:51] now sadly [3:00:53] it's clear [3:00:53] how unserious Trump [3:00:55] is about his role [3:00:56] as the commander-in-chief [3:00:57] his war within Iran [3:00:58] has already reminded us [3:01:00] how important it is [3:01:01] to prevent a war [3:01:02] how serious it is [3:01:03] to ask the military [3:01:04] to wage one [3:01:05] under poor strategic direction [3:01:06] how destructive [3:01:07] a wide-ranging war can be [3:01:09] for Americans [3:01:09] for our service members [3:01:10] and how difficult it is [3:01:12] to actually end one [3:01:13] once you start it [3:01:14] the incompetence [3:01:16] and casual disregard [3:01:17] for our service members [3:01:18] professionalism [3:01:19] and sacrifice [3:01:20] is in my opinion [3:01:21] in a scandal [3:01:22] General Kane [3:01:23] General Kane [3:01:26] can you tell us [3:01:27] the status of the Iranian [3:01:28] Revolutionary Guard Corps' Navy [3:01:30] the entity actively [3:01:31] closing the strait [3:01:32] Senator Apologies [3:01:36] I was listening to you [3:01:38] I was just trying [3:01:38] to write it down [3:01:39] they're mostly destroyed [3:01:43] CENTCOM continues [3:01:44] to watch them [3:01:45] not the Iranian Navy [3:01:47] no no [3:01:48] the IRCG [3:01:49] yes ma'am [3:01:49] the smaller [3:01:50] I won't get into [3:01:51] any classified materials [3:01:52] but the smaller [3:01:55] fast [3:01:56] and you know [3:01:56] smaller boats [3:01:57] Boston Whaler sized boats [3:01:59] there's still some [3:01:59] out there [3:02:00] yes ma'am [3:02:01] so this administration [3:02:03] and the Secretary of Defense [3:02:03] has been boasting [3:02:04] about sinking the ships [3:02:05] of the Iranian Navy [3:02:06] but let's call this [3:02:07] what it is [3:02:07] it's misdirection [3:02:09] they want us to focus [3:02:10] on the impressive number [3:02:11] of large Iranian ships [3:02:12] underwater [3:02:12] to distract from the fact [3:02:13] that they had no plans [3:02:14] for the second Navy [3:02:16] that Iran owns [3:02:16] that has always been [3:02:17] a hard problem [3:02:18] to address [3:02:18] by military force [3:02:19] the IRCG Navy [3:02:21] not the Iranian Navy [3:02:22] has been Iran's [3:02:23] tip of the spear [3:02:24] at the Straits of Hormuz [3:02:25] seizing vessels [3:02:26] and threatening [3:02:26] to target U.S. assets [3:02:28] Iran has long invested [3:02:30] in this second [3:02:31] asymmetrical Navy [3:02:32] specifically [3:02:33] to develop capabilities [3:02:34] that would be difficult [3:02:35] for conventional [3:02:36] U.S. military forces [3:02:37] to target [3:02:37] Iran's advantage [3:02:39] was well known [3:02:39] to anyone paying attention [3:02:40] I have no doubt [3:02:41] that competent planners [3:02:43] in the Pentagon [3:02:43] raised their concerns [3:02:44] about a quagmire [3:02:45] in the strait [3:02:46] to leadership [3:02:46] the question is [3:02:47] why their leadership [3:02:48] did not pay attention [3:02:49] to this sound advice [3:02:50] hubris is not strategy [3:02:51] and in war [3:02:52] it costs lives [3:02:53] even if the strait [3:02:54] reopens [3:02:55] this administration [3:02:56] has created [3:02:56] a new less safe world [3:02:58] by initiating [3:02:59] and then bungling [3:02:59] this crisis [3:03:00] and teaching Iran [3:03:01] that it can charge [3:03:02] a million dollars [3:03:03] a ship [3:03:03] to transit [3:03:04] the strait [3:03:05] it will take a long time [3:03:06] for the global economy [3:03:07] to bounce back [3:03:08] to normal trade flows [3:03:09] and Iran has learned [3:03:10] again that they can charge [3:03:11] a million dollars [3:03:12] per ship [3:03:12] creating a new funding line [3:03:13] for their malicious activity [3:03:14] against Americans [3:03:16] for years to come [3:03:18] and in the Indo-Pacific [3:03:19] I don't doubt [3:03:20] that if the worst day comes [3:03:22] our military will step up [3:03:23] to challenge [3:03:23] and defend Americans [3:03:24] and our interest [3:03:24] with military force [3:03:25] but will they be asked [3:03:26] to lay down their lives [3:03:27] unnecessarily [3:03:28] just because the White House [3:03:29] was unready [3:03:29] and incapable [3:03:30] of preventing a crisis [3:03:31] boiling over into a war [3:03:32] in the Indo-Pacific [3:03:33] General Cain [3:03:34] do you agree [3:03:35] that the military [3:03:35] would benefit [3:03:36] from significant [3:03:37] intra-agency planning [3:03:38] by the Department of Defense [3:03:40] on actions [3:03:41] short of war [3:03:41] that can be taken [3:03:42] if a crisis occurs [3:03:43] Ma'am [3:03:45] I appreciate that question [3:03:46] you highlighting [3:03:47] the importance of that [3:03:48] and we have really [3:03:50] great relationships [3:03:52] now on the joint staff [3:03:54] with the interagency [3:03:55] I think our relationship [3:03:57] in particular [3:03:57] I'll just pick CIA [3:03:58] I think it's the best [3:04:00] it's ever been [3:04:02] we're really working hard [3:04:03] to find the best [3:04:04] of Title 10 capabilities [3:04:05] plus the best [3:04:07] of Title 50 [3:04:07] to ensure that we deliver [3:04:09] really entrepreneurial options [3:04:11] for our national policymakers [3:04:13] to do what you're [3:04:14] talking about Senator [3:04:15] all right [3:04:16] but I am concerned [3:04:18] because during the recent [3:04:18] NDS hearing [3:04:19] I laid out the very real ways [3:04:20] that a crisis [3:04:21] in just one of the dozens [3:04:22] of flashpoints [3:04:23] in the Indo-Pacific [3:04:24] could be devastating [3:04:25] for our service members [3:04:25] Americans [3:04:26] and our American economy [3:04:28] but since then [3:04:29] this administration [3:04:29] has only further diminished [3:04:31] DOD's ability [3:04:32] to prepare for these crises [3:04:33] in fact [3:04:34] as many as one third [3:04:35] of the assets [3:04:36] in the Middle East [3:04:36] originally meant to be [3:04:38] in the Indo-Pacific [3:04:39] this war of choice [3:04:41] is draining our military resources [3:04:42] we need leaders [3:04:44] who do everything they can [3:04:44] to ensure war fighters [3:04:45] only fight [3:04:46] when they have to [3:04:47] not because of one man's whims [3:04:48] and the lack of bravery [3:04:49] among the yes men [3:04:50] he surrounds himself with [3:04:51] I thank you [3:04:52] for your service [3:04:52] General [3:04:53] and I continue to look forward [3:04:55] to working with you [3:04:56] Thank you [3:04:56] Senator Duckworth [3:04:57] Senator Rosen [3:04:58] Thank you Mr. Chairman [3:05:01] Thank you [3:05:01] Ranking Member Reed [3:05:02] Thank you General [3:05:04] for your service [3:05:06] Before I begin [3:05:08] my questions [3:05:08] for Secretary Hegsteth [3:05:10] I have one brief [3:05:10] important question [3:05:11] for General Cain [3:05:12] General [3:05:13] as you've acknowledged [3:05:14] at your confirmation hearing [3:05:16] service members [3:05:17] who served at locations [3:05:18] which another U.S. government agency [3:05:20] deems contaminated [3:05:21] like the Nevada Test and Training Range [3:05:23] should have the same presumption [3:05:26] of radiation exposure [3:05:27] as DOE employees [3:05:29] who served alongside them [3:05:31] but we also must ensure [3:05:32] that DOD provides the VA [3:05:34] with the records proving [3:05:35] that these individuals [3:05:36] serve there [3:05:37] so this is a problem [3:05:39] that DOD [3:05:40] has the power to solve [3:05:41] I know we've discussed this [3:05:43] so General Cain [3:05:44] will you commit to ensuring parity [3:05:46] for DOD personnel [3:05:47] who served in locations [3:05:48] that the U.S. government [3:05:49] has already deemed contaminated [3:05:51] identifying those [3:05:52] who served in such locations [3:05:54] and providing documentation [3:05:55] of that service to the VA [3:05:57] so that they can receive [3:05:59] the veterans benefits [3:06:00] that they have earned [3:06:02] You bet ma'am [3:06:03] and since our last time [3:06:06] together on this [3:06:07] we've continued to chip away [3:06:08] at removing [3:06:09] or figuring out [3:06:10] how to get past [3:06:11] that one particular blocking [3:06:13] in that record [3:06:14] so that that data flows normally [3:06:17] and I'm committed [3:06:18] to trying to solve that [3:06:20] for those leaders [3:06:21] and teammates [3:06:21] who are out there [3:06:22] at that site [3:06:23] Thank you [3:06:23] we'll look forward [3:06:24] to continue to work [3:06:25] with you on that [3:06:26] so Secretary Hegseth [3:06:27] I want to talk a little bit [3:06:28] about AI [3:06:29] because of course [3:06:30] our service members [3:06:31] deserve every advantage [3:06:32] we can give them [3:06:33] so I just want you [3:06:34] to help me understand this [3:06:35] in February [3:06:36] on the eve of Operation Epic Fury [3:06:39] you publicly designated Anthropic [3:06:41] as a supply chain risk [3:06:43] however this week [3:06:44] it's been reported [3:06:45] that the White House [3:06:46] is now helping agencies [3:06:47] get around this decision [3:06:48] to access Anthropic's technology [3:06:51] so the administration [3:06:53] cannot credibly make [3:06:54] both claims simultaneously [3:06:57] so before I ask you [3:06:59] about the inconsistency [3:07:00] I just want you [3:07:00] to reconfirm [3:07:01] what it is you plan [3:07:03] to use this technology for [3:07:05] it's been publicly reported [3:07:06] that the decision [3:07:07] to label Anthropic [3:07:08] a national security risk [3:07:10] was influenced [3:07:11] by your personal [3:07:11] and very public [3:07:12] contract dispute [3:07:13] with Anthropic [3:07:14] when the company said [3:07:16] that its technology [3:07:17] could not be used [3:07:18] for fully autonomous weapons [3:07:19] targeting [3:07:20] or mass surveillance [3:07:22] of Americans [3:07:23] so following up [3:07:24] on your response [3:07:25] to Senator Rounds earlier [3:07:27] can you confirm [3:07:29] whether or not [3:07:30] there will always be [3:07:31] a human in the loop [3:07:32] when AI is used [3:07:33] for lethal targeting decisions [3:07:35] well first of all [3:07:38] on Anthropic [3:07:39] they would not agree [3:07:40] to our terms of service [3:07:41] that would be like Boeing [3:07:42] giving us airplanes [3:07:43] and telling us [3:07:43] who we can shoot at [3:07:44] this is not [3:07:45] this is not just [3:07:46] about Anthropic [3:07:47] though [3:07:47] this is about [3:07:47] I just want to be clear [3:07:48] and also Anthropic [3:07:49] is run by an ideological [3:07:51] lunatic [3:07:51] who shouldn't have [3:07:52] a sole [3:07:53] but that's not my question [3:07:54] my question is AI [3:07:55] decision making [3:07:55] over what we do [3:07:56] writ large [3:07:57] we follow the law [3:07:58] should AI [3:07:59] well you confirm [3:08:00] you said this to [3:08:00] Senator Rounds earlier [3:08:01] so I'm just asking [3:08:02] for you to recommit [3:08:03] we follow the law [3:08:04] but we don't have to [3:08:05] sign a different [3:08:05] terms of agreement [3:08:06] with Anthropic [3:08:07] this is not the question [3:08:08] this is not about [3:08:09] Anthropic [3:08:10] this is just an example [3:08:11] I want you to confirm [3:08:14] that whether or not [3:08:15] there will always be [3:08:16] a human in the loop [3:08:17] when AI is used [3:08:18] in a kill chain [3:08:19] for lethal targeting [3:08:20] decisions [3:08:21] will there always be [3:08:21] a human in a loop [3:08:22] or will AI make [3:08:24] the decision [3:08:24] you said this to [3:08:26] we follow the law [3:08:28] and humans make decisions [3:08:29] so you will confirm [3:08:33] what you said [3:08:34] to Senator Rounds [3:08:35] that a human [3:08:35] will always be [3:08:36] in the loop [3:08:37] when AI is used [3:08:38] which is why [3:08:39] that's part of our [3:08:41] terms of service anyway [3:08:42] that's how we operate [3:08:45] all I want to say [3:08:48] is this [3:08:48] there is a DOD directive [3:08:50] 3000.09 [3:08:55] which mandates [3:08:56] that autonomous [3:08:56] and semi-autonomous [3:08:58] weapon systems [3:08:59] be designed [3:08:59] to allow commanders [3:09:00] and operators [3:09:01] to exercise [3:09:02] appropriate levels [3:09:03] of human judgment [3:09:04] over use of force [3:09:06] that is in the DOD [3:09:08] that's why we follow [3:09:09] the law [3:09:09] so the answer is [3:09:11] yes Mr. Secretary [3:09:12] the answer is [3:09:13] we follow the law [3:09:13] absolutely [3:09:14] I think this is more [3:09:16] important than following [3:09:17] the law [3:09:17] I think that people [3:09:18] want to know [3:09:19] that AI isn't going [3:09:20] to make lethal decisions [3:09:22] and it is critically [3:09:23] AI is not making [3:09:24] lethal decisions [3:09:25] that's what we want [3:09:26] to hear [3:09:27] we're going to follow [3:09:28] on that one [3:09:28] I have just [3:09:30] a few seconds left [3:09:32] but you keep doubling [3:09:35] down on this phrase [3:09:36] Mr. Secretary [3:09:38] you compare journalists [3:09:40] you compare us [3:09:41] you compare so many [3:09:42] to Pharisees [3:09:45] Pharisees [3:09:46] it's a problematic [3:09:47] and historically [3:09:48] weaponized term [3:09:49] that cast Jewish [3:09:50] communities [3:09:51] as hypocritical [3:09:52] or morally corrupt [3:09:53] you doubled down [3:09:54] again [3:09:54] and said it [3:09:55] words matter [3:09:57] words matter [3:09:58] what you choose [3:09:59] to say [3:10:00] how we choose [3:10:00] to say it [3:10:01] how do you justify [3:10:03] using this language [3:10:04] as Secretary of Defense [3:10:05] words matter [3:10:06] it's a hurt [3:10:07] historically hurtful term [3:10:09] why do you continue [3:10:10] to use it [3:10:11] and what actions [3:10:12] are you taking [3:10:13] to prevent rhetoric [3:10:14] like this [3:10:14] from permeating [3:10:15] throughout the department [3:10:16] that is going to target [3:10:17] specific groups [3:10:18] or individuals [3:10:19] of people [3:10:20] based on their religion [3:10:22] Senator I feel like [3:10:26] it's a pretty accurate [3:10:27] term for folks [3:10:28] who don't see the plank [3:10:29] in their own eye [3:10:30] and always want to see [3:10:31] what's wrong [3:10:31] with an operation [3:10:32] as opposed to [3:10:32] the historic success [3:10:33] of preventing Iran [3:10:34] from getting a nuclear weapon [3:10:35] so I stand by it [3:10:37] you stand by [3:10:38] calling people Pharisees [3:10:40] sir [3:10:40] I cannot [3:10:41] I cannot [3:10:43] stand for that [3:10:45] that is wrong [3:10:46] it is not respectful [3:10:47] to people [3:10:48] and I expect [3:10:49] anyone who is [3:10:50] in leadership [3:10:51] in our country [3:10:52] to be [3:10:54] respectful [3:10:55] and use respectful terms [3:10:58] and not be [3:10:59] an anti-Semite [3:11:00] thank you [3:11:03] Senator Rosen [3:11:05] the chair [3:11:07] and the ranking member [3:11:09] have no [3:11:10] second round questions [3:11:11] I'm told [3:11:12] by Senator Kelly [3:11:14] that he would like [3:11:15] to ask a second question [3:11:17] yeah Mr. Secretary [3:11:19] so 1.5 trillion dollars [3:11:22] 1.5 is a very round number [3:11:24] you know [3:11:26] if you're putting together [3:11:27] a budget [3:11:27] you'd come up with [3:11:28] these are the problems [3:11:30] we're trying to solve [3:11:32] this is the capability [3:11:33] we need [3:11:35] these are the systems [3:11:36] we have to buy [3:11:37] and at the end of the day [3:11:39] it would spit out a number [3:11:41] and it's probably not [3:11:41] 1.5 trillion [3:11:42] so to me [3:11:43] it feels like [3:11:44] that number [3:11:45] was just kind of [3:11:45] pulled out of thin air [3:11:48] I took a look [3:11:51] recently [3:11:51] and it seems [3:11:53] that the defense budget [3:11:55] of the rest of the world [3:11:57] I'm talking [3:11:58] China [3:11:59] Russia [3:11:59] India [3:12:00] every Asian country [3:12:02] every European country [3:12:04] South America [3:12:04] everybody else [3:12:05] is in the neighborhood [3:12:07] it looked like [3:12:08] 1.7 to 1.8 [3:12:10] so your request [3:12:12] is approaching [3:12:14] all defense spending [3:12:16] from everybody else [3:12:17] with the exception of us [3:12:18] that is a huge amount [3:12:20] of money [3:12:20] you know [3:12:21] when I got here [3:12:22] you know [3:12:23] just five years ago [3:12:24] it was almost half [3:12:27] of that [3:12:28] through budget reconciliation [3:12:31] you've received [3:12:31] a bunch of money [3:12:33] to buy things [3:12:35] some of the weapon systems [3:12:37] you know [3:12:37] to resupply [3:12:38] what we need [3:12:39] I'm just trying [3:12:41] to understand [3:12:41] you know [3:12:42] like where is all [3:12:43] this money [3:12:43] going to go [3:12:44] and if you've figured [3:12:45] out ahead of time [3:12:47] what do you want [3:12:47] to spend this on [3:12:48] and by the way [3:12:49] there are systems [3:12:52] the president wants [3:12:53] you know [3:12:53] he saw [3:12:54] last summer [3:12:56] how effective [3:12:57] Iron Dome [3:12:58] and David's Sling were [3:12:59] and because of that [3:13:02] the president decided [3:13:04] we're going to build [3:13:05] our own version [3:13:06] we're going to call it [3:13:07] Golden Dome [3:13:08] because the president [3:13:09] likes the color gold [3:13:11] we've seen that [3:13:12] see it in the Oval Office [3:13:14] we're going to call it [3:13:15] Golden Dome [3:13:16] and it might cost [3:13:17] somewhere between [3:13:17] 500 billion [3:13:18] and a trillion dollars [3:13:19] I've heard those estimates [3:13:20] by the way [3:13:22] on that problem [3:13:22] I know a little bit [3:13:23] about intercepting [3:13:25] stuff [3:13:26] in space [3:13:27] it's really hard [3:13:27] and the physics [3:13:29] on this favors [3:13:30] the offense [3:13:30] there's some things [3:13:32] in that program [3:13:34] that I think [3:13:35] is really important [3:13:35] that we do [3:13:36] and try to figure it out [3:13:38] but space-based interceptors [3:13:40] to hit multiple targets [3:13:42] and by the way [3:13:44] it's important [3:13:44] how you size the system [3:13:46] so [3:13:47] I'm trying to understand [3:13:49] Mr. Secretary [3:13:49] what kind of detail [3:13:50] did you guys [3:13:51] did you work out [3:13:53] like a detailed plan [3:13:54] and at the end of the day [3:13:55] it came out [3:13:56] oh [3:13:57] it just happens to come out [3:13:58] to be 1.5 trillion dollars [3:14:00] Senator [3:14:02] the exact amount [3:14:03] is actually [3:14:03] 1.535 trillion dollars [3:14:06] and it was a product [3:14:06] of a highly rigorous process [3:14:08] throughout our department [3:14:10] from COCOM commanders [3:14:11] to the services [3:14:12] with our comptroller [3:14:13] with our deputy secretary [3:14:14] with the chairman [3:14:15] and myself [3:14:15] to ensure the budget [3:14:17] reflects the realities [3:14:18] of the world we live in [3:14:19] and the capabilities [3:14:19] we're going to need [3:14:20] and that's why [3:14:20] there's 65 billion [3:14:21] for ship building [3:14:23] 120 billion [3:14:24] for the defense [3:14:24] industrial base [3:14:25] 331 billion [3:14:27] for munitions [3:14:28] 44 billion [3:14:29] for quality of life [3:14:30] 71 billion [3:14:31] on our nuclear dib [3:14:32] you name it [3:14:33] we're investing in it [3:14:34] and the biggest reason [3:14:35] for it [3:14:36] is the underinvestment [3:14:37] of the Biden administration [3:14:38] I mean what they spent [3:14:39] on defense [3:14:40] the continuing resolutions [3:14:41] and others [3:14:42] undercut the buildup [3:14:43] that President Trump [3:14:44] had created [3:14:45] so yes we're doing [3:14:46] a lot of deferred maintenance [3:14:47] here around the world [3:14:49] and in our department [3:14:50] and this budget reflects it [3:14:51] and it's a commitment [3:14:52] a generational commitment [3:14:53] to the security [3:14:54] of the American people [3:14:55] and if the rest of the world [3:14:56] won't spend on their defense [3:14:57] that's their fault [3:14:58] the American department of war [3:15:01] will invest properly [3:15:02] to defend the American people [3:15:03] and that's what this budget [3:15:04] stands for [3:15:04] I've always been supportive [3:15:04] of defense spending [3:15:06] in my entire time here [3:15:08] and after 25 years [3:15:10] in the Navy [3:15:10] I want to make sure [3:15:12] our folks have [3:15:13] what they need [3:15:14] I think you should go back [3:15:16] and take a look [3:15:17] and see if there are places [3:15:19] where we are making investments [3:15:21] that we actually don't need [3:15:22] there are some systems out there [3:15:23] I mean we're constantly looking [3:15:25] and trying to balance [3:15:26] do we want you know F-47 [3:15:29] which I've been supportive of [3:15:30] B-21 also supportive [3:15:33] and then we want to make [3:15:35] all these other investments [3:15:36] in really inexpensive [3:15:38] low cost munitions [3:15:42] because we suddenly realize [3:15:44] that the expensive stuff [3:15:45] even with through B-21 [3:15:47] we can't really [3:15:48] maybe not get close enough [3:15:50] but the whole idea [3:15:51] behind B-21 [3:15:52] and F-47 [3:15:52] is we can penetrate [3:15:53] further into the A2AD bubble [3:15:55] so there's some conflict there [3:15:57] so I'm just encouraging you [3:16:00] to go back and see [3:16:01] you know if there are [3:16:03] some systems [3:16:04] where we can bring that number [3:16:06] the overall number down [3:16:08] because as I look at what [3:16:10] the department [3:16:11] is trying to field [3:16:12] you know some of this stuff [3:16:14] in my judgment [3:16:15] and you know [3:16:16] I know others might have [3:16:18] another opinion [3:16:18] some of this stuff [3:16:19] we either don't need [3:16:21] or it's not going to work [3:16:22] thank you Mr. Chairman [3:16:24] Senator Kelly [3:16:24] your time has expired [3:16:25] let me just say [3:16:26] you have a great deal [3:16:27] of expertise [3:16:28] in the area of space [3:16:30] and we do look forward [3:16:31] to your contribution [3:16:34] as we mark up [3:16:35] further legislation [3:16:37] Senator Blumenthal [3:16:38] I understand you have [3:16:39] a follow-up question [3:16:40] yes [3:16:42] first of all [3:16:44] I want to thank [3:16:45] you Mr. Secretary [3:16:47] for your support [3:16:48] for the Major Richard Starr Act [3:16:51] which I think [3:16:52] is tremendously significant [3:16:54] I'm committed [3:16:55] to getting it done [3:16:56] as soon as possible [3:16:57] at least before [3:17:00] Veterans Day [3:17:00] and I look forward [3:17:02] to your help [3:17:03] in accomplishing [3:17:04] that goal [3:17:05] but I want to thank you [3:17:06] for your support [3:17:07] I'm sure the Veterans of America [3:17:08] are grateful [3:17:11] for the prospective victory there [3:17:13] I've talked to [3:17:17] many of the combatant commanders [3:17:20] about lessons learned [3:17:22] from Ukraine [3:17:23] and I think that [3:17:28] there is unanimity [3:17:30] on the point [3:17:30] that there is a lot [3:17:32] to be learned [3:17:33] not only about [3:17:35] what the Russians are doing [3:17:37] but what other adversaries [3:17:38] could do as well [3:17:39] General Cain [3:17:41] Chairman Cain [3:17:42] would you agree [3:17:44] that there are lessons [3:17:45] to be learned [3:17:45] from Ukraine? [3:17:49] You bet [3:17:49] you bet Senator [3:17:50] and there's lessons learned [3:17:51] from everywhere [3:17:52] and that's really [3:17:52] the culture of our [3:17:53] joint force right now [3:17:54] is to make sure [3:17:55] that across the globe [3:17:57] anytime we're in contact [3:17:58] with the enemy [3:17:59] we're going back [3:18:00] and determining [3:18:01] what we can learn [3:18:02] from there [3:18:02] but a big one [3:18:05] if you'll allow me [3:18:06] a big one [3:18:06] is mass [3:18:09] and simultaneity [3:18:11] which is something [3:18:12] the Secretary's [3:18:13] taking a strong role [3:18:15] in making sure [3:18:15] that we're doing that [3:18:16] through drone evaluations [3:18:18] and things like that [3:18:19] moving forward [3:18:20] Following up [3:18:23] on a question [3:18:24] that I asked [3:18:24] earlier [3:18:25] in my last question [3:18:27] the President [3:18:28] said yesterday [3:18:29] that his view [3:18:30] is after his conversation [3:18:32] with Vladimir Putin [3:18:34] that Ukraine [3:18:35] has been [3:18:36] quote [3:18:36] militarily defeated [3:18:38] in your professional judgment [3:18:42] has Ukraine [3:18:43] been militarily defeated? [3:18:45] Sir I haven't [3:18:46] I haven't seen [3:18:46] the President's quote [3:18:47] but you know [3:18:48] I'll go back [3:18:49] to something [3:18:50] I started with [3:18:51] and that's the [3:18:52] importance [3:18:52] of me maintaining [3:18:55] trust with a variety [3:18:57] of people [3:18:58] and you know [3:18:59] a President [3:19:00] will make a wide range [3:19:02] of comments [3:19:03] and considerations [3:19:04] as the Commander-in-Chief [3:19:05] You don't have to go [3:19:07] too much farther [3:19:07] I understand [3:19:08] the point [3:19:08] that you're making [3:19:09] Thank you [3:19:09] I appreciate it [3:19:10] Senator [3:19:10] In my view [3:19:13] Ukraine has not only [3:19:15] not been [3:19:16] militarily defeated [3:19:17] but the point [3:19:17] that I was trying [3:19:18] to make [3:19:18] in the last exchange [3:19:19] with the Secretary [3:19:21] there's a false narrative [3:19:24] based on my last visit [3:19:26] to Ukraine [3:19:27] which was my ninth [3:19:29] my conversation [3:19:30] not only with [3:19:31] President Zelensky [3:19:33] but with [3:19:33] our own [3:19:35] military [3:19:36] on the ground [3:19:37] as well as [3:19:38] our intelligence community [3:19:39] in fact [3:19:41] Ukraine arguably [3:19:43] is winning [3:19:44] there is this [3:19:45] false narrative [3:19:45] Russia is winning [3:19:46] Putin wants [3:19:47] that false narrative [3:19:48] to be our [3:19:49] official narrative [3:19:50] I'm not putting [3:19:50] words in your mouth [3:19:52] and you don't [3:19:53] have to respond [3:19:53] I understand [3:19:54] your reasons [3:19:55] for not responding [3:19:56] but the American people [3:19:56] should know [3:19:57] that the President [3:19:59] of the United States [3:20:00] is undermining [3:20:02] our security [3:20:03] because Ukraine [3:20:04] is holding [3:20:05] the line [3:20:06] against Vladimir Putin [3:20:07] who will keep [3:20:09] going [3:20:10] against Moldova [3:20:12] which I also visited [3:20:13] on my last trip [3:20:14] against [3:20:15] our NATO allies [3:20:17] and we still [3:20:17] have an obligation [3:20:18] under Article 5 [3:20:20] to come [3:20:21] to their defense [3:20:22] just as [3:20:23] they did [3:20:24] after 9-11 [3:20:27] as King Charles [3:20:28] so eloquently [3:20:30] reminded us [3:20:31] and [3:20:32] my view is [3:20:33] and [3:20:34] this observation [3:20:35] is hardly novel [3:20:36] that China [3:20:37] is watching [3:20:38] what we're doing [3:20:38] in Ukraine [3:20:39] would you agree? [3:20:40] Sir I'd agree [3:20:43] that China's [3:20:43] watching everywhere [3:20:45] and carefully [3:20:47] thinking about [3:20:48] what their force [3:20:49] posture and approach [3:20:50] will be [3:20:50] and I think [3:20:52] they're learning [3:20:53] a variety of things [3:20:55] to include [3:20:55] the tenacity [3:20:56] and grit [3:20:57] of the joint force [3:20:58] around the things [3:20:59] that we've been ordered [3:21:00] to do over the last year [3:21:01] but if they see [3:21:03] weakness [3:21:04] in our response [3:21:05] to Russia [3:21:06] and Ukraine [3:21:06] that will affect [3:21:08] the deterrence [3:21:11] of their [3:21:11] possibly [3:21:12] moving against [3:21:14] one of our [3:21:16] allies [3:21:17] or partners [3:21:18] in the Far East [3:21:19] let me [3:21:19] finally ask [3:21:21] Mr. Hurst [3:21:21] your estimate [3:21:23] of 25 billion dollars [3:21:25] would you share [3:21:26] with us [3:21:26] what that estimate [3:21:28] is based on? [3:21:32] Yeah we can work [3:21:32] to get you a product [3:21:33] the details [3:21:34] if you'd like [3:21:34] and finally [3:21:37] Mr. Secretary [3:21:37] is there going [3:21:38] to be a report [3:21:39] on the bombing [3:21:41] of the school [3:21:43] in the first day [3:21:44] or so of the war? [3:21:45] I know you were [3:21:46] asked about it yesterday [3:21:47] I'm wondering [3:21:48] whether you have [3:21:48] a more detailed [3:21:51] response that you [3:21:52] can share with us. [3:21:53] As I've said [3:21:54] that's under [3:21:54] investigation of 15-6 [3:21:56] a general officer [3:21:57] from outside [3:21:57] the chain of command [3:21:58] has been reviewing it [3:21:59] and it's still [3:22:01] within the parameters [3:22:01] of the investigation. [3:22:02] Will there be [3:22:03] a preliminary report [3:22:04] in the next few weeks [3:22:07] or do you have [3:22:08] a time estimate? [3:22:10] I don't have [3:22:11] a time estimate [3:22:11] for you [3:22:12] but it will be [3:22:14] it's right now [3:22:15] within the parameters [3:22:16] of the length [3:22:16] of time [3:22:17] that normally [3:22:17] these investigations [3:22:18] take. [3:22:18] I'm asking [3:22:19] because in your [3:22:20] final response [3:22:21] to Senator Gillibrand [3:22:22] you said [3:22:25] that great care [3:22:27] is taken [3:22:27] to avoid [3:22:28] civilian casualties [3:22:30] and it would be [3:22:31] profoundly significant [3:22:32] if that report [3:22:33] were made available [3:22:34] in a timely way [3:22:35] to show [3:22:36] in fact [3:22:37] the commitment [3:22:37] to avoiding [3:22:39] civilian casualties [3:22:39] and learning lessons [3:22:41] from the mistake [3:22:42] made there. [3:22:44] Thank you [3:22:44] Senator Blumenthal [3:22:45] this concludes [3:22:47] today's hearing [3:22:47] I'd like to thank [3:22:48] our witnesses [3:22:49] for their testimony [3:22:50] for the information [3:22:51] of members [3:22:51] questions for the record [3:22:52] would be due [3:22:53] to the committee [3:22:54] within two business days [3:22:55] of the conclusion [3:22:57] of the hearing [3:22:57] we are adjourned.