    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    .
                             [H.A.S.C. No. 117-56]

                                    HEARING

                                       ON

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022

                                      AND

                  OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND SPECIAL OPERATIONS

                                       ON

                         REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2022

                        BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL

                         OPERATIONS FORCES AND COMMAND

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                 JULY 21, 2021

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    47-465                     WASHINGTON : 2022

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND SPECIAL OPERATIONS

                        RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona, Chairman

    RICK LARSEN, Washington              TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
    JIM COOPER, Tennessee                AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
    WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts    SAM GRAVES, Missouri
    FILEMON VELA, Texas                  DON BACON, Nebraska
    MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
    JIMMY PANETTA, California            MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
    STEPHANIE N. MURPHY, Florida, Vice   C. SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
        Chair

                   Jessica Carroll, Professional Staff Member
                   Patrick Nevins, Professional Staff Member
                               Zach Taylor, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Gallego. Hon. Ruben, a Representative from Arizona, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations............     1
    Kelly, Hon. Trent, a Representative from Mississippi, Ranking
      Member, Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations....     2

                                   WITNESSES

    Clarke, GEN Richard D., USA, Commander, U.S. Special Operations
      Command........................................................     4
    McMenamin, Joseph J., Performing the Duties of Assistant
      Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
      Conflict, U.S. Department of Defense...........................     3

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Clarke, GEN Richard D........................................    37
        McMenamin, Joseph J..........................................    27

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [Responses provided were classified and retained in
          subcommittee files.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Gallego..................................................    49
        Mr. Scott....................................................    49

        REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2022 BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL
                         OPERATIONS FORCES AND COMMAND

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
           Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations,
                              Washington, DC, Wednesday, July 21, 2021.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:16 p.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ruben Gallego
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RUBEN GALLEGO, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
      ARIZONA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND SPECIAL
                               OPERATIONS

        [Mr. Gallego's reading of instructions for virtual remote
    hearing attendees was inaudible.]
        Mr. Gallego. Good afternoon. I call to order this hearing
    of the Intelligence and Special Operations Subcommittee on
    ``Shaping the Future: A Review of the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget
    Request for U.S. Special Operations Forces and Command.''
    Today's hearing follows a significant shift in the operational
    landscape which has dictated the deployments, training, and
    lives of special operations forces [SOF] through the withdrawal
    from Afghanistan.
        For the last two decades, special operations forces
    answered our Nation's calls, responding to the most dangerous
    threats in the most difficult environments. The wars in
    Afghanistan and Iraq consumed SOF in profound ways which we do
    not yet fully understand. The neurological trauma,
    psychological burden, and moral injury borne by the women and
    men across the SOF formation, enablers and operators alike,
    must be properly diagnosed, treated, and rehabilitated.
        The withdrawal from Afghanistan provides an opportunity to
    provide timely care for the formation and to demonstrate
    commitment to SOF truth number one: that humans are more
    important than hardware. As such, I appreciate the prioritized
    investments in cognitive rehabilitation and performance
    research through the Preservation of the Force and Family
    program, which is a critical vehicle to deliver specialized
    care and support across the formation. We must not lose sight
    that although SOF make up a small percentage of total joint
    force, they have endured the bulk of U.S. combat casualties
    over the last years.
        Today's hearing is focused on the fiscal year 2022 budget
    request for Special Operations Command [SOCOM] and SOF. The
    budget request highlights SOCOM's shifting focus to confront
    the complex threat landscape we face, most notably calling for
    a reinforcement of core competencies in irregular warfare,
    clandestine activities, and information operations, as well as
    investments in the unique capabilities that enable those
    activities. Additionally, the command invests in cybersecurity,
    rotary-wing upgrades, and accelerated development of emergent
    technologies required for the future fight.
        While winning the future fight is not just about acquiring
    new things, it is about making sure our special operations
    forces themselves have the skill and experience necessary to
    respond to the demands of strategic power competition. That
    means making a coherent and deliberate effort to diversify the
    SOF workforce in both background and skill set.
        Prioritizing diversity in SOF also means widening the range
    of expertise in technical fields such as cybersecurity,
    biomedical engineering, and programming, which our forces can
    bring to bear against our adversaries and enhance our
    competitive edge. Retainment of diverse personnel is equally
    important. Retraining manpower in historically undervalued
    fields, such as civil affairs and psychological operations,
    will need to be reprioritized and incentivized in order to
    compete with the likes of China and Russia.
        All of these topics--diversity and inclusion, health of
    force--are essential to our readiness. We need ready, able, and
    healthy special operations forces to compete. Much in the way
    one would never approve deployment of an aircraft that is
    partially airworthy, we cannot condone a partially ready force.
        With that, let me introduce today's witnesses who will
    defend U.S. SOCOM's $12.6 billion request for fiscal year 2022.
        Mr. Joseph McMenamin, Performing the Duties of Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
    Conflict; and General Richard Clarke, Commander, U.S. Special
    Operations Command.
        Gentlemen, we look forward to hearing from your commentary.
        I will now turn to ranking member for any opening remarks.

         STATEMENT OF HON. TRENT KELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
     MISSISSIPPI, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND
                           SPECIAL OPERATIONS

        Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank both you
    witnesses for being here.
        I thank you for your opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, and
    your leadership in organizing this afternoon's posture hearing.
        Today we will hear from two leaders across the special
    operations enterprise. The fiscal year 2022 budget request for
    Special Operations Command didn't just fail to keep pace with
    inflation, but it cut the top line for the second year in a
    row. The fiscal year 2022 budget request represents a $495
    million decrease from fiscal year 2021, a 4 percent cut. And
    the fiscal year 2021 enacted budget was a $600 million cut from
    the fiscal year 2020. Proper authorization and appropriation of
    national defense activities is vital. We cannot force our SOF
    formation into the impossible choice between readiness and
    modernization.
        As far as current operations go, maybe most pressing of all
    the threats right now is how SOCOM is postured to continue
    counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan with the impending
    redeployment of our troops. As we know, the Biden
    administration ordered all troops out of the country by
    September 11 of this year, of which we are currently on target
    to be ahead of that, and the Department continues to push
    forward ahead of this deadline, now currently targeting August
    31 for the complete withdrawal of activities.
        The way in which we plan to keep an eye on the security
    situation and the way in which we conduct intelligence
    gathering in Afghanistan post-withdrawal is of great concern to
    myself and members of this subcommittee. We continue to hear
    but I have yet to be briefed on what over-the-horizon
    capabilities truly means. And I use this as an example. As a
    battalion commander, a company commander, we used to always
    back-plan the mission and the fight, but we didn't plan to get
    out of the assembly area, the uncoiling from an assembly area
    and getting to an LD [line of departure] on time. Seems like a
    simple operation. But military operations, as no one knows
    better than SOCOM, have to be detailed planning and detailed
    execution. Otherwise, they fail. So a hand wave of over-the-
    horizon doesn't get it for me. We have got to know the detailed
    plans of how we intend to continue to get after the targets we
    need to in Afghanistan, North Africa, and other hard-to-reach
    areas.
        Lastly, I would like to publicly voice my support for
    SOCOM's Armed Overwatch program. I am pleased and assured by
    the work conducted by ASD(SO/LIC) [Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict] and
    SOCOM to ensure the right measures have been put in place to
    validate the need for this platform. I am eager to see the
    results of the ongoing demonstrations taking place right now
    and what that will mean for procurement in fiscal year 2022.
        I would like to thank Representative and Colonel Mike Waltz
    for his leadership on this issue. And as a special operations
    community operator for many years and a colonel, he definitely
    has the background to understand this.
        I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on all
    these topics, in addition to this year's budget request and the
    associated priorities of fiscal year 2022. I want to thank our
    witnesses in advance for their time today. I look forward to
    continuing to work with our special operations leaders during
    the 117th Congress to ensure we are appropriately postured to
    meet and defeat the threats posed by our adversaries.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Ranking Member Kelly.
        Now, we turn to our witnesses, and we will start with Mr.
    McMenamin for your opening remarks.

      STATEMENT OF JOSEPH J. McMENAMIN, PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF
     ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS AND LOW-
             INTENSITY CONFLICT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

        Mr. McMenamin. Chairman Gallego, Ranking Member Kelly,
    distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on our global posture for America's
    special operations enterprise. I am honored to testify
    alongside General Clarke, who has provided exemplary leadership
    for our special operations soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines,
    and civilians.
        Secretary Austin has outlined his three principal
    priorities for the Department: defend the Nation, take care of
    our people, and succeed through teamwork. The SOF community
    excels in each of these areas and plays an essential role
    within the joint force in advancing our strategic priorities.
    As reflected in SOCOM's fiscal year 2022 budget request, we
    continue to invest in capabilities to meet the challenges of
    strategic competition with China and Russia, while
    strengthening vital alliances and partnerships. As we innovate
    to compete more effectively, we recognize that our
    counterterrorism operations must become even more sustainable
    and focused on the most pressing threats to our citizens and
    interests.
        I appreciate the strong support of Congress for our SOF
    warriors and their families. This community has borne over half
    of all U.S. combat casualties over the past 2 years, and many
    more have sustained life-altering injuries and suffered
    psychological trauma.
        Enhancing the readiness and resilience of our SOF personnel
    and their families remains a top priority. Despite the COVID-19
    [coronavirus] pandemic, SOF have continued to maintain a high
    level of operational readiness. The President's fiscal year
    2022 budget request sustains funding for SOCOM's Preservation
    of the Force and Family program to optimize the performance of
    SOF personnel, and we continue to make progress in easing the
    strain of high rates of overseas deployments.
        General Clarke and I remain concerned about the moral and
    ethical health of the SOF community. SO/LIC is working closely
    with SOCOM on the implementation of its comprehensive review of
    SOF culture and ethics. We are also committed to enhancing
    diversity within the SOF community. As we compete against
    increasingly capable adversaries, a more diverse force empowers
    us to draw upon broader perspectives, different lived
    experience, and new ideas. Civilian military partnership will
    be critical to addressing these challenges.
        Finally, we continue to make progress in strengthening SO/
    LIC's role in providing civilian oversight for the SOF
    enterprise. On 5 May, Secretary Austin reaffirmed ASD(SO/LIC's)
    role as the principal staff assistant and direct report to the
    Secretary for SOF administrative matters. We are committed to
    ensuring that these reforms meet the intent of Congress and
    serve the interests of the Department and the men and women of
    our SOF community.
        Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by thanking the
    committee again for its strong support of our special
    operations community.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to
    your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McMenamin can be found in
    the Appendix on page 27.]
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Mr. McMenamin.
        And now General Clarke.

       STATEMENT OF GEN RICHARD D. CLARKE, USA, COMMANDER, U.S.
                       SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

        General Clarke. Chairman Gallego, Ranking Member Kelly, and
    distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for this
    opportunity, and I am honored to testify, along Mr. Joe
    McMenamin. But also joining in behind me is Chief Greg Smith,
    my Command Senior Enlisted Leader, representing the almost
    70,000 men and women of this great command. Greg marks his 31st
    year in uniform this past spring, and I am always welcome to
    his counsel and his leadership.
        USSOCOM, our structure, our authorities, and our purpose
    are the direct outcome of Congress. We strive each and every
    day to honor Congress' vision by training and employing the
    world's finest special operations force this world has ever
    known, a force that is inclusive and professional, supremely
    competent and trusted, and reflective of American diversity,
    values, and always committed to our constitutional oath.
        The incredible women and men of this multicomponent command
    employ their unique skills globally, fully integrated with the
    joint force, and aligned with the national priorities set by
    our Secretary that Mr. McMenamin outlined.
        USSOCOM continues to deter and disrupt persistent threats
    by terrorists and extremist organizations. Twenty years of this
    fight have honed our capability and our resolve. We remain
    poised to address any threats to the homeland or to the
    American people with approaches that are effective and
    sustainable.
        SOCOM remains well-postured to compete against malign state
    influence. SOF provide unique value in this critical endeavor.
    Below the level of armed conflict, SOF teams support a wide
    range of U.S. policy objectives and generate options to counter
    China, Russia, and other competitors. Often our activities to
    counter violent extremist organizations have tangible,
    derivative value to strategic competition. As we forge
    partnerships and build partner capacity, we gain access,
    placement, and influence in critical regions. Should future
    conflicts arise, our modernization priorities will provide
    interoperable forces able to win as part of the joint
    warfighting concept.
        Our team also extends beyond operators in the field to a
    wide array of military, interagency and international partners,
    as well as our unassailable partnership with ASD(SO/LIC) The
    oversight, policy guidance, and advocacy within the Department
    of Defense provided by ASD(SO/LIC) are essential for the
    modernization, readiness, and well-being of SOF and their
    families. Above all, we are committed to upholding the
    principle of civilian control of our military in line with the
    Constitution we have pledged to defend.
        Your continued support in Congress and the vital trust of
    the American people allow this command to support our Nation
    now and prepare for the challenges of tomorrow. Today, while we
    are here, over 4,000 special operators stand vigilant in over
    60 countries. Their commitment to America's security and
    prosperity is inspirational. And their enthusiasm to learn,
    adapt, and serve is infectious. It is my honor to serve with
    them.
        And I look forward to answering your questions.
        [The prepared statement of General Clarke can be found in
    the Appendix on page 37.]
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, General Clarke.
        And now we will be entering the question portion of the
    committee hearing, and we will start with 5-minute questions,
    and I will begin.
        General Clarke, earlier this year, USSOCOM released the
    Strategic Plan for Diversity and Inclusion. What does
    diversity, inclusion, and equity mean to you? And what are your
    next steps to actualize this document?
        General Clarke. Congressman, diversity for USSOCOM is to
    make sure that we, first, we reflect the best talent and the
    best people of this country. The people of this country have
    unique talents and skill sets, and we don't--we want to ensure
    that all of them are given the opportunity, you know, when
    able, to meet the standards that are required within our force.
        And the last thing I would say on the diversity side of
    this is that we want to ensure that any barriers to come into
    SOCOM, that whether they are actual or perceived, those are
    actually put down to allow the best talent to come in. And, at
    the end of the day, this still comes as an operational
    imperative for our force. When we are operating globally, and
    as you talked about in great power competition, having
    individuals that reflect this country but individuals that can
    understand others' cultures and where they are coming from that
    are problem solvers are exactly what we need in our force.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you.
        Mr. McMenamin, if I said that correctly, in your opinion
    what is the state of SOF readiness? And what do you believe are
    the most significant issues affecting readiness today?
        Mr. McMenamin. As General Clarke can probably attest to,
    SOF readiness is an important criteria for us to stay globally
    engaged. Whether we are deployed in a security assistance role,
    whether we are supporting an interagency partner, or supporting
    a foreign partner, the readiness and the SOF capability to
    respond is a crucial part of the development of the SOF
    operator and the SOF teams. The training, education, and
    development of the individual and the leader is imperative to
    allow us to accomplish missions set out by the Department of
    Defense and the President of the United States.
        Mr. Gallego. To follow up--or not follow up. This is
    another question, Mr. McMenamin.
        The official May 5 statement regarding the revised
    organization and role of ASD(SO/LIC) stated that the Deputy
    Secretary of Defense wanted to ensure that SO/LIC maintains
    dedicated resources and grows to a level commensurate with its
    increased responsibilities.
        How is the Department facilitating the growth, given the
    increase of responsibilities?
        Mr. McMenamin. Yes, sir. The office has set up a
    secretariat that is growing in strength with key personnel to
    work in both the personnel areas, such as the diversity and
    inclusion, also assisting in oversight, assisting in budget
    development, and working very closely with SOCOM. The team that
    is in place has a very good relationship with the leadership
    down at SOCOM, and we can see this relationship growing
    stronger as the expertise and the exchange of knowledge
    continues.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you.
        General Clarke, in 2020 posture--in the 2020 posture
    statement, you specified that USSOCOM continues to rightsize
    our deployed forces to meet the Secretary of Defense's minimum
    objective of 1:2 deployments-to-dwell ratio with a goal of 1:3.
    In this year's statement, you reference an expectation to
    achieve a sustainable balance of deployed forces across C-VEO
    [counter violent extremist organization] and strategic
    competition mission sets and reach the DOD's [Department of
    Defense's] directed 1:2 deployment-to-dwell ratio for all SOF.
    Is a 1:3 ratio still a goal, and what progress has been made in
    achieving that goal?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. In align with the Secretary's
    guidance, the 1:3 is still the goal.
        Mr. Gallego. What do you--what changes are you making to
    make that--to increase the dwell time?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Gallego. Administrative changes or anything of that
    nature.
        General Clarke. It really goes to operational changes in
    accordance with--in align with the geographic combatant
    commands, number one. We are making sure that the missions that
    SOF conducts on behalf of the geographic combatant commanders
    are missions that only SOF should and can do.
        Mr. Gallego. As I said before, not every CT
    [counterterrorism] mission has to be done by SOF.
        General Clarke. Not every single mission across the globe
    has to be done by our special operations forces. There are, as
    you well know, there are SOF-specific missions. But--and then
    we are also making sure that we leverage allies and partners
    who are also capable, very capable partners, that we have
    trained with that can actually do the mission that is required
    by SOF. And so, when others can do it at the adequate level, we
    should allow others to do it.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, General.
        Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I am very encouraged by our progress made on the Armed
    Overwatch program and the capability it can provide to our
    special operations forces. It is important to have a combat
    platform that is at your disposal, especially when it doesn't
    put other service members at risk and delivers the firepower
    that you need because our men and women that serve under you,
    General Clarke, they are not scared of going into danger's way,
    but we don't need to put them there when we have a platform
    that doesn't put human lives at risk. And so I am very
    encouraged by this.
        Can you elaborate on the types of missions it can be used
    for outside the counterterrorism mission in Africa?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir, I can. And thanks for your
    support to this program.
        This multirole capability that could provide both
    intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance [ISR] overhead
    but also is prepared to fire munitions in support of a team
    that could be in harm's way; it could be used globally. As you
    identified, it could be used in Africa, which it is optimal
    there. But it could also be used in the Philippines, in
    Thailand, you know, wherever we need or in South America,
    wherever we need ISR overhead for our troops. It is really a
    policy whether or not fires are required. It is policy and it
    is the conditions on the ground that could dictate whether or
    not you needed fires. So it is a multirole platform.
        Mr. Kelly. Absolutely. And I know President Biden supports
    this system, and I know that several other people do, but--and
    I just want to reiterate the point. It does collect
    intelligence and help with that, but at the end of the day, it
    delivers a payload that either support or keep our men and
    women in uniform from having to be exposed to combat fire of
    the enemy.
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. If I could take that, from the
    intel side, it is--but it is direct operational support to the
    team on the ground. And it is that direct--and it is raw
    information that is provided for the team. It is not there
    specifically----
        Mr. Kelly. Just like an Apache helicopter or a C-130 that
    is armed to support you guys, it is your platform that is
    operational in nature.
        General Clarke. That is correct.
        Mr. Kelly. Let me go a little bit. I mentioned in my
    opening remarks this is the second year in a row that SOCOM has
    incurred a budget decrease. The fiscal year 2022 budget request
    from the administration cuts SOCOM by $495 million, a 4 percent
    decrease. And that is not counting real dollars on inflation,
    which continues to rise. What are you not able to do because of
    these cuts, and what are the associated risks?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. I will--for us, our operations
    and maintenance [O&M] funding remains steady. So we can still
    maintain the operations required overseas and the readiness and
    training, as was asked about. Our training levels can maintain.
    Where we are taking some reduction is in MILCON [military
    construction] and some of our research, development, and
    technology. But what we have done inside of SOCOM's budget on
    the O&M is actually adjusted toward some priorities toward
    great power competition and looking long term for that budget.
        I will defer to Mr. McMenamin.
        Mr. Kelly. And let me--let me just real quick, because I
    know how much time you guys spend actually pulling triggers and
    training in preparations for missions and working as teams and
    the extensive amount of training. I understand that most of our
    warriors in your command are a little older. They are not--they
    are not your 19-year-old kids. They are a little older, and
    trust me, as you get older, your body is a little harder to
    maintain. And so some of those dollars is where that is going.
    And it matters that they be mentally, physically, and
    technically competent in everything that they perform. Would
    you agree with that, General Clarke?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir, I would agree with that.
        Mr. Kelly. And I won't even try to pronounce. I am from
    Mississippi, and we don't get more than one syllable out.
        Mr. McMenamin. Yes, sir. Either ``Joe'' or ``Mac'' always
    works for anybody that can't say it.
        You know, in support of the President's budget, SOCOM has
    had to make some choices. But, as General Clarke, you know,
    laid out what his priorities are, he still maintains that, you
    know, the operational readiness will be there, taking care of
    the force will be there. But the challenges would be in some of
    the R&D [research and development] and some of the MILCON. But,
    you know, in supporting the budget we make the hard choices and
    General Clarke, you know, working----
        Mr. Kelly. Let me interrupt you there, because I have got
    one more question. And I will take it for the record, because I
    don't think you can answer this here. And this is both of you-
    all. I am really concerned about this over-the-horizon. I
    really feel like we are hand-waving this. And we are not doing
    the amount of details to air corridors, which locations we are,
    protecting--how things are used, you know, our tactics,
    techniques, and procedures.
        So, guys, I think you guys have to take the lead on this in
    making sure that you give us a detailed plan of how we plan on
    executing over-the-horizon, rather than a hand wave.
        And, for that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you.
        I now recognize Representative Larsen.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry to turn on my
    microphone.
        Mr. Gallego. I saw that.
        Mr. Larsen. Anticipating you might call on me.
        Mr. Gallego. Jumped the gun on me.
        Mr. Larsen. Sorry about that. I will stay in my lane.
        So thanks for coming out. Actually, McMenamin's is a pub
    based out of Portland. So it is really easy for us in the
    Northwest to pronounce your last name.
        Mr. McMenamin. I wish I was related for the free----
        Mr. Larsen. Yeah, absolutely.
        So, General Clarke, I want to go back to Armed Overwatch
    and thanks for answering the questions and thanks for coming in
    yesterday to discuss that as well.
        But I think one of the concerns in 20 years of being on the
    subcommittee and on the committee and trying to do my oversight
    job is suddenly it is almost--it is almost suddenly coming
    across a program called Armed Overwatch that wasn't there. And
    now it is there, and that usually doesn't happen. Usually there
    is a longer process, a set of requirements to walk us into,
    even walk the Pentagon into a program that you need.
        And so, in my view, the program deserves a lot more--a
    little less love than it is getting and a little more scrutiny
    than it is getting, in my view. And that is where I come from
    on this, and we have had this conversation a little bit. So, in
    that vein, a basic question I have for you about the
    application of the platform in austere environments is kind of
    basic requirements. Is there enough work for an Armed Overwatch
    platform for what you are asking for? Given the focus on--
    really, really it is a CT-VEO purpose. I understand what you
    are coming from in other countries, but it is really a CT-VEO
    purpose.
        Right into the microphone. Pull it up. There you go.
        General Clarke. Is that better?
        Mr. Larsen. Yeah.
        General Clarke. Sir, to your first point, since the minute
    I walked into this job almost 2 and half years ago, we have
    been talking Armed Overwatch. And so it was not--it was not new
    to me, coming in. So, if we have not communicated that from the
    onset--and it was there before I came into the position.
        As far--in terms of the requirement, as we looked globally
    and looked at the operating [inaudible] where SOF deploys--
    where SOF forces are deployed today and where they are deployed
    in the future, we do think that the operating concept that we
    have for these aircraft would, in fact, get to full utilization
    of them in the future.
        Mr. Larsen. And how many would you--in the end, how many
    would you presume you would need?
        General Clarke. We----
        Mr. Larsen. SOCOM would need?
        General Clarke. We would presume for operations, 60
    aircraft divided into 4 squadrons of 15 each. And then we would
    need additional 10 to 15 aircraft for training. So we could
    have 5--we could have 4--1 squadron of 15 aircraft deployed at
    any one time.
        Mr. Larsen. Uh-huh.
        General Clarke. And it goes back to the question about
    dwell ratio.
        Mr. Larsen. Uh-huh.
        General Clarke. That we then, with this aircraft that we
    are setting up for the future, we would have, you know, one
    deployed and three back, recovering, preparing, and then
    training for future mission to make that dwell ratio.
        Mr. Larsen. So explain, if you can--5 minutes really isn't
    long enough for this. But explain, if you can, your number two
    and number three priorities are undersea capabilities, and I
    think more ISRs, ISR platforms. And then you have an under--
    unfunded priorities list as well----
        General Clarke. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Larsen [continuing]. Which you are required to give.
    And I would love to rescind that law because, you know, Head
    Start doesn't give--we don't require Head Start to give us
    their unfunded priorities list, which they ought to be able to
    do as well, but they are not allowed to. That is my problem.
        How does this--why did this come out number one? Because
    you have talked about this number one, compared to a lot of
    other really great things that are on the list and really great
    things that are on the unfunded priority list. I am not sold on
    where it sits in your priorities.
        General Clarke. And as we are looking as the broad
    capabilities for USSOCOM, the modernization of our ISR is one
    of our top priorities.
        Mr. Larsen. Sure.
        General Clarke. It is not just Armed Overwatch. But we see
    Armed Overwatch as a very cost-effective, you know, approach to
    a requirement to support our SOF teams, you know, in the
    future. So that is why we continue to push for it and knowing
    that our other----
        Mr. Larsen. Can I--I have a short time, and I apologize.
        How long in the near future is your near future for the use
    of Armed Overwatch? Do you see this as a bridge to something
    else? Or is this something that is, it is necessary now and so
    we got to spend the money now because this won't be a problem
    later?
        General Clarke. It is part today because there are other
    platforms that are actually as--that are actually hitting the
    end of their life cycle that are currently in support. And that
    is the U-28 aircraft that would need re-winging of all those--
    of all those platforms which would be almost as cost--it would
    be almost the same cost to re-wing all those aircraft as we
    start going towards the Armed Overwatch.
        Mr. Larsen. Yeah, I have run out of time.
        And I appreciate it, Mr. Chair.
        General Clarke. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Gallego. Representative Scott.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        General Clarke, does the fiscal year 2022 budget request
    include efforts to provide the human performance and wellness
    program to the special forces community and the National Guard?
        General Clarke. Sir, it provides specifically for the--for
    our Active Component, you know. And it does, as you are well
    aware, we have increased the funding specifically to the human
    performance cognitive and behavioral health capabilities within
    this. There has been some funding to the National Guard as a
    part of the POTFF [Preservation of the Force and Family]
    program. But on the spending of this money, we are very, very
    careful about how--about not the amount but that we are in
    accordance with the law of this funding towards our--to our
    National Guard Component.
        Mr. Scott. Okay. So, if the Guard Component is an issue,
    then we need to take a look at the law in the National Defense
    Authorization Act with regard to including----
        General Clarke. Sir, I need to come back to you.
        Mr. Scott. Okay.
        General Clarke. If I could take for the record----
        Mr. Scott. That is fine.
        General Clarke [continuing]. Because I don't want to
    confuse myself or the committee on what is allowed under the
    law for funding of the National Guard with our Preservation of
    the Force and Family funding.
        [A classified response was provided and is retained in
    subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Okay. That is fine.
        Obviously, the special forces operations have been
    predominantly Middle East oriented over the last couple of
    decades. As we talk about the changes to great power and near-
    peer competition, the reorientation, the training of special
    operations forces, how do you expect that to change
    specifically with regard to the urban terrain versus a desert
    terrain? And while I recognize that there are cities inside the
    countries that we have been operating in, they don't
    necessarily look the same as a metropolitan area in an
    industrialized country. So my question gets to the special
    operations training, urban terrain.
        General Clarke. Sir, you are hitting a key point that we--
    and as always, we are operating in a--we operate in urban
    environments even in the counterterrorism VEO fight. But I
    think increasingly we will operate more in a subterranean and
    urban environment.
        And if I could take your question one step further, the
    mission, many of our missions in the counterterrorism, counter
    violent extremists have been direct-action missions. I think
    more importantly what we have to look at is our irregular
    warfare competencies and training surrogate forces, not
    necessarily in a direct-action fight.
        Mr. Scott. That includes information and cyber?
        General Clarke. That includes information, cyber, logistics
    networks, and working with foreign partners.
        Mr. Scott. One of the reasons our men and women are so good
    at what they do is because of the--as much as we wish they
    weren't deployed as much as they are, they have a lot of
    experience. My concern is, if we end up in a true urban
    conflict, that is not going to be something where our operators
    have done it repeatedly, if you will.
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. And we set up specific venues to
    train our individuals in those urban environments.
        Mr. Scott. I am looking forward to more information on the
    Armed Overwatch. I am getting short on time right now. I
    appreciate your time discussing the A-10s, and I understand
    that the Army is the expecting to have a close air support
    platform. I very much look forward to the continued discussions
    on that platform, what it is, what it costs, and what its
    capabilities are. But I appreciate your time this morning, and
    I will save the remainder of my questions for the next session.
    Thank you, gentlemen.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Representative Austin.
        Representative Keating.
        Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to thank the witnesses for their service to
    the country. Just want to touch on an issue in terms of machine
    learning and artificial intelligence being used for support
    force and mission readiness, how you think the budget serves
    this, and also just not the systems. It is the individuals
    behind the systems. I am curious to share conversation I
    started in terms of a fine institution in Massachusetts, MIT
    [Massachusetts Institute of Technology], and some of the work
    that is being done to prepare our forces.
        General Clarke. A couple initiatives that SOCOM has taken
    on over the last few years. We hired our first chief data
    officer into SOCOM 3 years ago. And he is now the chief data
    officer for the Department of Defense. We have hired a
    subsequent one. And as anybody working in the AI [artificial
    intelligence], data is the most important part to ensuring that
    we have--that we can use AI effectively.
        Second, we are bringing interns into SOCOM--we brought our
    first group in last summer--to help us solve some of our
    problems in real world. We are teamed very closely with the
    Project Maven and the Joint Artificial Intelligence inside the
    Department of Defense. And they see us as a first user for
    these capabilities, and we have used and looked hard at object
    detection in the combat zones using Maven.
        And as you and I spoke about, but for the broader
    committee, SOCOM set up AI course with MIT for our mid- and
    senior-grade leaders, over 400 participants of mid-grade and
    senior leaders, in order for them to learn what the AI
    principles were so they could ask the right questions. And MIT
    was a great partner with us in teaching our workforce, our men
    and women in uniform. Thank you.
        Mr. Keating. Yeah, the systems are great. But we have to
    have the people there to utilize those the right way.
        Just the second area I just want to touch upon and that is
    your feelings on our preparedness and where we have to go for
    underwater systems and marine systems, maritime systems,
    something that, again, in my district, you know, we have fine
    institutions there, doing great studies. And so it is an
    interest level of mine. But I am sure it is with you folks,
    too. So maybe you can explore or expand on some of the
    priorities there. And are they being met?
        General Clarke. Our Navy SEALs [Sea, Air, and Land teams]
    over the past 20 years have been heavily invested in the land
    and specifically in the combat zones. We are now refocusing
    their efforts to their undersea/seabed capabilities. And in
    that, as we looked at our budget, we are actually shift--we
    have shifted within our budget to develop those capabilities
    for the future. And so teaming with the Navy and with other
    civilian organizations is critical. Thank you.
        Mr. Keating. Well, thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Representative Keating.
        Now we have Representative Franklin.
        Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        To follow up a little on the undersea warfare and seabed
    warfare question and also along with Ranking Member Kelly's
    questions before regarding the budget, I see, you know, in the
    unfunded priorities, there are some of those that touch into
    that area. And I would love to hear some more probably in a
    different forum about some of the capabilities that you are
    working on from the R&D side. But, you know, in looking at the
    cut that you received this year, we could fund all of those
    unfunded priorities with less than what the cuts have been to
    your budget which--and I understand we can maintain the OPTEMPO
    [operations tempo]. We can get the job done, and that is what
    you-all are called to do and will always do.
        But do you have concern that if this persists, will you be
    able to fund going forward the R&D necessary to shift from the
    CT mission in the Middle East towards the great power
    competition?
        General Clarke. I will take a stab at it and then turn it
    over to Mr. McMenamin. I do believe with this year that we were
    able to adjust accordingly and prioritize. And for that
    unfunded requirement list, if we had more money, that is where
    we would go to. And that is they are prioritized in that
    manner. But for future years, we've got to continue to look at
    what those priorities are.
        Mr. McMenamin.
        Mr. McMenamin. I would say, as we all know, technology
    moves a lot faster many times than the budgets in the budget
    planning process does. You know, General Clarke made the
    choices to prioritize. I think, as we go forward, working
    within the President's budget, we look at some of these
    requirements and continue to identify those investments that
    have the greatest promise to the SOCOM enterprise, whether that
    is in ISR, human performance, AI, machine learning, to
    prioritize those that can increase the effectiveness of SOCOM
    and the SOF operators more than others that may be on the list
    sometimes.
        Mr. Franklin. General, regarding SOFWERX, you have
    mentioned that in your testimony. And, again, kind of
    piggybacking on the thought of, you know, the responsiveness,
    the technology is changing quickly, this is a program, I think,
    other services are envious of the special operations' ability
    to act on technology quickly and get them fielded out there.
        The work, the ability to interact with the Small Business
    Innovation Research pilot program, I think, has been helpful. I
    have gotten very good feedback from small businesses that have
    wanted to be more involved in the acquisition process. It seems
    like it has been a great success. That is--that authorization
    is expiring this year. We are looking to not only continue that
    but expand it. Could you elaborate or comment some on what that
    means from your end and what you would like to see from it
    going forward?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. A couple of points.
        You highlighted SOFWERX which is our off-campus what I call
    incubator of ideas where folks without security clearances can
    come in, work with our operators. And it is a magnificent
    capability for us. It is enabled by the small business
    initiative, and we really appreciate Congress' support to that
    and would look--would ask for your support in continuing to
    grow that small business capability because it is giving us
    ideas, because a lot of the good ideas--a lot of the great
    ideas are really coming from those small businesses that we can
    tap into very quickly because we very--you know, what I think
    we do better than anyone else is tie our operator, who knows
    what the specific requirements in, right to the industry
    partners and work that together so we come up with the best
    product. Thank you.
        Mr. Franklin. That is really all the questions I had.
        I did want to take the opportunity, though, to thank you,
    General, on behalf of the subcommittee here for your and your
    staff's hospitality a few months back down at MacDill [Air
    Force Base]. I haven't spent a lot of time on the base. I still
    learned a lot, and there is nothing like the firsthand
    opportunity to see it. But thank you all for that.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you.
        Representative Murphy.
        Mrs. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        General Clarke, as you know, I got a chance when we were on
    that visit to MacDill to see the Joint MISO [Military
    Information Support Operations] WebOps Center [JMWC]. And I was
    wondering if you could talk a little bit about the value of the
    JMWC to our national security objectives and then also confirm
    that the budget request of just $479,000 would fully fund its
    requirements.
        General Clarke. Our Joint MISO WebOps Center--MISO,
    Military Information Support Ops, the acronym within the
    acronym. Information in today's competition is critical. And
    ensuring that adversaries' disinformation and misinformation is
    countered is one of the things that our JMWC does. And I think
    it, as you personally witnessed, it does it well. And we
    continue to grow the capabilities now and in the future,
    working very closely with the combatant commands.
        Our budget request for that in times with the Department
    is, as you know, was steady from last year to this year. A lot
    of that just has to do with it is still growing, and it is
    still developing. I will tell you if--if--we see that we could
    actually spend more money and more capability was needed in
    this fiscal year, I would ask for adjustments to be made in the
    middle of the fiscal year. But right now we don't see that. We
    do believe it is sufficient funding.
        Mrs. Murphy. Great. Thank you.
        And then, on a topic that you and I discussed a little bit
    yesterday, given that we both live in Florida, I am really
    concerned about some of the threats that are in our
    neighborhood or in our backyard in the Caribbean and Latin
    America, whether it is from China or non-state actors.
        I was wondering if you can talk a little bit about how
    SOCOM and SOCSOUTH [Special Operations Command South] are
    postured to address these threats and challenges and what you
    are seeing in the region.
        General Clarke. South America, you know, Central America,
    in our backyard. We work very closely, you know, with our
    special operations component, and we have had persistent
    presence and engagement inside South America for decades and
    continue to employ SOF forces and capabilities to include ISR
    and our people into the region.
        It has changed. Many times we are there to address other
    nations' security threats. But as we have seen, both Russia and
    China are showing great interest in that neighborhood. And
    having individuals that are present and helping host countries
    allows us to see and sense what some of those two near-peer
    adversaries' malign behaviors are and ensure that we can, in
    fact, counter those and work with the host countries.
        Mrs. Murphy. And although my last name is Murphy, I am not
    going to take a swing at Mr. Mac's full last name here. But I
    was wondering if you can give me a little bit of an update
    about the Functional Center for Security Studies in Irregular
    Warfare. It is going to be--irregular warfare is going to be a
    key component of great power competition, and in the fiscal
    year 2021 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act], we had
    directed the Department to move forward with establishing that.
        Mr. McMenamin. Yes. And, in fact, I saw the draft of the
    report a few weeks ago. And it makes some very good
    recommendations, but it needed to be refined a bit more before
    we send it over. So we are in the process of going through the
    report, making sure it answers the appropriate questions, and
    provides the right information. We may find ourselves requiring
    a change to the security cooperation legislation that talks
    about regional centers, and that would be chapter 16 of the
    bill.
        So, as we go through this, we look at the different options
    and the locations. And we also look at what we may need for
    legislative authority to establish the center. We will include
    all those in the report and work within the Department to bring
    that legislative proposal up to you.
        Mrs. Murphy. Great. Thank you.
        And, General Clarke, do you think that that center and the
    irregular warfare focus can be of use to SOF?
        General Clarke. I absolutely do. And because of the
    education, continued education, of our force, tied in, I
    think--and you are familiar with our Joint Special Operations
    University. I think the power of those two together could make
    it even better.
        Mrs. Murphy. Great. Thank you.
        Go ahead. Did you have something else to add, Mr.----
        Mr. McMenamin. No. I would also just like to add onto what
    General Clarke just said. It would also be a great value for
    our general purpose forces because irregular warfare is not
    just a SOF enterprise. We have to train our regular general
    purpose forces to operate in various environments, gray zone,
    irregular warfare, whatever we name it. But I think it is just
    as important for our general purpose forces as it is for our
    special operators.
        Mrs. Murphy. Great. Thank you.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Representative Murphy.
        We will go to Representative Waltz.
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I just wanted to pick up on Ranking Member Kelly and Mr.
    Larsen's conversation on Armed Overwatch and kind of get out
    there for the record that this isn't new. It may be, you know,
    I guess a new conversation and new people to the conversation.
    But this is something that has been going on for over a decade.
    It was under the Air Force with the Light Attack/Armed
    Reconnaissance program that actually started, my understanding,
    in 2009.
        So, for a dozen years, we have been messing around with
    this program. And our operators downrange, including myself, in
    many occasions couldn't get the air support and the close air
    support that they needed. So I just think that is important for
    everybody to understand.
        But we are where we are now. And we have had not one but
    two chiefs of staff of the Air Force, General Goldfein and now
    General Brown, validate this requirement, say SOCOM should have
    a leadership role in this requirement. We now have the number
    one request from the SOCOM commander and, as required by last
    NDAA, an independent third-party study that says the other
    alternatives, namely the MQ-9 and/or the A-10, are far more
    expensive and far less capable.
        Did I mischaracterize anything there, General Clarke?
        General Clarke. No, you did not.
        Mr. Waltz. Okay. So I think the other thing that is
    important to understand is it is easy to say this is really
    just focused on Africa. Right now, we have operators--and I
    think, frankly, we need more--out there. This great power
    competition isn't just about Taiwan. It is happening on the
    continent of Africa, operating in a space the size of the
    United States, China, India, and Western Europe combined with
    next to no air support, that this capability could provide down
    there with the teams in a rugged capability and at a fraction
    of the cost. I think the biggest piece here and why the Air
    Force is so supportive is they need to focus on the great power
    fight. They need their fifth-generation stealth assets focused
    on China and Russia, not bombing terrorists in the grass at
    $40,000 an hour.
        Is that a fair characterization of kind of the requirement?
        General Clarke. Sir, on top of that, of what you just said,
    it is also the tanker support and the back side of more than
    just the aircraft flying but the other aircraft that have to
    support those aircraft and the significantly larger maintenance
    tail that goes with that, that our Armed Overwatch requirement
    specifically narrows and limits the maintenance force.
        Mr. Waltz. All of which we need focused on, rightly, with--
    on the great power competition. But we still--the terrorists
    are still out there. And we still have operators out there by,
    with, and through our local allies, accompanying them in light-
    skinned, unarmored vehicles that needs this kind of capability.
        I wish we had this kind of handwringing, for the amount of
    money that we are talking about here, that we had this kind of
    handwringing in Congress over the, you know, things like the
    Joint Strike Fighter or the Ford-class carrier. But it just
    kind of befuddles me the overriding concern here. It is a need.
    And we have third parties, the Air Force, and SOCOM, and now
    the President's budget, all saying it is a need. And I
    certainly hope we can find that support here.
        I just want to switch in the time I have remaining. I share
    the concern about over-horizon. I have yet to find that
    doctrinal term. We have got the President of the United States
    saying it as though this is something we do all the time. Of
    course, we have the capability to hit anyone anywhere around
    the world. And I know your operators are going to maintain that
    capability. But we need to be very wide-eyed about the massive
    risk we are asking them to undertake. And we may not be blind
    in Afghanistan, but I think we are going to be legally blind.
    We are going to be darn close.
        And--let me ask you this. Would--could you do your mission
    better from a counter-VEO standpoint, keeping a lid on half the
    world's terrorist organizations with Bagram or without Bagram?
        General Clarke. We can always do our mission better when we
    are in closer proximity to the problem.
        Mr. Waltz. Absolutely. In the time I have remaining, if you
    are ever asked to undertake any type of unconventional warfare
    activities against the Chinese Communist Party, it is notable
    that most of their nuclear--new nuclear capabilities coming
    online are in western China, 400 miles from Bagram. Would it be
    better to have that base and have that platform or to try to do
    it from somewhere else?
        General Clarke. We have developed unique capabilities, as
    you well know, over the last 20 years. And now there is no
    place in the globe that SOCOM could not go to accomplish its
    mission.
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I yield.
        Mr. Gallego. Representative Sherrill.
        Ms. Sherrill. Thank you. And I would like to thank both of
    you gentleman for your service and for joining us at today's
    hearing, as well as to pass on my appreciation to the entire
    SOCOM enterprise for the tireless work they do to protect our
    Nation, as well as to ensuring broader peace and stability
    worldwide.
        I would like to thank you, General Clarke, and your staff
    for taking the time to meet with me yesterday; I found our
    conversation very informative. And the continued work to
    provide updates, including General Slife briefing me on
    Operation Overwatch during his son's Naval Academy graduation.
        Most critically, though, I want to draw attention to the
    immense sacrifices made by our special operators and their
    families over the last 20 years, particularly in Afghanistan.
    As our presence in that country comes to an end, we, as a
    Nation, owe the brave men and women who fought there our
    immense gratitude and appreciation.
        Please pass on my personal thanks to all of those who have
    served, continue to serve, and to their families.
        So, with regard to cyber, where we are increasingly finding
    ourselves challenged by China and Russia. This is also a key
    area where USSOCOM is seeing a significant per capita increase
    in spending. Can you explain what your cyber activities funding
    within your operations and maintenance budget, what you want
    that to provide?
        General Clarke. Cyber for SOCOM is particularly focused on
    the close access near where we would be in proximity to the
    threat; where CYBERCOM [United States Cyber Command] is
    actually looking globally, ours is in direct support of our
    operators on the ground.
        Ms. Sherrill. So how much of your cyber defense and
    information assurance is coming from contractor-provided
    services and how much is an organic SOCOM or DOD CYBERCOM
    capability? What factors at SOCOM do you use in choosing one
    over the other?
        General Clarke. Cyber mission teams that are provided by
    CYBERCOM in direct support of SOCOM. We have some contractors
    that support the defense of our network inside SOCOM, but I
    would have to take for the record to get back to you on the
    specific breakout of each one.
        [A classified response was provided and is retained in
    subcommittee files.]
        Ms. Sherrill. Thank you. And so I will submit for the
    record whether or not those costs could go down if we provided
    some of the capabilities organically. And given the cyber
    threat of Russia and China with the transition to great power
    competition, as well as special operations forces' historic
    leadership in operating from denied areas, to what extent do
    you see opportunities to leverage SOCOM in the future in
    support of intelligence, influence, cyber operations against
    China and Russia? And do you have the tools and resources to do
    so?
        General Clarke. This goes back to our value proposition of
    being forward deployed, as I talked about in opening statement,
    in 60 countries where both Russia and China are also deployed
    and that close proximity. And in closed session, I can give you
    some specific information on that.
        Ms. Sherrill. That is great. I will take the rest of the
    questions in closed session. Thank you.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Representative Bacon.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you.
        And I appreciate our leadership here today, grateful for
    what you do. Mr. McMenamin, thank you for serving the Pentagon
    and we appreciate General Clarke and the Command Chief Smith in
    the back there.
        I primarily served in the conventional forces, but I have
    had a lot of opportunities to work with the special forces.
    When I spent my year in Iraq at one of my four deployments,
    seeing at least as a minimum four missions a night by the SEALs
    teams, it was awe inspiring. The courage, the can-do spirit,
    the OPSTEMPO was just incredible. I know it is not just the
    SEALs; it is the whole community. And I think America's best
    aspire to be on the special forces teams.
        I would like to say, for the record, that I oppose the
    President's budget. When you factor in a 5 percent inflation
    rate versus a 1.7 percent growth in the budget, not factoring
    in the inflation, that amounts to about a 3 percent cut to our
    budget, or about $30 billion. And that is going to have an
    impact throughout our military.
        And so I think, as a minimum, the President should be
    recommending at least even with inflation or an even budget,
    but this is a reduction of real dollars, and it is going to
    have an impact on our services and on our special forces
    community.
        So, with that in mind, if we could get about a 3 percent
    growth or at least some increases there, I would like to ask
    General Clarke, what would be your top unfunded priorities that
    you would like to see funded? I know you touched on this a
    little bit, but I would like to deal with it directly.
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. We have submitted our unfunded
    priorities, and they are broadly in the crisis response,
    underwater capabilities, you know, that we need for the future.
    And so the continued funding of those--in those areas and next-
    generation ISR is a third one that, with Congress' support to
    those unfunded requirements, that is where I would spend my
    next dollar.
        Mr. Bacon. And I hope we can, through this process, do a
    little better than what we have proposed. I think one of the
    aspects of your missions that a lot of people don't know about
    is the training you give to special forces with our allies.
    Could you talk about some of our successes there because I am
    aware of them, but I think the public would like to know.
        General Clarke. There are two parts to training with our
    allies: One is there is many times when our allies come here to
    the United States where our forces are stationed. They come to
    our Joint Special Operations University. They go to some of our
    schools and classes here in the U.S., and they will bring
    entire units, and we will set up specific training to help them
    meet their requirements. But then many of our training
    exercises are actually when we deploy a team, an element to
    that country. And it could be anywhere from a few weeks to a
    few months, what is referred to as our joint combined exercises
    for training, or JCETs, which are value added for us because we
    are getting the vast majority of the training benefit, whether
    we are working in the mountains, you know, in Peru, or whether
    or not we are in the jungles of somewhere in Panama or
    Colombia, that we can't get some places in the United States.
        And so those training exercises are invaluable for us to
    work in different environments.
        Mr. Bacon. You see some of our allies do missions after
    years of training with you. There has been some impressive
    successes there, and it expands our capability in the end. When
    our allies have similar capabilities, it doesn't fall just on
    our shoulders. So I appreciate that.
        Changing gears a little bit. I am going to try to ask this
    question carefully. Ayman al-Zawahiri is still the al-Qaida
    leader as far as we know. Is it safe to say and can Americans
    feel confident that we are being vigilant, and if given the
    opportunity, some day we will get justice for this guy who has
    killed thousands of Americans?
        General Clarke. We continue and we will always look at
    those individuals who threaten our country, whether Zawahiri or
    others. We give no one quarter, and we will always go after the
    enemies of our country as directed.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you.
        And I yield back.
        General Clarke. Thanks.
        Mr. Gallego. Mr. Waltz, you have a question? Okay. Go
    ahead, for the record.
        Mr. Waltz. General Clarke, as we know, all of the services
    except Air Force/Space Force are looking at force reductions,
    looking at size reductions. And my concern is, as the, you
    know, Army wrestles with that internally and the Navy wrestles
    with that internally and the Marine Corps wrestles with that
    internally, that has a threefold compounding effect on SOCOM.
    So can you walk through how you are managing that process with
    the services and with OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense]?
        General Clarke. Honestly, I would like----
        Mr. Waltz. We will ask OSD. Fair enough. Phone a friend.
        General Clarke. It is a great question, and before I defer
    to Mr. McMenamin, this is exactly why we in SOCOM need a strong
    ASD(SO/LIC) who can see the compounding interest of all
    services looking at SOCOM inside cuts. So I will defer to Mr.
    McMenamin.
        Mr. McMenamin. As the services look at the different
    reductions, I know we advocate very strongly to sustain the
    quality and the size of the force that we have down at SOCOM
    and whether that is the Army, Air Force, Marines, or some of
    the great civilians we have. You know, being an advocate means
    we sit at the meetings, we explain why it is important, we push
    for the budgets, we push for the training programs, we push for
    the access to get interviews with quality individuals to come
    join the SOF team. So it is just a broader effort from the new
    ASD role, you know, with the oversight to push and be an
    advocate for the SOCOM programs within the Department.
        Mr. Waltz. So Secretary Austin has made the decision to not
    elevate SO/LIC to an Under Secretary, but continue that direct
    reporting line, the dual reporting line, right, to USD [Under
    Secretary of Defense for] Policy and to him. So I am taking
    from that your assurance that we don't have that triple
    multiplying effect from all of the services, that SOCOM doesn't
    become the bill payer for three services' force reductions. You
    giving the committee that assurance?
        Mr. McMenamin. The role for SO/LIC is a direct report to
    the Secretary and an advocate for the SOCOM enterprise. For
    those things that don't deal with the SO/LIC man, train, and
    equip, the ASD role goes through the Under Secretary for
    Policy, but we very strongly advocate with the Secretary either
    through the defense management groups, the senior leader
    seminars and meetings, or the role and the----
        Mr. Waltz. Do you want to give me that assurance?
        Mr. McMenamin [continuing]. The sustainability. We believe
    in the sustainability of the SOCOM enterprise.
        Mr. Waltz. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I yield.
        Mr. Gallego. Representative Larsen.
        Mr. Larsen. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
        And just on that point, it is going to be something that I
    think we agree on--a lot of us agree on on the subcommittee
    about oversight, the need for it, the directive, the new
    directive. A little bit different than it was in the past
    before the last change and a little bit more aggressive. And so
    I think that is generally, after going through this, it seems
    to be something that we can grab on to a little bit to ensure
    there is appropriate oversight.
        But just a question on something totally different here.
    General Clarke, the 2022 budget requests $10 million for a new
    POTFF Cognitive Performance program. Can you discuss how that
    funding will be used on cognitive agility and resilience within
    the forces, please?
        General Clarke. Yes, sir. I appreciate this question
    because as we have seen----
        Mr. Larsen. I wanted to ask a question that you
    appreciated.
        General Clarke. Not all the questions have to be
    appreciated as you well know. The cognitive domain is something
    that is critical to our forces, as you can well imagine. When
    POTFF first started, it was almost exclusively focused on the
    physical because it is what we could see. In particular, we
    were having a lot of physical wounds.
        In cognitive space, it is to ensure that our operators
    actually go through the mental drills--and I have been through
    some of them when you have to rapidly identify targets. I have
    shoot or no-shoot scenarios with someone watching you and
    quickly adapt to what we are doing because we want our folks--
    and they combine this with the physical where it becomes
    challenging and actually bringing in professionals who can
    assess where someone is today and then also look to where they
    could be in the future to help them develop, really makes a
    better and honestly more capable force.
        Mr. Larsen. Can you just discuss the resiliency part,
    though? At some point, the person is going to leave special
    operations forces, going to retire; can you discuss a little
    bit how these dollars might be used to think about the long-
    term mental health and life of that person?
        General Clarke. I think you are hitting a key part and this
    is where both the cognitive development and make sure that our
    forces--it also hits the behavioral piece and, you know, 40
    percent now of POTFF or slightly more is actually the cognitive
    and the behavioral so that our operators--we are looking for
    someone that is SOF for life. They are inside this formation.
    We are taking care of them as they leave and make sure they get
    a health check on their way out to make sure that they can be a
    functioning citizen and continue to provide value to our Nation
    after they leave.
        Mr. Larsen. And, finally, have you thought through, if we
    were to provide the dollars, how would you deploy these
    dollars, not how would you use them, but the mechanism?
        General Clarke. Specifically, it would be bringing in
    professionals that are versed in this and then tracking the
    improvements, the data to make sure that the money is being
    spent properly and we are actually seeing improvement in our
    operators.
        Mr. Larsen. That is fair. Thank you very much.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you. And that finishes our open
    committee hearing, and we will be moving to 2212 for our
    classified portion. We will reconvene in about, let's say, 10
    minutes. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 4:26 p.m., the subcommittee proceeded in
    closed session.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                 July 21, 2021

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 July 21, 2021

    =======================================================================
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                 July 21, 2021

    =======================================================================

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GALLEGO

        Mr. Gallego. In late January 2020, USSOCOM released the
    Comprehensive Review of SOF culture and ethics, in which it was
    determined that USSOCOM does not have a systemic ethics problem. The
    report emphasized that ``USSOCOM's cultural focus on SOF employment and
    mission accomplishment is to the detriment of leadership, discipline
    and accountability.'' Yet, in the 2019 report provided to the Congress
    pursuant to section 1066 of the FY19 NDAA then-ASD(SO/LIC) Owen West,
    it was determined that ``some SOF personnel face a deeper challenge of
    a disordered view of the team and the individual in the SOF culture,
    and, left unchecked, a value system in disorder threatens to erode the
    mutual trust among members of SOF and the trust of senior leaders, our
    allies, and ultimately, the American people in SOF.'' Can you please
    explain to the subcommittee how, only a year later, your review team
    came to seemingly different conclusions?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Gallego. We recently learned that a study was commissioned
    though the Joint Special Operations University to consider the case
    ``for and against'' USSOCOM--SOF--becoming a military service. Can you
    explain to the subcommittee the intent, objectives, and all preliminary
    findings?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Gallego. What is the state of SOF readiness across the entire
    formation, and what do you believe are the most significant challenges
    affecting readiness today? What will be the most significant readiness
    challenges in the future?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Gallego. Earlier this year, USSOCOM released the Strategic Plan
    for Diversity and Inclusion. What does diversity, inclusion, and equity
    mean to you, and what are your next steps actualize this document?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Gallego. In your 2020 posture statement, you specified that
    ``USSOCOM continues to right-size our deployed forces to meet the
    Secretary of Defense's minimum objective of a 1:2 deployment-to-dwell
    ratio, with a goal of 1:3,'' and in this year's statement you reference
    an expectation ``. . . to achieve a sustainable balance of deployed
    forces across both C-VEO and strategic competition mission sets and
    reach the DOD's directed 1:2 deployment-to-dwell ratio for all SOF.''
    Is a 1:3 ratio still a goal, and what progress has been made in
    achieving that goal? Does the 1:2 minimum and 1:3 goal of deployment to
    dwell time apply to the entire formation, to include enablers and
    support elements? What changes are you making to increase dwell time?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
                                     ______

                        QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCOTT
        Mr. Scott. Are there any efforts to provide the Human Performance
    and Wellness program to the Special Forces community in the National
    Guard, i.e. specifically title 32 guardsmen/women?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. During the Cold War, 10th Group looked and talked like
    Eastern Europeans through the Lodge Act and targeted recruitment.
    Today, as we see an influx in refugees why have we not aggressively
    recruited from those ethnic and language groups using a Lodge Act type
    construct to lead to citizenship? This is most appropriate for Army
    Special Forces as they need language skills to do their jobs. Special
    Forces Groups should look and talk like their target regions especially
    as we embark on the roles of SOF in a near-peer fight, especially those
    elements doing unconventional warfare and foreign internal defense.
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. It is common for many to think of missions like
    counterterrorism/counter violent extremist organizations as being
    presumptively SOF missions, preventing SOF from fully exploring and
    optimizing its unique potential to leverage special operations against
    potential adversaries like Communist China. What percentage of those
    missions are actually ``special'' in character? If SOF capacity were
    freed up, do you see opportunities for special operations in peace to
    enhance our current family of deterrence options in ways that might
    shrink the gray zone?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. U.S. doctrine employs a definition of unconventional
    warfare that is so restrictive that few at the policy level can see
    much application. However, unconstrained by our doctrine, all of the
    named threats in the 2018 National Defense Strategy appear to be
    leveraging and supporting insurgency in ways that have created many of
    our greatest post-Cold War security challenges. Isn't it time for the
    U.S. to also adopt a more fundamental perspective on unconventional
    warfare if we are to compete more effectively these days?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Are there opportunities for an enhanced partnership
    between the U.S. Coast Guard and USSOCOM? If so, which Coast Guard
    missions are ideal for joint operations with USSOCOM?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. In a June 2021 Proceedings article by Lieutenant
    Commander Stephen Gay, U.S. Navy, entitled ``Link Naval Special Warfare
    with FAC(A)s'' Gay writes, ``To compete with great powers, the Navy
    needs to capitalize on the experience gained from the past two decades
    of small wars and forge a permanent link between Naval Special Warfare
    (NSW) and carrier strike group (CSG) F/A-18F forward air controller
    (airborne) crews.'' Do you agree or disagree with this assessment?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. How can the Navy's big three ``tribes''--surface
    warfare, submarines, aviation--make the most of the capabilities that
    Naval Special Warfare brings to the fight now?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Is the procurement system keeping up with the sort of
    cutting-edge technology and weapon systems that the military needs now
    to compete against potential enemies?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Should the Combatting Terrorism and Irregular Warfare
    Fellowship Program be expanded?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Is USSOCOM doing enough to prioritize recruitment
    focused around language skills, engineering, cyber, intelligence, and
    cultural skills?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. What authorities need to be established to enable SOF to
    anomalously employ cryptocurrency?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Does USSOCOM plan to establish special operations
    domain-specific analytic platforms and a cadre of SOF data scientists
    that understand both the computational and the social science lines of
    inquiry?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Is there a need for enhanced authority for provision of
    support to partner nation liaison officers while assigned to the
    USSOCOM?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]
        Mr. Scott. Do you support an increased micro-purchase threshold for
    purchases by USSOCOM in support of operations overseas? If so, what is
    the recommended threshold?
        General Clarke. [A classified response was provided and is retained
    in subcommittee files.]

                                      [all]