[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]