[Senate Hearing 117-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


 
       DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                              ----------                              


                          TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2022

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met at 10 a.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen Senate 
Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
    Present: Senators Tester, Durbin, Leahy, Feinstein, Murray, 
Schatz, Baldwin, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, Blunt, Hoeven, and 
Boozman.

                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                   Office of the Secretary of Defense

STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III, SECRETARY OF 
            DEFENSE


                opening statement of senator jon tester


    Senator Tester. Let me begin by welcoming our witnesses 
Secretary Austin and General Milley. Your presence here today 
could not be more timely, and we appreciate your willingness to 
meet with us this morning.
    This hearing is intended to focus on the President's budget 
request for fiscal year 2023, but we would be remiss if we did 
not take this opportunity to receive an update on the situation 
in Ukraine, especially given your recent trip to Kyiv, Mr. 
Secretary.
    Last week the Administration submitted a $33 billion 
appropriations request for additional assistance to Ukraine, 
which includes $16.4 billion for the Department of Defense, and 
I'll have a few questions about that.
    But with respect to the fiscal year 2023 budget request, I 
am first and foremost interested in hearing how this budget 
builds on previously enacted appropriations to ensure America's 
continued military advantage in light of near-peer competition 
from China.
    Let me be clear. China continues to be the pacing threat. 
They're watching us closely, waiting to see if we can actually 
walk and chew gum at the same time. Whether it is Chinese 
nuclear force expansion, development of space capabilities, or 
cyber activities, they are working hard to catch up to us.
    So I am encouraged by the Department's continued commitment 
to modernization and development of new technologies. The 
budget request before us includes a record high amount for 
research and development, $130 billion, which is almost a $10 
billion increase over last year's levels. However, your request 
for procurement is essentially flat when compared to last year. 
So we have to wonder when the investments in modernization are 
going to show up as fielded capabilities for our troops.
    On the flip side of the equation, this budget also proposes 
to retire platforms that are deemed no longer necessary for the 
future fight. Some of these proposals are controversial. So we 
hope you can provide the strategic and operational context for 
these proposals.
    Of course, we acknowledge that the world is drastically 
different from just 1 year ago. The impact of the pandemic on 
global supply chains and workforce in both the Defense and 
commercial industrial bases are widely felt.
    Further, Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine has impacted 
global supply chains and markets across the board, driving up 
fuel prices and creating uncertain markets.
    So the affordability of the budget as proposed, in other 
words, are you going to be able to afford what you think you 
can? As well as the ability of industry to deliver for our 
troops in a timely manner are very real questions that this 
committee is going to wrestle with.
    We cannot afford to waste time or money to ensure that 
we're getting our troops what they need to do their jobs at the 
right time and at the right cost.
    Once again, I want to thank the witnesses for the testimony 
they're about to give. I look forward to hearing from you both. 
As you can see, Senator Shelby is ill today. So he is not going 
to be here.
    [The statement follows:]
            Prepared Statement of Senator Richard C. Shelby
    Thank you Mr. Chairman.
    Secretary Austin and General Milley, welcome back to the 
Subcommittee.
    The Department's request seeks $761 billion, a 4.6 percent increase 
over fiscal year 2022 appropriations.
    In most years, that sort of increase would be within a range 
sufficient to maintain readiness and modernize the force.
    Regrettably, we are also experiencing the highest level of 
inflation in this country in 40 years.
    In a fiscal environment with 8.5 percent inflation, the 
Department's budget request equates to a cut to our national defense at 
a time of unprecedented security risks.
    I have to say that I am a bit confused and more than concerned by 
this somewhat anemic request.
    Ukraine is entering its third month of repelling the Russian 
invasion. Putin's actions have created the largest humanitarian crisis 
in modern Europe while his forces attempt to consolidate their 
territorial gains in eastern Ukraine.
    At the same time, North Korea is testing missiles reportedly 
capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
    Iran continues its own pursuit of a nuclear weapon, while also 
arming radical militia groups across the Middle East.
    And let's not forget China as it continues to build military 
capability and capacity at an unprecedented pace. Chinese defense 
spending rose 7.1 percent in 2022. Their defense budgets have seen as 
high as 12 percent annual growth at points over the past decade.
    Meanwhile, the Department's budget request seeks to execute a 
``divest to invest'' strategy which potentially could shrink our 
combat-credible forces by 24 ships and 150 aircraft.While I appreciate 
the need to retire certain platforms and modernize our forces for the 
2030 fight, we still have a majority of this decade immediately before 
us, and I am deeply concerned that we are short-changing near-term 
readiness for future modernization.
    Given today's increasingly complex security environment, we should 
not and cannot sacrifice one for the other.
    I have said many times that the primary responsibility of our 
Federal government is the defense of the nation.
    I am growing increasingly concerned that years and years of 
misplaced spending priorities may leave us incapable of meeting both 
current and future threats.
    Personally, I hope we can pick up in fiscal year 2023 where we left 
off in 2022, with an increase--above the President's request--to assure 
the adequate defense of our nation.
    That will require proper levels of investment to assure our 
superiority for generations to come.
    I look forward to better understanding how this year's defense 
budget sets us on a path to that goal.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Senator Tester. So we'll just go right straight to you, 
Secretary Austin.

             SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III

    Secretary Austin. Good morning, Chairman Tester and the 
Distinguished Members of the Committee,
    I thank you for the chance to testify today in support of 
the President's budget request for fiscal year 2023.
    Mr. Chairman, we're still focused on three key priorities 
at the Department of Defense, defending our Nation, taking care 
of our people, and succeeding through teamwork, and our budget 
request helps us meet each one of those priorities.
    Our budget seeks more than $56 billion for air power 
platforms and systems and more than $40 billion to maintain our 
dominance at sea, including buying nine more battle force 
ships, and almost $13 billion to support and modernize our 
combat-credible forces on land.
    Our budget also funds the modernization of all three legs 
of the Nuclear Triad to ensure that we maintain a safe, secure, 
and effective strategic deterrent.
    Of course, none of these capabilities matter much without 
our people and their families. So we're seeking your support 
for a 4.6 percent pay raise for our military and civilian 
personnel and other special pay and benefits.
    We also plan to invest in outstanding and affordable 
childcare and the construction of on-base child development 
centers and in ensuring that all our families can always put 
good and healthy food on the table.
    We're also deeply focused on the terrible problem of 
suicide in the U.S. military. So we're increasing access to 
mental health care, expanding telehealth capacities, and 
fighting the tired-old stigmas against seeking help.
    With your support, I've just ordered the establishment of 
an independent review committee to help us grapple with 
suicide, to better understand it, to prevent it, and to treat 
the unseen wounds that lead to it.
    At the same time, we're working hard to implement the 
recommendations of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual 
Assault. We know that we have a long way to go to rid ourselves 
of this scourge. Our budget seeks nearly $480 million to do 
just that.
    This is a leadership issue and you have my personal 
commitment to keep leading.
    You're also seeing how much our leadership matters when it 
comes to Ukraine. Just last week I convened the first meeting 
of what is now the Contact Group on Ukrainian Security, a group 
of defense leaders from around the world committed to 
supporting Ukraine after Russia's unprovoked and unjust 
invasion.
    Now that gathering sent a powerful signal that nations of 
goodwill are intensifying their efforts to help Ukraine better 
defend itself, and with the help of Congress, the United States 
has been able to deliver security assistance to Ukraine with 
unprecedented speed and resolve and that has made a huge 
difference on the ground.
    President Zelensky made that clear when I met him in Kyiv 
along with Secretary of State Blinken just over a week ago.
    Even before Putin started his war of choice, we provided 
Ukraine with a billion dollars' worth of weapons and gear 
through presidential drawdown authority and since Russia's 
invasion, the United States has committed some $3.7 billion to 
Ukraine, but the war is changing and the coming weeks will be 
crucial.
    Our goal is to help get the Ukrainians the capability that 
they need most right now in the Donbas and in the South.
    Now as you know, the President has nearly exhausted the 
drawdown authority that Congress approved in March. So last 
week he submitted to you a $33 billion supplemental request 
which will help us continue to meet Ukraine's urgent 
requirements without interruption.
    Specifically, we are requesting, as you pointed out, Mr. 
Chairman, $16 billion for the Department of Defense, which 
includes $5 billion of additional drawdown authority, $6 
billion more for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, 
and another $5 billion for critical investments and to help 
cover the operational cost of bolstering NATO's (North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization) Eastern Flank.
    I want to thank you for your strong leadership toward our 
shared goal of helping Ukraine defend itself and supporting 
NATO. I hope the Congress will quickly approve this 
supplemental.
    Now let me briefly mention a couple of other major efforts 
that the department is focused on. As you know, the 
department's pacing challenge remains countering aggression and 
bullying from China. So this budget invests some $6 billion in 
the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and in keeping with our new 
National Defense Strategy, we're going to enhance our force 
posture, our infrastructure, our presence, and our readiness in 
the Indo-Pacific, including the missile defense of Guam.
    At the same time, we must be prepared for threats that pay 
no heed to borders from pandemics to climate change and we must 
tackle the persistent threats posed by North Korea, Iran, and 
global terrorist groups.
    So I'm proud that our budget seeks more than a $130 billion 
for research, development, testing, and evaluation, the largest 
R&D request this department has ever made.
    This includes $1 billion for artificial intelligence, $250 
million for 5G, nearly $28 billion for space capabilities, and 
another $11 billion to protect our networks and develop a 
cyber-mission force.
    Mr. Chairman, this budget maintains our edge but it does 
not take that edge for granted, and for the President's budget 
and with the help of this committee, we will continue to defend 
this Nation, take care of our people, and support our allies 
and partners.
    Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
    [The statement follows:]
               Prepared Statement of Lloyd J. Austin III
    Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Shelby, Chairman Leahy, 
distinguished members of the Committee:
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the 
President's Department of Defense budget request for fiscal year (FY) 
2023.
    On behalf of myself, Deputy Secretary Hicks, the leadership of the 
Department of Defense, and the men and women of our Department and 
their families, let me also thank you for the support that Congress 
continues to provide. Thank you also to the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, General Milley, who is testifying alongside me and is 
a critical partner in realizing the Department's priorities.
    The President's $773 billion defense budget request would provide 
the Department of Defense with the resourcing we need to address the 
threats that America faces and to advance the Department's four key 
strategic priorities: to defend the homeland, deter strategic attacks, 
deter aggression while being prepared to prevail in conflict when 
necessary, and build a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem. As 
always, the Department is determined to match resources to strategy, 
strategy to policies, and policies to the will of the American people.
    For more than seven decades, American vision and leadership have 
been pillars of international peace and prosperity. A strong, 
principled, and adaptive U.S. military remains central for U.S. 
leadership in the 21st century as we face dramatic geopolitical, 
technological, economic, and environmental changes. The Department 
stands ready to meet these challenges and seize opportunities with the 
confidence, creativity, and commitment that have long characterized our 
military and the democracy that it serves.
    We face rapidly evolving military capabilities on the part of our 
competitors, accelerated by emerging technologies and intensified by 
the potential for new threats to strategic stability and the U.S. 
homeland. We also face an escalation of our competitors' coercive and 
malign activities in the ``gray zone,'' as well as transboundary 
challenges that impose new demands on the Joint Force and the Defense 
enterprise. Our competitors seek to exploit our perceived 
vulnerabilities, including by developing conventional and nuclear 
capabilities that pose all-domain threats to the United States and 
could jeopardize the U.S. military's ability to project power and 
counter aggression.
    The People's Republic of China (PRC) is the Department's pacing 
challenge due to its coercive and increasingly aggressive efforts to 
refashion the Indo-Pacific region and the international system to suit 
its interests and preferences. The PRC has expanded and modernized 
nearly every aspect of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), including 
its conventional forces and nuclear capabilities, with a focus on 
offsetting U.S. military advantages. The PRC seeks to fragment U.S. 
alliances and security partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region, and the 
PRC's leaders hope to leverage their economic influence and the PLA's 
growing military strength to coerce China's neighbors and threaten 
their vital national interests. The PLA is also rapidly advancing and 
integrating its space, counter-space, cyber, electronic, and 
information-warfare capabilities to support its holistic approach to 
joint warfare.
    As we have seen in recent weeks, Russia also remains an acute 
threat, requiring close and sustained coordination across the NATO 
alliance to prevent further aggression in Europe. Russia's flagrant 
attack on its peaceful, sovereign, and democratic neighbor, Ukraine, 
poses a huge challenge to transatlantic security. Russia's nuclear 
capabilities also pose significant challenges now and in the future.
    While the PRC and then Russia pose the greatest challenges to U.S. 
security, we must also remain vigilant against other dangers. We face 
persistent threats from North Korea, with its nuclear arsenal and 
developing missile capability, and Iran, with its nuclear ambitions and 
support for proxy groups that threaten the security of our forces and 
our allies, partners, and interests in the Middle East.
    Meanwhile, other threats persist. We have degraded the capabilities 
of global terrorist groups--including al-Qa'ida and ISIS--but some may 
be able to reconstitute in short order. The whole world has learned how 
deadly and destabilizing a pandemic can be, and we must also be ready 
for other transborder challenges, such as cyber attacks and the 
existential threat of climate change.
    To address these challenges, we have developed a budget that we 
believe offers the right mix of capabilities across all domains, while 
retiring certain platforms that no longer meet the needs of the Joint 
Force. We are grateful for our partnership with Congress as we seek to 
ensure that the Department can successfully address present and future 
threats.
    As we work to defend the nation, the Department will continue to 
invest heavily in our people, who are the most important element of our 
national defense. Our All-Volunteer Force, with the support of their 
families, and our civilian and contractor defense enterprise, work 
tirelessly every day to defend the United States.
    After decades of leadership and investment, the United States 
enjoys an unparalleled network of allies and partners, who together 
provide an enormous strategic advantage that our competitors cannot 
match. This advantage has been on full display in Europe, where a 
galvanized NATO has risen to the moment and shown extraordinary unity 
in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression against a democratic 
neighbor, Ukraine.
    Countries around the world share a vital interest in a free and 
open international system. Close cooperation with allies and partners 
is foundational to protecting U.S. national security interests and to 
our collective ability to address the risk of aggression from the PRC 
and Russia, while responsibly managing the full array of other threats 
we face. In all cases, we strive to be the partner of choice for our 
friends. We will continue to work with our allies and partners to 
advance our shared interests and maintain the rules-based international 
order that relies on U.S. global leadership.
    The President's fiscal year 2023 defense budget request seeks to 
address these national security imperatives in three major ways: 
integrated deterrence, campaigning, and building enduring advantage.
    Integrated deterrence entails working seamlessly across military 
domains and the spectrum of conflict, using all instruments of U.S. 
national power and our extraordinary network of alliances and 
partnerships. It applies a coordinated, multifaceted approach to 
reducing competitors' perceptions of the net benefits of aggression 
relative to restraint, tailored to specific circumstances. Integrated 
deterrence is enabled by combat-credible U.S., allied, and partner 
forces, and it is backstopped by a safe, secure, and effective nuclear 
deterrent.
    Campaigning is the way that we tie together the global, day-to-day 
actions of the Joint Force to achieve deterrence. From joint exercises 
to military diplomacy, from advanced weapons tests to short-notice 
operations with close allies and partners, we campaign to make our 
competitors question the efficacy of coercion and aggression. Simply 
put, we aim to convince them that today is not the day to challenge the 
United States or our friends around the world.
    To shore up the foundations for integrated deterrence and 
campaigning, we are moving urgently to build enduring advantages across 
the defense ecosystem--the Department of Defense, the defense 
industrial base, and the array of private-sector and academic 
enterprises that spur innovation and support the systems on which our 
military depends. We will continue to swiftly modernize the Joint 
Force, with a focus on innovation and rapid adjustments to new 
strategic demands. We will make our supporting systems more resilient 
and agile in the face of any and all threats. And we will cultivate the 
talents of our exceptional team, recruiting and training a workforce 
with the skills, character, and diversity that our nation needs to 
creatively tackle today's national security challenges.
    Ultimately, this year's budget request seeks the resources for a 
Joint Force that can deter competitors and campaign across the spectrum 
of competition and conflict each and every day. But most critically, it 
also seeks the resources that the U.S. military needs to fight and win 
decisively should deterrence fail.
                         integrated deterrence
    Integrated deterrence aims to bring to bear the right mix of 
capabilities to demonstrate beyond doubt that the United States can 
respond across domains and the spectrum of conflict, working closely 
across the U.S. Government and with our global allies and partners--all 
in the manner, time, and place of our choosing.
    This requires that the Joint Force maintain our superiority in the 
air, on land, at sea, undersea, in space, throughout cyberspace, and 
anywhere in the gray zone where our competitors may seek to challenge 
us. Integrated deterrence also requires a safe, secure, and effective 
nuclear deterrent, which remains the ultimate backstop of our national 
security posture. And we will keep our capabilities networked and 
ensure that our warfighting concepts are integrated and optimized for a 
potential future fight.
    To maintain superiority in the air, the Department is focused on 
modernizing our global strike capabilities and continuing to provide 
rapid global mobility to the Joint Force, so that we can respond to any 
conflict or crisis effectively and swiftly. The President's fiscal year 
2023 defense budget request invests in our air command-and-control 
framework; in our surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities; in our 
Next Generation Air Dominance system of systems; in resilient basing, 
sustainment, and communications in contested environments; and in long-
range strike and fires capabilities, including the B-21 family of 
systems and investments in long-range standoff weapons and hypersonics. 
We have also made significant investments in 4th, 5th, and 6th 
generation fighters, logistics, and uncrewed aircraft systems.
    On land, the fiscal year 2023 budget continues to build a combat-
credible, ready, and lethal force that can tackle challenges around the 
world. Our budget request seeks to invest in additional Security Force 
Assistance Brigade rotations in the Indo-Pacific region and Europe, and 
it works to build capacity and improved capabilities in the Arctic. We 
are also focused on developing our long-range hypersonic weapons and 
mid-range capability prototypes on land, and we are increasing the 
command and control and domain awareness capability in our forces 
focused on defending the homeland. This will require unified network 
investments to facilitate the Joint All Domain Command and Control 
efforts across the Joint Force.
    At sea and undersea, we are investing in mobility, self-reliance, 
and survivability, and our budget request seeks to produce a balanced 
fleet that remains capable of a high level of readiness for power 
projection, sea control, maritime security, and sealift. Investments in 
this year's budget focus on force design to deliver a ready force now 
and in the future, including through investments in ship and aviation 
maintenance, training, and facilities. We have also invested in long-
range precision fires and platforms that ensure our future combat 
capability, including guided missile destroyers, attack submarines, and 
globally responsive, combat-ready naval expeditionary forces in the 
maritime littorals. The construction of our new battle force fleet 
ships and the incremental construction of Ford-class nuclear-powered 
aircraft carriers will ensure we maintain our dominance at sea.
    In space and cyberspace, we must continue to build and maintain our 
advantages over our competitors. The PRC has made significant 
investments in space-based and cyber capabilities. To protect our space 
architecture, the President's fiscal year 2023 defense budget proposes 
significant investments in space resilience and a more distributed 
space architecture. This includes investments in missile warning and 
tracking architecture, launch enterprise investments, protected 
satellite communications, and the Global Positioning System (GPS) 
enterprise.
    In cyberspace, our budget will help defend national security 
systems, including the Department of Defense Information Network; 
enhance the Department's own cybersecurity by implementing Zero Trust; 
build more redundancy and resilience into our cyber infrastructure; 
organize, train, and equip cyber mission forces; advance our cyber 
partnerships with like-minded countries; and reinforce international 
norms in cyberspace promoted by the United States.
    To defend the homeland, the fiscal year 2023 budget invests in the 
development of the Next-Generation Interceptor for Ground-Based 
Midcourse Defense, and it extends the service life of the current 
Ground-Based Interceptor. The budget also includes significant 
investment in the defense of Guam. We also improve our ability to see 
over the horizon, with investment in new homeland defense radars. Just 
as important is our investment in multi-Service, multi-domain, long-
range fires, including hypersonic capabilities on land, at sea, and in 
the air. The budget request would also procure more than 3,500 highly 
survivable subsonic weapons for new and existing launch platforms.
    We must be able to track, understand, and respond to malign 
activities in the gray zone, including the information space, and 
maintain a strategic hedge against unexpected, rapidly emerging 
threats, including from violent extremist organizations or an 
adversary's use of weapons of mass destruction. We also need to sustain 
a robust crisis-response capability. This budget invests in theater 
integration, including irregular warfare capabilities, Internet-based 
military information support operations (MISO), armed overwatch, and 
efforts to counter unmanned aerial systems (UAS) before they launch.
    Our nuclear triad remains the ultimate backstop of our national 
defense. Maintaining global strategic stability--particularly in light 
of Russia's significant nuclear capability and China's expanding 
nuclear arsenal--requires the United States to maintain a safe, secure, 
and effective nuclear capability. The President's fiscal year 2023 
defense budget provides for that investment through the modernization 
of our nuclear command, control, and communications system. It also 
fully funds the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine; ramps up 
production funding for the B-21 bomber; fully funds both the Ground-
Based Strategic Deterrent and the Long-Range Standoff weapon; and funds 
the revitalization of science and technology (S&T) research and 
development to keep pace with the evolving nuclear threat. The 
Department's nuclear modernization investments will ensure our extended 
deterrence commitments for years to come.
                              campaigning
    Day after day, the Department will strengthen U.S. deterrence and 
increase our advantage against our competitors' coercive measures 
through campaigning: the conduct and sequencing of coordinated military 
initiatives aimed at advancing well-defined, strategic priorities over 
time. The United States will operate forces, synchronize broader 
Departmental efforts, and align our activities with other instruments 
of national power to counter our competitors' coercion, complicate 
their military preparations, and develop our own warfighting 
capabilities, along with those of our allies and partners.
    In the Indo-Pacific region, campaigning requires thinking, acting, 
and operating differently every day, including by re-aligning our 
posture toward a more distributed footprint and building and exercising 
the preparatory elements needed in crisis and conflict, including 
infrastructure, logistics, dispersal and relocation. To that end, the 
President's fiscal year 2023 defense budget request makes clear that 
China is the Department's pacing challenge, and it makes investments 
that robustly support the requirements of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, as 
well as the development of capabilities and operational concepts 
aligned to those requirements. This includes leveraging existing and 
emergent capabilities, posture, and exercises to influence China's 
perception of asymmetric, temporal, and geographic advantages.
    Specifically, the budget invests in site surveys and the planning 
and design for potential future military construction projects, in 
achieving initial operating capacity for new missile warning and 
tracking architecture, in defense of Guam efforts, in a framework for 
multinational information sharing and multi-domain training and 
experimentation, and in other security cooperation efforts to improve 
allied and partner capability and capacity in the region. The fiscal 
year 2023 budget request includes significant investments in the 
Pacific Deterrence Initiative, and we remain grateful for congressional 
partnership in our efforts to address challenges posed by the PRC.
    Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine poses a historic challenge 
to transatlantic security. We need to continue robust investments in 
all domains relevant to European security. The fiscal year 2023 budget 
makes significant investments to support Ukraine's self-defense efforts 
through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and includes funding 
to support security cooperation programs throughout Europe, 
strengthening the capability and capacity of our allies and partners in 
the region.
    The Department was able to swiftly deploy additional forces to the 
European theater through our enhanced presence efforts, increasing 
readiness, operational flexibility, and interoperability with our 
allies. All of this was made possible by sustained investments in the 
European Deterrence Initiative (EDI). EDI has been vital to efforts to 
improve indications and warning, command and control, and mission 
command in Europe. Investments in EDI helped prepare U.S. and allied 
forces for the current situation in Europe, for credibly deterring an 
attack on alliance territory, and for ensuring we are ready to fight 
and win should deterrence fail. The Department is grateful to Congress 
for your leadership in the provision of EDI authorities and resources.
    Meanwhile, Iran challenges Middle East stability and poses threats 
to U.S. forces, our partners, and the free flow of energy. At the same 
time, ISIS, al-Qa'ida, and other violent extremist organizations remain 
a proximate threat to the security of the United States, our citizens, 
and our interests in the Middle East and South Asia. In response, our 
forces increasingly need to operate forward with a sustainable military 
posture and an operationally ready force capable of deterring security 
threats.
    Our fiscal year 2023 investments in support of campaigning 
activities across the Middle East and South Asia are focused on 
technological advancement, partner engagement and coordination, and 
focused military operations. We also continue to bolster integrated air 
and missile defense and counter-UAS systems. We are proud to cooperate 
with our partners through regional multilateral exercises, MISO, 
foreign military sales, and efforts to secure access, basing, and 
overflight. And throughout the region, we remain committed to 
countering Iran's malign influence and to counterterrorism operations 
that degrade groups that have the will and capability to harm the 
United States.
    In Africa, we face a series of intersecting challenges--from malign 
PRC activity, the evolution of violent extremist groups, and 
destabilizing transboundary dynamics across the continent. China and 
Russia have invested heavily in Africa to challenge U.S. influence and 
undermine our partners. In response, our forces in Africa are focused 
on day-to-day campaigning to counter violent extremist organization 
activity, strengthen the capability of our partners in the region, and 
observe, assess, and frustrate Chinese and Russian coercive behavior.
    Our military personnel are engaged in campaigning activity 
throughout the Western Hemisphere to combat cross-cutting threats. 
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance solutions offer low-cost 
capabilities to compete in the gray zone. Through increased security 
cooperation and the sharing of information, our strong, willing 
partners in the region have become force multipliers.
    In the homeland and the High North, our forces are working to 
sustain and strengthen U.S. deterrence to defend the United States and 
our allies and partners. The scale and scope of homeland 
vulnerabilities have fundamentally changed, and the United States faces 
multiple, simultaneous challenges from highly capable and advanced 
competitors, including nuclear and conventional missiles. Meanwhile, 
strategic competitors, rogue states, and non-state actors seek to 
strike institutions and critical infrastructure in the United States 
through cyber means to exploit our vulnerabilities, offset our military 
advantages, and disrupt our power-projection capabilities. At the same 
time, climate change is creating opportunities and vulnerabilities in 
the Arctic, requiring that we develop resilient infrastructure to 
support Arctic operations and train and equip our Joint Force to 
compete in this important region.
    A globally integrated, layered defense remains critical to 
deterring and thwarting potential attacks against the U.S. homeland. 
Our campaigning efforts in the U.S. homeland support homeland defense 
by helping our forces gain and maintain domain awareness, information 
dominance, and decision superiority. Annual exercises in the Arctic, 
including ARCTIC EDGE, ICEX, NORTHERN EDGE, and COLD RESPONSE, provide 
valuable experience and lessons-learned for conducting multi-domain 
operations while simultaneously demonstrating the U.S. commitment to a 
free, peaceful, stable, and open Arctic region.
                      building enduring advantage
    Finally, the Department must maintain our enduring advantage to 
continue to field the best joint fighting force in the world. That 
means changing and adapting the ways we operate across domains and 
within our Joint Force and the Department to ensure that the Joint 
Force will deter conflict across all theaters and domains now and in 
the future.
    To construct a durable foundation for our future military 
advantage, the Department--working in concert with other U.S. 
departments and agencies, Congress, the private sector, and our valued 
allies and partners--will move swiftly in five key ways.
    Transform the Foundation of the Future Force. Building the Joint 
Force requires modernization of the Department's force development, 
design, and business management practices over time. That starts with 
establishing a framework for strategic readiness. This framework will 
keep the Department's eyes on the horizon, ensuring that the urgent and 
competing demands of the present are balanced with preparations for the 
future.
    This effort requires investments in training, exercises, 
sustainment, and mission capability in all Military Services, the 
special operations community, and across the Joint Force. The 
Department is also updating and advancing its centerpiece joint 
training program to support integrated deterrence and campaigning by 
demonstrating and exercising our capabilities alongside our allies and 
partners.
    The fiscal year 2023 budget supports the exercise and engagement 
requirements of the 11 combatant commands, increases joint integration 
in Military Service exercises, and trains individuals and staffs in key 
joint skills. Our Department training efforts will better integrate 
major force elements across multiple levels of command and control in 
the conduct of Joint All Domain Operations against a strategic 
competitor, with live forces, virtual forces, allies, and partners.
    Make the Right Technology Investments. The United States' 
technological edge has long been key to our military advantage. To keep 
that edge razor-sharp, the Department will support the innovation 
ecosystem, both at home and in expanded partnerships with our allies 
and partners. That is why the fiscal year 2023 budget request includes 
the largest research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) 
budget in the Department's history--more than a 9 percent increase over 
last year's already historic RDT&E request.
    Our investments to build enduring advantages include resources for 
science and technology research, the National Defense Education 
Program, and the Department's educational and STEM programs, ranging 
from K-12 to the postgraduate level and continuing through employment.
    The Department will also invest further in the Rapid Development 
and Experimentation Reserve (RDER), which brings together the Military 
Services and combatant commands to experiment with advanced and 
emerging technologies. RDER's continuous, coordinated iteration across 
global and virtual exercises moves advanced capabilities into the hands 
of warfighters earlier, while developing new operational concepts and 
demonstrating our capacity for innovation to our competitors.
    In addition, the Department is committed to making the United 
States a world leader in 5G by working with the commercial sector and 
fielding 5G to the warfighter. We are enhancing the cybersecurity of 
the defense industrial base by sharing information and providing tools 
and expertise. By fielding resilient GPS and alternative Position, 
Navigation, and Timing capabilities to our most critical systems, we 
are enabling continuous operations in degraded environments. We are 
also prioritizing the Artificial Intelligence and Data Accelerator 
initiative to support combatant commands with urgently needed data, 
analytics, and AI-enabled capabilities.
    Adapt and Fortify Our Defense Ecosystem. The Department will 
prioritize joint efforts with the full range of domestic and 
international partners in the defense ecosystem. This will help us 
fortify the defense industrial base, our logistical systems, and 
relevant global supply chains against subversion, compromise, and 
theft.
    The fiscal year 2023 budget request includes significant investment 
in microelectronics, casting and forging, batteries and energy storage, 
strategic and critical minerals, and kinetic capabilities. The 
Department will also adapt and fortify the defense ecosystem by 
fostering supply chain resilience, including by making use of the 
Defense Production Act Title III and the Industrial Base Analysis 
Sustainment Programs and maximizing Made in America manufacturing and 
procurement where appropriate.
    The Department's ability to strengthen the defense ecosystem and 
project military force is inextricably linked to industry. Our 
industrial partners provide critical transportation capacity and the 
global networks to meet our day-to-day and wartime requirements. Our 
forces in U.S. Transportation Command spend approximately $7 billion 
with industry each year in transportation services to execute defense 
requirements. Our proactive approach and vibrant relationships with our 
commercial partners ensure that we have sufficient military capacity to 
satisfy wartime demands at acceptable levels of risk, making use of our 
industry emergency preparedness programs, such as the Civil Reserve Air 
Fleet, the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement, and a newly 
implemented Voluntary Tanker Agreement. We also maintain a strong 
relationship with the National Defense Transportation Association.
    Strengthen Resilience and Adaptability. The Department must 
maintain our ability to respond quickly and effectively to emerging and 
transboundary threats such as climate change and pandemics. To that 
end, the budget invests in installation resilience and adaptation, 
operational energy and buying power, science and technology, and 
contingency preparedness. We will also invest in the Energy Resilience 
and the Conservation Investment Program, which allows us to carry out 
military construction projects that make our installations more energy 
resilient.
    To further fight the damage wrought by climate change, the 
Department will strengthen resilience on several fronts. Climate change 
is a fact of life for Department of Defense installations around the 
country and the world that are facing rising sea levels and 
increasingly severe storms and droughts. The resilience of our 
installations is a critical component of our military readiness. 
Further, investing in more fuel-efficient platforms eases the logistics 
burden on the Joint Force and can extend the reach of our weapons 
systems. Finally, we must move with the commercial market toward 
electrification where it makes sense if we are to avoid being left 
behind, stuck with old technologies that are expensive and difficult to 
sustain.
    We must also learn from the current global pandemic and be more 
prepared for future outbreaks. Fighting COVID-19 will continue to be a 
priority for the Department, and our activities will be informed by the 
best science, the most rigorous evidence, and the need to maintain 
readiness.
    The Department has worked hard to tackle the COVID-19 challenge, 
providing urgently needed support across the United States. That has 
included vaccinating our force, their families, and Americans around 
the country, sending vaccines around the world, and supporting stressed 
healthcare systems. Our determined COVID-19 response has also included 
procuring personal protective equipment, therapeutics, and tests on 
behalf of the Federal Government. Safe and effective vaccines against 
COVID-19 help ensure that we remain the best and most ready fighting 
force in the world.
    Additionally, the fiscal year 2023 budget request supports the 
Biological Threat Reduction Program (part of the DoD Cooperative Threat 
Reduction Program), which will help strengthen the Department's 
capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to global outbreaks of 
disease. The program also strengthens partner countries' capacities to 
mitigate biological threats--whether deliberate, natural, or 
accidental.
    Cultivate the Workforce We Need. Strategies mean little without the 
right people to execute them. To recruit and retain the most talented 
workforce, we must advance our institutional culture and reform the way 
we do business. The Department must attract, train, and promote a 
workforce with the skills and abilities to tackle national security 
challenges creatively and capably in a complex global environment. 
Investments included in the fiscal year 2023 budget request aim to 
diversify and dynamically shape the mix of skills and expertise among 
our workforce to meet the needs of our missions, now and in the future.
    The Department must improve its capacity to find, support, and 
nurture an innovation-minded workforce to support our warfighters and 
encourage innovative best practices throughout the armed forces. The 
across-the-board pay raise of 4.6 percent is critical to compete for, 
hire, develop, and retain our force. Authorities for incentives, 
special pay rates, and workforce-development programs will be vital to 
growing our team.
    Enhancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility is 
fundamental to our strategy. Building a talented workforce that 
reflects our nation improves our ability to compete, deter, and win in 
today's increasingly complex global security environment--and doing so 
is a national security imperative.
    Taking care of our workforce is also a national security 
imperative. Every day, Americans who answer the call to serve need the 
Department's support to do their best work to defend our country. 
Across the Department, we have implemented initiatives to make sure 
that Service members and their families, and our civilian and 
contractor employees, can stay safe, be healthy, and thrive.
    That includes numerous efforts to combat sexual assault in the 
military. Sexual assault is an affront to our values and a threat to 
our readiness. Implementing the approved recommendations from the 
Independent Review Commission (IRC) on Sexual Assault in the Military 
requires a long-term culture change. We will not compromise on the 
safety of our teammates, and we will get this right.
    In furtherance of these efforts, the fiscal year 2023 budget 
request provides significant resources to reform military justice by 
putting prosecution decisions for sexual assault and other named 
offenses in the hands of trained, experienced attorneys; fielding a 
specialized prevention workforce in every Military Service to reduce 
sexual assault, suicide, and domestic violence; and providing sexual-
assault response coordinators and victim advocates with independence 
and increased expertise needed to foster recovery and to ensure that 
victims have the resources they require.
    The Department is deeply committed to the health and well-being of 
Service members and their families--in body and mind. That is why we 
have been clear: mental health is health. We are steadfastly committed 
to preventing, identifying, and treating mental health conditions 
across the force.
    One suicide in the U.S. military is too many. Suicide stems from a 
complex interaction of factors, and there is no single fix. We are 
addressing the problem of suicide in the military comprehensively to 
increase access to mental healthcare, to reduce barriers to getting 
support, to combat old stigmas on getting help, and to reach out to 
populations at highest risk. Our fiscal year 2023 budget request 
expands telehealth, implements programs to end stigma, optimizes use of 
mental health providers, embeds mental health providers in units, and 
conducts comprehensive mental health screening throughout one's 
service.
    Serve Military Families. Child care support is essential to many in 
our Joint Force, and it is critical to the readiness, efficiency, and 
retention of our people. The Department provides high-quality, 
affordable child care for children from birth to age 12, through 
installation-based Child Development Programs and community-based fee 
assistance. To help meet the child care needs of our Service members 
and civilian workforce, the Department will invest in the construction 
of additional on-base child development centers, expand fee assistance 
programs, extend eligibility for fee assistance programs to lower 
income Department civilian employees, and support public-private 
partnerships to increase child care capacity in high-demand, low-
capacity areas. The fiscal year 2023 budget request also continues a 
promising pilot program that provides financial assistance to Service 
members to offset the cost of in-home child care.
    The economic security of our Service members and military families 
is also critical. Military compensation must remain competitive with 
private sector pay, and we must address the high stress and demands on 
the force, today's tight labor market, and the effects of inflation on 
our Service members.
    We will work across the Department to enhance support to military 
families, increase access to healthy food, improve financial resources, 
and increase awareness of available resources. The Department is 
focused on the food security of our military families, and we continue 
to gather data to better understand the problem of food insecurity. But 
we will not wait to take action. This is a multifaceted problem, 
without a single solution, and we will pursue several angles to get at 
this challenge.
    The Department will also continue to improve the environment in and 
around our installations. This includes transitioning from the use of 
potentially harmful chemicals and cleaning up the soil and groundwater 
on and around our bases, to ensure that our military families and the 
surrounding communities have access to safe, clean drinking water. The 
budget invests in programs and initiatives to ensure that we are 
meeting these obligations.
                                closing
    Providing the resources for our strategy requires hard choices, 
which are reflected in the President's fiscal year 2023 defense budget 
request. We have made some tough but necessary decisions already, such 
as shifting our posture, ending the U.S. war in Afghanistan, 
transitioning our combat forces in Iraq, and prioritizing modernization 
to meet future challenges. The Department undertook a rigorous 
analytical process to retire vulnerable systems and programs that no 
longer meet mission needs. That included the decommissioning of certain 
ships, including some Littoral Combat Ships, and divestment of some A-
10s, E-3s, and KC-135s. Taken together, these savings will enable the 
Department to improve the Joint Force's efficiency and to redirect 
resources to higher national defense priorities.
    We are focused on the most important security challenges facing the 
United States, while ensuring that we maintain the capabilities 
required to protect our global interests and respond to emerging crises 
around the world. We must maintain that discipline to move the 
Department forward--and we look forward to Congress's support and 
partnership as we build the force of the future.
    The United States has advantages that no other country can match. 
We have the right strategy, resources, people, and partners around the 
globe to do precisely what the Department has always been called upon 
to do: defend the nation, protect our national interests, take care of 
our outstanding people, and work as a team with those who share our 
values. We will continue to help lead the free and open international 
system through this tumultuous period to a place of greater peace, 
prosperity, and stability.
    Ultimately, America's strength stems not just from our military 
might but from our democratic values, our Constitution, our open 
society, our diversity, our creativity, our hard-fought operational 
experience, our unmatched network of allies and partners, our valued 
colleagues across the U.S. Government, our civilian and contractor 
workforce, and above all, the extraordinary patriots of our All-
Volunteer Force and their stalwart families. We will meet the nation's 
security challenges with the vigor to prevail in the near term and the 
strategy, resilience, and wisdom to remain strong in the long term.

    Senator Tester. Appreciate your testimony, Mr. Secretary.
    General Milley, you have the floor.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY, USA, CHAIRMAN, 
            JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
    General Milley. Chairman Tester and Members of the 
Committee, thank you, and I also want to publicly thank Senator 
Shelby, although he's not here today, for his lifelong service 
in America's interests.
    I am privileged to represent the soldiers, sailors, airmen, 
Marines, and guardians of the United States Joint Force, and 
our troops, as you all know and with your help, are the best 
led, best equipped, best trained, most lethal, and most capable 
military force in the world.
    Alongside our allies and partners at any given time, 
approximately 400,000 of us are currently standing watch in a 
155 countries and conducting operations every day to keep 
Americans safe.
    Currently, we are supporting, as you noted in your opening 
comment, Senator Tester, our European allies in guarding NATO's 
Eastern Flank in the face of an unnecessary war of aggression 
by Russia against the people of Ukraine and the assault on the 
democratic institutions and rules-based international order 
that have prevented great power war for the last 78 years, 
since the end of World War II.
    We are now facing two global powers, China and Russia, each 
with significant military capabilities, both who intend to 
fundamentally change the current rules-based order.
    We are entering a world that is becoming more unstable and 
the potential for significant international conflict between 
great powers is increasing, not decreasing.
    The United States military comprises one of the four key 
components of national power, diplomatic, economic, 
informational, and, of course, military, in order to protect 
the homeland and sustain a stable and open international 
system.
    In coordination with the other elements of power, we 
constantly develop a wide range of military options for the 
President as Commander in Chief and for this Congress to 
consider.
    As the U.S. military, we are prepared to deter and, if 
necessary, fight and win against anyone who seeks to attack the 
United States, our allies, or a significant or vital national 
security interest.
    The Joint Force appreciates the work that our elected 
representatives do to ensure that we have the resources needed 
to train, equip, and manage the force in order to be ready.
    We thank the Congress for increasing last year's fiscal 
level of military spending and we look forward to your support 
for this year's budget.
    The Joint Force will deliver modernization and readiness to 
our Armed Forces and security to the people of the United 
States that the fiscal year 2023 budget requests of $773 
billion.
    This budget will enable the decisions, modernization, and 
transformation of the Joint Force in order to set and meet the 
conditions of operating environment that we expect to encounter 
in 2030 and beyond, the so-called changing character of war 
that we have discussed many times in the past.
    We will work diligently to ensure the resources the 
American people entrust to us are spent prudently in the best 
interests of the Nation, in alignment with the National Defense 
Strategy and the forthcoming National Military Strategy.
    This budget delivers a ready, agile, and capable Joint 
Force that will defend the Nation while taking care of our 
people and working with our partners and allies.
    We are witnessing right now, as we sit here, the greatest 
threat to peace and security of Europe and perhaps the world in 
my 42 years in uniform. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is 
threatening to undermine not only European peace and stability 
but global peace and stability that my parents and generations 
of Americans fought so hard to defend.
    The islands of the Pacific and the beaches of Normandy bore 
witness to the incredible tragedy that befalls humanity when 
nations seek power through military aggression across sovereign 
borders.
    Despite this horrific assault on the institutions of 
freedom, it is heartening to see the world rally and say never 
again to the specter of war in Europe.
    Your military stands ready to do whatever is directed in 
order to maintain peace and stability on the European 
continent, a peace that ensures global stability and an 
international order where all nations can prosper in peace.
    We are also prepared and need to sustain our capabilities 
anywhere else in the globe as well as with our priority effort 
being the Asian Pacific against the pacing challenge of the 
People's Republic of China, and in defense of our Nation, we 
must maintain competitive over-match in all the domains of war, 
space, cyber, land, sea, and air. Second place has no room in 
the geo-strategic competition between us and our adversaries.
    The United States is at a very critical and historic geo-
strategic inflection point. We need to pursue a clear-eyed 
strategy of maintaining the peace to the unambiguous capability 
of strength relative to China and Russia. This requires that we 
simultaneously maintain readiness and modernize for the future. 
It's not one or the other.
    If we do not do that, then we are risking the security of 
future generations, and I believe this budget is a major step 
in the right direction to securing the United States.
    I look forward to your questions.
    [The statement follows:]
              Prepared Statement of General Mark A. Milley
    I am privileged to represent the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines 
and Guardians of the United States Joint Force. Our troops are the best 
led, best equipped, best trained, most lethal and capable military 
force in the world. Alongside our allies and partners, American 
Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Guardians are currently standing 
watch in 155 countries and conducting operations every day that keep 
Americans safe. We are supporting our NATO allies and guarding the 
Eastern flank in the face of the unnecessary war of Russian aggression 
against the people of Ukraine and the assault on the democratic 
institutions and rules-based international order that have prevented 
great power war for 78 years.
    The United States military is a key component in the efforts to 
sustain a stable and open international system and an important 
component of our national power. In cooperation with our diplomatic 
corps, economy, and democratic institutions, we are part of the range 
of options available to this legislative body and the Commander-in-
Chief. As the U.S. military, we are prepared to fight and win if those 
who seek to attack the United States, our allies, and partners are 
undeterred.
    The Joint Force appreciates the work that our elected 
representatives do to ensure that we have the resources needed to 
train, equip, and manage the force in order to be ready. This 
legislative body increased the level of military funding for the last 
fiscal year and with that additional funding we are ensuring that the 
future modernization of the armed forces along with funding the 
security requirements of today remain on track.
    The Joint Force will deliver modernization of our armed forces and 
security to the people of the United States at the fiscal year 2023 
budget request of $773 billion. This budget will enable the decisions, 
modernization, and transformation the Joint Force needs to set the 
conditions for the Force of 2030. This budget allows the Joint Force to 
remain on a stable glide path toward that future.
    The people of the United States through Congress provide the 
military the resources we need, and we will work diligently to ensure 
it is spent prudently in the best interest of the Nation. In alignment 
with the forthcoming National Defense Strategy and National Military 
Strategy, this budget delivers a ready, agile, and capable Joint Force 
that will defend the Nation, while taking care of our people and 
working with our partners and allies.
Strategic Environment
    We are witness to the greatest threat to the peace and security of 
Europe and perhaps the world in my 42 years of service in uniform. The 
Russian invasion of Ukraine is threatening to undermine the global 
peace and stability that my parents--and generations of Americans--
fought so hard to defend. The islands of the Pacific and the beaches of 
Normandy bore witness to the incredible tragedy that befalls humanity 
when nations seek power through military aggression across sovereign 
borders. Despite this horrific assault on the institutions of freedom, 
it is heartening to see the world rally and say never again to the 
specter of war in Europe. Your military stands
    ready to do whatever is asked to maintain peace and stability on 
the European continent, a peace that ensures global stability and an 
international order where all nations can prosper in peace.
The People's Republic of China
    The People's Republic of China (PRC) remains our #1 long term geo-
strategic pacing challenge. The PRC continues to challenge the 
stability and security in the Pacific and is increasingly exporting 
their ability to destabilize countries abroad.
    The PRC has and continues to develop significant nuclear, space, 
cyber, land, air, and maritime military capabilities, and they are 
working every day to close the technology gap with the United States 
and our allies. In short, they remain intent on fundamentally revising 
the global international order in their favor by midcentury, they 
intend to be a military peer of the U.S. by 2035, and they intend to 
develop the military capabilities to seize Taiwan by 2027.
    Furthermore, they are actively watching the events in Ukraine and 
intend to exploit efforts in order to weaken the U.S. and our allies 
supporting Ukraine. Where Russia is an acute threat, the PRC is our 
long-term, geo-strategic national security pacing challenge. As 
President Biden's Interim National Security Strategic Guidance stated, 
China is the only country ``capable of combining its economic, 
diplomatic, military, and technological power to mount a sustained 
challenge to a stable and open international system.''
    History is not deterministic; war with the PRC is not inevitable. 
The PRC is clearly a strategic competitor, and it continues to improve 
its technology and modernization of its armed forces. It is imperative 
that we keep our relationship with the PRC a competition and not allow 
it to become a conflict.
Integrated Deterrence
    Integrated deterrence, as defined in the National Defense Strategy, 
is how we will align the Department's policies, investments, and 
activities to sustain and strengthen deterrence--tailored to specific 
competitors and challenges and coordinated and synchronized to maximum 
effect inside and outside the Department. We must act urgently to 
develop deterrence approaches--including denial, resilience, and cost 
imposition--across domains, theaters, and spectrums of conflict. If we 
remain militarily superior to our adversary, then conflict is less 
likely. As history has shown, peace through strength is a time-tested 
approach and our best approach for a strategic way ahead.
Russia
    In recent months, Russia--under the direction of Vladimir Putin--
has taken unprovoked, premeditated actions to violate a sovereign 
nation. With the invasion of Ukraine, Putin has created a dangerous, 
historical turning point and has invaded a free and democratic nation 
and its people without provocation. Shoulder-to-shoulder with our 
allies, we have bolstered NATO's Eastern Flank and imposed wide-ranging 
costs on Russia, demonstrating our willingness to defend the 
international, rules-based order. Russia retains a large and varied 
nuclear capability to threaten the United States and our allies and 
partners, and we have heard very provocative rhetoric concerning 
Russia's nuclear force alert levels from Russian senior leaders. Russia 
has repeatedly demonstrated its capability and will to conduct complex 
malicious cyber activities targeting American protected digital 
infrastructure, both military and commercial.
Democratic People's Republic of Korea
    The Democratic People's Republic of Korea's (DPRK) continued 
weapons testing and development poses real threats to our allies and 
partners in the Indo-Pacific as well as the homeland. The DPRK 
continues to enhance its ballistic missile capability and possesses the 
technical capacity to present a real danger to the US homeland as well 
as our allies and partners across the Indo-Pacific. They show no signs 
of relenting in their myopic focus on military capability at the 
expense of their citizens and peace of the Korean Peninsula as well as 
the entire region.
Iran
    Iran is likely to remain a significant regional threat to the 
United States and our partners and allies. Through its support of 
terrorist activities and a proxy army inside the borders of its 
neighbors, along with its ballistic missile programs, Iran seeks to 
revise the Middle East regional order and balance of power in Iran's 
favor. Iran has continued to develop its nuclear program as leverage 
towards that end. Furthermore, if not constrained through a new 
diplomatic agreement, their continued nuclear program threatens the 
emergence of a regional arms race. Additionally, Iran continues to 
openly threaten to assassinate current and former members of United 
States Government and our military, which is unacceptable.
Violent Extremist Organizations
    Following the conclusion of two continuous decades of U.S. presence 
in Afghanistan, terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Al 
Shabaab, and others continue to export terror, destruction, and 
destabilization. Until and unless the root causes of instability that 
give rise to these types of groups are resolved, we will continue to 
deal with their attacks to undermine legitimate governments worldwide. 
The root causes can only be effectively addressed by governments of the 
region and we can best influence outcomes with diplomatic, economic, 
information and stability efforts along with train, advise, assist and 
intelligence sharing combined with an effective counter-terrorism 
capability that can find, fix, disrupt, and destroy an emerging 
specific terrorist threat. Through coalition efforts in support of 
local governments and an aggressive counter-terrorism strategy, we will 
continue to ensure they do not possess the capacity and capability to 
exert their terror in the U.S. homeland.
Allies & Partners
    Our alliances and partnerships are our most significant asymmetric 
advantages and are key to maintaining the international rules-based 
order that offers the best opportunities for peace and prosperity for 
America and the globe. This budget allows us to build our partners and 
allies capabilities, foster interoperability, and strengthen 
relationships. Doing so allows us, our allies, and partners to counter 
the coercion of our strategic competitors, the malign activity of 
regional challengers, and meet the varied security challenges state and 
non-state actors, terrorism or any other threat that may emerge. We are 
stronger when we operate closely with our allies and partners. 
Simultaneously, we must be ready for today and prepare for tomorrow.
Readiness and Modernization
    Continued modernization is imperative for the Joint Force. We 
cannot allow ourselves to create the false trap that we can only either 
modernize or focus on today's readiness, we must do both. The United 
States has always had the advantage of time to conduct a long build up 
prior to the beginning of hostilities, we have the fortunate geography 
of having the Atlantic and Pacific oceans as our east and west borders 
and having friendly neighbors to our north and south. With advances in 
technology, we will no longer have the luxury of a long protected 
buildup prior to conflict. Having modernized forces in sufficient size 
and readiness that can rapidly respond at scale will be the key to 
sustaining deterrence and maintaining the peace, and if deterrence 
fails, being able to fight and win.
    Our Strategic competitors are modernizing their militaries, weapons 
and capability. We will continue to modernize ours to ensure we deter 
and, if necessary, defeat adversaries. We will divest legacy systems to 
enable the modernization of our forces not only in terms of materiel, 
but also in terms of doctrine. In the fall of 2019, the Joint Staff 
began to develop the Joint Warfighting Concept (JWC) to address the 
changing character of war, fully informed by the future operating 
environment and threats we will face. The JWC guides how we organize, 
train, and equip the Joint Force. It further guides us in shaping our 
strategic environment and future operations. JWC continues to evolve 
and is being refined through robust experimentation and war-gaming. 
Among the enablers for JWC, Joint all domain command and control 
(JADC2) is a warfighting capability to sense, analyze, and act at all 
levels and phases of conflict, across all domains, and with partners, 
to deliver information advantage to our forces and decision makers at 
greater speeds than our adversaries can react. JADC2's data-centric 
approach to command and control will dramatically increase the speed of 
information sharing and decisionmaking in a contested environment. 
Conceptual frameworks like the JWC and JADC2 will ensure capabilities 
such as Long Range and Hypersonic Fires, Logistics and Information 
Advantage are employed to the full extent. This combination of 
operational concepts and technology will enable integrated deterrence.
    As important is the education of our military leaders. The Joint 
Chiefs of Staff and their senior enlisted advisors unanimously endorsed 
two documents: shared visions for both officer and enlisted joint 
professional military education. We increased the time our developing 
leaders spend studying the changing character of war and a greater 
focus on both the PRC as the pacing challenge and Russia as our 
immediate threat, which seeks to create leaders fully versed in the 
Joint Warfighting Concept. Furthermore, our shift to outcomes based 
military education will help us better measure progress and the return 
on our investment.
    Our staff college and war college curriculum are being streamlined 
to focus on the warfighter skills necessary to execute the JWC and 
prevail in future conflict. Also underway is the first class of 
GATEWAY, the Joint Staff's newest in-person enlisted development course 
introducing the Joint Environment to E-6s and E-7s from across the 
force. GATEWAY is designed to develop joint enlisted leaders capable of 
operating in Joint Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational 
(JIIM) organizations. And we, the Joint Force, must also focus on 
recruiting the most capable talent so we can develop our leaders of the 
future.
    We are focused on building a more lethal Joint Force ensuring that 
we continue to modernize our concepts, doctrine, training, and military 
education. It is imperative that we continue to invest in capabilities 
that sustain our advantages, while strengthening alliances and 
attracting new partners. Investments in this budget will ensure that 
the requirements our nation levees on the Joint Force are executable. 
The investments made in this budget will specifically ensure that we 
remain a relevant and ready force while ensuring that nuclear 
modernization, long range fires, hypersonic technology, shipbuilding, 
missile defeat and defense, space and cyber remain at the center of our 
funding priorities.
Nuclear Modernization
    The nuclear triad is the cornerstone of our strategic deterrent. 
Our adversaries are improving their nuclear stockpiles and potential 
nuclear threats continue to emerge. While today's nuclear TRIAD is 
safe, secure, and effective, most U.S. nuclear deterrent system are 
operating beyond their original design life, increasing concerns about 
mission effectiveness, reliability, and availability. Replacement 
programs are in place, but there is little or no margin between the end 
of useful life of existing systems and the fielding of their 
replacements. Managing the programmatic risk is a key feature of our 
approach going forward, however we must also account for geopolitical, 
operational, and technical risks the could pose new deterrence dilemmas 
in the future. Risk mitigation in the programs is one aspect, the other 
area encompasses the nuclear weapons complex, infrastructure, and the 
nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3). All of which remain 
a high priority in the Department and the Joint Force.
Long Range Fires
    One need look no further than the current conflict in Ukraine to 
see the devastating effect that long range fires provide. Ensuring we 
have a strike capability without having to also maintain air 
superiority is a critical asset. We must field multi-domain, long-range 
offensive capabilities that are both cost-effective and cost-imposing 
as a means of improving deterrence. By enabling power projection from 
standoff ranges, the risk to critical U.S. assets decreases while the 
defensive burden imposed upon the enemy increases. The PRC has 
thousands of ground- launched theater-range missiles in its arsenal 
that would be difficult for the U.S. to counter given its current 
inventories. Investments in long range missiles are a cost-effective 
strategy that improves our ability to compete with the PRC.
Hypersonic Technology
    This technology is going to continue to be developed by our 
adversaries and the means and mechanisms for delivery will be varied 
and difficult to detect and defeat. At the very core of this technology 
is a speed that is almost unbeatable. It is for this reason that we 
must invest in this technology. Hypersonics are a suite of capabilities 
that provide transformational warfighting capability to our Joint 
Force.
Missile Defeat and Defense
    Missile Defeat is all whole-of-government activities to counter the 
development, acquisitions, proliferation potential, and actual use of 
adversary offensive missiles of all types, and to limit damage for such 
use. As the scale and complexity of missile capabilities increase, we 
must continue to develop, acquire, and maintain credible U.S. missile 
defeat capabilities as necessary to protect against possible missile 
attacks on the U.S. homeland, allies, and partners. The Ground-Based 
Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, and continued modernization and 
expansion of it, will remain an important and effective element of our 
comprehensive missile defeat approach to defend the homeland from DPRK 
long-range missiles.
Optimizing Force Structure
    To pace the PRC threat, we can no longer afford to maintain weapons 
that are not relevant in the future fight and whose capabilities can be 
matched by superior technology. Sustaining such equipment takes needed 
defense dollars away from the acquisition of systems that are needed 
for modernization. We need to retire aging platforms, and ensure that 
every defense dollar is spent on programs and equipment that will be 
relevant to the high-end fight in contested environments. We cannot 
continue to mortgage our future by being wedded to technology of the 
past.
Naval Forces
    Strategically, the United States has always been and remains a 
maritime Nation, and we cannot have a world class Navy without world 
class ships. Manufacturing our warships overseas is simply not in our 
national interest. Our shipbuilding and supporting vendor base are a 
national security capability that needs support to grow and maintain a 
skilled workforce. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget reflects the 
Administration's strong commitment to continued American naval 
superiority, including a properly sized and well-positioned industrial 
base to meet the demands of our current and future defense needs. The 
conclusions from past force structure analyses have been fully 
considered and are simple: ship count is an incomplete metric, as it 
fails to fully capture the capability, payload capacity, and employment 
of ship classes in the fleet. We must have the right ships, with the 
right crews, and the right capabilities in the theaters where they 
matter. This budget specifically procures warships and submarines with 
credible combat power to deter China while continuing remotely operated 
ship development and investing in the industrial base to support fleet 
modernization and on time delivery of the Columbia class submarine. 
Sealift recapitalization is a critical component of our fleet, 90 
percent of war material moves by sea and the DoD fleet is reaching its 
end of life with an average vessel age of 46 years.
    Our overall sealift readiness rate is consistently below our stated 
requirements. We must recapitalize our fleet.
Space Forces
    More so now than ever, space is essential to our way of life; space 
capabilities are essential to our economy, quality of life, our 
exploration initiatives, and our ability to wage war. Every day we see 
additional commercial space launches and increased competition for low 
earth orbit as well as increased reliance on these space assets by 
Americans. Adversaries are testing and fielding counterspace weapons 
that threaten not just our National interests and advancements in 
space, but those of all nations that rely upon space. Russia recently 
tested both a ground-based anti-satellite missile and an on-orbit anti-
satellite weapon prototype which will threaten our space capabilities 
once fielded. Left unsecured, our capabilities in space will become 
strategic vulnerabilities, and if we begin to lose our freedom of 
maneuver in space, this impact will be felt by Americans of all walks 
of life. This year's budget submission provides a significant 
investment in resilient space architectures so U.S. and allied partners 
will be able to continue to derive the national security and societal 
benefits from space in the face of these threats.
Cyber Forces
    Our adversaries are leveraging the open commerce platform that is 
the modern cyber environment to further their own nefarious ends. The 
PRC consistently uses the cyber domain to collect intelligence from the 
U.S. Government and to extract proprietary commercial information from 
the private sector. Malign cyberspace actors increasingly exploit 
supply chain vulnerabilities, such as commercial software, to gain 
network access and conduct cyber operations against U.S. citizens, 
organizations, and institutions. The low cost combined with deniability 
and the frequency with which non-state actors conduct operations make 
this domain a priority focus for adversaries to asymmetrically compete 
without escalation in other domains.
    Therefore, we must increase our ability to compete in cyberspace 
and ensure all elements of informational power are integrated into 
operations, activities, and efforts to deter our adversaries and 
protect the U.S. homeland. This requires investment in partners and 
technology, building and maturing cyber operations and readiness, 
reducing risk to weapon systems and critical infrastructure, 
strengthening cybersecurity, and improving network resiliency.
Ground Forces
    Decision in war is ultimately achieved on land, and maintaining a 
capable land force in the United States Army and Marine Corps is key to 
our overall deterrence capability and national security. The Army is 
rapidly modernizing with innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship 
in the application of combat power. Modern battlefields are 
increasingly faster, more lethal, and more distributed. To meet 
emerging challenges, the Army is transforming to provide the Joint 
Force with the speed, range, and convergence of cutting edge 
technologies that will generate the decision dominance and overmatch 
required to win the next fight. By 2035, the Army aims to realize its 
vision of a multi-domain force. Similarly, the Marine Corps is 
deliberately transforming its capabilities, capacity, and composition 
through its expeditionary advanced base operations to meet future 
challenges.
Air Forces
    Maintaining the role as the global leader in airpower requires our 
Air Force to accelerate change or lose. In an environment of aggressive 
global competitors and technology development and diffusion, the Air 
Force must have the capabilities to control and exploit the air domain, 
while also underwriting national security through nuclear deterrence. 
To best address these necessary changes, we must balance risk over 
time. The Air Force will develop and field new capabilities 
expeditiously while selectively divesting older platforms not relevant 
to our pacing challenge-- all while maintaining readiness. The Air 
Force must ensure its path continuously drives towards readiness to be 
best prepared when called upon by the Nation. Accelerating change means 
both getting the direction right and moving as fast as possible.
    In last year's budget submission, the Air Force began the process 
of making hard decisions to modernize the Force. Last year's budget 
highlighted the Air Force needs for 2030 and beyond, and the message 
has not changed: the need to modernize is critical to counter strategic 
competitors. The Air Force is taking measured risk in the near-term, 
while simultaneously prioritizing an affordable, defensible force 
structure that grows readiness over time and accelerates investment in 
critical capabilities to deter and defeat the advancing threat.
Special Operations Forces (SOF)
    SOF's full range of core activities, tailored capabilities, and 
enduring partnerships provide critical options for campaigning to 
bolster deterrence. The access, placement and influence generated by 
SOF long-term commitments to building partner capacity and improving 
Ally interoperability provide expanded, low-cost options to gain 
awareness and present an adversary with multiple dilemmas, if 
necessary. Additionally, SOF remain ideally suited to identify an 
adversary's challenge in the ``gray zone'' and counter those malign 
activities with firmness while managing escalation. USSOCOM continues 
to prioritize its operations, activities and investments in the Indo 
Pacific and Europe while maintaining prioritized posture to counter 
threats from the Middle East, Africa, and other regions.
    SOF continue to optimize our global posture to counter violent 
extremists and other non-state actors while sustaining the ability to 
respond to crises worldwide. Focused, deliberate campaigning in Eastern 
Europe over several years has supported our recent response in 
conjunction with critical Allies and Partners. This will enhance their 
resistance capabilities if threatened with territorial aggression or 
abrogation of sovereign territory.
People First/People and Families
    We must take care of our people. Taking care of our people is a 
fundamental component of readiness. People are our most important 
resource in the Joint Force. We must ensure that we are doing all that 
we can do to take care of and guard our most critical resource in order 
to attract both our troops and their families and retain the best 
talent in the world. Taking care of people decisively impacts unit 
cohesion, recruitment, retention, and confidence in leadership.
    Just one example in the Budget of taking care of our troops and 
families is ensuring that the services increase their childcare 
capacity. The DoD childcare system is the gold standard of childcare 
with 98 percent of centers being accredited. Funding support from 
Congress is vital for fully- staffed military childcare. Childcare is 
key to keeping military families serving and ensuring the safety of our 
children.
    The Joint Force is committed to growing a bench of talent and 
ensuring that all who meet the requirements to serve are able to serve. 
The Joint Force competes for the talent of America's youth along with 
every other business, and organization who seeks our Nation's best and 
brightest. The Joint Force's objective is to field the most lethal and 
combat effective fighting force in the world. We will continue to 
support the accessions of all qualified people to all jobs and 
positions within the Joint Force.
    Finally, another example of taking care of our people and emerging 
realities is the Secretary of Defense's decision to close Red Hill. The 
Secretary made the decision to close the Red Hill fuel storage location 
earlier this year, and this decision demonstrates that we will ensure 
we do all we can to safeguard our most important resource. Closing Red 
Hill is not only an opportunity to demonstrate to our people that we 
care, but also an opportunity to modernize how we distribute fuel to 
our fleet in the Pacific. Moving away from a large legacy bulk storage 
system to a distributed system improves our warfighter campaign and 
ensures safe water for our troops, their families, and the local 
community. Looking for opportunities to take care of our people and 
modernize our force and capabilities is something we will continue to 
prioritize.
Conclusion
    The United States is at a very critical and historic geo-strategic 
inflection point. We are entering a world that is becoming more 
unstable and the potential for significant international conflict 
between great powers is increasing, not decreasing. The United States 
needs to pursue a clear- eyed strategy of maintaining the peace through 
unambiguous capability of strength relative to the PRC and Russia. This 
requires we simultaneously maintain readiness and modernize for the 
future. If we do not, then we are risking the security of future 
generations. This budget is a major step in the right direction.
    It remains imperative that we redouble our efforts to improve 
readiness and to modernize so that we remain the most capable and 
lethal Force on the planet. Our job as the Joint Force, our contract 
with the American people is that we, the United States military will 
always be ready to deter our enemies and if deterrence fails then to 
fight and win.

    Senator Tester. I want to thank you for your statement, 
General Milley. I thank you both for being here.
    Again, before we get to questions, I want to allow the 
Chairman of the Appropriations, to make an opening statement.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY

    Senator Leahy. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I had to use 
my duties to open the Senate at 10 o'clock, so that is why I 
was not here. I am glad to see both Secretary Austin and 
General Milley, both of whom are friends. I am glad to see them 
here.
    I would note, and I do not need to tell you this, the world 
is a lot different today than it was when the Full Committee 
heard from the two of you last year. Russia's unprovoked, 
unwarranted aggression in Ukraine, which may become even worse, 
China's domination in the global marketplace, continued 
instability in the Middle East, an enduring pandemic. The 
Department of Defense as well as the State Department, all our 
agencies have to confront these issues and more. I think the 
President's budget looks not just at the current issues but 
anticipates what we have to look at first.
    But this budget is also the first since the United States 
ended its involvement in Afghanistan last year as well as the 
first since Russia's unprovoked and senseless all-out assault 
on Ukraine. It reflects some of these changes with emphasis on 
building on programs the committee has funded for revitalizing 
NATO, both our partners capabilities and our ability to stand 
side by side with them.
    In fact, I hope you do not mind a parochial comment, the 
Vermont Air National Guard is on deployment in Europe as part 
of that right now. I am particularly appreciative of your 
comments, Mr. Secretary, about what you call integrated 
deterrence.
    I have long believed the military does not act in isolation 
from the rest of the government. As the Chairman and Vice 
Chairman of this committee have asked your predecessors, 
Secretary Mattis, to explain the importance of a budget that 
invests in our Nation's military but also in our Nation's 
people. I do not think you can separate the two.
    The men and women of our Armed Services reflect the United 
States, and the programs Congress supports across each and 
every appropriations bill yields an economy, a workforce, a 
citizenry, an educational system, and more that makes our 
Nation stronger and more successful.
    So, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for giving me this 
time.

                      AGREEMENT ON TOPLINE NUMBER

    Senator Tester. Chairman Leahy, first of all, we wish you 
luck in getting a top line number and hopefully both sides can 
put pressure on both Shelby and you to get to that number soon 
so we can get a budget out by the end of September, but I 
will----
    Senator Leahy. As I say, we want it very, very much. I will 
not be here next year, but I look at some who will and we will 
try to get a clean slate for the committee beginning at noon on 
January 3rd.
    Senator Tester. I think we're all onboard with that, 
especially Senator Collins. You may go proceed with your 
questions, if you might, Mr. Chairman.

                   NON-DEFENSE SPENDING AND RESEARCH

    Senator Leahy. Okay. Well, thank you. Secretary Austin, I 
have spoken to you privately about this but you know how much I 
have appreciated seeing you and Secretary of State Blinken 
working hand in hand not only here in the U.S. but in your 
trips abroad, including the very important one to Ukraine. I 
think your partnership has been a driving force.
    A few years ago I wondered if the United States could get 
our NATO allies and our other partners to join on the same 
page. The two of you, President Biden, you have all worked 
very, very hard, to do that, and I think that is so important.
    Secretary Austin, do you agree that the investments we make 
in non-defense discretionary spending to ensure the fitness, 
health, and education of the future force are also essential to 
our national security?
    Secretary Austin. I do, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Leahy. We are on the cusp of negotiating a final 
comprehensive bill that is going to ignite our efforts to be 
able to compete with China. The investments made by that 
legislation would empower the Department of Commerce to provide 
a jolt to the micro-electronics industry in our country, 
bringing onshore the development of critical national security 
technologies.
    We have seen twice in the last 2 days how things have 
slowed down considerably in our country, on just solar energy 
for one, because of the reliance on China and those countries 
they control.
    How important are the resources for non-defense research? 
Obviously we all agree on the importance of defense research, 
but in non-defense research and development to ensure our 
Nation's national security, cybersecurity, and economic 
independence from foreign manufacturing.
    Secretary Austin. Well, I think it's critical, Chairman, 
and let me, before I answer in full, let me just again thank 
you for your many years of service to our Nation on behalf of 
the Department of Defense. We are truly grateful for your 
leadership and your support of Defense.
    So I believe your question was how important is the 
investment in non-defense-related research to us. I would say 
it's very important. As you know, over the years we have 
benefitted from a number of developments that have taken place 
in the civil sector and again it's putting together a number of 
capabilities and building capacity in ways that hasn't been 
done before that creates tremendous opportunity for us.
    So I think it's very, very important to answer your 
question, Chairman.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you and thank you for the kind 
personal comments, too.

                       STATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

    General Milley, I looked at your written remarks. You 
discuss the importance of working with our allies and our 
partners. Today, and I use this because the example could be 
from many States, but the Vermont Air National Guard is doing 
that in Europe on deployment. I am a long-time supporter of the 
National Guard State Partnership Program. Our State recently 
added Austria to its existing partnerships with Nigeria and 
North Macedonia.
    In light of Russia's aggression in Ukraine, the success we 
have had in cementing our NATO partnership, can you speak to 
the relationships between State National Guards, not just 
Vermont obviously, but National Guards and our international 
partners?
    General Milley. Thank you, Senator, and I, too, want to 
echo the Secretary's comments and thank you for your half 
century of public service, deeply appreciated, and I know all 
of us in uniform appreciate your leadership.
    With respect to the State Partnership Program, you know, to 
go from big to small, allies and partners are an asymmetric 
advantage for the United States.
    Neither China nor Russia have anything close to the allies 
and partner network that the United States has. Just as an 
example of that, last week I was with Secretary of Defense 
Austin in Ramstein and he called a meeting. In 6 days, 42 
countries' Ministers of Defense and my counterparts Chiefs of 
Defense all showed up in Ramstein to coordinate and synchronize 
support to the ongoing struggle in Ukraine.
    Russia has nothing comparable to that. They have Belarus, 
maybe a couple others. That's about it. China certainly doesn't 
have the network around. So allies and partners are critical. 
They're a critical component of the national defense of the 
United States, and it's one of our asymmetric advantages.
    The National Guard from all the different States play a 
very important role in that. Each one of our units has State 
Partnership Programs. We'll take Ukraine for an example. In 
Ukraine, California's aligned with them along with others. 
Those have been invaluable in maintaining the connective tissue 
between our military.
    So it's an important program at the micro-tactical level, 
but it also has very great strategic effect.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Collins.

                              BUDGET RISK

    Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you both for your service and thank you, Secretary 
Austin, for going to Ukraine. I think that was extremely 
important.
    Mr. Secretary, for the second year in a row, the 
Administration has submitted a budget request that would result 
in a real reduction in defense spending when you take inflation 
into account.
    The 2018 bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission 
recommended an increase in the annual defense budget at a rate 
of three to 5 percent above inflation which we know is at a 40-
year high today.
    Given the aggressive rate at which China's modernizing its 
military and the fact that everywhere we look we see new 
threats, including the largest land war in Europe since World 
War II, I'm very concerned that this budget would result in 
real cuts in defense spending at exactly the wrong time.
    If you look at the services and the Combatant Command 
Unfunded Priorities Lists they've submitted, they amount to 
more than $21 billion.
    What are the areas in the budget where the department is 
accepting the most risk?
    Secretary Austin. Well, thank you, Senator. We built this 
budget--first of all, $773 billion is a very substantial 
budget. We built the budget, as you know, based on our strategy 
which we just released about the same time that we released the 
budget.
    We believe that it gives us the ability to go after those 
capabilities that support our war-fighting concepts, and in 
that strategy, Senator, China is listed as our pacing challenge 
and Russia is cited as an acute threat, and again we believe 
that we're going after the right things to ensure that we 
maintain a competitive edge going forward.
    When we built the budget, obviously you have to snap the 
chalk line at some point while you're building the budget and 
at that point, you know, we factored in what was the 
appropriate inflation rate. Of course, again, if we're unable 
to buy the things that we think are essential, we'll come back 
to the President and ask for more assistance, but we believe 
that there's significant capability in this budget.

                        SHIPBUILDING INVESTMENT

    Senator Collins. General Milley, speaking of China, in your 
written testimony you noted that China intends to develop the 
military capabilities to seize Taiwan by the year 2027.
    During that critical window, the Navy's fleet would 
actually continue to shrink to 280 ships by 2027 under the 
Administration's budget request. That compares to a Chinese 
fleet that the Pentagon assesses would be as large as 420 ships 
by 2025 and 460 ships by 2030.
    Now I appreciate the point that you've made that many of 
our ships are more capable than China's, but as virtually 
everyone I've ever talked to in the Navy has told me, quantity 
has a quality all of its own.
    We need to be urgently investing in our shipbuilding 
capacity and fleet, not going in the opposite direction. 
There's real risk in relying on capabilities that won't be 
ready till the 2030s to deter or defeat a Chinese threat that 
may materialize in the next 5 years.
    From my perspective, our current shipbuilding trajectory is 
inconsistent with the Navy's fleet architecture studies done by 
both the prior Administrations and this Administration.
    Are you concerned that the strategy that this budget is 
inconsistent with the multiple assessments saying that we need 
a larger fleet?
    General Milley. Thank you, Senator. The United States is 
fundamentally a maritime nation, have been from the birth of 
our Nation, and we rely significantly on the sea lines of 
communication for national trade, etcetera, and we have made as 
a matter of policy a commitment for over two and a half 
centuries freedom of the seas, freedom of navigation, and the 
right for, you know, open investments around the world.
    That's fundamental. It's part of our DNA. Part and parcel 
of that is to have a significant capable fleet and not just in 
the Pacific or the Western Pacific but throughout the globe.
    So, sure, it would always be nice to have more ships, but 
the fact of the matter is the most important thing is to have 
the ships that we do have, have them in a readiness status, 
have them with the manning, the training, and the equipping, 
have them in a very significant readiness status.
    So that's important, as well, and I personally don't want 
to get hung up on the number of ships of China versus the 
United States. Its true quality has a quantity all its own, but 
we have allies and partners. China doesn't. The Japanese Navy, 
the Australian Navy, other allies and partners that would 
probably work with the United States, we exercise routinely 
with them. That would make a significant difference.
    The other last thing I'd say relative to Taiwan, it is true 
that the Chinese, President Xi has set an objective to have his 
military prepared capability-wise. That's not the same to say 
he's actually going to invade but to have the capability to 
seize the island of Taiwan.
    That is a very tall order and it remains to be seen whether 
the Chinese will actually be able to execute that, the Chinese 
military, whether they will have that capability or not, but 
that is the target on the wall, 2027. We have to keep that in 
mind as we go into the future.
    Senator Collins. Thank you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Feinstein.

                            FOOD INSECURITY

    Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Secretary Austin and General Milley, last year I asked 
about military weapons being lost and stolen, and I want to 
thank you for your prompt response on that issue, but I have 
one more. I'd like to raise your awareness of food insecurity 
in the military, to include active Guard and Reserve troops.
    The Washington Post has reported on this problem and Jamie 
Lutz at the Center for Strategic and International Studies has 
also documented that service members face hunger at rates 
exceeding the general population.
    The Adjutant General in California has likewise indicated 
that we have this problem in California. It is most pronounced 
among junior enlisted personnel, especially those with 
children.
    So here's the question. Do you agree that we have this 
problem of food insecurity, what is its impact on our 
readiness, and what do you believe the military will do about 
it?
    Secretary Austin. Thank you, Senator. I'll start. Yes, I do 
agree that we have an issue with, as you pointed out, our lower 
ranking enlisted force, and it is important to me, the health 
and welfare of our force, our troops and our families, very, 
very important to me, and you have probably heard me talk about 
this before, and you heard me mention it in my opening 
statement that we want to make sure that people can put food, 
good food, healthy food on the table.
    That's why I've asked you to support me in providing a 4.6 
percent pay raise to the force. Each of the services are making 
sure that they're doing things to not only help their lower 
ranking enlisted force but also making sure that they're 
helping them learn how to manage finances and other things.
    So this is a thing that we're focused on at the department 
level and I would say that all of our services are focused on 
it, as well. Again, it's very, very important to us.
    General Milley. And, Senator, I would just add that taking 
care of our people is critically important for our entire chain 
of command and I know it's of great interest to the Congress.
    That pay raise will go a long way to help. We do 
acknowledge that that is a real issue. The size and scale and 
scope, the Secretary's got some folks out there trying to 
determine exactly what the parameters of that are, but it's 
real and no soldier, sailor, airman, Marine should struggle to 
feed their family. Having good medical care, good education, 
safe and secure environment and putting food on the table is 
fundamental.
    60 percent of our force is married, on average two children 
per, relatively young, and we owe it to them if they're going 
to put their life on the line for this country, we owe it to 
them to make sure they're being taken care of and we intend to 
do that.

                 COMMUNICATION WITH CHINESE COUNTERPART

    Senator Feinstein. Thank you for that. Thank you. Secretary 
Austin, it was reported last month you spoke with your Chinese 
counterpart for the first time since becoming Secretary of 
Defense.
    I'd like to thank you and commend you for that, and I think 
it's very important in order to build trust and to solve 
problems.
    Could you share with us what you learned from speaking with 
your Chinese colleague and where you believe this can go?
    Secretary Austin. Well, Senator, this is the first of what 
I hope will be many conversations, but again we both recognize 
the importance of dialogue and maintaining open channels and we 
both want to make sure that we work together to promote 
security and stability in the region and so I look forward to 
again engaging him in the future, the not-too-distant future. 
I'm sure I'll see him at the Shangri-La Dialogue coming up in 
June.
    Senator Feinstein. Let me just thank you for that. I'm 
obviously a Californian and we believe we're in the century of 
the Pacific and so these things become very important to the 
safety and security of the entire West Coast of this country.

                          END GAME FOR UKRAINE

    One last one. It's imperative that Russia not be allowed to 
get away with aggression and land grabs, and it seems that 
Ukraine, with the support of the United States, is really 
showing considerable strength on the battlefield.
    So I wanted to ask a quick question. If you can share with 
us what the end game is and what you hope to achieve?
    Secretary Austin. Well, the end game will be defined by the 
Ukrainian Government, as it, you know, engages with Russia, and 
so I won't try to define that for them.
    I would just say that we're going to continue to do 
everything within our power to make sure that we support 
Ukraine in its efforts to defend its sovereign territory. We 
hope that at the end of this that Ukraine will be a sovereign 
state with a functioning government that can protect its 
territory and so that's what we're focused on from now and 
going forward.
    Senator Feinstein. My time is up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Schatz.

                                RED HILL

    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you both for being here. Secretary Austin, I want to 
thank you for your clarity and your leadership on the question 
of the future of the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility. I 
also want to thank Deputy Secretary Hicks and Admirals Paparo 
and Aquilino.
    I know up and down the Department and the Department of the 
Navy and the rest of the Federal Government was deeply engaged, 
and this was a tough decision, but it was the right decision 
and I think you know that not just from the standpoint of safe 
drinking water for the State of Hawaii and the residents of 
Hawaii and your service members, but that it was right for 
national security, in your own words, ``centrally-located bulk 
fuel storage of this magnitude likely made sense in 1943 but 
doesn't make sense for how we operate in the Indo-Pacific 
today.''
    Can you talk about why this is a better decision from a 
national security perspective?
    Secretary Austin. Well, Senator, let me thank you and the 
entire State delegation for what you did in exercising 
leadership on this important issue. We really appreciate it.
    You hit the nail on the head when you quoted me regarding 
the fact that this was conceived in the 1940s and it served a 
specific purpose at that point in time. It doesn't necessarily 
support the way that we operate today. We're much further 
forward in theater. We operate in a dispersed fashion.
    You know, our logistical support ought to mirror that, 
ought to enable our operations, and so we thought, I thought, I 
felt that it was important to make sure that we had our 
reserves positioned appropriately to support our operations 
going forward here and that's what drove my decision in 
conjunction with the fact that, you know, I'm very concerned 
about the health and welfare of our troops, our families, and 
the people of Hawaii, as well.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you. As you know, we're in the 
implementation phase of the decision that you came to. The 
third party assessment wrapped up last week. I know it's going 
to take some time at the Office of the Secretary and the CAPE 
(Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office) to kind of come 
to some final conclusions.
    I have a very specific question pertinent to the Defense 
Appropriations Subcommittee, which is that you got the third 
party assessment coming in. Now you're in process, sort of 
final phases, maybe, you know, 10 yard line, but we need a 
number if we're going to not miss a whole fiscal years' worth 
of progress and so I'm wondering where you are in that process 
and how quickly you can turn that third party assessment into a 
requirement so that we can consider it as a subcommittee.
    Secretary Austin. Well, thank you, Senator. The Navy's 
reviewing that report, all 880 pages of it, and that will 
inform their approach to recommending how we should go about 
defueling the facility.
    So to your point, I'm waiting on the Navy to come back with 
its specific plan for defueling and I expect to get that at the 
end of the month.
    Senator Schatz. Okay. So in time for us to consider a 
number?
    Secretary Austin. I certainly hope so, Senator.

                      COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION

    Senator Schatz. Okay. Thank you. I want to use my final 
minute and a half for the Compact of Free Association 
negotiations.
    Admiral Aquilino's posture plans for the Indo-Pacific rely 
at least in part on maintaining access to Compact States, 
Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.
    Can you talk about the importance of these Compact States 
to DoD's (Department of Defense) mission in the Pacific?
    Secretary Austin. They're very important. We always aim to 
be the partner of choice and I think our continued engagement 
with them will certainly result in additional capability and 
capacity as we go forward.
    So I think the Combatant Commander's doing a great job in 
terms of continued engagement, but again our goal is to make 
sure that we are the partner of choice and so far I'm very 
encouraged by what we're seeing.
    Senator Schatz. Just a bit about the interagency process 
here. You know, as you know, you have the Department of 
Interior through the Secretary for Insular Affairs and then you 
have the Department of State as sort of lead negotiator, but 
DoD is right there, and to a certain extent, although you're a 
silent partner in terms of the nuts and bolts of the 
negotiation, you're the biggest deal in the negotiations.
    So what I'd like you to consider is appointing someone 
specifically to be in the room for even the preliminary 
negotiations. Again, State's got a lead on this, but having DoD 
at the table makes an enormous difference for Compact States in 
terms of conveying to these Compact States how important they 
are to us.
    Secretary Austin. Well, as the Chairman pointed out at the 
top of the meeting here, Secretary Blinken and I are great 
partners and certainly I'm sure that this will be what he will 
want to see, as well, and we will continue to work with the 
entire interagency to make sure that we're in the right place 
here.
    Senator Schatz. Great. Thank you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Boozman.

                          INTEGRATED DETERRENCE

    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Thank you all so much for all that you do and for you being 
here today. Both of your testimonies highlight the importance 
of integrated deterrence for aligning department policies, 
resources, and activities to strengthen deterrence. An 
essential part of this is bolstering of our allies and partners 
to better deter our adversaries.
    General Milley, as you mentioned in your testimony, the 
U.S. must continue to strengthen our relationships by building 
our partners' capabilities to deter our adversaries.
    Recently, several European allies have stated their intent 
to purchase the F-35 fighter jet. Would Poland, Finland, and 
Germany having F-35s be helpful to our national security and 
deterrence against Russia in Europe, and going further, given 
the current situation, in your best military advice, do you 
believe we should be assisting our European allies in training 
so they can receive the F-35s as soon as possible?
    General Milley. I do, and I think, first of all, it's an 
excellent capability. Secondly, I think the inter-operability 
with our allies is important, and I think the strength of the 
alliance is critical to the deterrence of any broader land 
conflict on the European continent.

                          PREPOSITIONED STOCKS

    Senator Boozman. Thank you, sir. Preposition stocks are 
essential for the rapid mobilization and equipping of units 
during time of crisis.
    As you know, the Army activated its preposition stocks in 
March of this year as the conflict in Ukraine escalated for the 
first in an unplanned contingency. I was happy to learn that 
these prepositioned stocks allow an armored brigade combat team 
to deploy from the U.S. to Eastern Europe faster than Russian 
forces advance from Belarus to Kyiv.
    I understand that prepositioned stocks require military 
construction support and being the Ranking Member on the 
Military Construction Subcommittee, does the U.S. have 
prepositioned stocks to respond to potential threats in the 
Pacific from China outside of Japan and South Korea? Are there 
any plans to establish prepositioned stocks?
    Secretary Austin. Well, first of all, let me thank you for 
what you did several years ago to enable what you just 
described in Europe there. The European Defense Initiative 
really laid the groundwork for, you know, the prepositioned 
stocks and some of the facilities that we use there.
    As you'll see in terms of what we're investing in with the 
Pacific Deterrent Initiative, we are investing in 
infrastructure and a number of other things to ensure that we 
have capability further forward in the theater. So that's our 
goal to make sure that, you know, we have that ability in the 
Indo-Pacific to a greater degree in the future.

                           MISSILE STOCKPILES

    Senator Boozman. Well, to follow up on that, our missile 
stockpiles are being stretched thin after years of reducing it 
at a minimum rate of sustainment and increased demand resulting 
from the U.S. current efforts to bolster our Ukrainian defense 
I think are stretching that very, very thin.
    I'm hearing from industry some of the challenges they face 
with trying to increase production rates while shortening lead 
times.
    How critical is it to maintain these stockpiles and in what 
ways can the committee support you and industry to help ramp up 
production efforts to meet the demand and replenish our 
stockpiles?
    Secretary Austin. Well, it's very critical to make sure 
that we maintain what we consider to be our minimum required 
stockage levels, and you can rest assured that I will not allow 
us to go below that in critical munitions.
    We have met with industry, I think you saw us do this 
fairly early on, and encourage them to work with us to begin to 
open up production lines to increase their production and they 
are doing that. They are leaning forward, in some cases a 
little bit more difficult to do than others, but industry has 
been very supportive, and so we'll continue to work with them.
    We'll continue to identify things that we need from you if 
a need arises, but to this point, I think we're in pretty good 
shape, and industry is responding.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Baldwin.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, guys.

                              BUY AMERICA

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Secretary Austin, welcome. A healthy defense industrial 
base is a critical element for our national security, and 
President Biden issued an Executive Order in January of 2021 to 
strengthen Buy America requirements for all Federal programs.
    In July a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking increased the 
domestic content requirement from 55 percent to 60 percent with 
a phased-in increase to 75 percent. This is a move I strongly 
support.
    However, I know from the experience with the Navy's new 
frigate that if we require 100 percent American-made within a 
reasonable timeline, industry can step up and deliver. With the 
frigate, this actually resulted in the on-shoring of new U.S. 
manufacturing.
    So do you support replicating the success for other defense 
programs with the goal of hitting 100 percent American-made so 
long as the department has reasonable timelines and reasonable 
waivers at their disposal?
    Secretary Austin. I absolutely support making sure that 
where we can we invest in America, that we, make sure that we 
have the supply lines available to do the things that you just 
described, and so you're right.
    The President has an initiative that he launched awhile 
back and DoD is a strong partner in that initiative to ensure 
that we strengthen our supply lines, that we make sure that we 
have the critical materials available to build the types of 
munitions and platforms that we think we'll need going forward. 
So, yes, I support that position.

                      UKRAINE SECURITY ASSISTANCE

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. General Milley, I understand 
you had a version of this question asked already. So I'm going 
to try to take it in a little bit different direction.
    But Ukraine has far exceeded most expectations over 2 
months into this most recent phase of Putin's war. I support 
providing the Ukrainians with the capabilities that they need 
to defend their sovereignty and hope that we can quickly pass a 
Ukraine supplemental that fulfills President Biden's request.
    It's clear that this conflict may extend for some time. As 
you talk with Ukrainian counterparts, I know you've been asked 
what a realistic end state is for Ukraine. I'd like to ask a 
little differently, what does a realistic military success or 
end state look like for the United States, and how will our 
security assistance need to change at this new phase in order 
to support those goals?
    General Milley. Thank you, Senator. The end state has been 
articulated by the President and the Secretary of Defense, 
Secretary Blinken several different times, and what it is, is 
maintaining the cohesion of NATO, make sure that Ukraine at the 
end of the day ends up as a free sovereign nation with the 
territorial integrity intact, no kinetic war between NATO and 
the United States and Russia, so no action between our military 
forces specifically, and continue to support the Ukrainian 
people with what they need to defend themselves.
    So that's what we're trying to do and we need to--at the 
end of the day, you know, what's it all about? It's all about 
the rules-based international order that has been grossly 
violated by Russia with an illegal aggressive action by 
military forces across a sovereign border. We have had a set of 
institutions in place for 78 consecutive years to prevent that 
very thing from happening and that's what's at stake.
    It's beyond Ukraine is what's at stake and our intent is to 
maintain and uphold the rules-based international order by 
achieving those specific objectives the President has given us.

                           RUSSIAN ESCALATION

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. So, Secretary Austin, on this 
topic, some analysts believe that the more we assist Ukraine in 
degrading Putin's military, the more likely he will be to 
escalate to new levels, possibly with chemical, biological, or 
even tactical nuclear weapons.
    Can you clarify how this might change the calculus that 
General Milley was just outlining in terms of use of force from 
the U.S. military?
    Secretary Austin. There are a number of things that Mr. 
Putin could do. You could make the case, by the way, Senator, 
that he's already escalated in terms of the types of things 
that we see him doing in attacking civilians, destroying 
cities, towns, and villages, indiscriminate targeting.
    Certainly he has a number of things that he could do. He 
could escalate by conducting a cyber-event or, you know, 
there's been a lot of talk about the possible employment of 
chem-bio. Of course, if he employs a chemical-biological 
weapon, I think he will see a reaction from the international 
community and because that's a pretty serious step, and, of 
course, you know, President Biden's been clear about, you know, 
his views on this.
    So it's possible that he could do that. I certainly hope 
that he chooses to not do that. Again, I think the 
international response will be significant, but, you know, 
Senator, he could end this war today.
    Senator Baldwin. Yes.
    Secretary Austin. This is a war of choice. He could choose 
to stop fighting and withdraw his forces from Ukraine and again 
this is the decision of one man and so I would hope that Mr. 
Putin would decide to do something different going forward.
    Senator Baldwin. Yes, and I just want to close with should 
Putin continue to escalate, is it your expectation that the 
Administration would come to Congress requesting an 
authorization for use of military force?
    Secretary Austin. That's a policy decision that my boss 
will make and so I won't get in front of my boss.
    Senator Tester. Senator Blunt.

                               INFLATION

    Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman, and thanks to both of 
you for your current and your long service to the country. I'm 
deeply appreciative, as I'm sure we all are.
    Secretary Austin, I think McKinsey had a report out last 
year that indicated that from 2000 to 2021 the Defense Cost 
Index, the inflation index ran about 20 points ahead of the CPI 
(Consumer Price Index) during that period of time.
    Do you think this budget will reflect the world we're in 
now in terms of replenishing our stock and getting ready for 
the future? It's about a 5 percent increase in an inflationary 
economy. It seems to me we may not be holding our own, let 
alone moving forward here.
    Secretary Austin. Well, thank you, Senator. Before I answer 
that question, let me thank you for your service and, you know, 
tremendous service to our country and to the Senate. So thanks 
for your support of the military on behalf of the entire 
Department of Defense.
    As I said earlier, when we crafted this budget, we built 
the budget based upon our strategy and at that point you have 
to make assumptions about levels of inflation and so we used 
the appropriate number, what we believed to be the appropriate 
number at that time and things have changed now.
    So there is a difference.

                     JAVELINS AND STINGER MISSILES

    Senator Blunt. Well, that's helpful, and I'm sure we're 
going to be discussing that more with the Secretaries as they 
come in. So it's helpful. I missed your observation about that, 
and I think it's helpful to know that that's where you are now.
    You know, a number of things have changed and one is we 
have an intent to provide our Ukrainian friends with a lot more 
things to fight with.
    Does this budget at this point anticipate replacing the 
Javelins or the Stinger missiles that we have given or will 
give to them?
    Secretary Austin. It is a substantial budget in my view, 
Senator, and it allows us to go after the things that we need 
to have to support our war-fighting concepts that are outlined 
in our strategy here. Again, China is listed as our pacing 
challenge. Russia is listed as an acute threat.
    The supplementals that you provided us to this point have 
been very helpful in going after the kinds of things that you 
mentioned, and again this next supplemental that the President 
has asked for your support on will enable us to do what you 
just described, replenish stocks and also continue to support 
Ukraine, but the supplemental funds are really focused on that.
    Senator Blunt. Well, to pursue that just a little bit more, 
I think we've roughly provided roughly 5,000 Javelins and 1,400 
Stingers. The Javelins, that's about a third of our stockpile 
already provided, and the Stingers about 25 percent of our 
stockpile.
    Is it possible to replace a third of our stockpile or, 
let's say, 50 percent before we're done here within a year?
    Secretary Austin. It certainly is not only possible but we 
will do that. We will never go below our minimum requirement 
for our stockpiles. We'll always maintain the capability to 
defend this country and support our interests, but this will 
help us to not only replenish our stockpiles but also replace 
some of the capability that we've asked our partners and allies 
to provide. Some of the Eastern Flank countries early on 
provided Stingers and other countries provided Javelins upon 
our request and so it'll help us do that.

                     INVESTMENT FOR MODERN WARFARE

    Senator Blunt. Well, I know we'll want to work with you on 
that.
    General Milley, let me get in one more question here. I 
know you're a great student of warfare and my guess is we've 
all learned a lot in the last 3 months of assumptions prior to 
what's happened in Ukraine and what we've seen happen.
    In terms of effectiveness of force or the weapons that are 
most effective we're seeing in that theater of war, does this 
budget yet reflect what you think the next budget should 
probably reflect in terms of our transition to be sure we're 
keeping up with the lessons we're learning from modern warfare?
    General Milley. It does. It moves us in the right direction 
for sure. This has got the most research and development of any 
budget in NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) history 
actually and it's a very significant movement into the future, 
and as we look at what's happening in Ukraine or, for example, 
in Mosul or Syria, what we're seeing is some fundamental change 
in the character of war that is going to lead into the future.
    One of those changes is highly-dense urban area combat. You 
saw the Battle of Kyiv, for example, and the Russian failure 
there. You're seeing the ubiquitous use of precision munitions. 
You're seeing the use of drones, for example, and unmanned 
aerial vehicles. You're seeing the very effective use of air 
defense systems, both SAMs (Surface-to-Air Missile) and MANPADs 
(Man-Portable Air-Defense System), to deny the Russians the air 
space, and the most effective weapon they've used so far has 
been anti-tank weapons and, of course, Javelin is what we have, 
but many of the countries are providing all kinds of NLAWs 
(Next Generation Light Anti-Tank Weapon) and Carl Gustafs and 
RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenade), a wide variety of anti-tank 
weapons.
    So the combination of all of that together has led the 
Russians to not achieve the successes that they thought they 
would have and those have direct application and I think this 
budget takes that into account, but beyond that, this budget is 
also investing in artificial intelligence, robotics, most of 
which we're not really seeing in the current battlefield, but 
we do expect those to be very, very significant players in a 
future battle, you know, 20-30 years from now, something like 
that. Those are going to be dominant technologies at that time 
and this budget takes us on that path.
    Senator Blunt. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Murray.

                       EQUIPMENT GIVEN TO UKRAINE

    Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 
you to both of you for being here today.
    Secretary Austin, I want to commend the work that you have 
done so far to get Ukraine the equipment and support they need 
to fight back against Russia's unforgivable attack on their 
country, and at the same time I'm glad we're starting to 
provide more capable systems and I really urge you to increase 
those deliveries and provide all the necessary training so 
Ukrainian forces do have everything they need.
    Now I have heard repeatedly from people on the front lines 
and those involved in the logistic system in Ukraine about 
equipment that we deliver not reaching front line units that 
most need the weapons and ammunition and body armor.
    There seems to be a number of logistical and institutional 
issues, including some diversion and hoarding, which are 
standing in the way.
    So I wanted to ask you today what is your assessment of 
those issues and how are you working with Ukraine to make 
distribution of international assistance more transparent and 
effective so the units on the front lines actually get the 
equipment that they need.
    Secretary Austin. Well, thank you, Senator. This is 
something that's very important to us at the Department and to 
me and General Milley specifically, and we talk to our 
counterparts on a weekly basis and without fail this is a 
question that I ask about.
    We don't have people on the ground to be able to provide 
accurate feedback on how this equipment is moving and whether 
or not it's getting to where it's needed most, but the report 
that we get back from the senior leadership routinely is that 
it's getting to where it needs to go.
    But, you know, I won't stop. I'll continue to engage and 
make sure that we emphasize that it's important that all the 
stuff we're giving them gets to the right place so that they 
can be successful, and, in addition to that, you know, when I 
engaged the senior leadership in Kyiv last week, I emphasized 
the importance of accountability, as well, and they 
acknowledged that this is something that's important and 
something that they're focused on.
    Again, without people on the ground to be able to confirm 
or deny, it's very, very difficult to do at this point.

                           PRIVATIZED HOUSING

    Senator Murray. Okay. I appreciate that. Turning to home, 
Secretary Austin, in January, I and many of my colleagues sent 
you a letter regarding DoD oversight of privatized housing 
after Balfour Beatty Communities pled guilty to defrauding the 
government. The Department's response provided few meaningful 
answers on how oversight is actually going to improve and that 
really needs to change.
    On top of that, as you probably know, just a few days ago 
the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a 
report showing that after the period covered by the DOJ 
(Department of Justice) investigation, Balfour Beatty continued 
to fail to remediate mold, failed to make critical repairs, and 
falsified information in the database DoD uses to calculate 
their incentive fee. That is really outrageous and really 
completely unacceptable.
    In my home State of Washington, Balfour Beatty continues to 
obstruct building sufficient housing at Fairchild and along 
with the shortage of housing in the community where BAH (Basic 
Allowance for Housing) fails to keep up with rent prices, that 
means that military families are left without housing. Some 
have been stuck living out of RVs for months now and at Joint 
Base Lewis-McChord, dozens of families have sued Lincoln 
Military Housing over really deplorable living conditions.
    Our service members should have access to the best, or at 
least decent housing, not the worst. Now we all want to fix 
this as soon as possible. This budget requests almost a $168 
million for military housing privatization support. That is $45 
million more than last year.
    Can you tell me, first, what are our military families 
getting out of this funding increase and, secondly, what is 
your assessment of the private housing companies' compliance 
since the plea agreement, and will you hold them accountable 
for such horrendous, abusive conduct?
    Secretary Austin. To your last question first, yes, I will 
hold them accountable, and I expect the service secretaries to 
hold them accountable, as well, and, you know, the health and 
welfare of our troops, our families is very, very important to 
us, and, we put a great deal of emphasis on this, but, 
obviously this is something that we can never take our eyes off 
of and we're not there yet.
    We put more resources into the budget so we can provide 
more and higher quality housing, but we're going to have to 
hold the contractors accountable and we intend to do that. I 
intend to do that.
    Senator Murray. What are the military families getting out 
of the funding increases that is being requested?
    Secretary Austin. Of course, it's spread out over a number 
of different projects, but it will be more and better housing, 
high quality housing.
    Senator Murray. Okay. Well, we've been told this for a long 
time and we're still seeing these deplorable conditions and the 
ongoing really substandard housing and the challenges that our 
families are having. So this needs a lot of work and oversight 
and we have got to stay up on top of it. I want to know that 
you're going to be doing that.
    Secretary Austin. I will.
    Senator Murray. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Tester. Senator Moran.

                              HYPERSONICS

    Senator Moran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both for 
your service to our Nation.
    In your written testimony, you both mentioned that our 
adversaries are rapidly developing hypersonic missiles. As 
hypersonics become more commonplace, it seems we can't rely 
upon nuclear deterrence alone to prevent hypersonic attacks and 
once hypersonic interceptors are developed, how do we plan on 
deploying these defensive capabilities around the globe to make 
certain that our deployed troops are sufficiently protected 
from attack, and what shifts do you expect to see in missile 
and interceptor investment in future years as the U.S. competes 
with China?
    Secretary Austin. Well, hypersonics is important to us and 
in this budget I think you've seen, Senator, that we're 
investing some $7.2 billion in long-range fires, $4.7 billion 
of that is focused on hypersonics, and so we continue to 
develop capability for ourselves but what's important is that 
we need to consider the mix, the range of capabilities, the mix 
of capabilities that we're going to bring onboard to support 
our war-fighting concepts. So hypersonics is an important 
capability, but there are other things that add to this 
equation, as well.
    In terms of defending ourselves, this is a priority for me 
and as soon as we came onboard, I tasked my staff to make sure 
that we pull the right elements together to make sure that we 
were pressing forward rapidly to increase our efforts in 
developing our defenses against the hypersonic threat.
    You've seen us engage industry on this issue and we'll 
continue to press, but, you know, we've made some progress, but 
we have a ways to go yet.
    Senator Moran. What concerns do you have about the 
hypersonics weapons workforce? What do we need to do to be 
training and preparing ourselves? What kind of investment in 
our workforce is necessary?
    Secretary Austin. In our----
    Senator Moran. In our private sector workforce.
    Secretary Austin. Well, certainly, you know, we've engaged 
industry and asked them to pick up the pace, and in terms of 
what they need specifically in their workforce elements, that's 
something that we haven't discussed, but again I think the 
issue to this point has been, you know, we've not pushed to the 
degree that we can push and we've not invested to the degree 
that we can invest, and so we invested in this last year, we 
invested in it this year, and we're going to continue to press.

                           SUICIDE PREVENTION

    Senator Moran. Thank you. Let me shift the nature of my 
question. I had the opportunity to review and sit down with 
staff from the Inspector General's Office to discuss their 
November 2021 report evaluating the Department's Implementation 
of Suicide Prevention: Resources for Transitioning Members.
    We know from our work on the Veterans' Committee that the 
most vulnerable time for many members of our military is as 
they are leaving Active Duty and becoming veterans.
    That Inspector General's report demonstrates a lack of 
compliance with Executive Order 13822 regarding mental health 
screenings and the warm hand-off to mental healthcare for 
transitioning service members. It continues to be troubling to 
me that this does not seem to receive the attention that it 
deserves within our military community.
    Can you share with me, either one of you, what progress the 
department is making in implementing the Inspector General's 
recommendations from that November 2021 report?
    Secretary Austin. What I can tell you, Senator, is that 
you've heard me say this a number of times that this is 
important to me, this is important to our Department, and this 
is why we've invested in suicide prevention and mental health 
in a major way this year. We invested in it last year, as well.
    But this year we're investing $1.4 billion in mental health 
efforts. We continue to liaise and engage with our counterparts 
in the VA (Veterans Affairs) to ensure that we can close, as 
much as possible, the gap as troops transition from active duty 
to leaving the service or going in any direction.
    So I've also stood up an independent review committee to 
address this issue and give us further insights into mental 
health issues and also prevention of suicide and so we're 
investing in this in a major way.
    Senator Moran. I intend to pursue this further in NDAA and 
I look forward to your cooperation as we figure out what 
language and instructions might be valuable to the Department 
to see that that gap that you just described is closed. Thank 
you.
    Senator Tester. Before I get to Senator Durbin, I just want 
to add to Senator Moran's question on the transition. We have 
work to do, and I know you guys aren't necessarily in the 
position to deal with pushing people out, you want to keep them 
in, but it is apparent that this is a pretty massive problem 
and it is both active military and VA.
    So I want to thank Senator Moran for that line of 
questioning.
    Senator Durbin.

                RUSSIAN MILITARY AND DECLARATION OF WAR

    Senator Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both for 
being here, General Milley as well as Secretary Austin. Thank 
you for what you're doing today and your years of service to 
our country.
    And so those of us who've been in the business of military 
politics over a period of time are considered to be wise 
forecasters of what's going to happen and sometimes we are and 
sometimes we aren't.
    I can recall the early briefing on what we might expect in 
Ukraine when the Russian troops were all poised at the border, 
and if I remember it correctly, the prediction was that the 
city of Kyiv would fall in a matter of days and that major 
parts of Ukraine would fall to the Russians, as well. Then they 
would find that the maintenance of order in ``conquered 
territory'' would be extremely difficult and they would face a 
resistance for a long period of time.
    I remember that prediction as we all watched reality 
unfold. Kyiv today, thank goodness, is still not in the hands 
of the Russians, those under attack, I'm sure, and most of 
Ukraine has not been conquered by Russia, thank goodness, and 
they are apparently having a difficult time hanging on to what 
they currently have and are fighting to extend their reach 
every day.
    I just wonder. We can assess it in many different ways, but 
certainly the courage and resilience of the Ukrainian people, 
first and foremost, is the reason for what we see, at least I 
think so, and I wonder what we've learned about Russia's 
military strength and what we anticipated they would deliver in 
the field and what they actually delivered, and I know it's 
been asked earlier by Senator Baldwin, but a declaration of 
war, what would that mean in terms of Putin's capabilities in 
extending his military reach in Ukraine? Secretary Austin.
    Secretary Austin. Yes. With your permission, I'll answer 
first and if you want the Chairman to respond, as well, sir, 
certainly we'd offer that.
    We have learned a lot about Russia's leadership at the 
lower levels, which I think has been very, very key in their 
efforts here. They have modern equipment. They have lots of it. 
They have a doctrine that really wasn't followed and so as we 
saw things unfold on the ground, we saw them not able to 
support themselves logistically. We saw them make some bad 
assumptions at the very beginning of this. We saw them fail to 
integrate aerial fires with their ground maneuver and just a 
number of missteps, and I attribute a lot of that to lack of 
leadership at the lower level.
    We saw Russia push its senior officers forward as a result 
of that and many of those were killed from being forward on the 
battlefield. We'll see some of the same mistakes, some of the 
same weaknesses as they prosecute the fight in the Donbas and 
in the southern part of the country, but they will learn from 
what they did in the early stages of this fight, and we'll see 
them improve their logistical efforts and we'll see them 
improve their massing of fires and that sort of business, but 
some things they won't be able to correct.
    We've learned a lot about their leadership at the lower 
levels and their level of training.
    Senator Durbin : I'd like General Milley to respond, but 
there was a suggestion that if declaration of war took place, 
something would happen automatically under Russian law of a 
conscription and that suggests to me as a civilian that a lot 
of untrained men in this circumstance might be called into 
training and exercises that they aren't prepared for. They 
haven't been conditioned for. That doesn't seem like it would 
be an immediate boost to their effort.
    Secretary Austin. That's exactly right, Senator. He would 
be able to mobilize more people but to adequately train those 
people to be more effective than what we've seen on the 
battlefield thus far, that's questionable.
    Senator Durbin. General Milley, if you'd respond to that 
question I've asked earlier, and if you'd also add to your 
comments since I'm running out of time. I have a particular 
concern about Poland and the Baltics and they worry every step 
of the way of extension of Russian aggression into their 
region. I hope you'll address that in your comments.
    General Milley. Very briefly, Senator, declaration of war 
does have some implications inside Russian society legally. As 
the Secretary said, it would allow them to mobilize additional 
forces, but again training, etcetera, how long it would take 
for them to get to the front.
    In terms of the lessons learned, leadership is clearly the 
key from Zelensky on down to the lowest private, and as 
Napoleon taught us a long time ago, you know, moral is to the 
physical as three is to one.
    So they are capable. That is probably the most important 
difference right now between the Russians and the Ukrainians is 
the leadership throughout the levels. In addition to that, it's 
what the Western nations, NATO and particularly the United 
States taught their leaders since 2014 about mission command.
    The Ukrainians are practicing a decentralized intent-based 
set of tactics. The Russians are practicing a top-down very, 
very top-heavy directive in nature, sort of the set of orders 
coming from the top, which is not necessarily the best thing to 
do in a dynamic battlefield.
    The second thing is the effective use of anti-tank weapons 
has been phenomenal on the part of the Ukrainians. Third is the 
denial of the air space, the air supremacy and the air 
superiority to the Russians by the Ukrainians and their 
effective use of ground air defense systems. Terrain has played 
to the Ukrainian favor.
    Intelligence is really important. The Ukrainians have a 
built-in intelligence system being the people. So the Russians 
have walked into an area that is clearly unwelcome to them and 
the people have provided a massive amount of intelligence, plus 
we have opened up the pipes, which I'm not going to go into 
detail here in an open hearing, but there's a significant 
amount of intelligence flowing to Ukraine from the United 
States. All of that in combination and many, many more are some 
of the early lessons learned that have made the difference as 
what you've seen.
    In terms of predictions, those were our early assessments 
and war is a dynamic interaction between competing wills. So 
between those predictions that you heard in early February and 
January, a lot of things happened on that battlefield in 
preparation prior to the invasion on the 24th, not the least of 
which is an intelligence flow from the United States and that 
made a significant difference in outcomes.

                         POLAND AND THE BALTICS

    Senator Durbin. Poland and the Baltics.
    General Milley. Poland and the Baltics. So Poland is----
    Senator Durbin. Baltics.
    General Milley. Yes. Poland is clearly--you know, these are 
all NATO Article 5 allies. As you know, the United States under 
the direction of the President and the Secretary of Defense, we 
went ahead and directed U.S. troops. So right now you have U.S. 
troops in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Hungary, 
the entire belt has U.S. troops in there and that was done 
immediately in order to reinforce the NATO Article 5 deterrence 
posture of the United States and to assure our allies that 
they're not going to be left alone.
    So that is a critical component, as the President has said 
many, many times, as members of Congress have said many, many 
times, Article 5 matters. It's a Senate-ratified treaty and the 
United States will not give up--will protect every inch of NATO 
territory.
    Senator Durbin. Thank you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Graham.

                      INFLATION AND DEFENSE BUDGET

    Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both for 
coming.
    General Austin, this budget request is a 4.4 percent 
increase?
    Secretary Austin. Yes, from last year's.
    Senator Graham. Okay. What's the inflation rate?
    Secretary Austin. Current inflation rate is well above 
that.
    Senator Graham. Okay. So this budget doesn't keep up with 
inflation, Number 1. Percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) 
spent on defense, what percentage does this budget represent?
    Secretary Austin. I think it's 3.1.
    Senator Graham. Okay. How many times have we been below 3 
percent since World War II?
    Secretary Austin. I don't know, Senator.
    Senator Graham. Well, you need to look it up. 1940-1999-
2000-2001. In the 10-year window, the fiscal year Defense Plan 
in year 10, 2032, what percentage of GDP will be spent on 
defense?
    Secretary Austin. In the 10-year window?
    Senator Graham. Yes. Fiscal year 2032. The trajectory we 
are on, where will we be in fiscal year 2032?
    Secretary Austin. We should be a bit above where we are 
right now.
    Senator Graham. Now we're at 2.4 percent if the numbers 
I've been given are right. So over time we spend less 
historically than we've ever spent and given the 10 years that 
I'm looking at, I don't see the real peace dividend out there.
    How many current battle warships do we have in the Navy? We 
have 296.
    Secretary Austin. 293.
    Senator Graham. We have 11 aircraft carriers. How many 
ships does China have?
    Secretary Austin. I think the latest number was around 400.
    Senator Graham. Yes. 355. They're going to 422 by the end 
of--well, 460 by 2030. Where will we be in terms of ships by 
the end of 2032? U.S. ships? It's 280.
    So the bottom line is we're on the wrong path here from my 
humble opinion. We're spending below inflation. The Chinese are 
increasing their Navy. By 2032, if these numbers are right, 
we'll have 280 ships, below what we have today. GDP spent on 
defense will be at 2.4 percent. I don't know what kind of world 
we're looking at out there, but you're seeing a different world 
than I am, and I hope we in a bipartisan way can correct this 
because I think in really many ways this is dangerous.

                              AFGHANISTAN

    Afghanistan. General Milley, I think you and Secretary 
Austin said last year that we could expect in the next 2 to 3 
years threats to the American homeland emerge from Afghanistan, 
is that still accurate?
    General Milley. I still believe that to be a correct 
assessment, yes.
    Senator Graham. Has it moved one way or the other?
    General Milley. We're seeing initial indications, as you 
have seen in the media, as well, and you're privy to some of 
the intelligence which I won't go over here, but ISIS (Islamic 
State of Iraq and Syria) and other groups are trying to put 
themselves back together. They have not succeeded yet and they 
have not yet presented a threat to the U.S. homeland, but we 
are watching that very, very closely, and if they raise their 
head and do present a threat, then we'll take appropriate 
action.
    Senator Graham. Is our over the horizon capability to 
monitor Afghanistan sufficient?
    General Milley. I think we have room to improve to be sure. 
We do have----
    Senator Graham. I don't want to do anything----
    General Milley [continuing]. The capability.
    Senator Graham. Right. We're unclassified here, but ISR 
(Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) presence in 
Afghanistan, I think you'll be shocked to know what it is and 
where it's headed.
    To both of you, you advocated for troops to remain in 
Afghanistan, is that correct? It's the President's decision, 
but that was the position of both of you, is that correct?
    Secretary Austin. That's correct. Let me be clear, Senator. 
I support the President's decision.
    Senator Graham. I know, but the recommendation you gave, I 
want to be clear, was that we'd be better off to have a 
residual force, is that accurate?
    Secretary Austin. Sir, you know I will never convey what 
I----
    Senator Graham. Well, the record's replete with the fact 
that it was and I just want to compliment you both. I'm trying 
to compliment you that I thought that was the right decision, 
that pulling everybody out of Afghanistan was a mistake.
    Do you believe that our withdrawal from Afghanistan made it 
more likely that Putin would invade Ukraine?
    General Milley. I think that President Putin made his 
decision to invade Ukraine long before we pulled out of 
Afghanistan, to be very, very candid.
    Senator Graham. Why didn't he do it before?
    General Milley. Why didn't he do it before?
    Senator Graham. Yes.
    General Milley. I think he was preparing the force. Last 
year he ran a very, very large exercise and getting the force 
ready.
    Senator Graham. Why did he invade Crimea when they did?
    General Milley. In 2014?
    Senator Graham. Yes.
    General Milley. I can't answer that question right now.
    Senator Graham. Well,----
    General Milley. I think it's because----
    Senator Graham [continuing]. I've got a theory here----
    General Milley. Say again.
    Senator Graham [continuing]. That, with all due respect, 
that Afghanistan sent the worst possible signal to our 
adversaries and our allies.
    President Biden and Secretary Blinken have said they have 
no regrets regarding our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Secretary 
Austin, do you have any regrets?
    Secretary Austin. Senator, as I've said, I support the 
President's decision----
    Senator Graham. Okay.
    Secretary Austin [continuing]. And again, you know, I----
    Senator Graham. What about you, General Milley?
    General Milley. I deeply regret the loss of 11 Marines, one 
sailor, and one soldier.
    Senator Graham. Yes. I do, too. I regret the loss of 
everybody we've lost over there and all the wounded, but do you 
have any regrets in terms of our national security that maybe 
we made the wrong decision?
    General Milley. Senator, I'm a soldier and I execute the 
decisions that I'm told to make and I don't think at this point 
it's helpful for me to express regret or not.
    Senator Graham. Fair enough. So I want to work with you 
both. Chairman Durbin's been great on Ukraine. We want to do 
more, not less. We want to send a signal we're in it to win it 
and I appreciate the robust response. It's getting better every 
day. So thank you both.
    In terms of the budget, the budget before us is inadequate 
to the threats we face and over time it's a disaster and I'd 
like to fix it.
    Thank you.
    Senator Tester. Senator Hoeven.

                          WEAPONS FOR UKRAINE

    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Question for both of you. What weapon systems does Ukraine 
need the most and need the soonest that they don't have?
    Secretary Austin. What they've asked for, Senator, is long-
range fire capability and we're providing that as you've seen 
with most recently 90 155 systems and----
    Senator Hoeven. And they're capable of using them or do 
they need to be trained on them?
    Secretary Austin. They're using them now. They're using 
them as we speak. As you may know, we took a number of troops 
out and trained them up very quickly on 155s, put them back 
into action and they are employing those weapon systems now. 
They have the ammunition that we're providing them and other 
countries are providing them 155 capability, as well.
    They've also asked for armor capability, tanks and armored 
vehicles, and countries in the region are providing that, and 
as we witnessed in our meeting that we held in Ramstein a week 
ago, countries like Canada and Germany are stepping up, 
providing armored vehicle capability, and so their capability 
overall is increasing, and again they put the stuff that we 
provided them to very good use, in addition to the UAVs 
(Unmanned aerial vehicles) that we're also providing.
    Senator Hoeven. General, same question.
    General Milley. Yes, same thing, Senator. I talk to my 
counterpart literally every other day and we work very, very 
hard to get him what he thinks he needs. Long-range fire, 
specifically cannon artillery and rocket artillery. They were 
used to using the old Soviet Model 152 artillery. Ammunition 
became a problem. So we're moving to a NATO standard.
    So the United States and many of our allies and partners 
are providing him with multiple battalion's worth of 155 cannon 
and the ammunition to go with it, plus the radars, plus the 
fire direction, the entire package for effective use of fires. 
That's the most important thing right now in the current fight.
    Secondly is to continue to sustain them on anti-tank 
weapons, very effective, anti-aircraft weapons, ground-based, 
either SAMs and/or MANPADs. Those are probably the top three 
and Number 4 would be his ground maneuver capability of tanks 
and mech infantry vehicles which many countries are now helping 
to contribute, as well.
    So those would be the top four. There's a whole laundry 
list below that, but those are the top four.
    Senator Hoeven. Looking at what the Ukrainians have done to 
the Russian tanks with our Javelins, do we have something that 
is going to ensure that the tanks we provide are able to defeat 
that same type of shoulder-mounted threat and truly be 
effective?
    Secretary Austin. The tanks that have been provided to 
them, Senator, have been tanks that they are accustomed to 
using and that they have the maintenance capabilities to 
maintain. So we've seen tanks, a number of tanks being provided 
by countries like Poland and others that are in the 
neighborhood, and again Russians don't have something that 
approaches the Javelin.

                          UKRAINE SUPPLEMENTAL

    Senator Hoeven. All right. So then next question, have we 
fully utilized the funds that we've already provided such that 
you need this and when do you need this supplemental, and have 
we really focused on the lethal aid versus getting other things 
in this $33 billion supplemental?
    Secretary Austin. We absolutely have focused on the lethal 
aid, Senator, and we're at the very end of our drawdown 
capability here. So, you know, we're very quickly going to run 
out of funds.
    Senator Hoeven. Okay. General, did you have anything to add 
to that?
    General Milley. No. I think it's clear to me that the 
monies that the Congress has provided is overwhelmingly in 
support of lethal aid. There's no question about it. It's 
almost all lethal aid actually.

                             NUCLEAR TRIAD

    Senator Hoeven. Switching gears here, more along the lines 
of Senator Graham, are you both--this is a question for both of 
you. Are you both fully committed to upgrading, updating, and 
modernizing our Nuclear Triad and is the funding in this budget 
adequate to do that?
    Secretary Austin. $34 billion allocated to that effort in 
this budget and, yes, Senator, I am absolutely fully committed 
to modernizing the Triad.
    General Milley. A hundred percent. It's the number one 
priority in this budget and it'll have to be sustained over 
time in future budgets, but it helps ensure the protection of 
the United States for many, many years, and we need to reinvest 
and recapitalize it. It's number one.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you. I appreciate that and agree a 
hundred percent.

                               SKY RANGE

    Final question. Are you familiar with Sky Range, for 
developing the Sky Range System to test hypersonics as a way 
actually do it rather than lining up naval ships and trying to 
do it, and do you support it, including using the Global Hawks 
for that purpose?
    Secretary Austin. I am familiar with it, Senator, and, yes, 
I do support it, and again the Air Force will continue to work 
to make sure that the right capabilities are in place to 
support that effort.
    General Milley. Same, same.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, appreciate it.
    Senator Tester. Senator Murkowski.

                          HYPERSONICS TESTING

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Gentlemen, thank you both for your leadership. We 
appreciate it at all times but certainly at these very, very 
difficult and challenging times.
    I want to just follow on Senator Hoeven's comments about 
hypersonics. We are in a unique position, as you know, in 
Alaska providing the only location supporting both short- and 
long-range hypersonic weapons testing within the country just 
because of where we are with our unique geographic location.
    You don't have to fly over civilian populations and I know 
that this is something that, General Milley, you have spoken a 
lot about with regards to China's hypersonic weapons testing 
ability.
    Just very briefly are you looking at the Aleutians for this 
in terms of opportunity for testing----
    General Milley. Yes.
    Senator Murkowski [continuing]. In conjunction with our 
Space Port there in Kodiak?
    General Milley. The short answer is yes, and the 
hypersonics are an important weapon in an entire array of 
weapon systems.
    As you know, the Russians have already fired hypersonic 
weapons in Ukraine. I do want to caveat that, though, but the 
key to it is in its name. It is very, very fast and there's no 
effective defensive weapon against it per se to shoot it down. 
So the key, as Senator Moran had asked earlier, the key is to 
shoot the archer, not the arrow, and to get at the system at 
its launch sites.
    The other key from protection standpoint is not only the 
integrated air missile ballistic defense system but it's also 
the tactics of the units. So the units are going to have to be 
as we move into this changing character of war in the future, 
units and organizations and equipment are going to have to be 
smaller, faster, much more hidden in the sense of not quite 
totally invisible, probably never get there, but we need to be 
very, very difficult to find on the battlefield, a constant 
state of moving and motion, invisible to the extent that it's 
possible, smaller in general, and speed will matter on future 
battlefields because so far what we see with hypersonics is 
they're very effective against fixed targets, much more 
difficult against moving targets.

                   JAVELINS AND TRAINING FOR UKRAINE

    Senator Murkowski. Let me ask about the Javelins here, I 
was just speaking about that with Senator Hoeven, Mr. 
Secretary. We've been working with a constituent of mine. He's 
an Army Special Forces vet. He's been in Ukraine training 
ground forces for the past couple months. He has facilitated 
several requirements letters from the Ukrainian Ministry of 
Defense verifying the need for Javelin training kits, including 
one from the Head of Ukrainian Defense Intelligence.
    [The information follows:]
    
    
    Senator Murkowski. I understand these documents have been 
pushed to your office. Obviously the Javelins have the ability 
to significantly help Ukrainian forces, but what we are hearing 
is that the new Ukrainian troops are not provided adequate 
training to operate these $200,000 weapons systems. I was just 
looking at an article that came out a week ago with regards to 
the training aspect of it.
    So the question to you is whether or not they have enough 
Javelins, but also what are we doing to help facilitate 
training so that they can most effectively deploy these 
weapons, and what is DoD telling the Ukrainian Ministry of 
Defense in response to their ask for more trainers? How are we 
doing on that side?
    Secretary Austin. First of all, thank you, Senator. I would 
highlight that we have taken at this point several hundred 
troops out of Ukraine, trained them in other countries on 
artillery, operation of UAVs, and other things, and they've 
been reintroduced into the fight.
    So training is something that we're doing, but the issue is 
that in my engagements with the Minister of Defense, and I 
think also with the Chief of Defense and the Chairman, the 
specific issue of training on Javelins has never come up, but 
if they raise that issue certainly we stand ready to train 
them. If it is a requirement and since you brought it up, no 
doubt it is, we'll go back and check with them again and the 
people that they need to train, we stand ready to train them 
and we're pushing training kits into country, as well.

                           ARCTIC OPERATIONS

    Senator Murkowski. I will be happy to follow up and provide 
you with the information that we have on this and I thank you 
for that.
    Then just very lastly, and this doesn't require a response, 
but this is with regards to Arctic operations. You'd be 
disappointed if I didn't raise it with you, but I am thankful 
that you have stressed the importance of supporting Arctic 
operations, the training, and equipment for our Joint Forces in 
this important region.
    I know you've made good progress with regards to the Ted 
Stevens Arctic Securities Studies Center in Alaska and the 
first Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Arctic Affairs. 
You've got NORTHCOM tasked with an Arctic Security Assessment. 
So there's a lot coming on in this regard.
    I understand there's a report due soon. We look forward to 
reviewing that and being there to support you in all those 
efforts, but I truly appreciate the heightened level of 
engagement in this very important part of our responsibility.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                     DEFENSE BUDGET AND DIVESTMENT

    Senator Tester. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
    I'm going to take my question time now. Fellows, we've been 
at this for about an hour and 37 minutes, which is a little 
longer than I had anticipated, but it's a big budget and it's 
worth every question to be asked, and I would just want to 
start by thanking you guys for what you're doing.
    I mean, the truth is, it is $773 billion, you're going to 
have people come in saying it's too much, you're going to have 
people coming in saying it's too little. As you've already 
pointed out, Secretary, you have to snap the chalk line 
somewhere. That's a good analogy.
    I just appreciate the work that you've done because anybody 
can pick holes in it--anybody can pick holes it--and to talk 
about where we're going to be in the next decade, 10 years from 
now, is pretty interesting because you have to have people 
around you nimble enough to know whether we're even going to 
need ships or tanks, or if it's going to be fought in outer 
space, or if it's going to be fought in the cyber realm, 
wherever it's going to be fought, and the truth is if you screw 
up, we're all going to have opinions and we're going to beat 
the crap out of you and so you've got to do what's best for 
this country and best for the people who serve under you and I 
just want to thank you for that.
    Talking about the area of decommissioning, divesting, it's 
always a challenge. You've always got people in the Senate that 
don't want to see certain things go away, but I want to talk 
about a proposal to get rid of ships that, quite frankly, we 
just put into service. In fact, some of them aren't even 
totally put into service yet, the Littoral Combat Ships.
    How much confidence do you have in the analysis that these 
things just aren't fit for the fight?
    Secretary Austin. I'm very confident, Chairman. Again, I 
think you hit the nail on the head there. We're looking to 
acquire capabilities that are relevant in the future fight and 
survivable.
    The earlier variants of the ship that you mentioned did not 
live up to expectations. It's very expensive to maintain and so 
we've made the decision that it would be better to decommission 
those ships and invest those resources in acquiring 
capabilities that are more agile and more relevant to the 
future fight, more survivable.
    Senator Tester. Those ships have been on the books for--
like I said, I think there's still some in process, but they 
were designed what, 20 years ago, 15 years ago? Do you know 
offhand?
    Secretary Austin. I think it was about 20 years ago, 
Senator.
    Senator Tester. About 20 years ago, and it's already 
changed in 20 years and pretty dramatically, I might add.

                       ACCOUNTABILITY FOR UKRAINE

    I want to talk a little bit about something that's already 
been visited and that's accountability. There's been $3.7 
billion spent on a supplemental so far. That's a lot of money 
and there's another $16.4 projected to go out.
    You had said with earlier questions that you're reasonably 
confident that the weaponry is getting to the Ukrainians and I 
get it, you don't have people on the ground there to be able to 
monitor everything, but the question is, are we making sure 
that, Number 1, none of these weapons are falling into the 
wrong hands? Is there any way to do that? And then, Number 2, 
are we making sure that the taxpayer dollars that are being 
spent are actually making a difference? I'm talking about a 
significant difference.
    Secretary Austin. Well, first of all, I think they are 
making a difference, Chairman, and, you know, just looking at 
the battlefield today versus what we were looking at a couple 
of weeks ago, we see that the Ukrainians have defeated the 
Russians around Kyiv and they've moved back. They're focused on 
the South and East now and we expect that to be a bit of a 
different flavor of fight that employs more long-range fires, a 
bit more maneuver, and the Ukrainians have asked for what they 
believe is relevant in that fight, and the department and the 
Joint Staff under the Chairman's leadership there have really 
hustled to get the capabilities to them as quickly as possible, 
and we've engaged other countries to do the same, to provide 
additional capability.
    But in terms of accountability, we have to depend on the 
Ukrainians at this point to do the right thing and make sure 
that they are prudent and careful about how they issue these 
weapons out and account for these weapons. Again, I engage the 
very senior leadership in the country on this issue and they 
assure me that this is something that's important and that 
they'll continue to focus on.

                           WEAPONS PRODUCTION

    Senator Tester. For resupplying, there's a lot of stories 
about cold production lines, about the fact that we have supply 
chain issues when it comes to replacing everything that we're 
shipping into Ukraine and our allies are shipping into Ukraine 
too.
    You said you thought--and don't let me put words in your 
mouth--that the weaponry could be replaced within the next year 
with this budget.
    Secretary Austin. All of it won't be replaced within a 
year. We'll see production lines operate at different speeds 
just based upon what they are. We're optimistic about the 
Javelin being industry being able to increase the production 
rate in a very meaningful way, and there are decisions to be 
made on the Stinger going forward.
    But in every case, you know, industry has leaned into this 
and is willing to work with us to increase production as much 
as possible.
    Senator Tester. And the dollars in this budget will 
accomplish getting those production lines up and it 
accomplishes getting what we need to replace what's being 
utilized?
    Secretary Austin. And the supplemental that we've asked you 
for, right, Senator.

                           R&D AND PROTOTYPES

    Senator Tester. Okay. In the opening statement, and this is 
for you, General Milley, I believe you're asking for a $130 
billion in R&D spending. That's $10 billion over 2022, $12 
billion over the previous year. Procurement, conversely, is 
flat at about a $144 billion. For years R&D has been used to 
mature and prototype technologies, like AI, like hypersonics, 
which are important if we're going to compete, particularly 
with China.
    When will they become real programs and widely fielded? My 
concern is that we're prototyping everything to death and it 
never gets to the field. Is this a concern you have number one, 
General, and, number two, can you give me any sort of 
expectations on when we might see some of this stuff come to 
reality?
    General Milley. I think the time window, and again I agree 
with your comment about predicting 10-15 years out, but we do 
know the broad outlines or at least we think we know the broad 
outlines of the future operating environment in this changing 
character of war, and these programs will need to be online, 
fielded, in the hands of the force, in the hands of the Joint 
Force inside of 10 years if we are going to have an opportunity 
to be superior to our adversaries, specifically China.
    The programs I'm specifically talking about are artificial 
intelligence, robotics, hypersonics. There's a wide variety of 
these technologies that are coming online, but, in addition to 
that, it's more than just the technologies, the Joint 
Warfighter Concept, we have to get that on the street. We've 
got to make sure that our organizations, our doctrines, and our 
talent management are all adjusted.
    We've got to shift this military from its current state 
that we're in and we have to bias the future. We have to make 
some predictions, as risky as that can be, as to what warfare 
will look like in the 2030s and 2040s and we've got to move 
this organization in that direction. If we fail to do that, 
we'll be condemning generations to come to be on the losing 
side of a war.
    We can do it. We're capable of doing it. This budget puts 
us on that path.

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY

    Senator Tester. Okay. And so that's good to know. That's 
good enough.
    One last question and then I'll let you guys go. Mr. 
Secretary, the 2022 National Defense Strategy does continue to 
highlight China as our most consequential strategic competitor 
and pacing challenge.
    Has the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused you to rethink 
the department's priorities laid out in the NDS (National 
Defense Strategy) and will that have budget implications if the 
answer is yes?
    Secretary Austin. It has not, Chairman. As you look at the 
strategy, you see we characterize Russia as an acute threat and 
the capabilities that we're going after to support our 
competition with China are very, very relevant to what we're 
seeing and potentially will have to do in an extreme case with 
respect to Russia, and, you know, we're part of the strongest 
alliance in the world with NATO. It's not only our capability 
that's relevant there but it's also the capability of all of 
our allies. So what we're going after is relevant to both areas 
of competition.
    Senator Tester. Thank you both. I just want to acknowledge 
that Senator Shelby's statement will be a part of the record 
and let him know that we missed him here today and we look 
forward to him returning very, very soon.
    Everybody has theories, everybody has 20/20 hindsight, and 
I can tell you, just as a statement for the record, some can 
say that the pull out of Afghanistan was a mistake. I think it 
was a decision that had to be made that, quite frankly, can be 
questioned either way. If we left troops there, it would have 
been questioned. If we had pulled out troops, it could be 
questioned, but to say that Putin invaded Ukraine because of 
the pull-out of Afghanistan is the most bizarre thing I've ever 
heard. It was just his theory. So I got mine. I think the 
reason Putin invaded Ukraine is because President Trump 
empowered him to do such. I don't expect a response from you 
guys on that, but that was absolutely ridiculous.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    I want to once again appreciate your guys' testimony here 
today. Senators may submit additional written questions and we 
ask that you respond to them in a reasonable period of time. In 
other words, as quickly as you can.
    [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but 
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the 
hearing:]
            Questions Submitted to Hon. Lloyd J. Austin III
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
    Question. The 2022 National Defense Strategy continues to highlight 
the People's Republic of China as our most consequential strategic 
competitor and pacing challenge.
    Is the Russian invasion of Ukraine causing you to rethink the 
Department's priorities as laid out in the NDS?
    Answer. The NDS continues to guide the Department's approach. The 
NDS recognizes the acute threat that Russia poses, while maintaining 
that the People's Republic of China (PRC) is the overall pacing 
challenge for the Department.
    Question. Will you request adjustments to your fiscal year 23 
budget request as a result?
    Answer. The Department does not plan to change the President's 
Budget request for fiscal year 2023. We will work closely with Congress 
and appreciate Congressional support for the significant military 
assistance we are providing to Ukraine, and for our urgent efforts to 
replenish U.S. military stocks.
    Question. Competition within the Defense Industrial Base is vital 
to ensuring national security. When markets are competitive, the Nation 
reaps the benefits through improved cost, schedule, and performance for 
the products and services needed to support national defense. 
Unfortunately, cost and schedule performance on some major defense 
programs continues to degrade despite the continued growing financial 
health of the aerospace and defense prime contractors. In other words, 
DoD is spending record amounts of money, contractors are reaping the 
benefits, and the taxpayer is left holding the bag when programs are 
over budget. At some point, this is going to impact the affordability 
of existing and future defense programs.
    How do you plan to address this? What is the Department doing to 
instill better industry practices, and hold contractors accountable for 
cost over-runs and schedule delays?
    Answer. Every defense contractor should live up to its contractual 
responsibilities. The Department has found that selecting the 
appropriate contract type is the best way to manage the risk of cost 
overruns or schedule delays. Under fixed price contracts, contractors 
assume cost risk and are motivated to save money to minimize the risk 
of losses related to cost overruns. Contractors earn profits on fixed 
price contracts when they manage costs appropriately. Federal 
Acquisition Regulations prescribe the use of cost type contracts when a 
reasonable basis for firm pricing does not exist, either because 
circumstances do not allow the agency to define its requirements 
sufficiently to allow for a fixed-price type contract or uncertainties 
involved in contract performance do not permit costs to be estimated 
with sufficient accuracy to use any type of fixed-price contract. Cost-
reimbursement contracts and their risk of cost overruns are necessary 
to equitably distribute risk between contractor and government where 
the requirement to be performed is inherently risky.
    Question. Last year, Congress established a Commission to review 
the Department's budget process and make recommendations to speed up 
the process of getting stuff to the warfighter. Often, these 
Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some cases, rightfully 
so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you could 
fix yourself.
    Where do you feel the primary pitfalls are in the current budget 
process, and what is the Department doing internally to improve its 
processes?
    Answer. The Department continues to work to rapidly transition new 
or emerging concepts or technologies to functional products to address 
warfighter needs. Some ongoing initiatives focused on improving the 
Department's agility include:
  --Joint Warfighting Concept (JWC) Campaign of Learning--The Campaign 
        of Learning is a series of learning activities in a deliberate 
        and repeatable framework that is focused on the challenges of 
        great power competition, crisis, and conflict. It enables the 
        future Joint Force to be the most prepared to support and 
        defend national interests well into the future. JWC is driving 
        future research and development and acquisition, together with 
        integrating combatant command reviews and service plans. As 
        such, the concept's development is a critical DoD priority.
  --The Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve (RDER)--RDER is a 
        continuous campaign of joint iterative experimentation to close 
        joint warfighting capability gaps. It is a collaborative effort 
        across the Department including the Joint Staff, Combatant 
        Commanders, Services, as well as our allies and partners to 
        formulate a series of joint experiments in a highly contested 
        environment to accelerate the transition of new capabilities to 
        the warfighter.
  --Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer (CDAO)--The CDAO 
        is a Deputy Secretary of Defense effort to promote and better 
        align robust authoritative data and artificial intelligence 
        resources across the DoD to accelerate development of priority 
        initiatives such as Responsible Artificial Intelligence. 
        Elevating these programs better aligns them in a strategic 
        effort to improve our existing capabilities and quickly develop 
        novel and innovative implementation of digital and artificial 
        intelligence across the DoD.
  --The Artificial Intelligence Data Accelerator (ADA)--ADA takes 
        lessons learned in Artificial Intelligence implementation and 
        expands those capabilities to the Combatant Commands, allowing 
        for more rapid deployment of joint capabilities to the 
        warfighter.
  --Innovation Steering Group--The Innovation Steering Group was 
        established to improve the Department's ability to transition 
        innovative technologies into programs of record. The Steering 
        Group will serve as the principal forum to drive systemic 
        strategy, policy, programmatic, cultural and budgetary changes.
  --Capability Acquisition Pathfinders (CAPs)--The establishment of 
        CAPs is an Office of the Secretary of Defense initiative to 
        accelerate the establishment of programs of record in critical 
        mission areas and promote timely development and fielding of 
        joint capabilities to secure military advantage. CAPs are 
        intended to improve the speed to deliver capabilities while 
        informing scalable reforms and aligning systems across the 
        defense acquisition enterprise, ensuring the required 
        capabilities transition from initial concept to warfighter. 
        They have the highest attention from leaders across the 
        Department.
  --Program Budget Review (PBR) Reform--The Department is making 
        significant reforms to the Program and Budget Review (PBR) 
        process to better align strategy with resourcing decisions. We 
        are accomplishing this by defining PBR's scope from the top 
        down using NDS-derived strategic guidance while ensuring that 
        bottom up issues of importance to components will continue to 
        receive consideration by the enterprise at the appropriate 
        level. The additional benefit of this process is that the 
        Department's senior leaders will better be able to focus on 
        those issues that are most critical to the future joint force.
    Question. Congress has already provided authorities to reduce 
paperwork and speed up acquisitions. Yet we continue to hear about 
internal roadblocks, such as long contracting times. How are you 
addressing this?
    Answer. Delivering state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale 
is critical to secure our enduring military advantage. Protracted 
timelines to acquire these capabilities harm the Department's ability 
to timely access technological advancements.
    Section 886 of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 
year 2018 required the Department to adopt a standard definition of 
Procurement Administrative Lead Time (PALT) and make PALT reporting 
data available for DoD contracts and orders valued above the Simplified 
Acquisition Threshold. The Department implemented these requirements by 
defining PALT, collecting data in the Federal Procurement Data System 
Next Generation and making the data publically available via SAM.gov.
    The Department is addressing contracting times by leveraging 
positive authorities it sought and received in enabling legislation to 
streamline the procurement process, such as the Commercial Solutions 
Opening process and Other Transaction Agreements.
    Question. Space debris causes significant risk to on-orbit 
satellites for all nations operating in space. The recent announcement 
by the administration to fore-go destructive anti-satellite weapons 
tests sets the stage for discussions with other nations on a 
collaborative policy to help mitigate the impacts of these tests in 
creating hazardous space debris. This policy announcement comes at an 
important time, given the recent direct ascent anti-satellite tests by 
Russia that illustrated to the world, the harm that one nation, acting 
recklessly, can have on our collective ability to operate in space.
    Have you spoken to your peers about this policy change, encouraging 
them to follow our lead?
    Answer. When Vice President Kamala Harris announced that the United 
States commits not to conduct destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite 
(DA-ASAT) missile testing, she called on other nations to make similar 
commitments and to work together in establishing this as an 
international norm.
    In close partnership with the Department of State, the Department 
communicated the commitment to close allies and to many United Nations 
Member States prior to, and after, the Vice President's public 
announcement. During the first meeting of the United Nations Open-Ended 
Working Group on ``Reducing space threats through norms, rules and 
principles of responsible behaviors,'' which began in May, the 
Department called for other nations to assess their commitments, and to 
contribute their voices in identifying this as an emerging norm. We 
were pleased to see Canada and New Zealand announce commitments to 
refrain from the same type of destructive testing, and many nations 
have expressed support for the U.S. announcement.
    In the coming months, we intend to continue consultations with our 
allies, partners, and other United Nations Member States to encourage 
similar commitments and to determine the next steps to achieve further 
multilateral support for this commitment.
    Question. You are not requesting any new Multi-Year Procurement 
contracts this year, but the military services are requesting similar 
contract authorities that don't require a certification of savings.
    Is there a disconnect between DoD leadership and the military 
services about how we buy things in bulk most efficiently?
    Answer. The Department remains grateful to the Congress for the 
flexible acquisition authorities it has provided over the years, 
including multi-year procurement (MYP). This has been an effective way 
for the Department to save billions of taxpayer dollars when procuring 
major defense acquisition programs that have stable requirements and 
design. The independent certification element of the savings associated 
with each MYP is an important part of ensuring that those MYPs are 
providing value for the Department.
    The Department pursues MYP and block buy proposals where they meet 
our strategic goals. For example, the fiscal year 2023 President's 
defense budget included a block buy request for DDG-class ships. We 
will continue to make use of the contracting authorities provided by 
Congress, where appropriate, in support of our enduring goal to make 
the most effective and efficient use of taxpayer funds in support of 
national defense.
    Question. The extreme consolidation of the defense industrial base 
over the last couple of decades has severely limited competition and 
increased national security risks as a result.
    What is the Department doing to lower barriers for small business 
and new entrants to be able to compete for defense contracts?
    Answer. The Department is finalizing a new Small Business Strategy 
to increase small business participation in the Defense Industrial 
Base. One of the core focus areas of this strategy is increasing 
engagement and support of small businesses. The Department has active 
engagement and training programs for small businesses and consistently 
seeks to reduce barriers. The Department has revised the Office of 
Small Business Programs (OSBP) website to streamline entry points to 
the portfolio of small business programs to encourage broader 
participation.
    The Department also has several small business-focused programs 
that support and invest in research, development, and manufacturing 
capabilities and innovation in key technology sectors. The Department 
is working across these programs and others such as the Mentor Protege 
Program (MPP) and Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business 
Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) to ensure that awards and investments 
are made to small business firms across the underserved communities, 
including by establishing small business participation or assistance 
baselines.
    Question. The Administration has recently stated that the DoD needs 
to take steps to ensure resilience in the supply chain for five 
priority sectors: casting and forgings, missiles and munitions, energy 
storage and batteries, strategic and critical materials, and 
microelectronics.
    What strategies are you planning to implement to improve these 
supply chain priorities and what can this Committee do to support these 
strategies?
    Answer. Over the past year, the Department has taken proactive 
steps to strengthen these supply chains as outlined in the report we 
released in response to EO 14017 entitled ``Securing Defense-Critical 
Supply Chains.'' That report outlines 64 recommendations that the 
Department is working through, which includes close collaboration with 
interagency and international partners. To complement these 
recommendations, the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request 
included $2.1 billion to expand production, improve manufacturing 
processes, update standards, and on-shore specific capabilities. I 
would appreciate the support of Congress to fund these efforts as 
important steps to strengthen these supply chains.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick Leahy
Inflation and the Pay Raise for Members of the Military
    Question. How does your proposed 4.6 percent pay raise for members 
of the military take into account the current inflation rate?
    Answer. The proposed basic pay increase, which the Department set 
based on national economic conditions when the budget was developed 
late last year, is informed by growth in private-sector wages as 
measured by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Economic Cost Index. 
The Department uses that index in setting the annual military pay raise 
because it allows DoD to keep pace with the wide range of employers 
with whom we compete for talent.
    Question. Will members of the military, specifically junior 
enlisted and junior officers, have sufficient pay to overcome the 
impact of inflation on food insecurity?
    Answer. The Department is committed to strengthening economic 
security in the force, including addressing the problem of food 
insecurity, which recent data has shown is most common among the junior 
ranks.
    For reference, an entry-level military member at the start of 
service currently earns $43,500 per year. In addition to their basic 
pay, active duty members also receive tax-free allowances for housing 
and subsistence. Annual rate increases for these allowances are based 
on surveys of local rental housing costs and the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's food index, which allows them to be closely aligned with 
inflation in these critical cost areas. Currently, basic allowance for 
subsistence for enlisted members is $406.98 per month, and basic 
allowance for housing averages more than $2,000 per month.
    The Department will be implementing a Basic Needs Allowance, 
consistent with congressional direction, in January 2023. This 
additional compensation will supplement members pay up to 130 percent 
of Federal poverty guidelines for military households whose income 
falls below that threshold.
    The Department is committed to the health and welfare of our Force 
and their families. As part of the President's budget, the Department 
has asked for a 4.6 percent pay raise for our Service members.
Suicide Rates in the Military
    Question. During the hearing, you discussed the high suicide rates 
within the ranks of the military and among veteran populations, which 
remain high, despite decades of promises to reduce them and the stigma 
around seeking help. You testified that you have ordered an Independent 
Review Committee to investigate the high suicide rates and have 
requested over $400 million for suicide prevention programs.
    Will your review committee consider incorporating behavioral health 
more closely into overall fitness for military personnel in order to 
begin prevention well before suicidal ideations as well as improve the 
health of those who do not experience ideations? The National Center 
for PTSD has documented extensive research showing rates of PTSD and 
suicidal ideation can be high in populations not associated with 
traditional suicide prevention and preventative mental health programs, 
such as drone operators.
    Answer. The Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review 
Committee (SPRIRC) is an independent body that is considering a range 
of issues related to suicide prevention and response, and is charged 
with developing recommendations for the Department to apply across the 
enterprise. I look forward to reviewing their recommendations on a 
range of issues, including on behavioral health. As I have said many 
times: mental health is health--period. We can and must improve our 
efforts to prevent and respond to suicide--and better support our 
Service members and their families.
    Question. What steps has the Department taken to support the mental 
health of service members especially with roles not popularly 
associated with stresser events, such as drone operators, and how will 
you improve your resources using the funding requested in your fiscal 
year 2023 budget?
    Answer. The Department is committed to supporting and expanding 
mental health support for service members. The fiscal year 2023 budget 
request includes $1.4 billion for mental health. Our efforts are 
focused on improving primary care, behavioral health, expanding 
telehealth, and strengthening preventative measures for Service members 
and their families across all services and career fields.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
    Question. President Duterte of the Philippines cited the Biden 
administration's delivery of more than 3 million COVID-19 vaccines as a 
reason to renew the Visiting Forces Agreement with the U.S. after 
almost 2 years of uncertainty.
    How important are soft power tools like vaccine diplomacy in 
supporting U.S. national security objectives?
    Answer. The use of soft power tools like vaccine sharing not only 
fulfills our humanitarian obligations, but can advance U.S. national 
security objectives and our strategic competition efforts. The United 
States, with its scientific and economic preeminence, is able to 
effectively use a range of soft power tools to support its partners and 
allies.
    Soft power tools not only benefit the global community, but also 
benefit the American people. In today's globally connected world, 
infectious diseases easily transcend borders, and the investment in 
vaccinations overseas aids in minimizing the spread of these diseases 
to the United States. Toward this end, the U.S. Government has pledged 
to share 1.2 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses, established a Global 
Vaccine initiative to enhance readiness, and has consistently 
maintained a ``no-strings attached'' vaccine sharing policy.
    Our approach will help low and lower-middle income countries save 
lives, accelerate the end of the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, 
protect Americans from new variants, and demonstrate to the world the 
goodwill of the American people and the value of having the United 
States as a partner.
    Vaccine sharing also strengthens bio-preparedness, global health 
security systems, and global health. Vaccine sharing solidifies 
existing relations, creates opportunities, provides economic benefits, 
and serves to enhance the long-term influence and credibility of the 
United States internationally--all of which benefits U.S. national 
security.
    Question. How harmful to our global interests is the recent 
decision in Congress to strip international COVID funding from the 
forthcoming COVID-19 supplemental?
    Answer. The Administration has been clear in its support for 
international pandemic response funding to be included in COVID-19 
supplemental funding bills. It is in our national interest to curb the 
COVID-19 pandemic at home and abroad as quickly as possible and funding 
for international efforts to combat COVID-19 supports that critical 
objective.
    Question. Please provide an update as to the Department's efforts 
to comply with the Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) provisions in the 
NDAA, including the designation of an Agency Coordination Lead and the 
establishment of the cross functional team.
    Answer. On February 14, 2022, I directed the establishment of the 
Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) cross-functional team (CFT), and 
designated the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)) as the 
senior designated official of the CFT. As directed, on March 22, 2022, 
the USD(P) selected the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland 
Defense and Hemispheric Affairs (ASD(HD/HA)) to act as the Department's 
Agency Coordination Lead. In this capacity, the ASD(HD/HA) represents 
the Department in interagency and National Security Council 
engagements, coordinates directly with the Lead Interagency 
Coordinator, has conducted a site visit to the National Intrepid Center 
of Excellence, and provides senior leadership support to the CFT's 
establishment.
    Question. How is General Wolff, as the newly appointed Ukraine 
Security Assistance Coordinator, working with the Department of Defense 
on security assistance issues to ensure we are swiftly delivering the 
materials our Ukrainian friends urgently need to defend their country?
    Answer. The Department works extremely closely with the White 
House, including the Ukraine Security Assistance Coordinator, to 
coordinate security assistance with our Allies and partners, including 
efforts to secure donations on key systems to aid the Ukrainians in 
their defense.
                                 ______
                                 
            Questions Submitted by Senator Richard C. Shelby
    Question. Russia's unprovoked war in Ukraine has entered its third 
month. I think you will agree that the battle raging in the Donbas 
could prove decisive in how this war ends. General Milley testified to 
Congress that the war in Ukraine will be measured in years. I'm 
concerned that replenishment of weapons stocks--particularly Javelins 
and Stinger missiles--is happening too slowly, and that we risk losing 
the capacity to address other inevitable emerging threats.
    Secretary Austin, how is the Department addressing this challenge?
    Answer. The Department is laser focused on ensuring that we have 
what we need to defend the nation--and to strengthen our defense 
industrial base.
    The Department has awarded Javelin and Stinger replenishment 
contracts to re-supply these critical, battle-proven capabilities and 
components for our forces, allies, and partners, with funding 
appropriated under the Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022. 
The remaining funds provided under this Act will enable replenishment 
of defense articles that have been transferred to the government of 
Ukraine from U.S. stocks.
    Funds appropriated under the Additional Ukraine Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2022 will be used for additional replenishment 
tranches to replace DoD stocks provided to the government of Ukraine.
    In most cases, the Services will use these funds to backfill 
equipment through existing contracts, which will expedite 
replenishment, as new contract competitions or negotiations will not be 
necessary.
    Question. Please explain the steps you have taken to ensure 
industry has a clear understanding of what the Department needs and the 
funding and direction to execute quickly.
    Answer. In April 2022, my Deputy Secretary of Defense and members 
of my senior leadership team met with the Chief Executive Officers of 
the Department's eight largest prime contractors to discuss strategies 
on how to accelerate the production and fielding of systems critical to 
the Department's ongoing security assistance to Ukraine. The Department 
continues to engage our industry partners emphasizing the need to 
deliver critical capabilities to Ukraine; enhance U.S. force 
preparedness, and support our Allies and partners in bolstering their 
defense capabilities. Concurrently, the Department continues to work 
urgently with sub-tier suppliers to identify long lead items and 
obsolescence issues and mitigations for these issues.
    Question. The Administration's decision to remove U.S. forces from 
Afghanistan was predicated on our ability to neutralize terrorist 
threats from ``over the horizon.'' I understand that the U.S. has not 
executed a single over the horizon strike against ISIS-K or Al Qaeda 
since last August. I am concerned that without a credible threat, these 
terrorist organizations will reconsolidate, grow in strength, and once 
again threaten the homeland.
    Secretary Austin, why hasn't the Department used its over the 
horizon capability?
    Answer. We maintain the ability to strike anywhere in the world, as 
required. Our over the horizon capability helps us monitor and track 
any threats to the United States and our interests. USCENTCOM employs a 
range of capabilities to build and maintain an understanding of 
terrorist threat networks in Afghanistan. These efforts monitor whether 
these networks are undertaking activities that could lead to conducting 
external operations against the United States. We are postured to 
conduct lethal operations, and are working in partnership with other 
agencies to advance our interests in the region.
    Question. I am concerned about the impact inflation is having on 
the Department, specifically, your ability to maintain readiness and to 
modernize for the future fight. The current inflation rate of 8.5 
percent must significantly cut into the Department's buying power.
    Secretary Austin, please explain how the Department accounts for 
inflation in its budgeting process and how it impacted this year's 
budget. For example, did you fully account for all foreseeable 
inflationary pressures for fiscal year 2023?
    Answer. As part of the Department's Planning, Programming, 
Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) process, the Department uses changes in 
the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) price index as determined by the 
Council of Economic Advisors and the Office of Management and Budget 
and, as prescribed by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act (BBEDCA) to project the inflation impact on new and existing 
programs and make the necessary budget adjustments prior to submitting 
the President's Budget to the Congress.
    In formulating the fiscal year 2023 President's Budget, based on 
the increases in GDP price index and personnel costs seen over the last 
year, the Department worked closely with the OMB and the White House to 
add $20 billion per year in additional funding to protect the 
Department's buying power and account for increased compensation 
expenses. However, the world kept changing after the budget was 
finished, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine spiked energy prices and 
rattled the global markets. While no one knows for certain at this 
point if these conditions, such as high fuel prices, will persist into 
fiscal year 2023, we recognize that these global economic conditions 
can impact our buying power. We are working closely with OMB, and with 
relevant committees, to ensure the Department has the buying power it 
needs to deliver capabilities and take care of the Force.
    Question. The Department's budget request seeks to execute a 
`divest to invest' strategy which potentially could shrink our combat-
credible forces by 24 ships and 150 aircraft. While I appreciate the 
need to retire certain platforms and modernize our forces for the 2030 
fight, we still have a majority of this decade immediately before us, 
and I am deeply concerned that we are short-changing near-term 
readiness for future modernization.
    Secretary Austin, give a detailed assessment of the near-term risks 
associated with the divestments proposed in the Department's budget 
request. In particular, which near-term capabilities did the Department 
take the greatest risk to fund modernization? How do you intend to 
mitigate this risk?
    Answer. The Department's President's Budget request for fiscal year 
2023 re-prioritizes funds for systems that are no longer optimized for 
military need due to changing mission and operational requirements (for 
example, the ability to operate in a highly-denied environment against 
a peer threat); made obsolete by more capable, less expensive, or more 
efficient replacements; or whose support costs have become 
unaffordable.
    Question. Do you assess that the Department is capable of deterring 
Chinese aggression today and through this decade?
    Answer. The Department mitigates risk to mission and force, today 
and in the future, by re-prioritizing funds to invest in capabilities 
that are lethal, resilient, sustainable, survivable, agile, and 
responsive against the pacing challenge of the People's Republic of 
China (PRC).
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Mitch McConnell
Support for Servicemembers in Kentucky
    Question. What is the Department of Defense's plan to keep its 
commitment to serving the health needs of our servicemembers and their 
families at both Fort Campbell and Fort Knox? Please include any plans 
for increasing capacity at the Fort Knox Ireland Army Health Clinic, 
addressing manpower concerns at the clinic, which is experiencing a 
workforce shortage, and improving timely access to care at health 
facilities in the surrounding community.
    Answer. The Department is committed to ensuring access to quality 
care for Active Duty Service members (ADSMs), their families and other 
beneficiaries at all military medical treatment facilities (MTFs), 
including those at Fort Campbell and Fort Knox. The Department is 
implementing a standard manpower model, which is scaled to the size and 
scope of individual MTFs, to optimize our ability to meet demand for 
care in MTFs. The Department fully funds government civilian employee 
and contactor personnel positions, which are not filled by uniformed 
medical personnel. Currently, there are no manpower concerns at either 
Fort Campbell, Blanchfield Army Community Hospital (ACH) or Ireland 
Army Health Clinic (AHC).
    The Department also supports Blanchfield ACH and Ireland AHC 
centrally with virtual health support, including through virtual 
readiness and primary care exams. The Department plans for Blanchfield 
ACH to be integrated into the Tele-Critical Care (TCC) system, which 
will allow for Intensive Care Unit inpatients at Blanchfield ACH to be 
monitored 24 hours a day by critical care intensivists at one of the 
Department's three TCC nodes, located at Brooke Army Medical Center in 
San Antonio, TX, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in 
Bethesda, MD, and Naval Medical Center San Diego in San Diego, CA.
    When healthcare services are not available in a MTF or when access 
is not available within Military Health System (MHS) standards, MTFs 
refer care to the local TRICARE network. The Department closely 
monitors access to care in the network to identify and resolve access 
challenges.
    Question. Kentucky's defense installations are currently working on 
long-term projects to renovate and replace outdated housing on their 
installations, particularly the VOLAR barracks at Fort Campbell and the 
privatized housing at both Fort Campbell and Fort Knox. However, the 
installations often do not receive the resources necessary to make 
these renovations until after existing housing is outdated and unsafe, 
particularly for enlisted servicemembers and their families. What steps 
are you taking to increase the pace at which Kentucky's installations 
can provide quality housing options for their servicemembers?
    Answer. The Department recognizes that the environment in which our 
service members live impacts their quality of life, their ability to do 
their job, and the Department's ability to recruit and retain. We are 
committed to ensuring that all our on-base housing meets life, health 
and safety requirements and provides a quality living experience for 
military personnel and their families. In keeping with this commitment, 
the Army has numerous projects planned in their long range master plan 
(thru 2030) to repair or replace unaccompanied housing at Fort Knox and 
Fort Campbell. These include three VOLAR repair projects at Fort 
Campbell that were pulled forward for award in fiscal year (FY) 2022 
due to the additional $73 million provided in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2022. The Army looks to accelerate all barracks 
renovation and construction projects to the greatest extent possible.
    In addition, the Army's Military Housing Privatization Initiative 
(MHPI) provider (LendLease), with the consent from Army, is planning 
significant recapitalization of family housing at Forts Knox and 
Campbell over the next 5 years. Over the next 5 years, LendLease plans 
to fund and construct four (4) new homes, renovate more than 1,600 
homes, and replace more than 500 roofs at its Fort Knox MHPI project, 
and will demolish 250 older homes, construct 680 new homes, and 
renovate more than 450 homes at its Fort Campbell MHPI project.
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) Program
    Question. I have worked for decades to provide the resources needed 
to safely destroy the remaining U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical 
agents and munitions stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot. Please 
provide an update on ACWA's progress toward the complete destruction of 
all chemical weapons by the statutory deadline of December 31, 2023. 
Are there any risks to the program that would result in a failure meet 
this deadline?
    Answer. The Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program 
is making swift progress towards completing the destruction mission by 
the September 30, 2023 Chemical Weapons Convention commitment and the 
December 31, 2023 congressionally-mandated deadline. As of May 13, 
2022, the ACWA program has destroyed 80.28 percent of the chemical 
agent tonnage and 78.89 percent of the munitions in the chemical 
weapons stockpiles located at the U.S. Army Pueblo Chemical Depot in 
Colorado and the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky.
    The Colorado site began destroying the final chemical munitions 
campaign, which is the mustard-filled 4.2-inch mortars, in February 
2022.The Kentucky site is scheduled to begin the final campaign, which 
is the GB (Sarin) nerve-agent filled M55 rockets, in July 2022. The 
Program Executive Office for ACWA continues to proactively address and 
mitigate risks to increase confidence in completing the destruction 
mission.
    The primary risk to the ACWA program is the condition of the 
remaining chemical weapons stockpile; specifically, at the Blue Grass 
Army Depot. PEO ACWA is implementing lessons learned from the previous 
destruction sites, as well as taking other actions, to address the 
concerns with the condition of the stockpile.
    Question. While the chemical weapons destruction activities are 
expected to conclude by 2023, work on closure operations will continue 
for a number of years. What is the plan for maintaining this highly-
skilled workforce through the end of closure operations, including any 
efforts to help transition these workers to other jobs at the Depot or 
surrounding area after closure?
    Answer. Closure includes a managed drawdown of government and 
contract personnel as sites transition from operations into closure 
and, ultimately, mission completion. This drawdown will occur in 
planned, coordinated and communicated actions. A well-defined process 
exists for government personnel that may include transitioning to other 
positions within the Federal Government. Each contractor will utilize 
their own corporate specific policies regarding employee draw down and 
transition. The Department will follow Federal regulations) regarding 
advance notification of closure to employees, where applicable
    The Department's Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation 
provided a grant to the Blue Grass Area Development District, enabling 
this group of local government agencies to award a contract for 
development of an economic resiliency plan designed to be a roadmap for 
the employees transitioning out of the chemical weapons destruction 
mission. This ongoing study is expected to formalize long-term planning 
for economic development and job creation though new industries and 
opportunities.
Subterranean Training
    Question. U.S. and allied forces are likely to face a range of 
subterranean threats if engaged in a future conflict with near-peer 
adversaries. What advantages does a Category 3 subterranean (SUB-T) 
training facility have over Category 1 and Category 2 facilities in 
preparing our servicemembers to face these threats?
    Answer. Category 3 underground facilities are designed and built to 
serve as command and control, operations, storage, production, and 
protection facilities that provide some of the most challenging 
tactical environments friendly forces can expect to encounter. A 
Category 3 SUB-T training facility would provide the training community 
the most realistic representation of a military purposed, hardened, and 
deeply buried threat environment.
    Question. It is my understanding that the Department's Joint 
Operational Training Infrastructure (JOTI) Strategy requires both 
conventional and special operations forces to prepare for SUB-T 
operations. What is the Department's plan for maintaining joint force 
access to a Category 3 SUB-T training facility east of the Mississippi 
River? What are the benefits of assigning responsibility to the Army 
for management of a joint force Category 3 SUB-T training facility?
    Answer. The Department recently renewed its access to train in a 
limestone mine in Crestwood, Kentucky. This renewed access is an 
interim approach while the Department assesses the best option for a 
high-end SUB-T training facility. A Category 3 SUB-T facility provides 
realistic and relevant high-end training. There are additional 
advantages that can be provided in a classified response upon request.
                                 ______
                                 
            Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
    Question. I am concerned that DoD has not adequately addressed the 
need to acquire rapid containment solutions to manage surges during 
infectious pandemics or biological attacks. In 2021, I wrote the 
Department urging the evaluation of DoD's need for commercial-off-the-
shelf modular negative air pressure room containment systems as part of 
the review of DoD pandemic preparedness required by Sec. 732 of the 
fiscal year 2021 NDAA. When does DoD expect to complete this review and 
submit the required report to Congress?
    The Department is working to prepare a thorough response to Section 
732 and will provide the report to Congress as soon as possible.
    Has DoD or DHA analyzed the need for additional modular negative 
air pressure containment systems for use in expanding military medical 
treatment facilities during pandemics or in response to biological 
threats?
    Answer. The Defense Health Agency has not conducted an overall 
review of medical treatment facilities (MTFs) to evaluate requirements 
for additional negative pressure units. However, every Commanding 
Officer of an MTF can analyze their own command and can initiate a 
request for a negative pressure unit if they identify an outstanding 
requirement.
    Question. The Pentagon's Comptroller last week noted that fuel 
costs to DoD are currently expected to cost $1.8 billion more than 
anticipated for the rest of the year, an amount in addition to the $1.5 
billion Congress added to the fiscal year 2022 omnibus to address 
rising fuel costs. Are there other accounts in the Department where 
inflation is expected to result in costs well-above what was provided 
in fiscal year 2022?
    As you noted, Congress provided additional funding in the fiscal 
year 2022 omnibus above the fiscal year 2022 President's Budget 
request. The Department will continue to use various reprogrammings 
using available sources for the remainder of fiscal year 2022, as 
necessary, to address any funding shortfalls.
    What parts of the fiscal year 2023 budget present the greatest risk 
that may need to be reevaluated as likely to come in above the budget 
request we received in March?
    Answer. The Department recognizes that the economic picture will 
continue to evolve. Today's data offers us only limited insight into 
future economic conditions. However, unless global energy prices, which 
spiked following Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, return to 
pre-invasion levels, inflation and rising fuel costs will likely be 
issues the Department will need to manage.
    In the short-term, we expect that many DoD programs will be 
insulated from market pressures because of existing long-term and fixed 
price purchase agreements between DoD and its prime and subcontractors 
and suppliers. In fiscal year 2023 and beyond, DoD anticipates that 
inflationary impacts could manifest through increased costs under new 
and renegotiated contracts. DoD is also closely monitoring the impact 
of inflation on housing costs and healthcare services, which directly 
impact service members and their families.
    Question. Last month a Russian general claimed that Russia intended 
not only to seize southern Ukraine but also link up with the Russian-
speaking Transnistria region of Moldova. There have been several 
bombings there in recent days which may be a Russian pretext for 
widening the war. How is the U.S. and NATO preparing for the prospect 
of the war in Ukraine spreading to neighboring Moldova?
    Answer. As we continue to support Ukraine's brave fight against 
Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, the United States has 
reaffirmed our support for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of 
Moldova. The United States and NATO are closely following wider 
developments in the region, particularly any possible escalation or 
expansion of Russia's aggression. The Department remains committed to 
our bilateral defense relationship with Moldova and supports its 
efforts to further develop its internal defense capabilities.
    Question. I know you were in Ukraine about a week ago and met with 
President Zelensky, Ukraine's minister of defense, and many others. 
Shortly after that, the Administration submitted a new $33.6 billion 
request for further assistance for Ukraine, including $6 billion for 
the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and $4 billion for Foreign 
Military Financing. What did you learn during your visit with respect 
to what types of weapons and capabilities Ukraine most urgently needs 
to fight Russia in this current phase of the war in Eastern and 
Southern Ukraine?
    I understand that Ukrainian soldiers will be training on certain 
equipment outside of the country, such as on howitzer artillery systems 
that the United States is providing. We have also done a little bit of 
training on the Switchblade drones that we have provided Ukraine, which 
I was happy to see the United States provide given Ukraine's effective 
use of Turkish drones. Over the past 2 months, the training 
requirements to use certain weapons systems that are currently 
unfamiliar to the Ukrainians has been often cited by American and 
European officials as a reason for not supplying those systems to 
Ukraine. As this war drags on, are there other weapons systems where it 
now makes sense for the U.S. or NATO partners to provide Ukrainians 
with the specialized training needed to operate them and provide those 
weapons to the Ukrainian military?
    Answer. During the initial phase of the fighting in and around Kyiv 
and other cities across Ukraine, the Ukrainians urgently needed air 
defense and anti-tank systems, most notably Stingers and Javelins. The 
Department relied on Presidential Drawdown authority to pull these 
systems from U.S. stocks so they could be fielded quickly. These are 
systems the Ukrainians were familiar with and had trained on.
    As the battlefield changed, the Department's security assistance 
changed with it. During the latest stage of the conflict, we tailored 
our assistance to focus on artillery, such as 155mm Howitzers, and to 
provide Switchblade Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems. These systems are 
now assisting the Ukrainians as they confront the Russians in the east 
and in the south.
    As the battlefield continues to change, we will continue to adapt 
our approach, and part of this adaption will be supplying Ukraine with 
what it needs to build its enduring strength. We are also providing 
Ukraine with security assistance that is effective on the battlefield 
and will also help the Ukrainian Armed Forces move away from a 
dependency on Russian equipment. The Department remains in close 
contact with the Ukrainian Government and continually adapts the 
assistance being provided to respond to Ukraine's needs, including the 
required training for new systems provided and maintenance packages to 
sustain those systems in the long-term.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
    Question. President Biden invoked the Defense Production Act to 
give the government more avenues to provide support for the mining, 
processing and recycling of critical materials such as lithium, 
graphite, nickel, and cobalt that are used to make large-capacity 
batteries. Yet, except for a small handful of mines and facilities, 
they are almost exclusively produced outside of the United States.
    How will DoD use this DPA determination to revamp and strengthen 
our supply chains of critical minerals?
    Answer. The Presidential Determination (PD) on Large Capacity 
Batteries is intended to stimulate domestic mining, beneficiation, and 
value-added processing of the strategic and critical materials 
necessary to produce batteries needed for the automotive, e-mobility, 
and stationary storage sectors. The PD authorizes the Department to 
fund a wide range of actions, including feasibility studies, co-
production of battery materials, and productivity improvements.
    Question. What additional resources are needed to meet the 
requirements and goals of the Presidential Determination pursuant to 
Section 303 of the Defense Production Act that was signed on March 30?
    Answer. As President Biden has made clear, a robust, resilient, and 
sustainable domestic industrial base to meet the requirements of the 
clean energy economy is essential to our national security. In support 
of this goal, the Department delivered a detailed cost estimate for 
implementation of the Presidential Determination to congressional 
defense committees in May 2022. Projects to be undertaken with these 
funds include: minerals feasibility studies, expansion of by- and co- 
product extraction, productivity improvement programs, recycling and 
reclamation, and aggregate expansion of supply.
    The Administration has also submitted two legislative proposals 
that would improve the nation's ability to fulfill the goals of this 
Presidential Determination: ``Reform of the Strategic and Critical 
Materials Stock Piling Act'' and ``Posturing the Defense Production Act 
to Respond to Increasing Requirements.'' The Department urges adoption 
of these legislative proposals, which would give the Department the 
authorities and agility necessary to compete with China, and others, in 
the development of secure sources of critical and strategic materials.
    Question. How does the President's budget adequately address our 
nation's need to, as the President said, ``end our long-term reliance 
on China and other countries for inputs that will power the future?''
    Answer. The President's budget will help ensure the U.S. is less 
reliant on China and other foreign sources for key future energy and 
mobility technologies by recapitalizing the National Defense Stockpile 
(PB23: $253 million requested), expanding industrial base investment 
programs under Title III of the Defense Production Act (PB23: $660 
million requested), and Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment 
programs (PB23: $588 million requested). These funds will be invested 
in critical materials necessary for national defense as well as future 
energy technologies, such as rare earth elements, metals, and magnets. 
The Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 
appropriated $600 million to, in part, expand the domestic capacity for 
strategic and critical minerals.
    Question. I am concerned the DoD has not prioritized and expedited 
clean-up of harmful substances, notably lead, copper and PFAS remaining 
on U.S. Government military owned and abandoned property, and on land 
that has been transferred to Alaska Natives pursuant to the Alaska 
Native Claims Settlement Act. As evidenced by recent Federal Government 
reports, these substances present a severe public health threat, 
particularly in remote Alaskan communities, where drinking water 
resources are scarce.
    How does the budget request address this issue?
    Answer. The Department has requested $227 million for the Formerly 
Used Defense Sites Program, which addresses hazardous substances, 
pollutants, and contaminants (e.g., lead, copper, and per- and 
polyfluoroalkyl substances), released by the Department during the time 
of possession. Many of these include locations in Alaska, some of which 
are on Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) land.
    In addition, the Department has requested $12 million for the 
Native American Lands Environmental Mitigation Program (NALEMP). The 
purpose of NALEMP is to mitigate impacts to Indian lands and on other 
locations where the Department, and Indian tribe, and the current land 
owner agree that such mitigation is appropriate. Approximately 60 
percent of the NALEMP cooperative agreement funding available is 
directed to Alaska tribes for mitigation projects. NALEMP has worked 
with 37 tribes in Alaska and awarded 224 cooperative agreements with a 
total value of $98 million. There are currently 19 open cooperative 
agreements in Alaska and the Department is considering eleven 
cooperative agreements in Alaska for fiscal year 2023.
    Question. How is the Department of Defense working with Alaskan 
communities to expedite clean-up of these lands?
    Answer. The Department has two main programs that work with Alaskan 
communities related to cleanup activities: the Native American Lands 
Environmental Mitigation Program and the Formerly Used Defense Sites 
Program. During the execution of both programs, the Department 
coordinates with stakeholders, including Alaska communities and tribes, 
regarding prioritization of our mitigation or cleanup efforts, and 
especially where cleanup actions may be needed on Indian lands. 
Additionally, standing Departmental guidance requires DoD Components to 
consult with Indian tribes on proposed actions, plans, and ongoing 
activities that may have the potential to significantly affect 
protected tribal resources, tribal rights, or Indian lands. 
Installations work directly with Tribes, seeking permission to access 
tribal land to carry out Department of Defense cleanup actions. The 
foundation of tribal consultation is built on respect for tribal 
sovereign nation status through recurring and meaningful consultation.
    Question. Can I get your commitment to work with the EPA and 
Department of the Interior as they develop a plan to address 
contamination on Native lands?
    Answer. Yes, the Department will work with the Environmental 
Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior on these efforts.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator John Boozman
    Question. Science, biology, and common sense expose the unfair 
advantage biological male athletes possess when pitted against female 
athletes in competition. Physiological distinctions between the sexes 
matter in protecting equal opportunity. The Defense Department is 
currently seeking recommendations on accommodating ``non-binary'' 
service members.
    How will you ensure that women have a fair playing field in 
military sports programs? How will you ensure the preservation of sex-
specific programming and scholarships at military academies?
    Answer. The Military Service Academies abide by National Collegiate 
Athletic Association (NCAA) rules. The NCAA policy on transgender 
student athlete participation is currently based on whether or not the 
athlete is being treated with hormone therapy. According to NCAA rules, 
a transmale (female to male) athlete taking testosterone for gender 
transition may compete on a men's team but may not compete on a women's 
team; a transfemale (male to female) athlete taking testosterone 
suppression medication for gender transition may compete on a men's 
team, but may not compete on a women's team until completing one 
calendar year of testosterone suppression.
    Gender is not a criterion for appointment to the Military Service 
Academies.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted to General Mark A. Milley
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
    Question. The 2022 National Defense Strategy continues to highlight 
the People's Republic of China as our most consequential strategic 
competitor and pacing challenge.
    Which capabilities that we are currently developing to counter 
China translate to address the acute threats presented by Russia?
    Answer. To prevail against a near-peer adversary in our next war, 
the Joint Force must employ a variety of new technologies across 
multiple domains. To that end, the Department has identified 14 
critical technology areas vital to national security. The Joint Force 
will continue to evolve our Joint Warfighting Concept and deliver these 
technologies as warfighting capability as the ever-changing threat from 
our adversaries `demand.
    The Department's 14 critical technology areas are:
    1. Seed Areas of Emerging Opportunity
  --Biotechnology
  --Quantum Science
  --Future Generation Wireless Technology (FutureG)
  --Advanced Materials
    2. Effective Adoption Areas--where there is existing vibrant 
commercial sector activity
  --Trusted AI and Autonomy
  --Integrated Network Systems-of-Systems
  --Microelectronics
  --Space Technology
  --Renewable Energy Generation and Storage
  --Advanced Computing and Software
  --Human-Machine Interfaces
    3. Defense-Specific Areas
  --Directed Energy
  -- Hypersonics
  --Integrated Sensing and Cyber
    Question. Last year, Congress established a Commission to review 
the Department's budget process and make recommendations to speed up 
the process of getting stuff to the warfighter. Often, these 
Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some cases, rightfully 
so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you could 
fix yourself.
    Do you feel that the warfighter is getting a fair shake in 
articulating their needs during the budget process?
    Answer. Delivering combat capability to the warfighter is at the 
forefront throughout the budgeting process. The Department's Budget 
Review process allows Combatant Command (CCMD) Issue Nominations to 
advocate for changes in funding from the what was presented in the 
Services' POMs. Further, the CCMDs are active participants throughout 
Program and Budget Review and are represented at both the 3-star and 4-
star forums making recommendations directly to the Vice Chairman and 
Deputy Secretary of Defense.
    Question. Last year, the Committee included funding to push AI 
capabilities out to the combatant commands so that our warfighters at 
the tactical edge can integrate best-in-breed technology. This appears 
timely given that we heard recently from the NORTHCOM Commander that he 
does not have sufficient AI capabilities.
    What is the Department doing to ensure that AI is not only 
incorporated in high-end acquisition programs, but also supporting the 
day-to-day work of the warfighter?
    Answer. PB23 invests $1.1B in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and 
Machine Learning (AI/ML) to expand mission capabilities, transition 
those capabilities to the warfighter, and to maintain a department-wide 
advantage by rapidly deploying capabilities to decision makers and the 
warfighters.
    The Department is investing $135 million to accelerate the 
operationalization of AI/ML tools at each Combatant Command, ultimately 
providing data supremacy and decision overmatch. The President's Budget 
funds DOT&E's effort to integrate AI-enabled cyber assessments of 
warfighting systems by decreasing vulnerabilities and increasing our 
resilience in a complex warfighting domain.
    The Department stood up the Chief Digital and Artificial 
Intelligence Office (CDAO). This senior office is responsible for the 
acceleration of the Department's adoption of data, analytics, and AI to 
generate decision advantage across the battlefield. In February 2022, 
the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), Defense Digital 
Services (DDS), the Chief Data Officer, and the enterprise platform 
Advana were combined to stand up CDAO. The CDAO will perform several 
critical functions in close coordination with the Services, the Joint 
Staff, OSD's Chief Information Officer (CIO), Under Secretary of 
Defense (R&E), and other digital leaders.
    Question. Space debris causes significant risk to on-orbit 
satellites for all nations operating in space. The recent announcement 
by the administration to fore-go destructive anti-satellite weapons 
tests sets the stage for discussions with other nations on a 
collaborative policy to help mitigate the impacts of these tests in 
creating hazardous space debris. This policy announcement comes at an 
important time, given the recent direct ascent anti-satellite tests by 
Russia that illustrated to the world, the harm that one nation, acting 
recklessly, can have on our collective ability to operate in space.
    How will this policy affect our current military operations? Are we 
taking options off the table for the Commander-in-Chief to execute in 
times of emergency?
    Answer. The U.S. commitment to not conduct destructive direct-
ascent anti- satellite missile testing does not affect any of our 
current military options, nor does it take options off the table for 
the Commander-in-Chief. The United States is not ceding a right to act 
in self-defense to protect U.S. interests, or those of our allies and 
partners, which is inherent under international law. This is a non-
legally binding commitment related to the destructive testing of 
certain capabilities, and was designed to promoted sustainability and 
advance the security of space.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick Leahy
Inflation and the Pay Raise for Members of the Military
    Question. How does your proposed 4.6 percent pay raise for members 
of the military take into account the current inflation rate?
    Answer. The 2023 President's Budget request proposes a 4.6-percent 
pay raise for all pay grades. This proposal equals the Employment Cost 
Index (ECI), which complies with Section 1009 of Title 37. ECI is based 
upon the wages and salaries of private industry workers. Setting the 
pay raise equal to the ECI ensures Service Member compensation remains 
competitive and does not lag private industry growth. Our lethality as 
a Joint Force depends on our talented and professional Service Members. 
This 4.6-percent across-the-board pay raise is critical to retaining 
the best talent of today's Joint Force, recruiting the best and 
brightest for tomorrow's Joint Force, and reinforcing Secretary 
Austin's priority to ``take care of our people.''
    Question. Will members of the military, specifically junior 
enlisted and junior officers, have sufficient pay to overcome the 
impact of inflation on food insecurity?
    Answer. The Department is working to implement a Basic Needs 
Allowance, with a target start date in January 2023, that will provide 
a supplemental allowance to those with the greatest need. The 
Department has also created a strategic plan to specifically get after 
this issue and I am confident these efforts will help improve food 
security.
    The Department regularly reviews military compensation through the 
Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation, to ensure it is at 
appropriate levels. We recognize the hardships the current economic 
climate creates for military families. Food insecurity is a complex 
problem with no singular cause. This means we need to take a multi-
faceted approach by addressing military spouse unemployment, child care 
affordability, and improving financial readiness, for example.
The Effect of Non-Defense Spending on Military Recruitment and 
        Readiness
    Question. In your statement, you referred to the need to recruit 
``the most capable talent so we can develop our leaders of the 
future.'' The Reserve Officers Training Corps is one example of a 
recruitment program that draws in capable talent and develops leaders, 
as I know you are personally aware. In Vermont, many of our colleges 
and universities have active ROTC programs, such as University of 
Vermont, our largest public University, and Norwich University, the 
birthplace of ROTC.
    What are the benefits ROTC cadets bring to the Joint Force from 
their time utilizing civilian education systems supported by domestic 
non-defense appropriations?
    Answer. ROTC programs train officer candidates in a civilian 
educational environment. This allows students to experience and 
appreciate the experiences of both military and civilian cultures and 
challenges. ROTC graduates also maintain ties to their civilian 
educational institutions, often mentoring the next generation of 
officers and government civil service employees. Along with the Service 
Academies and Officer Training School (OTS), the Reserve Officer 
Training Corps (ROTC) program provides highly qualified graduates to 
fill the Joint Force's officer corps. The Joint Force makes no 
distinction between officers of any commissioning source. ROTC, OTS, 
and Service Academy graduates are eligible for the same careers and 
duty locations. Additionally, commissioning graduates from a large 
network of civilian academic institutions gives the Joint Force access 
to a broad applicant pool. With their unique personal and academic 
backgrounds, ROTC graduates provide the Joint Force with diverse 
perspectives and problem solving approaches.
    Question. Apart from ROTC, how do investments in domestic non-
defense programs, such as education and healthcare, improve your 
ability to recruit quality service members and increase readiness of 
the U.S. Armed Forces in all ranks and from all backgrounds?
    Answer. Feedback from recent U.S. youth surveys suggest 16-21 year 
olds are motivated to join the military for non-defense related 
programs and incentives to include: pay, funding future education, 
travel, health and medical benefits, as well as gaining experiences/
work skills.
The Climate Crisis' Effect on Military Readiness
    Question. The Department and you and the other Joint Chiefs have 
been clear about the security threats climate change poses to the 
United States and partners, releasing studies and strategies to cope 
with the challenges it imposes.
    How has the threat of climate change changed the requirements of 
defense acquisition, training, and facilities management programs?
    Answer. The threat of climate change requires additional resilience 
to prevent degradation of warfighting capacity and to build enduring 
advantages over our competitors. In line with the Department of Defense 
Climate Adaptation Plan and recently published National Defense 
Strategy, we are analyzing the effects climate change has on the Joint 
Force through modeling, simulation, and wargaming. The Department uses 
these results to make informed decisions on training and acquisitions 
to prepare and equip a climate-ready force. The Department has also 
developed a comprehensive set of policies, directives, and plans to 
manage the effects of climate change on its facilities. These include 
updates to the Unified Facilities Criteria for facility planning and 
operations to ensure our infrastructure is available for mission 
preparedness, military readiness, and operational success in changing 
conditions.
    Question. In what ways has your fiscal year 23 budget modified 
assumptions in prior FYDPs due to the changing environment brought 
about by the climate crisis?
    Answer. The Department's fiscal year 2023 budget prioritizes 
climate investments that enhance operational capability, mission 
resilience, and readiness. The funding is designed to improve 
installation energy and physical resilience, to increase operational 
energy efficiency and resiliency, to develop new capabilities keeping 
the U.S. military at the cutting edge of technology, and to reduce 
future operational costs.
    PB23 leverages private sector investments to increase our 
resiliency and decrease our dependence on fossil fuels by transitioning 
to electric vehicle fleets.
                                 ______
                                 
            Questions Submitted by Senator Richard C. Shelby
    Question. While the war in Ukraine has the world's attention, the 
Department's recently released National Defense Strategy ranks China as 
our primary challenge and pacing threat.
    General Milley, what lessons should the United States take from the 
war in Ukraine to apply in the Indo-Pacific region, in particular 
regarding the defense of Taiwan?
    Answer. The Joint Force is aggressively capturing lessons learned 
from Ukraine and using them to inform future requirements. Specific to 
Taiwan, I assess the most relevant lessons to be further examined are 
the importance of strong international partnerships, effective 
asymmetric defense capabilities, the impact of information warfare on 
influencing world opinion, sufficient stocks of critical munitions, and 
the criticality of a resilient society.
    Question. In your opinion, what lessons is China taking from 
Russia's performance on the battlefield?
    Answer. Beijing is seeking to gain insight from Russia's military 
failures in Ukraine to improve its own military capabilities--the PLA 
closely studies U.S. and Russian military operations for lessons 
learned. The PRC likely perceives that Russia failed to use sufficient 
force early in the conflict to decisively defeat Ukraine, which gave 
Kyiv time to establish an effective defense. Beijing likely will stress 
the importance of conducting a rapid, decisive and lethal military 
campaign, supported by effective planning, preparation, and logistical 
support. For Beijing the conflict likely has also underscored the 
challenges of conducting complex joint military operations, including 
effective command and control. The Ukraine conflict is likely also 
influence PRC assumptions about a defender's will to fight and mobilize 
for a ``people's war.'' Finally, Beijing probably views Russia's 
difficulties in conducting urban combat operations and maintaining 
security in rear areas as requiring further assessment. However, there 
is no evidence that Russia's failed invasion has changed Beijing's 
willingness to use force against Taiwan--instead, the PLA may 
incorporate these lessons into its own planning and training for a 
Taiwan invasion or other regional military conflict.
    Question. The Department's budget request seeks to execute a 
`divest to invest' strategy which potentially could shrink our combat-
credible forces by 24 ships and 150 aircraft. While I appreciate the 
need to retire certain platforms and modernize our forces for the 2030 
fight, we still have a majority of this decade immediately before us, 
and I am deeply concerned that we are short-changing near-term 
readiness for future modernization.
    General Milley, give your best military assessment of the near-term 
risks associated with the divestments proposed in the Department's 
budget request. In particular, which near- term capabilities is the 
Joint Force taking the greatest risk today to fund modernization? How 
do you intend to mitigate this risk?
    Answer. PB23 balances capacity risk in the near term with our 
modernization goals as we transition the Joint Force to meet the 
threats of tomorrow. The budget is aligned with the National Defense 
Strategy and provides for the defense of the Nation today, while 
preparing for the future.
    Retiring legacy platforms with less relevant warfighting capability 
enables the Joint Force to invest in modernization and ensures the 
readiness of our most lethal platforms to deter and, if necessary, 
defeat any strategic threat.
    We routinely assess what we need today versus what we need in the 
future to maximize Joint Force lethality against evolving threat 
environment.
    Question. Do you assess that the Joint Force is capable of 
deterring Chinese aggression today and through this decade?
    Answer. Yes, the Joint Force will continue to deter Chinese 
aggression with support to the greater Department of Defense approach 
of Integrated Deterrence--bringing in allies and partners; working 
across the conventional, nuclear, space, and informational domains; 
drawing on our reinforcing strengths in economics, in technology, and 
in diplomacy. We are shifting our military investments away from 
platforms that were designed for the conflicts of the 20th century 
toward asymmetric systems that are longer-range, harder to find, and 
easier to move. We developed the Joint Warfighting Concept 2.0 and will 
transition to doctrine in 2023. And we're diversifying our force 
posture and global footprint, fortifying our networks, critical 
civilian infrastructure, and space-based capabilities. This also 
involves assisting our allies and partners in the region with their own 
asymmetric capabilities.
                                 ______
                                 
            Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
    Question. For years, the Army have been procuring Expeditionary 
Shelter Protection Systems (ESPS), which are lightweight and easily 
erected ballistic protection systems for use against mortars and other 
indirect fires. ESPS's effectiveness was previously demonstrated when 
it protected the occupants of the US Consulate in Herat, Afghanistan in 
2013.
    Congress has invested significant sums to establish advanced 
prepositioned stocks (APS) of needed equipment in Europe--is there a 
value in ensuring this type of system is prepositioned in Europe for 
quick and ready use by American forces and NATO allies in the case of a 
conflict with Russia?
    Answer. The ESPS does provide for quick and easily erected 
ballistic protection. The ESPS has not been added to the Army 
Prepositioned Stock (APS) Program yet. The Army is assessing the 
requirement for ESPS and its applicability within APS--worldwide.
    The military services maintain pre-positioned war reserve materiel 
and stocks in many locations worldwide. It enhances the responsiveness 
and military capability of our Combatant Commands during the initial 
phase of operations. These assets also provide initial sustainment 
capability until the establishment of sustainable and enduring 
logistical lines of communications.
    Question. Fighting in Ukraine has demonstrated there may be a need 
for ESPS to protect Ukrainian fighters against indirect fires- has DoD 
given any consideration to providing this type of system to help the 
Ukrainian's protect their troops and positions from Russian indirect 
fire?
    Answer. DoD is exploring all options to help Ukrainian forces 
defend against Russian aggression. Improved protection against indirect 
Russian fires is one of the many capabilities that could be included in 
upcoming security assistance packages for Ukraine. DoD--in close 
coordination with the Interagency--bases final decisions about specific 
systems on numerous factors, foremost among these are Ukrainian 
priorities and requests, USEUCOM recommendations, and the commitments 
made by our other Allies and partners.
    Question. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has long 
supported terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and 
militias in Iraq and Syria. Do you believe that Iran's IRGC continues 
to engage in terrorism and other malign activities throughout the 
Middle East?
    Answer. Yes, Iran continues to provide close partners and proxies 
in the region with advanced weapons, direction, and UAVs, which gives 
Tehran a deniable means to attack the U.S. and our allies. 
Additionally, Iranian officials continue to perceive that they have not 
sufficiently retaliated for the death of former IRGC-QF Commander Qasem 
Soleimani, and probably are planning covert actions against U.S. 
officials in retribution in a manner that would maintain plausibly 
deniability and minimize escalation.
    Question. If the IRGC were to receive an increase of funding due to 
sanctions relief on Iran, do you believe some portion of that funding 
would likely be used to support terrorism against the U.S. or our 
allies?
    Answer. I assess that new funding would be used to support 
terrorism against the U.S. or our allies. Iran has continued its 
regional activities despite the U.S. re-imposing sanctions in 2018. 
These sanctions have impeded Tehran's access to traditional government 
funding streams, including oil and exports.
    Question. As the world's attention is understandably on what Russia 
is doing in Ukraine, it is important to maintain a strategic focus on 
the threat posed by China. What lessons are you taking away from 
Russia's war in Ukraine with respect to how the United States and 
Taiwan can deter, or defeat if necessary, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan?
    Answer. The Joint Force is aggressively capturing lessons learned 
from Ukraine and using them to inform future requirements. Specific to 
Taiwan, I assess the most relevant lessons to be further examined are 
the importance of strong international partnerships, effective 
asymmetric defense capabilities, the impact of information warfare on 
influencing world opinion, sufficient stocks of critical munitions, and 
the criticality of a resilient society.
    Question. Should the United States be considering more aggressive 
efforts to ensure Taiwan has the arms necessary to deny a potential 
Chinese invasion?
    Answer. The United States, in accordance with the Taiwan Relations 
Act and Six Assurances, will continue to explore all options and 
authorities to provide for Taiwan's defense.
    Question. You noted in your written testimony the importance of a 
properly sized and well positioned shipbuilding industrial base, and 
the Navy's shipbuilding plan correctly states that sustained and 
growing the shipbuilding industrial base is a national security 
imperative.
    One way the Pentagon can help support stability and capacity in our 
industrial base is the use of multiyear procurement contracts. I 
strongly support the need for Congress to authorize a new multiyear 
contract for fifteen DDG-51 Flight III destroyers, as well as the need 
for additional industrial base support for our shipbuilders, which will 
ensure we can maintain the capacity to build the ships we need to 
counter China.
    Answer. The Joint Force supports smart acquisition strategies and 
is committed to achieving the best value possible. This includes using 
multi-year and multi-ship procurements when those acquisition 
strategies support the National Defense Strategy and warfighting 
requirements. The Department uses block buys, multi-ship, or multi-year 
procurements when allowed by Title 10 to aid in delivering cost-
effective capacity and to provide predictability to the industrial 
base.
    Question. Can you elaborate on the importance of our shipbuilding 
industrial base in accomplishing the National Defense Strategy and 
competing with China?
    Answer. America's maritime superiority guarantees security and 
prosperity across the world's oceans, and ensures global commerce 
remains protected. Our nation's maritime superiority is fundamental to 
implementing the National Defense Strategy, and the shipbuilding 
industrial base is vital to providing credible naval forces to preserve 
our national interests and prevail in combat.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Senator Tester. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene on 
Tuesday, May 10, at 10 a.m. to hear from Secretary of the Army 
and the Army Chief of Staff.
    This committee stands in recess.
    [Whereupon, at 11:49 a.m., Tuesday, May 3, the subcommittee 
was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 10.]