 Today we will continue our posture hearings with INDO PAYCOM and US Forces Korea. I want to thank our witnesses for being here in their service to our nation. Gentlemen, you can be seated. The Indo-Pacific is our nation, has some of our nation's greatest threats. In North Korea, we have a madman who would rather build illegal nuclear arsenal than feed his own starving people. Late last year, Kim Jong-un declared he was abandoning the longstanding policy of achieving unification with South Korea. He announced that South Korea is now, quote, a hostile country, close quote, and that North Korea can legally annihilate them. Alarmingly, he backed up this hyperbole by testing new nuclear-capable missile technology. Tests included a strategic cruise missile, submarine-launched cruise missile, and a solid-fuel ballistic missile with maneuverable reentry vehicle. Each of these missiles were designed to disrupt our ability to detect them and to evade our missile defenses. I'm very concerned the advances in Kim's missile technology is the result of a strengthening alliance with Vladimir Putin. Since August, North Korea has shipped millions of artillery shells, rockets, and ballistic missiles to Russia, while Russia supplies energy back to North Korea. Putin is testing missiles on the battlefield of Ukraine with deadly effect. And Kim is using this firsthand knowledge to improve his missile technology and tactics, something he'll rely on if war erupts on the Korean Peninsula. But Kim is not the only Asian ally Putin has cultivated to support his illegal invasion of Ukraine. Shortly after the invasion, Putin and President Xi entered into a quote, no limits, closed quote, partnership. And while China has not yet provided weapons to Russia, Xi is providing Putin with critical economic and security assistance. This includes dual-use materials and components for weapons. Xi can afford to do so because he continues to invest heavily on building a modern military. Earlier this month, the PRC announced it was raising its defense budget by 7.2% in 2024. It's the third year in a row in which China has increased defense spending by 7% or more. This unprecedented level of defense spending is paying off. The PLA is fielding modern military systems like hypersonic weapons and fifth-generation fighters. They can project power well into the Pacific with a 340-ship Navy that includes a new aircraft carrier and nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines. They've improved their ability to conduct joint operations with more realistic exercises and new AI-driven technologies that will shorten the kill chain. And they're building a modern nuclear arsenal at a dizzying rate. China's extraordinary military buildup is certainly concerning. But what's most alarming is the increasingly provocative actions Xi has taken in recent years, such as pushing out China's borders with new defense agreements and military bases on foreign nations, threatening our allies in the region with reckless ship and aircraft intercepts, and attempting to coerce Taiwan with military exercises and a near-daily airspace incursions simulating an invasion of the island. We have no choice but to take Xi's threats seriously. And we have to be resolute in our response. We need to accelerate our own military modernization. We need to enhance training and readiness in the region. And we need to better distribute logistics throughout the Pacific. But we won't prevail in any conflict with the CCP on our own. We need to expand and strengthen our partnerships in the region. We need to better arm our allies with agreements like AUKUS. And we need to expedite the delivery of arms and training to a Taiwan so they can better defend their democracy. I look forward to our hearing from our witnesses on their assessment of the threats and what support they will need from this committee to deter them. And with that, I yield to the ranking member for an opening statement he may have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity. I appreciate your opening statement. I want to thank our witnesses, and particularly Admiral Aquilino, I believe this will be your last time before us in a posture hearing as Change Command is coming up soon. You've been a tremendous partner. Great to work with, certainly, on the committee and the cabinet for those of us who have visited the region. We can see the incredible work you're doing to advance U.S. interests. We really appreciate that. I understand it might also be General LaCama's last appearance, how the Change Command goes. It could be a little unpredictable around here, as we've all learned in the last year, but we really appreciate all of your service to our country. And I want to really emphasize one of the points of the Chairman's statement. And that is North Korea, China, Russia, and how our adversaries are beginning to more and more align. The Indo-Pacific is an incredibly important region. We've had this ongoing debate about what's the number one priority and the pivot to Asia and a whole bunch of other debates. What I hope we all recognize is how interconnected it all is at this point. Sadly, and we can throw Iran and other terrorist organizations like Hamas into that equation, they are beginning to coordinate to try to thwart our role in the world and advance their very, very troubling agenda for the world. As we've seen what Russia has done in Ukraine, we've seen what Iran has done throughout the Middle East, we've seen the things that the Chairman just mentioned about China and North Korea. It is all interconnected, but certainly the Indo-Pacific region is one of the central parts of this focus. And that focus is to deter our adversaries. And in that part of the world, that's China and North Korea. I think we've made a lot of advancements. Just in the last year or two, and working with partners in the region to be able to deter those adversaries. And I want to just start there and make a couple of comments about that before shifting specifically to the US. Those partnerships are crucial. We are not going to be able to deter that alliance that I just described on our own. We will need partners and allies in the world. And building up those partnerships is crucial. Certainly helping build up the capability of Taiwan to directly deter China is crucial. Building up South Korea, but also so many other partners in the region. The work that has been done to bring Japan and South Korea closer together, working together, has been incredibly important in the last year, the role that Australia is playing, the AUKUS agreement that we reached with them, the Quad, working with Australia, Japan, India, along with us, the work that has been done just in the last year to improve so much our relations with the Philippines that have become part of that. Those partnerships and alliances are going to be crucial to deterring China. And it is a very clear vision. We want a rules-based international order. It's not perfect. It's not always going to work out exactly right, but there is some structure to it. China right now, and I mean to add up the number of countries, but it's somewhere between six and 12 countries in which China claims territory that is now the sovereign territory of other nations. It is not just Taiwan. Ironically, one of those countries is Russia. I'm interested to see how they work that out in the future. But China basically wants to bully their way across the globe without any respect for any rules. We need to work with all those countries in the world that understand what a threat that is, not just to US interests, but to global interests. On our specific efforts, I know Admiral Aquilino has submitted an unfunded requirements list that has talked about some of the other capabilities he needs, but from our witnesses, I'd be really interested to hear the capabilities that we most need to build up to make sure that the US is playing its role, but then also linking those capabilities to what our partners can potentially bring to that deterrent capability as well. So the really interesting part of the world, I look forward to the testimony from our witnesses. Again, I thank them all for their service, and I thank the chairman for holding this hearing, and I yield back. Thank you. I think the ranking member, introduce our witnesses. First, we have the honorable Eli Ratner, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs, Admiral John Aquilino, US Commander, United States Indo-Pacific Command, and that is gonna be your last time testified, and your service to our country has been admirable, and we gonna miss you. I don't think you gonna miss us, but we gonna miss you. General, the camera is the commander of United Nations Command Korea, and US Combined Forces Command, US Forces Korea. Also, you have done a great service to our nation, and I appreciate you, and I hope this is not your last time before us. But we'll start with Dr. Ratner. You're recognized for five minutes. Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today about how the Department of Defense is strengthening peace, stability, and deterrence across the Indo-Pacific region. I'm pleased to be joined today by Admiral Aquilino and General LaCamera for what will likely mark our last time sharing a witness table together, and I wanna thank both of my colleagues for their years of military service to the United States, including as we have worked together closely these past three years. Mr. Chairman, in 2022, the National Defense Strategy identified the People's Republic of China as the department's top pacing challenge. Since then, Russia's lawless war in Ukraine has continued into its third year. We've seen an outbreak of instability across the Middle East, and the DPRK continues to engage in destabilizing behavior. At the same time, the department's fundamental assessment of the PRC has not changed. The PRC continues to present the most comprehensive and serious challenge to our national security. That's because the PRC remains the only country with the will and increasingly the capability to dominate the Indo-Pacific region and displace the United States. Today, the PRC is pursuing its revisionist goals with increasingly coercive activities in the Taiwan Strait, in the South and East China Seas, and along the line of actual control with India and beyond. But as I have said here before, conflict in the Indo-Pacific region is neither imminent nor inevitable, and the department is doing more than ever to keep it that way with the help of U.S. allies and partners. First, we are supporting our regional friends as they strengthen their own capabilities. In just the past year, for example, we have announced landmark bilateral agreements with Australia, India, and Japan to co-produce or acquire advanced capabilities that will strengthen deterrence across the region. Second, we're building on historic momentum with our allies and partners toward a regional force posture that is more mobile, distributed, resilient, and lethal. In the past year, we have continued to implement major announcements with Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, and Australia, and we've concluded a new bilateral defense cooperation agreement with Papua New Guinea. Thanks to the leadership of members here, the United States will also extend the economic assistance at the heart of our compacts of free association with three key Pacific Island partners into the 2040s. Third, we're building new initiatives that deepen ties between our Indo-Pacific friends. For example, after President Biden's Camp David Summit with President Yoon of the ROK and Prime Minister Kishida of Japan, our three countries delivered on a multi-year trilateral exercise plan, and we fully activated a real-time DPRK missile warning data-sharing mechanism. With Australia, we are working together to integrate Japan into our force posture initiatives. With Thailand and Indonesia, our marquee bilateral exercises have expanded to feature participation from across the region, and we're investing in the next generation of regional defense leadership with our friends in ASEAN. Finally, we're delivering cutting-edge capabilities in the near term and investing in the capabilities our military will need to maintain deterrence in the long term. That's why the President's budget seeks major funding for our air power, sea and undersea power, nuclear triad modernization, space capabilities, cybersecurity, and more. We're also developing new operational concepts that will integrate these capabilities, enhance our warfighting advantages, and ultimately strengthen deterrence. Mr. Chairman, with the support of Congress, the Department has delivered significant results in recent years to strengthen peace, stability, and deterrence in the Indo-Pacific. Even so, we remain clear-eyed about the substantial and growing challenges ahead, and we know that meeting them will require heightened urgency, attention, resources, and strong partnership with Capitol Hill. Thank you for your time and attention, and I look forward to your questions. I thank you. Thank you, Dr. Ratner. Admiral Lino, you're recognized. Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, and the distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to be here again this year. This will be my last time, Chairman. I will miss all of you. We've had many great interactions, and I hope to be available if you need me in the future. I do want to thank my family for their support during the most challenging tour that I've had in my time. And after 40 years of service, I can unequivocally state that the sacrifice our service members make is a family affair, and I couldn't have done this job without mine. Well, you should spend just a moment. Well, y'all, I would like somebody from the staff to stand outside this door and make sure we keep it closed and ask people who have ingress and ingress to come through the any room. I'm sorry, Admiral. Go ahead. Thanks again, Chairman. The last three years have been the honor of my lifetime, commanding our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, guardians, Coast Guard men, and the civilians who work tirelessly alongside our allies and partners to keep the nation safe and to ensure free and open Indo-Pacific. And I need to thank all of you, our work together and your support, especially in establishing the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. The American people should know that your efforts to focus our country's resources on addressing the most pressing national security challenge our nation has ever faced are making a difference. But we have much more to do and we have to go faster. When I assumed command, we established the CZ Initiative approach to implement the national defense strategy. In order to deter our adversaries, we challenged the Joint Force to think, act, and operate differently. And we all ought to do that. While progress has been made, the risk is still high and it is trending in the wrong direction. CZ Initiative has been challenged by the delayed delivery of construction, advanced capabilities, and in some cases, resources to persistently project and maintain forces west of the international dateline. While modernization of the force and the development of new concepts are essential to our ability to deter, we need to move at the speed of relevance and the pace required to address the rapidly evolving security environment. As required by the NDAA, I have provided my independent assessment of IndoPaycom's resourcing requirements to inform the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. And for three years, the requirements we've submitted have been transparent and consistent. That said, I acknowledge the requirements have grown and that's due to a couple of things. First, unfunded lists roll over and get included in the requirement. So anything previously unfunded shows up. Second, as we develop, as we shift from planning and design funds to military construction, those costs increase. Third, inflation that we're all dealing with. And then lastly, and most importantly, the threat has continued to grow and accelerate. In last year's submission, we highlighted the fact that we expected the ask to increase. So I'll be ready to discuss that if anybody would like to. I continue to reiterate that the requirements outlined in the assessment have been consistent, 90 plus percent the same for three years. As I've said many times, I agree with Secretary Ratner's assessment that the conflict is not imminent or inevitable. But our potential adversaries have become increasingly aggressive and emboldened. The PRC's unprecedented military buildup and a campaign of coercion actions continue to destabilize the region. And they challenge the values and institutions that support a free and open Indo-Pacific. We must continue to build upon the progress achieved in the last few years and we need to accelerate fielding the key joint capabilities described in my assessment. These include the Guam defense system, our joint fires network and decision superiority capabilities as an office and the rest of our multilateral agreements with our partners. And as I prepare to depart, again, I do want to thank the Congress for your focus, your challenges and the many interactions that I've had with almost all of you during my three years here. My successor will need your support as well. And I know you will be prepared to give it to him. Chairman, Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity and I look forward to your questions. Thank you Admiral, General LeCamer, you're recognized. Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith and distinguished members of the committee. It remains my distinct honor to sit before you today as the commander of United States Forces Korea, Combined Forces Command and the United Nations Command. I want to express my sincere appreciation for your unwavering support to our service members, our civilians, our contractors, our interagency colleagues and all of our families overseas and those who wait at home. We can never take our eye off the solemn responsibility to take care of those who have raised their right hand to defend our constitution and our way of life including our families who did not volunteer but served nonetheless. I'm prepared to discuss those in the security environment on the Korean Peninsula. It was just over 70 years ago that a China supported, Russia spurned and opportunistic communist North Korea decided to illegally invade the South, plunging Korea into a very costly armed conflict that is ongoing today. 22 United Nations States came to the aid of the Republic of Korea then and 17 of them continue to support Armistice Enforcement today through the United Nations Command. Defending forward in this strategic location allows us to better protect our people, the Korean people, our homelands and reinforce the United States ironclad commitment to the Republic of Korea. Situated on the Asian continent, the Korean Peninsula shares a Northern border with both China and Russia. Although UN Security Council resolutions have levied strict sanctions against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, they have found refuge in their alliance with the People's Republic of China and their revitalized partnership with Russia. In the last year, DPRK has continued developing its military capabilities, including solid fuel ballistic missile technology which violates sanctions. Some of the missile systems that North Korea has been testing threaten countries worldwide. North Korea has also been providing military material support to Russia, assisting in Russia's illegal and indefensible invasion of Ukraine. These relationships have allowed the DPRK to circumvent sanctions, build their weapons program, illegally further missile technology, sustain their cyber crime-derived economy and threaten the international rules-based order. During the same time, the U.S. Rock Alliance continued to adapt to meet the evolving challenges. In April of 2023, the presidents of two countries signed the Washington Declaration of reaffirming our commitment to mutual defense. They also announced the establishment of the Nuclear Consultative Group to strengthen extended deterrence, discuss nuclear strategic planning and manage the DPRK threat. We have taken substantial and concrete steps to follow through on those commitments. The Republic of Korea has organized its own strategic command, giving us another arrow in our quiver. There have been multiple strategic asset deployments to the Korean Peninsula, including a nuclear ballistic missile submarine and the first B-52 landing in the last 40 years. In August of 2023, the presidents of the U.S., Republic of Korea and the Prime Minister of Japan met at Camp David for a trilateral summit. This historically significant meeting recognized the importance of advancing the security and prosperity of our people. We have made significant progress and follow-through on the commitments made during the summit, including steps toward the sharing of real-time missile warning data, increased trilateral exercises on the sea, and introduction of trilateral air and cyber exercises. Over the past three years, my thinking on operations, activities, and investments continue to evolve. However, what has not changed is my focus protecting our homelands, preparing for combat, and taking care of people. Since readiness is perishable, I will never be satisfied with our level of training and preparedness. As the Republic of Korea and U.S. conduct regular military training activities on the peninsula, I am convinced that DPRK is not only reacting to our activities, but in many ways mirroring them. We must continue to build physical, mental, and spiritual readiness through operations and activities designed to compete in the gray zone with DPRK. To defend the rock, we must continue to invest in the 28,500 service members, including by, try, and multilateral exercises on and off the peninsula, multi-domain training integrating live virtual and constructive entities, and continue to experiment with next-generation capabilities in the exact environment where they will be employed. To maintain the armistice agreement, our ironclad commitment, and maintain our combat readiness, we need your continued support and recognition of the threat to the homeland. It is an honor to serve in these three commands. Once again, thank you for all your support, and I look forward to your questions. Thank all the witnesses for their open statements. I recognize myself for the first questions. Admiral Acollino, we've seen a growing security cooperation between China and Russia, Iran, and North Korea, especially with respect to the war in Ukraine. What level of concern do you have about this building, a budding alliance? And particularly if Russia were to be successful in Ukraine, what do you think that alliance could yield? Thank you, Chairman. Again, I've described the security environment as the most dangerous I've seen in 40 years in uniform, and a big portion of that are the cooperation, number one, between the PRC and Russia. Again, in President Xi's words, a relationship that has not been seen in 100 years. And we should listen to him when he speaks. They tell us what they're thinking about. So that cooperation from those two authoritarian nations puts us in a different security environment. So I'm very concerned about that. It's amplified, as General Likamer said, with regard to the DPRK supporting Russian in the form of ballistic missiles and other munitions and capabilities. My sense is this is a way to combat the broadened United States' alliance's partnerships with our like-minded allies and partners around the region. This is their counter, but I articulated, we're almost back to the axis of evil when you plug in Iran to this problem set. That set of cooperation is concerning, and it should be concerning to the whole globe. So we ought to act accordingly. We ought to listen to what they say. We need to absolutely, and we do every day, watch what they do. But we do believe the strategy's right, and our operations that we're executing are delivering the right message, which is the United States Joint Force, combined with our allies and partners, is the strongest military power on the planet. General, can you give us your assessment of North Korea's intentions? I know we've been seeing some actions from them recently. Given the provocative behavior we've seen from them lately, do you have any kind of vision into what you think their intentions are? Yes, Chairman, I think his top and state priority is regime survivability, and he's developing weapons of mass destruction for that. He's looking for sanctions relief, and he's preparing to defend his nation, his top priorities. So you don't see, as far as your view of things, any anticipated aggression against the South? The actions right now, as I stated in my opening statement, Ukraine's own activities, military's trained. He's got a military, he's coming out of COVID just like everybody else. He's in his winter training cycle right now, and he's testing equipment, and he's also having Russia test some of his equipment by providing that for the fight in Ukraine. Secretary Ratner, what do you think the biggest challenge is we're going to have in helping Taiwan develop its capabilities to defend itself? Congressman, we are working as absolutely rapidly as we can to fulfill our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act. One thing that we have spoken about here before is the question of resources and providing Taiwan with the security assistance it needs, and I know that between the presidential budget for 2024, for 2025, and the National Security Supplemental Congress is considering both enhanced foreign military financing and presidential drawdown authority backfill for Taiwan security assistance, and that would be one way that we could strengthen their resilience and strengthen deterrence. Chair yields to the ranking member for any questions he may have. Thank you. Dr. Ratner and Admiral Aquilino start with you on something we haven't talked that much about, and that's India and the role that they play in all of this. I see them as crucial. I wouldn't partner, certainly, but also a little bit of a swing vote in that they have a relationship, certainly with Russia. They have relationships across the world with many of our adversaries. Getting them to work with us more going forward I think is crucial to meeting our needs. How would you describe our relationship with India, the way they look at the world, and what we need to be doing to enhance our relationship with India? Ranking Member Smith, I would describe the U.S.-India relationship as growing and stronger than it's ever been, and absolutely essential to our vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific. We have been strengthening a number of areas across the relationship, including in co-production, where we've made some major strides on jet engines, some new projects on armored vehicles to integrate our defense industrial base, which is one important way to make those bonds all the stronger. We've been working at the Department to strengthen the relationships between our private sectors, particularly in defense technologies, and we have some really important new initiatives to be doing that. Admiral Aquilino has been leading a number of important exercises and operations with the Indians that are enhancing our operational coordination, and our defense trade now is valued at over $20 billion. And India recently announced their decision to acquire over 30 MQ9Bs, and that's part of, again, a growing defense relationship between our countries that couldn't be more important. Chair Admiral Aquilino. Yeah, Congressman, thanks. I was in India two and a half weeks ago to visit with my partners and to continue to work our mill-to-mill channels together. So, number one, it's the largest democracy on the planet, and we have many overlapping values. We also have overlapping interests, although we don't have always the same interests. We, military to military, we have been executing much more increased operations and exercises together. They are working towards becoming more interoperable. They've bought our helicopters. They have C-130s as we do, and we continue to expand, both bilaterally and multilaterally, our actions and exercises with them. And how do you feel the calculation? The biggest alarm bell in all of this is the BRICS countries, which obviously includes Russia and China, but India is a big part of that, and so they're working in that relationship, which is challenging in and of itself, but when those BRICS countries decided to allow Iran to join them, what do you think India's calculation is in terms of, I understand a little bit Russia and China, but why would India be part of empowering Iran in that way? Ranking members, part of India's strategic identity, as you know, is as a member of the Global South, they aspire toward an international system based on a principle of multipolarity, and that is reflected in part of their foreign policy, but on balance, they have been trending towards strategic convergence with the United States, and I think we do share a vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific, and we're going to do whatever we can to nurture in advance that part of their orientation. Yeah, then don't misunderstand me. I see Iran as a valuable, crucial partner, and I agree with that. I just think we need to better understand some of their motivations if we're going to move them in the right direction, and then just quickly, Admiral Aquilino, could you give us your current assessment of how China is looking at the Taiwan question? Where do you put the risk? How do you think they're deciding, you know, whether or not to launch a military attack? Thanks, ranking member Smith. So my view is that China would absolutely like to assimilate Taiwan without a war, and that is evident by their increasingly aggressive coercive campaign against Taiwan, increasingly deploying ships in the vicinity, crossing the centerline with their air assets, entering their aid is with their aircraft, adjusting flight paths from China to get much more closer to Taiwan. They're taking all actions to attempt to get the Taiwan's to capitulate. Now, I don't see that happening. To back that up, their intent is to build military capability capacity should they need to take action. And as you know, coming out of the last two meetings, they have not over the past number of years just announced the use of force. They continue to keep it on the table. So that's how I see it today. I apologize. I'm out of time. Thank you. I thank the ranking member. We'll now go to Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank each of you for being here today. And Admiral Aquilino, it's good to be back with you. We appreciate your service so much. I'm the only member of Congress still serving who has had the opportunity, sadly, to visit Pyongyang, North Korea. I saw firsthand the oppression of the people of North Korea. It's beyond comprehension, the subjugation of the people there. And when you compare it to South Korea, which is the exact opposite, a country of opportunity for its citizens, and the contrast per capita income is pretty clear. And North Korea is $967. South Korea is $44,000. You can't have a clear example in the world of difference between socialism and capitalism. With that in mind, you've stated that North Korea is hoping to leverage their assistance providing 155 artillery shells to war criminal Putin to murder Ukrainians. And North Korea wants to receive nuclear and ballistic missile capability. What evidence do we have of this exchange of information? We certainly have intelligence information that has shown the support from North Korea to Russia. I'll turn it over to General Le Camre in a second. And that's pretty concerning. And as you've stated, Congressman, all of that technology and all of the funding that Russia might be putting into North Korea continues to go to their military buildup and not their people and to feed them. So that is a concern. Let me turn it over to General Le Camre. Thanks, Congressman. And it was good seeing you on the peninsula last month. The evidence, we're still digging into exactly what is being provided back. But KJU has an opportunity with the Russians right now to have some of his technology tested on the battlefield. And not just his missile technology, but his artillery and others. Well, to me, it's really concerning. Obviously, it's a direct threat to the people of South Korea, to Japan, but the ICBM capability to attack and threaten American families. And so whatever you can do, we appreciate. And Dr. Ratner, I'm concerned that there are reports of the People's Liberation Army training at a former U.S. military base in Panama with the Chinese military personnel, possibly 20,000, crossing the southern border into the United States. What information do you have about the training in Panama and what is the training level and is this a danger to American families? Congressman, I haven't seen that report. I'm not aware of a major PLA deployment to Latin America, but I will take that back and respond to you in an appropriate setting. Well, it's so critically important and connecting the dots is really not that difficult. And that is that if there's a training facility, if there are People's Liberation Army personnel being trained there, and then persons of Chinese military age unaccompanied are coming into the United States due to Biden open borders, every American family is at risk, and this should be a priority of the Indo-Pacific as to the deployment of troops from the Chinese Communist Party. It's that important. Admiral Aquilino, as we see the attack of war criminal Putin on democracy of Ukraine, we are so concerned as to the efforts by war criminal Putin and also their allies of Iran and Chinese Communist Party. What's your assessment of what the editorial governments are gaining by supporting war criminal Putin invasion of Ukraine? So Congressman Wilson, thanks. Again, this kind of goes back to Chairman Roger's question on the linkage between Russia and the PRC. The PRC is certainly watching that conflict and they're gaining a lot of lessons learned on what gets done right, what gets done wrong. The combination of the two supporting each other, whether it be in the information space or in the UN, is concerning, right? You have a lineup behind the war criminal that you've identified by other nations which legitimizes the actions and we have to ensure that we don't support that assertion. Well, again, it's just so important connecting the dots again, it's so easy. War criminal Putin was in Beijing prior to February 22nd, 2022, the invasion of Ukraine to get a green light with that in mind. I yield but thank you for your service. It's more important than ever a worldwide invasion of dictators into democracies. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, can I just respond to that question quickly? Just a quick intervention because there has been this dialogue about the connection between the theaters and I think it is really important to underscore the degree to which standing with Ukraine will help strengthen deterrence in the Indo-Pacific. It will demonstrate that there are costs and consequences for this kind of violence and that the free world will come together if you look at what U.S. allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific are doing to support Ukraine. That says a lot. From the ROK to Japan to Singapore to Australia, all of these countries are providing support in one way or another to Ukraine because they believe what happens there matters strategically for them in the Indo-Pacific. It's an unintended positive consequence just like Sweden and Finland. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. I will now go to Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Whitman. And thank you to all the witnesses and I want to join my colleagues in terms of expressing our respect and admiration for Admiral Aquilino's service and the fact that he's always, I think, understood that we are an independent, separate branch of government and your testimony has always been accordingly treated us in that fashion. Admiral Aquilino, yourself and your predecessors, Admiral Harris and Admiral Davidson have repeatedly testified at these hearings over the years to stress the importance of our submarine programs in the Indo-Pacific. And page 21 of your testimony talks about how it's the undersea domain is getting a little more crowded out there with Russia now with a Pacific fleet. The severed events can upgraded kilos that are out there. Can you just express again for the record how critical is the mission of U.S. attack submarines in maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific? Certainly, Congressman, thanks. Again, the United States' asymmetric advantage of undersea capabilities, we are second to none and that is a domain that we need to maintain superiority. We need to maintain capacity and we need to maintain the industrial base that supports it. So again, I should say as you work the supplemental, thank you very much for the $3 billion identified towards supporting the industrial base. The Indo-Pacific, Taiwan, and as Dr. Ratner said, the linkage between the Ukraine support and the support for the Indo-Pacific can't be separated. But we need to maintain those investments in the undersea sets of capabilities because they allow us to be dominant. No, and I agree with you about the submarine industrial base funding, which again is spread between not just production but also maintenance, which is a critical effort that we need to protect. But as Admiral Harris used to say over and over again, quantity is also quality in terms of our fleet. We have a budget that came over that will decommission three Los Angeles-class submarines and cut procurement from two to one, the first time in 13 years. And I just, again, in terms of just looking out at our commitments that we just made, which I enthusiastically support in terms of the ACA sales of three submarines in the 2030s, can you just comment in terms of how you see that budget fits in or doesn't fit in in terms of the next few decades? Thanks, sir. So again, with the capabilities that the PRC are producing, delivering, and continue to support, their numbers and their capability and capacity are increasing. That's a conscious decision by the CCP to support a 7.2% defense increase despite an economy that is on the decline. And I agree, we are at a point where the capability being produced does have a quality all of its own as it applies with capacity. It is the world's largest Navy right now. It is soon to be the world's largest Air Force as they continue to produce. So across all joint force capabilities, don't support a reduction of capacity in the theater so that we can continue to deliver the deterrent effects we need. Thank you. I mean, this is not the budget hearing at this point, but clearly the top line for the Virginia and shipbuilding in general is lower than 2024. And as I said, the net numbers really, I think have raised tremendous concerns amongst our colleagues really quickly. You know, we've seen in recent news accounts about the fact that, you know, Philippine fishermen are getting rammed in the East China Sea area and South China Sea area. Can you comment about whether there's any, like even version of a mill to mill communication trying to sort of reduce these types of episodes and incidents, either with the Philippines and the Chinese Navy or the U.S. or Indo-Pay-Com? So there are procedures in place to avoid dangerous and unsafe accidents. We've been doing it for decades. Call regs is that current environment or procedural set of guidance. Additionally, with the PRC, we have the United States has a code for unplanned encounters at sea. That should also separate and avoid those things. The Philippines can use those. They have communicated with the PRC, yet the PRC continues to execute this belligerent dangerous and aggressive activity to prevent Filipino fishermen from executing their rights inside of their exclusive economic zone at Scarborough Shoal. And they have also prevented the resupply of the Philippine forces on Sierra Madre at Second Thomas Shoal. Those are not based in legality. The 2016 Tribunal has ruled that the PRC has no legal claim to the area of Second Thomas Shoal. Yet they continue to drive a perception that and they articulate that that is Chinese sovereign territory. It is not. I thank Mr. Courtney and I will now go to Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for testifying. Admiral, I would like to congratulate you on your upcoming retirement and for four decades of service to our country. Admiral Aquilino, when you appeared before this committee last year, I said that accelerating the development of our offensive and defensive hypersonic capabilities was a top priority. My colleagues agreed and Congress mandated that we field a defensive capability by 2029. Last year, the director of the Missile Defense Agency Vice Admiral Hill testified that pushing the fielding of the glide phase interceptor into the 2030s does not meet the threat. Do you agree with Admiral Hill, first of all, Admiral Aquilino? Thanks, Congressman Lamborn. So from the Indo-PACOM position, I've articulated the requirement and it's been consistent for five years, which is a 360-degree integrated air and missile defense capability for Guam that would protect our citizens and protect the forces that we need, and that includes ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missile threats. So the requirement has remained consistent. The ASC has been articulated in my last three reports and the two reports that Admiral Davidson submitted before me. This gets to my testimony, which is we must go faster and I've articulated that needs to be in place by 2027. Okay, I like that, 2027, because I'm concerned because not only did the Missile Defense Agency recommend ending the SM-3 Block 1B program. We can talk about that in a minute, but also delaying the glide phase interceptor until 2035. That's eight years later than 2027. So that's not responsive to the needs of Indo-PACOM, is it? Again, sir, I'm the guy who articulates the requirements and I've said those have been said very clearly and consistently. Again, this goes to the fact that we all need to go faster. Okay, and are you also concerned about the recommendation in the fiscal year 25 budget request to terminate the primary sea-based missile defense interceptor in the fleet, the SM-3 Block 1B? For the requirements that I've set, Congressman, it doesn't matter to me what provides it. If there are capabilities that deliver to provide those defense against crews, ballistic and hypersonic threats, I'm going to be okay. So I'll have to go back and look at that particular weapon and effector to see if it impacts what we need based on the requirements. I haven't heard that there's a concern at this point. Well, if you could get back to us on that, that would be very helpful. We also know, for instance, from Dr. McCormick testifying in front of us Strategic Forces Subcommittee hearing that China has the world's leading hypersonic arsenal, that we are falling behind China in that particular regard. Can you explain the value of having a conventional, offensive, hypersonic capability that Indo-Pyte Paycom could use? To execute the strategy and to deliver the different deterrent effects we need, Congressman, it's combined through what we talk about as decision superiority. Again, the Chinese will continue to develop weapons that they believe have advantage and deliver vulnerabilities to the United States. We need to negate those vulnerabilities and we need to take advantage of our capabilities that outmatch theirs. So the criteria that I've asked for and the way we talk about decision superiority is in the form of blind sea and kill. I need to prevent the adversary from being able to close their kill chains against our forces. That's the blind piece. The sea is persistent awareness and understanding of everything in the battle space at every second, real time. And then the kill are the networks and the effectors are weapons that allow me to deliver effects if tasked such that we can act and deliver those effects at speed well in advance of our adversary. Specifically, would Indo-Pyte Paycom be able to use a conventional, offensive, hypersonic capability and would having that somehow be destabilizing even though China has that as well today? Yeah, we have certainly identified the need for that. There are some capabilities that exist. The Chinese have put production capability in their place and we must get to that same place. I don't think it would be destabilizing. Thank you so much. I yield back. I think Mr. Lamborn will now go to Ms. Jacobs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to our witnesses. I wanted to first talk about Papua New Guinea. As you know, in April 2022, the Biden administration identified Papua New Guinea as a partner country to prevent conflict and promote stability pursuant to the Global Fragility Act. Last year, the administration released a 10-year strategy. As part of that strategy, the interagency has committed to improve justice systems and professionalized security forces. The GFA requires the interagency to align all activities in priority countries. So, Assistant Secretary Ratner and Admiral Aquilino, can you both discuss the ways in which IndoPaycom is prioritizing its engagement in Papua New Guinea to professionalize security forces and promote justice and accountability and how you're coordinating with the State Department and USAID on those activities? Maybe I'll start and turn it over to Admiral Aquilino. Thank you for the question. And in fact, last week I had the opportunity to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee alongside Assistant Secretary Crittenbrink from the State Department and Michael Schiffer from USAID on the Pacific Islands in particular to talk about the whole-of-government approach. Because as it relates to the Pacific Islands, only three of them have militaries. We do security cooperation throughout the region. But this is very much an effort in which our development finance and diplomacy are front and center. So those, we coordinate with them very closely. As it relates to Papua New Guinea in particular, as you know, last year we signed a Defense Cooperation Agreement, a historic agreement with Papua New Guinea. I had the opportunity to travel down there with Secretary Austin for the first visit ever by a Secretary of Defense to Papua New Guinea. And we have managed to sign a new shipwriter agreement that allows for Coast Guard cooperation. We can help them with maritime domain awareness. And we are working under the Defense Cooperation Agreement to strengthen their own capability as well as to explore possible access and infrastructure opportunities for the United States, both maritime and air. And I know Indo-Picom site survey teams have made one trip down there already late last year and are going to be executing a second one soon. So we're moving out on that agreement. Congresswoman, I've been to Papua New Guinea twice and I hosted the delegation that negotiated the DCA at my house prior to the agreement. That's the amount of importance that I take as it applies to PNG. Historically, if you go back to World War II, we operated from bases there, both airfields and seaports. And it's critical for the support that we would need. Plus, the people there are wonderful and they have many of the same values that we do of freedoms and the desire to have a voice free of coercion. What we've done to date, Dr. Ratner highlighted, I have teams there in L.A. that have identified what it looks like to take the next step, which is to support construction of capabilities. And we're going to continue to work to build those out, assuming that the funding is authorized and appropriated. So really important. Thank you. And thank you for that. We'll continue monitoring since the Global Fragility Act implementation is a big priority of mine. I wanted to ask quickly to both of you again about the new Bravo AI battle lab that IndoPaycom is creating. And if you could talk more about that and in particular how you're working to ensure warfighters have a clear process for reporting any new technologies in the AI space that aren't working or aren't functioning as reliably or responsibly as we had intended once they're in use. Yeah, I think that one's for me, Congresswoman. Thanks. So that battle lab is used to develop and build our joint fires network. I talked about the kill, which is both the network and the weapons that allow me to close kill chains across great distances. We've linked that with DARPA through the previous Assault Breaker II program. Support from Ms. Shu and R&E from ANS, from CDAO, and we're pulling that together in my headquarters through our Joint Mission Acceleration Directorate to deliver those capabilities you're talking about. And we're trying to get to best of breed. So we've pulled all of the service programs in and we're trying to integrate those into a joint capability, whether it be convergence, overmatch, or ABMS, along with the data that's coming from NSA and our other exquisite sources. We need to pull that together fast and deliver a capability. And we're going to demonstrate the first version of that of JFN in Valiant Shield in 24. The team has worked incredibly hard and at a pace that I don't think anyone else could have matched. I'd like to thank Ms. Jacobs. I now recognize myself for five minutes. Gentlemen, thanks again for joining us. Admiral Aquilino, earlier you spoke to the unfunded priorities list. We appreciate that based upon 1302 requirements. We know you're very thoughtful about prioritizing and protecting the homeland. One of the things you pointed out, too, was building capability and capacity quickly. I would call it at the speed of relevance to increase the risk and uncertainty for the Chinese to make sure that when Xi wakes up every morning, he says, no, not today. One of the aspects where we can build that quickly is in relation to what we know is a vast domestic industrial complex in China that can do traditional military construction, those exquisite system construction much faster than we can and in a much greater scale. The one place that I think holds great promise is us being able to use our technology and innovation in the realm of expendable and attributable platforms. Can you give us your perspective about how we pursue that enterprise in the context of your 1302 requirements? And is there value in talking about in the acquisition process, creating some guardrails here to say, listen, we ought to acquire systems within these price guardrails so that we actually get maximum utility and we send the right demand signal to those innovators and creators out there, whether it's for attributable platforms or exquisite platforms. Thanks, Congressman. So first let me start by thanking Secretary Hicks for the initiation of the Replicator Program. It's exactly what you're talking about. That billion two is in my 1302 report because it's critical to our concept and the ability to deliver multiple dilemmas and problem sets should there be activity by our adversary. So it is important. There are capabilities, technologies that have been passed. I believe our industrial base and those companies who have those capabilities are aware. She's been through Tronch 1. We're getting ready to do Tronch 2. So those capabilities that can deliver those effects, we are taking all comers to be able to vet, understand which ones are most effective against my problems and then deliver those. That said, they have to deliver them at scale and they have to deliver them cheaply. This is the asymmetric advantage. So we're absolutely supportive and they are included in my report. Fantastic. Thank you. On your 1302 report where you talk about the President's budget and then what your 1302 requirements are, we see there's a big delta there and you talked to us earlier about prioritizing those and really going in order of the 42 items that you placed in that list. As Congress makes those tough decisions about how do we place resources properly, give us your perspective on how we can make sure that we're coming up with the right formula. I want you to elaborate on maybe what you talked to us about earlier about how do we look at that list and the things that we need to do. Obviously, we're probably not going to have the resources to fulfill the list and you've asked for that, which you should. But I wanted to get a little drill down from you as to how we should look at doing all we can within the context of the list you provide us. Thank you, sir. So, again, I've provided that one-to-end list of priorities that you've asked for. I would categorize it this way. They focus around number one defense of the homeland, which is the Guam defense system. That is certainly the top priority. And then below there, we get at the blind-seekill aspect of this, which includes our Joint Fires Network, our IndoPACOM mission network, which allows us to communicate with all of our allies and partners. Right now, I have 16 networks to do that. I would prefer to have one. I would prefer to fund one. I think you would, too. And then that network tied to the weapons that can deliver those effects, that would be how I look at it in the top priorities list. And, sir, we're always ready to work with your staff should you have further questions on additional drill downs. Absolutely. What would be your message to those that look at the list and say, well, we can't do that? I guess what I would say is the process allows me to input my requirements into the overall PPB and E. Again, it's tough choices to be made, but I can tell you this adversary, as Secretary Ratner said, there is no other adversary with the capability, capacity, means, and intent to displace the United States. That's why it's the top priority. So we've got to make some tough choices and I've articulated the resources I think I need to do that. Very good. So you would say, not to put words in your mouth, but you would say that this is an all-hands-on-deck call moment for folks across the enterprise, both in the Pentagon, in the service branches, and in the industry. That's exactly what I would say. And, by the way, with a sense of urgency and in ways that can get past our slow and antiquated processes. Very good. Thank you, Admiral Aquilino. We'll now go to Mr. DeLuzio. Thank you, Mr. Whitman. Appreciate it. Good afternoon, gentlemen. And, Admiral Aquilino, I want to echo many of the kind words passed on today by my colleagues about your service, but as a fellow Naval Academy grad, I'd be remiss not to mention that you're also the old goat, the longest-serving grad in the fleet, so I'm very proud of that. Admiral, I'll start with you. Your testimony, you mentioned significant PLA, People's Liberation Army, built up across all domains. I'll quote part of it back to you. In three years, since I took command, the PLA has added over 400 fighter aircraft, more than 20 major warships, has more than doubled its inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles, and quote, last year I asked you about Chinese shipbuilding investment compared to our own, and you made clear then that the Chinese are building ships at a pace that far exceed ours. Has that trend changed at all since this time last year? No, Congressman. Matter of fact, it's one of the key reasons I'm concerned. Despite an economy that has taken a 30% hit at a best estimate, right, they've prioritized the delivery of military capability capacity. Hadn't slowed down, increased the budget by 7.2%. Oh, by the way, that's what they advertise. Their budget process is not very transparent. My assessment is it's larger than that, and it's way cheaper to deliver stuff when you have a guaranteed workforce without all of the safeguards that we put in to R. So that's why I say the trend is in the wrong direction. And to be clear, we're not talking just about the fleet for them, we're talking commercial shipbuilding as well in terms of their capacity and output. I'm talking about all capabilities in their joint force. So shipbuilding, airplanes, missile systems, satellites across the board. Dr. Rackner, do you agree Chinese industrial output and capacity is generally far exceeding that of the United States? In some areas, Congressman, yes. In others, no. What are some key ones where it isn't? Where we are still maintaining advantage. Undersea capability is one important area, and there are many others. So I think we can debate the reasons why the places we are at disadvantage that we've gotten there. I think part of it is lousy industrial policy decisions across decades. I think a lack of investment. Our own industrial base, anti-competitive behavior by China and looking globally others. I'll point to the recent Section 301 shipbuilding petition that I support that several unions including the steel workers, ABW and machinists have brought forward. I'll quote from that. Government interventions to accelerate the development of the Chinese shipbuilding industry include policy loans from state-owned banks, equity infusions and debt for equity swaps, the provision of steel plate from state-owned steel producers at below-market prices, tax preferences, grants, and lavish financing from China's state-owned export credit agencies. And quote, Dr. Rackner, I'll go to you. Do you agree that those types of unfair trade practices are counterproductive to our efforts in the region and thus hurting our national security? Yeah, there's no doubt. And those are longstanding issues that we have had with their industrial policy. Congressman, what I would say is that, look, the 2022 national defense strategy was the first ever that identified the PRC as the United States' top-pacing challenge. Since that time, the administration has been moving to realign the budget toward the China challenge and toward the requirements that Admiral Aquilino has identified. This year's budget would invest $2.3 billion more in Indo-Paycom than last year. That's a nearly 20 percent increase. The focus areas of the budget are on the areas that Admiral Aquilino has largely identified, including in critical munitions and in Milcon, and we're going to continue to work with them to close these gaps. Understood. And look, my point more broadly is that our domestic supply chains and manufacturing prowess and power are relevant to our security interest across the globe, certainly Indo-Pacific. All the things we need to produce ships, submarines, aircraft, whether it's engines, pumps, valves, steel, you name it, we should be doing things like we were doing with semiconductors. And I'll close with my particular concern around steel and proposed sale of Pittsburgh-based U.S. steel to a Japanese company. Of course, our Japanese friends are important regional partners of ours, but I pose the deal, which I think will hurt folks in my part of Pennsylvania, but also undermine our security interests in manufacturing and industrial leadership. I've been proud to see President Biden also oppose it and my hope is we see more American icons like U.S. steel and others rise and be there to deliver for our industrial base. So with that, Mr. Whitman, well, Mr. Chairman, excuse me, I will yield back. Gentlemen, yields back. Chair and I recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Dr. J. Jarlay. Thank you, Chairman. This was not an original question, but after seeing some of the unfunded mandates and your shortfall in funding, in an open setting, can you say roughly what you are needing to be ready to fight tonight? Yeah, thanks, Congressman. Again, I would categorize it around the defense of Guam system to be able to protect those citizens and our military capabilities there. It's the assets that deliver the ability to blind see and kill our adversary in the form that I've described with regard to persistent battle space awareness and a real-time capability with the networks and weapons that close the kill chain. There's capability, and again, in that report from one to end, there's a variety of different sets of capabilities that deliver those three things broadly. So that's where I would start. And then there's, again, a number of things. We'll be ready to talk in detail. Is there a rough number in billions? The shortfall that I've identified is $11 billion. $11 billion? Yes, sir. I bring that up because right now on the Hill, the here and now we know what's going on in Israel. We know what's going on in Ukraine. We know what's going on in the southern border. We see a supplemental emergency request for $100 billion, I think $65 billion to go to Ukraine, $14 billion to Israel, a little bit of money for the border. But this isn't maybe the time or place to have that in an emergency funding, but is it approaching that level compared to those other crises that we're facing as Congress and funding? Where would you three fit this urgency in terms of funding because we're talking $11 billion. There's $100 billion hanging out there to be voted on. Where does this fit in that picture? So I would say this is in addition and this is the request for the 25-budget Congressman. Again, I think the supplemental that you're debating, number one, we need it quickly. Number two, everything that's in there, again, there's a bunch of it that's been identified that supports the Indo-Paycom needs. There's $3 billion for infrastructure, for the ship maintenance and other things. There's $1 billion for Indo-Paycom requirements. There's $2 billion in support for Taiwan. Those are all critical needs for Indo-Paycom. But additionally, all that other money that is supporting the Ukraine problem set also provides a deterrent value for Indo-Paycom, right? A inability for Russia to succeed is a deterrent for President Xi in Indo-Paycom. So it's a large number, but it's all tied, and it is beneficial if you look at the global security environment. Yeah, I guess I'd just like to see your shortfall included in there as part of that. I get what you're saying that it is indirectly, but maybe directly considering the urgency of this threat, we ought to be looking at it in that light as well. Thanks, Congressman. I also would like to see it in there. Yes, sir. Secretary Ratner, last year, China's military power report to the department dedicated a significant amount of the attention to the PLA's growing nuclear capabilities. The report estimated that China had over 500 operational nuclear warheads today, and will have over 1,000 by 2030. Is there a reason that you refrain from publishing estimates beyond 2030? I believe there was previous iterations reported something like 1,500 estimated warheads by 2035, but such estimates tend to be, you know, either an underestimation based on the scale and speed in which Chinese nuclear buildup is occurring. Can you have a, or do you have an up-to-date estimate past 2030 that you can share with the committee today? Congressman, I don't have an open source estimate to share in this context, but you're right. We do aim every year to provide the most up-to-date figure in our annual military power report to Congress, and we'll aim to do that again this year. Okay. Are you seeing any signs of cooperation between either technical, strategic, or otherwise between PRC and Russia in terms of their respective nuclear forces? Congressman, they're certainly engaging in dialogue on advanced military capabilities. I think that question would be better answered in a classified setting. Okay. Also, you're probably going to say the same thing here. You know, we know there's 300 ICBM silos at this point. Do you believe they've loaded any of these, or do you not know? Again, happy to provide information on that in a classified setting. All right. Thank you. Okay, fair enough. I'm about out of time, so I'll stop there. Thank you all for being here today. It means a lot. Jim, he goes back. Chair, now I reckon, Jim, in the next few years is a foregone conclusion. Well, I think it's critical that we be prepared for such a scenario where Taiwan is taken by force we should be pursuing every option to prevent a conflict in the region. Adro Aquilino, in your submitted testimony, you speak about the four lines of effort and the need to move faster on them to reduce the risk of conflict in the near and midterm. Can you speak to your efforts to move faster on these lines of efforts? Do these lines of efforts also help us reduce the risk of conflict in the long term? Thanks, Congressman. Yeah, absolutely. The PRC will be a competitor with the United States today, tomorrow, and in the future. They're not going away. So the strategy articulates that. All of the actions and the approaches and the four pillars that we've set up, which are posture, our operations, capabilities, and allies and partners are designed to give us a sustained persistent advantage. And by moving faster, that reduces the risk in the near to midterm, and then continuing to modernize and deliver those capabilities and things we need in the long term will maintain that advantage. All of it, the entire strategic approach by INDOPACOM is designed to prevent this conflict. Thank you. We have seen China rapidly accelerate in advancement of space capabilities, particularly with the increase in launch cadence. Mr. Ratner, does China's increase in space activity raise cost for concern? How do partnerships like Five Eyes help us and our allies maintain an advantage within the space domain in this AOR? Congressman, absolutely is an area of concern, and it's an area where we do see China rapidly modernizing and investing. And it is an area in which we are working with our allies and partners, including our Five Eyes partners, to think about how we can manage that capability, and the allies will be an essential part of our response, including our own investments here at home. Thank you. Mr. Ratner. Actually, Admiral Aquilino, can you speak to how maintaining superiority in the space domain is important to countering the threat of China in your AOR? And do you feel you have the capabilities needed to maintain space superiority? Thanks, Congressman. So I guess I would answer it this way. The space capabilities identified in my 1302 report have been coordinated with both General Salzman and the SpaceComm commander. Those are designed to meet my requirements as we talked about blind sea and kill. So our space-based sensing layer and the other capabilities we can provide some space are absolutely required. They also generate and support the survivability and protection of my force. So they're absolutely critical, and I'm aligned with both SpaceComm and SpaceForce as it applies to the asks that are in my 1302 report. Thank you. Mr. Ratner. Islands in the Indo-Pacific are already feeling the effects of climate change and feel the burden more than most regions in the world. Can you speak to how climate change impacts our readiness in this region and what the Biden administration is doing to counter this? Well, thank you, Congressman. That's a really important question. And as we have been seeking to deepen our partnerships in the Pacific Islands, one of the principles upon which those partnerships is based is that we are meeting our partners where they are and working with them on what their top priorities are. And we hear again and again and again from our partners that they are quite concerned about the challenges of climate change. I had the opportunity just within the last couple of weeks to meet with the Deputy Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea earlier visiting Washington and have had the opportunity to engage other Pacific Island leaders who are concerned about this. And it affects our interest as well and so far as we have seen the effects of major storms, whether it's Guam or other facilities, affect our installations. And so as it relates to the department itself, our force posture initiatives and our infrastructure are focused on building climate resilient infrastructure in the region. And of course, more broadly, we're approaching the climate issue from a whole-of-government approach. I didn't notice any requirements or any unfunded request on space. Were there? Yes, Chairman. And we can highlight it with your staff. If you would please. There's about four different capabilities listed in there. Thank you. Chair down, I recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Gallagher. Thank you. Admiral Aquilino, good to see you again. Is it correct that the President's budget includes barely half or 58% of the capabilities and priorities that you list as critical in your CZ Initiative Report? Congressman Gallagher, so we've identified a requirement of 26.5 of which there's an $11 billion shortfall. So the total cost of where we're short is about $11 billion. Yes, sir. And can you explain to this committee and the American people the consequence of failing to find that funding, which includes money for things like defending Guam and the Joint Fires Network? Yeah, I think I would define it in the form of time, Congressman. So this intent for emergency and to move faster, any delays in those fundings or reduced fundings push everything out. And then those capabilities we've asked for deliver not in a relevant time or in a time where they don't deliver the deterrent effect soon enough. So the $11 billion is important to find. Do you know how much expiring funds expired funding was canceled from the Defense Department last year and returned to the Treasury where it sits in abeyance for five years and then evaporates? I don't have that number, sir. The answer is $11 billion, which is the amount of money you need for your critical priorities list. Not only did we fail to take advantage of money that was appropriated, that we could have rerouted for our priority theater, the Indo-Pacific, to give you the resources you need to prevent World War III, the Department was actively working against a legislative effort to give DoD the flexibility to reroute that money. I would hope, going forward, we would find a way to take advantage of that money for our most critical priorities, particularly stockpiling critical munitions and surging at West of the International Dateline before it's too late. By some estimates, we've lost $125 billion over the last decade, which is unacceptable. And I fear we're sleepwalking into a conflict that would be horrific. Dr. Ratner, you know, in recent years, we've seen increasing attempts by the CCP to expand their political and economic relationships in the region. I think the Solomon Islands Security Deal caught a lot of people by surprise. It was doubly disheartening, given just the history we have and the fact that a lot of Marines paid with their lives for Guadalcanal and I think the same geographic logic that made it important in World War II makes it important today. All the islands, I mean, they're less than 0.4% of the world's land mass, but their EEZs are something like 14% of the worldwide total. We narrowly have avoided failing to renew the Compact and Free Association States agreements. I guess if you were to advise this committee to be paying attention to something that flies under the radar, that isn't as sexy as, say, the defense of Taiwan or, you know, what we do with Japan and Guam itself, where would that be? Where in the region do we need to be spending more time and attention so we can avoid the CCP doing something like they did in the Solomon Islands? Well, thank you, Congressman, and fully agree with you that the renewal of the COFA agreement was a really important bipartisan achievement for Congress. That's an area larger than the continental United States that will now be more free and more peaceful because of it. Look, I think we have a clear understanding of the PRC's strategy in the Indo-Pacific and globally. We've articulated that in the China Military Power Report. They are looking to gain influence and power, and they are looking to divide U.S. allies and partners. There are the areas that are fundamentally important and of the focus of this committee, and there are areas where they're pursuing new initiatives, including overseas basing initiatives, which might be one of those areas. I have a question very specifically. The Military Power Report has articulated places where we believe the PLA is pursuing basing opportunities in South Asia, in Africa, potentially in the Western Hemisphere. That may be an area of additional committee attention. And then quickly, Iraq, Alina, if we don't have access to Guam, Japan, and South Korea, either because of enemy action or political constraints and a conflict, what does that mean for your ability to do fuel and stores and do repairs in the midst of a conflict? Yeah, Congressman. Again, our strategy has been to diversify. And again, if you look at the posture asks that we've had, they certainly are broad and expansive across the theater. That's designed to ensure that if there's any places that we are unable to use, that we do have alternative places to use. Some of those are land-based. Some of those might be sea-based. So again, the approach that we've laid out, I think, takes into account resilient, redundant, and flexible. My time. I'll yield my four seconds back. Well, you got a little extra because they didn't start the clock on you, so you've been very fortunate. I appreciate it. I feel fortunate to serve under your command. Chair Nowak recognizes Ms. McClellan for five minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this hearing today and for our witnesses for being here. I want to follow up, well, echo concerns raised by Representative Courtney about the President's budget, only including enough funding for procurement of one submarine a year instead of the standard two. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative was established in the fiscal year 2021 in DAA to enhance U.S. defense posture in the Indo-Pacific region by modernizing and strengthening U.S. armed forces, improving logistics, and building our cooperative capabilities with allies. In recent years, we've seen the percentage grow in the program slow year over year. And this year, the President's budget request calls for $9.9 billion in funding and almost $5 billion decrease in spending despite the committees allocating more funding year over year. Can you, Secretary Ratner and Admiral, explain the decision to request a cut in funding here and does the PDI have everything that it needs to be as effective as possible? Well, thank you, Congresswoman, and I'll just say on the first issue, as you know, the President's budget does request $4 billion for the defense industrial base and sorry, for the submarine industrial base and combined with funding and national security supplemental, we believe these investments would be a major step forward in terms of our defense industrial base as it relates to our submarine. So we're very focused on that issue as well. And I would refer you to Navy Undersecretary Eric Ravens' remarks just within the last week where he described his concerns about the near-term ability of the industrial base to produce that additional Virginia-class submarine and why it's so important for the budget to make these investments in the submarine industrial base to get that capacity back on track. So there's no disagreement about the absolute importance and need for those submarines and we're investing in the way that we believe it's going to get us fastest there. So that is, I think, an important point on the submarine industrial base. On the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, the President's budget seeks $9.9 billion for PDI, which is consistent with the request last year. So I'm not tracking from the administration a cut to PDI funding and we're making major investments in military construction and missile defense, exercising training, cyber capabilities, and a number of other important areas with allies and partners. And we really thank Congress for its leadership in creating that initiative. So to be clear, you think the $9.9 billion provides you everything you need for the PDI to be as effective as possible. Congressman, the PDI is simply an accounting mechanism based upon a rubric that Congress established if by no means represents the totality of the administration's investments in the Indo-Pacific, nor as it relates to major security challenges like the PRC and the DPRK. Thank you. That's a helpful clarification. My staff recently had the chance to travel to Japan and meet with our security partners there who expressed concerns that shipbuilding and repair capabilities are located almost exclusively in the United States, and that in times of war or during a conflict, this could severely constrain our combat capabilities if we had to send back, send ships back all the way back to Hawaii or San Diego for repairs. Could you give a sense of your assessment of the risk here and what the department and the administration are doing to ensure we have robust repair capabilities available in the Pacific if a conflict should break out? Well, thanks, Congresswoman. So if we get to crisis or conflict, I certainly don't want to send the ships all the way back to the United States to get fixed. Those ships that are forward stations in Japan are repaired in Japan, but having a more set of options for the maintenance and support and sustainability of the force, no matter where it comes from, so that it stays forward and can deliver the deterrent effects we're working towards certainly would be a positive way forward, I believe. Thank you. And this one, you probably won't be able to answer, but I'm going to ask it if you could provide something for the record later. If you could give some, help us understand how operating under a CR for the past six months has impacted readiness and procurement for your operations in the Indo-Pacific. That'd be very helpful. And with that, I yield back. Jen Leaston, just by a chair, and I recognize Jen from Florida. Mr. Gates for five minutes. Admiral Ock, well, you know, during the Revolutionary War, I think it was like 15% of Americans who fought for liberty. Does that sound about right? 15, 20%? I couldn't answer that now. Congressman, I have to go back and look. I guess I'm just kind of wondering in Taiwan, what percent of the Taiwanese do we assess would actually fight in the event of kinetic conflict with China? Yeah, I also don't have that calculation. What I can tell you is when the Russians invaded Ukraine, that was a pretty good wake-up signal for a lot of people across the globe. And especially for those people on Taiwan. And we continue to execute our responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act to ensure we support their ability to defend themselves. And does that act require the development of a home guard in Taiwan? I'd have to go back and look at the law. I don't specifically know if that... I don't think it does, but maybe you could talk a little bit about what the home guard theory is in Taiwan, how that would enhance their capabilities. Well, again, what the people on Taiwan have done is they do have a reserve activation program. President Tsai just extended that to a one-year commitment. So again, when I talk about the people on Taiwan taking it seriously, they are. It includes that approach that you've just articulated. And I almost think that's what it's going to take because I worry that the Taiwanese military may be infiltrated by the PLA and that if there's really going to be a deterrent for a Chinese invasion, that might not come exclusively from the uniform military or even the reservists. We may have to actually render capability to the hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese who don't want to be part of China, right? Yeah, your point is valid. And again, I believe that that approach and actions are being taken there. What I would say is the example, the best example that I think exists is when Israel was attacked by the violent extremists in Hamas, the next day, 360,000 Israelis reported for duty. That's the type of response that I believe... Yeah, but I worry that we conflate the cultural features there, right? Because what I worry about in Taiwan is kind of a replay of Afghanistan where we look at some fake government and we do the normal kind of DoD thing of large weapon systems and then we give them to that government and then the real governing power, in Afghanistan's case, the Taliban, in Taiwan's case, perhaps China, has the ability to then repurpose those assets against the United States. So it just seems to me, I mean, you are the guy, you're the person in charge of this theater. I think you need to know, you need to have some sort of assessment as to whether or not you're going to get that Israel level response from the Taiwanese. What percentage of this group of people is going to stand up and fight? And sure, we're all continuously informed by events going on around the world. But in Taiwan specifically, we've seen cases where the PLA is infiltrating their government, their military, and I don't offer that as some sort of criticism. Heck, I think they try to infiltrate our government and our military, too. But I worry, I worry whether or not we're going to be able to rely on the uniformed service there. So is there a plan at DOD to kind of make these assessments about a home guard and ensure that you have small arms in the hands of these people that might deter a Chinese invasion? Congressman, there absolutely is, and I'd love to talk to you about it in a classified setting. Great, no, it's good to know. And is that consistent with this porcupine theory that you think about often with Taiwan? I don't use the term porcupine theory. A lot of people do. Why don't you use it? I hear it a lot on this committee. Again, I would articulate it in a way that is in alignment with the law, which is we're providing the people on Taiwan the ability, capability, and training to be able to defend themselves in time of conflict. That by itself with regard to a strong Taiwan sets of capabilities to turn a point. Yeah, I just think this is a real important piece of the homework to emanate from this. You've talked about the Taiwan Security Engagement Act. I get that, but I think you and I are both a little unclear as to the extent to which that authorizes the work with the home guard that we really need to convert Taiwan into an effective porcupine because I assess that this is all about time. China cannot endure an extended war with Taiwan. They can't endure the sanctions. They can't endure the other consequences. So if we can demonstrate to them that that's going to be a longer period of time, I think that pushes out the inevitability of a kinetic conflict with China. So I appreciate the exchange, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Chairman yields back. Do you recognize the item from Massachusetts? Mr. Keating. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'd like to thank our witnesses for their service. As a person who's a ranking member on House Foreign Affairs Committee on Europe and former chairman, I just have a question for Admiral Aquino too. There's a recent report that I find concerning that Hungary and China have inked an agreement allowing Chinese police to patrol streets in Hungary alongside their local counterparts. They say it's to boost their security in well-trafficked tourist areas, but what I'm concerned about is that China is penetrating in security services dealing with a NATO ally. Could you speak to the importance of not just cooperation but solidarity among our NATO allies in terms of dealing with Indo-Pacific and taking a united approach on these issues and concerns about China's activities in that regard and talk to the importance of that relationship as it affects our policy in the Indo-Pacific? Yeah, thanks, Congressman. So again, we're a globally integrated world like no one's ever seen before. The PRC's intent as Dr. Ratner stated is to achieve an advantageous position not just regionally but globally with regard to some of their basing, their interaction, and their intent to separate the United States from our relationships with allies and partners. The police support is a way that they do that. They just don't do it in Europe. They're doing that exact model in the Pacific Islands. So it's a foot in the door. It's a way to get power, influence, and the ability to take further actions and set the stage for what you described. Now, that said, I do talk to my counterparts. You will hear from all the other combatant commanders the activities and actions that China is taking in their AOR, whether it be South America or Europe. And I spoke with General Cavoli last week. We stay close. The importance of the European nations and the UK understanding that what happens in the Pacific matters to them is a critical point. And General Cavoli and I are synced on that. He is telling that story. He visited Japan and Korea two weeks ago as he and I coordinate to ensure that we're combating these types of problems from a global perspective. I just want to thank you for your work in that regard because absent Hungary and some of Hungary's activities, I've never seen the cooperation with our European coalition towards the Indo-Pacific greater than it is today, alongside the greater cooperation that you've built in that area to begin with. Dr. Ratner, do you just want to comment on that for a moment? Congressman, I fully agree with you. I think there's a huge opportunity here to work more with our European allies in the Indo-Pacific. They are operating there more. Some of them are resident powers like France. And we are working with, Indo-Pacom is working with the UK, the other important Germany and others who are sending forces. Canada, not a European powder, but part of the Atlantic community. And all of this contributes to peace and stability and deterrence. And all these countries have their own relationships and partnerships too. And we can coordinate on security cooperation and together strengthen deterrence in the region. And also, Admiral, if I could, what gaps in our underwater autonomous vehicles are there and what can we do to bring it next year's authorization and appropriations? Because I find that a particularly important area and we don't want to have any gaps there at a time when it's more necessary than ever. Yeah, thanks, Congressman. If I don't, if you don't mind, I'll save gaps discussion for a classified setting. What I would say is... Then if you could, just the importance of... Yeah, the importance is critical, right? So the ability to deliver swarming type unmanned attractable capabilities, to deliver a problem set for the adversary won't be prepared for and would have a really difficult time countering, whether it's honesty, undersea, honesty or above the sea, all of those capabilities are needed and they're included in our ask as it applies to the 1302. And innovation is so critical in that regard and that's more research, that's more development. So I just like to close... You know, our whole posture towards the Indo-Pacific and China's threats really centers on deterrence right now. And I must say, I want to just thank you for bringing up, Admiral, in your remarks, prior to this, the fact that the importance of Ukraine, we're sitting here now talking about deterrence. To me, sitting here on March 20th, we're sitting here not acting on the Ukraine assistance that's so vital, you know, as a deterrent. Because if we fail there, it's just going to send a signal that counteracts all the good work we talked about this morning that you're involved in. So let's hope we get that done. Hope the speaker puts that on the floor for a vote. It would pass and I yield back. Chairman yields back. Chair and I recognize the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Chairman. And thank you, General, for being here. I have a couple of questions for Admiral Equilino and then one for General McCamera. First, I want to ask a question about electronic warfare in the Pacific Theater. I'm told that the PAKOM requirement for EA-37 is the new compass call that's going to provide tremendous amounts of capability that the requirement is 22. However, the Air Force has only funded for 10 of them thus far and I don't see any funding plans in the near future. Can you explain the need for 22 EA-37s and just unpack that for us a little bit? Yeah, in an unclassified setting, Congressman, I think what I would say is the ability to deliver the capabilities that come from a compass call across the broad spectrum of this theater has the requirements that you've laid out. So it's critically important that we get to those numbers. It's critically, and I guess what I would say is the only caveat would be those are the mechanism of delivery. If there's other ways to deliver, then we might be able to live with less, but we do need the capabilities that currently reside in that aircraft. Thank you. On a similar note, I read with the Navy because of the budget restrictions, they only do one new attack submarine in the upcoming plan. That concerns me because attack submarines are very important to your war plans. Are we headed the right direction with our attack submarine for size? Or do you see optimism or I see pessimism from where I'm at, but hopefully I'm wrong. Again, I'll go back to, as the operational commander, the need to dominate and execute our undersea strategy and approach to be able to deliver a successful mission accomplishment. The undersea is critically important. Submarines are an aspect of that. They're also very important for our AUKUS agreement with the UK, Australia as it applies to pillar one. So again, I'm very supportive of continuing our efforts in the undersea domains. Do you have enough attack submarines now or do you see a plan to get there? I would say if you ask all of our combatant commanders, none of us have enough. Right. On another similar note, I'm concerned about the Air Force structure. For every new fighter we bring on, the Air Force is eliminating two and a half fighters or two and a half aircraft. So we're getting smaller. And I think in the fight that we could have with China, hopefully we don't, we're going to need a bigger force size than we have now. Could you provide a little bit of your perspective on the Air Force? Yes, Congressman. Let me make it a little more broadly and then drill down. Number one, it will take the entire joint force. Matter of fact, as you heard Dr. Ratner say, to deter this adversary, it will take all forms of national power, which is the design of integrated deterrence. So as it applies to the joint force, with the capability capacity that the adversary is building, we need to continue our capability advantages and we need to get to the right capacity. I don't support a smaller force in the Indo-Pacific. And specifically, when you talk about half the globe, most of it is water, all of it is air. You know, we need the right capacity at the maritime and the air component to be able to deliver deterrent effects and then if deterrence fails to be able to fight and win. So I don't advocate for getting smaller. I appreciate your perspective. Mr. Chairman, it seems like something we have to look at. Our air force is getting smaller at a time when it needs to be getting bigger. It's a concern. The North Koreans are one of the most impoverished malnutrition people on the whole globe. How are we trying to reach them? Do we have an adequate voice of America or those kind of capabilities to communicate with the North Korean people? Because I see that as being perhaps a weak spot for the leader of North Korea. I'm directly from my command. I have met with individuals from the State Department and the things that they're doing. The Republic of Korea tries to reach them. They have non-government agencies. They're sending balloons across the border with messages and limited supplies. But we do not have a direct it's not part of my mission statement to communicate to them. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you'll be back. Mr. Chairman, I recognize you're from California. Mr. Panetta. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There was a recent article in the economists that talked about that the title was Does America's Army's Future Lie in Europe or Asia. Within that, we had a couple quotes from a couple of generals, including James Rainey, who says that basically now we're going to fight under constant pressure. There is no break. There is no sanctuary. General Harrington goes on to say that China has optimized its forces to attack U.S. satellite ships and air bases. However, but not to find, fix, and finish land formations that are distributed mobile and networked. And because of that, the article talked about how we've developed these three experimental multi-demain forces, one that's in Europe, and they can do a wide range of things from gray zone and hybrid to kinetic and conventional warfare. So I'd ask, if you can expand and elaborate on these MDTFs, one, two, though, also last year's NDA had mandated a permanent stationing of green berets on the Kinman Island near China to train Taiwanese forces when prior SOF, Special Operations Forces, only made an up-presence on and off the island. I was wondering if you could elaborate on the current Special Operations Force mission in Taiwan as well. And if there's any coordination between the two. First, let me just say the article is incorrect. There is no permanent stationing of U.S. forces there. We can talk in a classified setting for further evaluation, but that is just inherently inaccurate. On the Kinman Island. Now, as it applies to the force described, I have a bit of a different view, which is the entire joint force is at risk of being tracked, targeted and employed against. That is maritime, air and land. There is no sanctuary for any of the joint force under the structure that the PRC has built. And our actions require movement, maneuver protection and all the things that we have to do. But there is no sanctuary on the land. So that I inherently disagree with. Now that said, I do support the MDTF and it is focused on delivering the capabilities that I need in the Indo-Pacific AOR. But what I would say is it needs all the capabilities that are designed to go with the MDTF. So the anti-air capability and the anti-ship capability are lagging and they need to go to be in there and sooner, right? This is the urgency theme. So I support the MDTF. It is absolutely the right design. But it has to be fully equipped with all the capabilities it is designed to deliver. Great. In Congress, I would just add to that. In addition of the capabilities that Admiral Aquilino mentioned, of course we need the political agreements with our allies and partners to be able to put together the kind of force posture that you described of being more distributed, more networked, more resilient and more lethal. And that is an area where over the last year we have made absolute historic progress. If you look at what we have made with Japan, with the Philippines, with Australia, with Papua New Guinea, major transformations now it will take time. And I agree with Admiral Aquilino that we need to move absolutely as fast as we can. But the political structures are in place to do exactly that thanks to the great work of the last year. Got it. Secretary Ratner, obviously that, as you know, based on the elections recently in Taiwan, the Taiwanese Democratic Progressive Party won the recent presidential election President Xi's growing relationship with the U.S. Meanwhile, the KMT Party won a slight majority in Taiwan's legislator and is expected to favor more cooperation with China. We might expect China to exploit this split in policy and can anticipate any influence campaigns from the Chinese to increase favorable policy coming from Taiwan's legislature. How are we preparing to approach these cross-strait relations under a split Taiwanese government? Congressman, we look forward to working with all relevant parties in Taiwan. That includes the incoming administration and as you know, the DPP won that election again from a leadership perspective. We've had a bipartisan unofficial delegation go out around the time of the election to meet with Dr. Lai. The chairwoman of AIT has, our envoy has met with Taiwanese officials and everything that we have heard suggests we're very encouraged by the message of continuity in terms of the new incoming government. To your question about the legislative U.N., look, we are committed to working with all parties to advance our critical reforms and we would encourage members of Congress to do the same. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Mr. Chairman, I recognize gentlemen from Indiana. Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral, I saw on your unfunded priorities list that endopacom believes it needs well over a billion dollars more in air and defense, missile defenses. So would you agree that it's an urgent priority for endopacom to get more air and missile defenses to protect our forces from potential Chinese missile and air attacks? Senator or Congressman, if you're talking about the Guam shortfall, I think it's about 30 million is that we've identified for the ability to put the defensive Guam system in place. That includes both some of the integration capabilities and the military constructions that's required. So I have to go back and look at the billion dollar number and where that is. But I do believe we will absolutely need to provide increased air and missile defense to support both the homeland and the former Guam and wherever our forces are operating from, I'm required to protect them. So we will need more integrated air and missile defense. Understood. So we agree it's an urgent priority. It's clear that we don't have enough air and missile defenses for a fight with China. I think that's my take away from the billion dollar unfunded priorities list. Yet we've used well over 100 of these missiles in SYNCOM to shoot down Houthi drones that cost 100 times less than our own missiles. Rather than saving them for a potential fight with China. So Admiral has the high rate of missiles that we're using in SYNCOM reduced the number of air and missile defense assets that your forces expect to receive next year? I don't know if I would view it that way Congressman. I think what I would say is for those missiles coming off the destroyers those SM2s are resonant in my theater on my destroyers and we have those. If you're talking about that in Patriot which again is going to be a pretty large portion of what we're going to need to defend air bases and those other places where our forces are I don't think those have been employed at the large number that would impact me. What I would say is I commend those sailors and the joint force in SYNCOM that are executing the protection mission against both our forces and those tankers. They are fighting with what they got and we should never ask them to stop or conserve. What we do have to do is move forward on our directed energy path to be able to get on the right side of this cost curve. So your point is completely valid but bottom line mission success there I would never ask them to restrict what they need to do but we do need to make sure that the capabilities that I've identified are delivered at a relevant time and then we ought to accelerate the technologies that get us back in the right place. I appreciate your candor on that and well put and well understand. Dr. Ratner has President Biden's failure to deter attacks on forces by Iranian proxies deprived our forces in Indo-Pakom of vital assets that we might need for a potential fight with China based on what you just heard the admiral say. Congressman our position is that deterrence in the Indo-Pacific is real and strong and we're doing everything we can to keep it that way. If we don't have enough air and missile defense assets for one region how can we expect to be trying to fight in two different regions? I mean it's obvious trade off right? Congressman look what I would say is reiterate what I said earlier which is the 2022 national defense strategy identified the PRC as the top pacing challenge and since then it has produced the most strategy driven budgets in its history including investing $2.3 billion more than last year on Indo-Pacific priorities upwards of a 20% increase year on year. So we are doing everything we can to focus on the pacing challenge. Thank you. I yield back. I want a foot stomp in agreement with what the admiral said about we should be more aggressively pursuing directed energy capabilities to support our air defense systems and SENTCOM and bin net cost curve. With that I'll recognize the gentleman from Minnesota Mr. Finstead. Thank you Chairman Rogers Ranking Member Smith and to our witnesses for testifying today. China remains the existential threat to America as an institution and to the American way of life. This is true on all issues but especially so on critical issues like defense, supply chains and national security. At China's 2024 National People's Congress the Chinese Communist Party announced a 7.2% increase in annual defense spending. China also had a greater than 7% increase in defense spending in 2023. Over a 10 year average China's increased defense spending approximately 7.5% per year considering the serious investment that China is making in its defense primarily to prepare to meet and defeat the United States in war. China is woefully inadequate meeting our top obligation of keeping American citizens safe. Specifically the United States has made a strategic and proper choice to build the vast majority of its industrial base in the private sector. These small businesses and private sector companies are the hard working Americans that rely on a healthy, proper and sustained demand signal to keep making those investments in the pursuit of defense of America and a lot of these jobs and a lot of these companies are happening all over rural America specifically in my district and I'm proud of them and what they do to our national defense. As a Reagan Republican I believe in peace through strength our ability to project strength originates from the industrial base we must invest more in America. So with that said Admiral, great seeing you again with the combination of the scarcity of resources and your growing needs and requirements how badly do you feel the squeeze and vulnerabilities from the defense industrial base on your supply chain efforts. Thanks congressman it's good to see you too again I've articulated over three years now the requirement and the need for the defense industrial base to ramp up and be prepared and that's all across the defense industrial base that ship maintenance and sustainment it's airplane depot maintenance it's for the ground force maintenance of tanks and other military vehicles it's weapons production it's aircraft production it's shipbuilding so critically important for us to be able to have a footing that enables us to deliver a position of strength right this is not just in time supply and just in time delivery does not work in this security environment thank you for that and I will just tell you having the honor to travel all over my district and talk to the folks that are working in this space the signals that we hear in this body that can send out to the countryside gives them the security to invest in those needed professions whether it's the welders, the pipe fitters the plumbers whatever it may be but it also gives that signal to our job providers that there is work to be had and it's a good long term proposition for them to invest in I will just say I just left the ag committee Mr. Chairman and as a farmer myself and I think about agriculture and food and food security as a national security piece I will tell you China's investment in farmland in the U.S. and specifically near U.S. military installations is worrisome it should be worrisome to each and every one of us China is also investing at record levels in farmland all over the place here and this can and likely will lead to food insecurity issues while promoting espionage concerns and really our ability to project power can be compromised by this communist China investment in our farmland we must pay attention to this before it's too late and Mr. Chairman I would just say in my closing here that food and farm security as national security and I think that we can and needs to talk more about our farmland and the food security piece because it is a strong component in our national security so I appreciate all of you being here today I appreciate the service and the work that you do for our men and women and for our country so with that Mr. Chairman I would yield back Congressman if I can certainly go ahead Congressman you're highlighting the Chinese approach in terms of their national power to deliver an advantage for their objectives so that's point one point two and I should have said this the supplemental is so important because it does have in it those things that you described in the farm of the industrial base three billion dollars and I thank the chairman and the committee for supporting that that is a great start to getting us back on track and I thank you chairman sure before we go to the next member I want to point out we have all four votes in about 20 minutes so we intend to adjourn this hearing at 1.30 so with that chair I recognize the general aid from Hawaii Mr. Kuda Thank you Mr. Chair Admiral Aquilino General La Camara since this is your last posture hearing before this committee I join my colleagues in thanking you both for your service and your leadership in your respective commands Admiral I hope you will continue to visit us in Hawaii and know that that is always going to be home for you and I appreciate the partnership and commitment to working with the people of our beloved state over the past few years and addressing our shared challenges that we've had among those shared challenges has been the state of aging military infrastructure in Hawaii and across the region an issue I'm very passionate about and I know these issues generally fall on the service budget but as a critical customer and user of this infrastructure, IndoPaycom has a significant stake here in Hawaii whether it's the barracks of the Guard, the filling wastewater systems at Pearl, the ramp at Hickam the cumulative impact of these infrastructure issues affects not just our local communities but also our readiness and the quality of life of our service members and their families Admiral Aquilino in your written testimony you mentioned that many infrastructure projects across the AOR still need to be prioritized by the services with only 12 of over 200 required projects completed in the three years of your command and 47 high priority milcon projects still needing to be funded. I'd also note the significant infrastructure gap of 3.4 billion dollars identified in your unfunded priorities list which suggests that the FY20-25 budget falls far short of the 4.8 billion infrastructure needs identified in your section 1302 report and that's not even getting to the infrastructure equities that fall to the services I know my friend and colleague Mr. Moreland would agree with me on how important it is that we stop delaying especially in remote places like places where the maintenance and delayed investments lose us not only time but also resources given the cost increases as well. Admiral Aquilino how does the aging military infrastructure affect Indo-Pakom's ability to project power out into the clusters you mentioned and effectively deter aggression and what risks are we imposing on Indo-Pakom because of these delayed investments in our infrastructure. Thanks Congresswoman Aloha it's good to see you. Thank you again in coordination with Congress I commissioned a study by all the components to identify what critical and what infrastructure in Hawaii would potentially negatively impact my ability to generate the force and deploy it that was in the wake of if you remember we had a couple of water main breaks and it gave us an indication that we need to look at this and ensure that we A understand it and then B invest in it to fix it so the support was developed I briefed it back to Congress and the service components were tasked to go ahead and put that into their palms and maintain the ability to generate the force from Hawaii so we continue to watch that I am concerned about power generation and brownouts and blackouts that we get sometimes so we're watching it very closely and we need to ensure that we reinvigorate the critical infrastructure required to support and generate the force in time of crisis. Thank you very much I'm going to come back but I do want to ask you another question Admiral what about overseas installations across the Indo-Pacific in places like Japan, Okinawan, the Philippines what's your assessment of military infrastructure and deferred maintenance impacts on readiness and quality of life that we have in those critical assets. The report I mentioned Congresswoman was tasked for all of our forward station forces so it was facilitated or at least was identified based on the water main on Hawaii but I had tasked that same requirement not only for Hawaii but for Japan and our other forward station bases. We were a little better off there some of that stuff was newer but we're monitoring it and again the services are required to keep that ready. Do you especially feel and was this part of the report that given extreme weather conditions that we are seeing that a lot of it also has to do not just with the state of the current condition but also resiliency Guam facing the most recent super typhoon but these are more common instances that we are experiencing so was part of that reporting extreme weather impacts climate change in terms of how that might factor into more gaming and planning. Thanks Congresswoman again so the national security impacts of climate change is what we focus on and the severity of storms sea level rise against our military capabilities the ability to plan and then build our construction in a way where it's aligned and can sustain any of those problem sets pardon me that's how we look at it so it's important we've done a look across all of the nations and our assets and we're implementing those requirements to ensure what we build is able to adhere and stand for a long time. Thank you I know my time is up I might have more questions to add to the record appreciate the report now it's on us to make sure we urgently follow up with that in terms of the due diligence to make sure it actually gets done and it's fun. Thank you Chairman Rogers thank you Ranking Member Smith and each of our panelists today Admiral Aquino first I want to thank you for your faithful service to our country it's been a great career and I appreciate it before us as I shared with you last year I'm fully on board with providing Indo-Pacific Command with the proper resources and funding to support the defense of Guam mission I know the Army is working to roll out a plan for integrated missile defense for Guam however as each of you know well know we can't just provide weapons systems there are several other things needed to support this mission what is the defense of Guam 2030 architecture and how does it align in Indo-Pacom budget request and unfunded priorities Congressman it's my top priority I think the shortfalls we identified across all aspects of what is needed right the purchasing of the capabilities the integration of those assets both the ages portion of it the armies portion of it with regard to integrating THAAD Patriot IFPIC LTAMS that architecture that we've designed again the shortfall we identified is about 430 million that also includes military construction so it is the top priority because it's the defense of the homeland 170,000 U.S. citizens as well as my ability to surge and execute the force thank you at present does Guam's existing power infrastructure support the on demand power needs of the emerging defense of Guam's architecture yeah it's critically important again we've taken some steps in the past I give you this example so the Anderson Air Force Base power distribution mechanism is all underground and during that storm we had only small impacts there in places where the power distribution was above ground the super typhoon went through it pretty badly we have to take those next set of steps the Air Force has identified 7.2 billion to do that the Navy has identified I think it's 22 something billion that I think is a combination of the critical infrastructure needed plus the additional capabilities on the sub base so we have to work through that but the ability to sustain Guam certainly from storms and ultimately from attack is critically important to us thank you Admiral in general earlier this week we saw yet another reckless attempt by North Korea to destabilize the Indo-Pacific through three short-range ballistic missiles launches off its eastern coast we currently have THAAD batteries standing ready to defend against these type of actions in two locations in the Indo-Pacific Guam and South Korea last year Indo-Paycom released an operational need statement that advance THAAD's capabilities to defeat the full range of advanced ballistic and hypersonic missile threats can you speak to the need and the upgrade to the THAAD that will be required to support integrated air and missile defense requirements that's certainly Congressman again the integration of all of our ballistic well let me start with the sensing aspect right number one we need to identify it we need to track it and then we need to shoot it I don't care what tracks it I don't care what shoots it we just got to hit it so the integration of those capabilities whether they be Aegis from ashore Aegis from the sea THAAD Patriot and the other systems I identified they all have to come together to be able to execute at speed and there's not a lot of time for decisions when you're talking about intercontinental ballistic or ballistic missiles so we are working to do that on Guam and then the architecture and integration certainly exists across all those capabilities today we got to get it synchronized and we got to be able to operate at pace thank you I'll go ahead and mention another thing I know today we've mentioned PAC-3 SCM-2, NGI THAAD, Patriot, Directed Energy I want to thank those in the industrial base many of these are at Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama and I took a codel there with many members I'm just telling you right now it's unbelievable but we've got to be prepared we've got to give the warfighter what they need to defend our country I think each of you for being here Mr. Chairman I yield back Chair and I recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts thank you Mr. Chairman Admiral Aquilino generals and admirals win awards and immortal fame for winning wars not preventing them but for your work over the last three years in my humble opinion I think you're an American hero we're not where we need to be we have a lot more work to do but we're a lot closer to where we need to go because of your leadership you've also been someone who's been willing to engage in the debate with our committee that should be a hallmark of the relationship between the Department of Defense and our Congress you've even been willing to admit when you're wrong you and I have had our fair share of debates I've been willing to admit that too and I think I've had to admit it more times than you but when we fail to participate in that humble and honest debate we're seeding one of our supreme advantages over our authoritarian allies so it's incredibly important and you've set a great example by your leadership so so thank you Admiral Aquilino China has been getting steadily more aggressive in their actions against our allies in the Philippines threatening their sovereign territory their economy their interests and their ships how should we respond thanks congressman and again I too do appreciate the debates like I'll say that I don't have to get it all right I just got to get it less wrong than the other guy let me start by saying I am not a hero the heroes that exist out there the 380,000 soldiers, the Marines, civilians and their families I will pass on your comments to them I'd have failed without them they're incredible as it applies to the Philippines it's a really critical hotspot right now that could end up in a bad place the continued belligerent and aggressive and dangerous activity by the PRC against our allies in the Philippines is concerning to me the Chinese have no legal claim to the area that they have articulated as their sovereign territory and the fact that they are now firehosing and ramming are attempting to support Philippine sailors on the Sierra Madre so I'm concerned where it could go I would hope that the international community condemnation of those actions is enough to get the Chinese to back off but if it doesn't it could go in bad places the Philippines if a sailor or soldier or one of their members were killed could invoke article 5 of the mutual defense treaty and that would put our policy decision makers in a place that would require really tough choices it would be my requirement and responsibility to provide the secretary with options if that were to happen Dr. Radner where do you assess that we have the strongest advantage over our potential adversaries in developing those allies and partnerships in the region some of which have really atrophied over the years and how do you how do you think about what we need to do from the administration perspective but also from the congressional perspective to strengthen those allied relationships and ensure that when Xi Jinping looks out at the Pacific he sees a lot of allies and not just the United States of America thank you congressman a really important question and I think the fact of the matter is that today our most important alliances and partnerships are stronger than they have ever been so if your question is where are our strong points they are in the Republic of Korea Japan Philippines Australia India and among other partners in ASEAN as it relates to the Indo-Pacific I think in terms of what can we do to make them stronger we have bilateral agendas with all of these countries where we are working with them strengthening their capabilities advancing our roles, missions and capabilities expanding our posture opportunities as we talked about earlier the important and innovative elements of our strategy in the region is the degree to which we are starting to knit these together so we have seen unprecedented cooperation between the United States the ROK and Japan we are seeing unprecedented cooperation between the United States Japan and Australia where they have designed their own access agreements and we have now seen F-35s from both countries visit each other we are working on the Quad we are integrating the Philippines into these structures so it is not just an individual hub and spoke model but a set and constellation of partnerships that really strengthens deterrence I think where you can have recommendations for Congress about how we can better support that work it is something we would like to hear so thank you very much Mr. Chairman I yield back Jimmy yields back I would remind people that we are supposed to adjourn at 1.30 but we are going to try to get in two more members Mr. Moylan of Guam and Mr. Davis of North Carolina thank you very much Mr. Chairman as you know my work on the Armed Services Committee has focused on two issues as the safety of the people of Guam and the need for resilient civilian infrastructure on Guam which underpins military readiness I would like to thank the INDOPECOM for having prioritized the safety of the people of Guam and making the mess of the fence their number one unfunded priority for FY25 I will also lead these efforts to ensure this item is fully funded Admiral on Guam the military and civilian communities share one port one power grid one set of roadways and all other major infrastructures yet Guam's infrastructure is being pushed to the point of failure I have put forward several legislation proposals addressing the problem however can you please speak to the military importance of this infrastructure and any national security risk posed by allowing this infrastructure to fail yeah thanks congressman with Guam as a critical aspect of our strategic approach and the ability to deter and generate forces both the capability to defend the capability to deliver offensive effects and the ability to sustain the force through the airport and the seaport that exists there Guam is obviously a strategic location and critical to our approach so that says everything's got to work to include the infrastructure it's got to be flexible it's got to be redundant and we can't have breaks so I talked about the numbers of 7.2 billion on the Air Force side 22.4 I think for the Navy side we have to be able to get this in a place where we do have sustained, consistent flexible and redundant power, water and all of the capabilities needed to generate the force thank you next question Admiral is one of our cargo moving through the port of Guam is military cargo the military is the largest consumer of electrical power on Guam yep the load shedding occurs shedding occurs the Department of Defense is not affected and the military is the only organization exempt in Guam's local law from weight restrictions for vehicles on public roads the people of Guam have came to consensus that the federal government must contribute to the reconstruction of our infrastructure I have responded to this consensus by proposing legislation such as Typhoon Mawar Reconstruction Act which will allow FEMA to carry out necessary construction efforts would expanded federal involvement of Guam's infrastructure make your mission easier from my seat Congressman again it doesn't matter the mechanism that gets it as long as the capability can be delivered from Guam and we can support the military requirements as well as being a good part of the community because our footprint will increase there we need to take that into account but for me the mechanism doesn't matter as long as it's ready in place resilient and sustainable okay thank you for my final question a few weeks ago I had a pleasure of meeting with Brigadier General Cruz President General of the Guam National Guard he relayed to me his sentiment of wanting his force to have closeness and presence amongst the force on island how is Guam Guard being incorporated into the strategic plan of future operations on Guam Congressman for the operations and actions that we execute from my seat the integrated joint force is what is needed and what that means as it applies to the Guard and Reserve is if I go to work and I can't tell who is a Guardsman and who's active duty that's what Wright looks like now that said on Guam they're kind of leading the path here so in the wake of the storm they went to full full activation and support directly alongside the Title 10 component that was supporting there Guam they currently support and protect the that or formation there so I think it's probably a pretty good example of what Wright looks like for a total integrated force I thank you, I just wanted to say I appreciate your service you've been a good friend to the people of Guam and you'll be missed but I'm sure your replacement will have that good relationship as well and on a final note I'd also like to reiterate that my colleagues and I are still awaiting a clear plan from DOD regarding Typhoon of War's recovery and with that Mr. Chairman I yield back Chairman yields back, Chairman I recognize General from North Carolina Mr. Davis Thank you so much Mr. Chair and to the witnesses for being here today since Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine we've seen President Putin and Xi develop an increasingly intimate relationship Mr. Rackner and General Locomoron just last week Russia-China Iran completed at sea phase of the sea security belt 2024 exercise near the Gulf of Omen what can we learn from the exercise about the growing US Russia-China relationship Thanks Congressman I mean we're watching the activities in Ukraine we're watching the activities in the Middle East we're watching the training that goes on and around the peninsula with China, Russia and DPRK and incorporating it into our exercises making sure that we understand the capabilities that our adversaries are developing and as a reminder the treaty does not name an adversary of what we have to do to protect the Republic of Korea Yeah Congressman I'm concerned about the increasing relationship between the PRC and Russia Again I've articulated that the world is more global it's more integrated, it's more connected and the two authoritarian powers that are focused on delivering the same strategic objectives is concerning I continue to articulate that a any win for Russia as it applies to the Ukraine is a win for China and that's not in our best interests so the continued support to Ukraine is critical Again that's also in the supplemental but the critical capabilities that you've identified to go to IndoPaycom are also critical so I thank the Congress for the support and hopefully we can get that passed very soon I want to thank you for your response and respect of time Mr. Chair I will submit any additional questions thank you so much I yield back gentlemen yields back to you and I recognize as general Mr. Guillermini for a brief acknowledgement Thank you very much Mr. Chairman gentlemen thank you for your testimony today your patience worked through all of this I want to specifically address Admiral Aquilino I want to thank you for your extraordinary leadership your strong intelligent always informed and I must say successful leadership it is quite remarkable what you were able to accomplish in your tenure as the IndoPaycom Commander you have focused the Department of Defense and the Congress on the most difficult of all of the regions in this world and I thank you I thank you for the personal relationship we've been able to build and for what you have done for this nation and with that Mr. Chairman I yield back well said and not completely concur thank all of you for your presence and your service to our nation with that we are adjourned