 This hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee will please come to order. We are here today to discuss the national security components of the President's supplemental funding request. Very glad to have Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken with us to talk about the challenges we are seeing around the world and the urgency of providing the necessary resources to meet these challenges, support our allies, and make the world and our country safer. At our first full committee hearing earlier this year on out-competing China, both secretaries made a strong case for why passing our full year appropriations bills with robust investments in America and avoiding perpetual CRs and devastating cuts is so crucial to keeping our nation competitive on the world stage. As the two of you return to this committee, I think every member on this dais understands and takes to heart many of the messages you left with us at the last hearing. These are unprecedented and difficult times, and American leadership and support will be critical as we face the many threats and challenges we will discuss today. That's why Congress must come together in a bipartisan fashion to act decisively and purposely. This is not a time to punt American leadership or punt on funding agencies critical to these efforts and to American families. If we let politics and division drive us away from this mission, I worry about where we will stand for years to come. So I hope this committee can continue to lead the way with thoughtful, swift, bipartisan action that keeps your message here today in mind. Thank you both for joining us again. We are at a precarious moment across the globe. Ukraine is continuing its courageous resistance against Putin's bloody invasion. And Israel is reeling from a horrific terrorist attack by Hamas, a vicious attack that none of us will ever forget. Now it is often the innocent that suffer most in war. So of course there are also urgent humanitarian needs, including aid for the Ukrainian people and the countries caring for those displaced by Putin's war and aid for Palestinian civilians in Gaza. It is also a humanitarian imperative that Hamas release the hostages it took during its violent attack. And of course Putin's invasion has also severely disrupted food supply chains around the world, leaving a serious crisis of global hunger in its wake. And in the Indo-Pacific, our friends and partners face growing threats and aggression, particularly from the Chinese government. In short, the world is on edge and how the US wields its leadership will be a critical factor in determining what happens next. Now is a time for serious, sober discussion, not partisanship or political show. This hearing is a crucial opportunity for us to make sure we are taking a full view of this moment, meeting immediate requirements while planning for the long term and providing the resources necessary to make the world safer for America and its allies. If we are going to get this right, we have to understand how these conflicts are developing today and what our strategy is for the future. We have to appreciate the nuances that differentiate each of these challenges as well as the ways in which they are all interconnected. We have to see the big picture without losing sight of the human reality on the ground, the fact that in the middle of every conflict are civilians, residents displaced from their homes, hostages torn from their families, people facing obstacles getting basic medical services and kids and families who desperately need food and water. And we have to be able to recognize the complexity of these issues while holding fast to the simple, actionable truths that can guide our work. For me, that means America must stand strong by our allies, dictators cannot be allowed to invade sovereign democracies, terrorism cannot be tolerated, and we cannot ignore the humanity and the cries for help from civilians who are caught in the middle of conflict and crossfire who we must protect. It's a tall order, but the Biden Administration's National Security Supplemental Request offers us a useful blueprint. And Vice Chair Collins and I are working right now to craft strong bipartisan legislation that meets the national security priorities that the President laid out. That means a package that provides support to the Ukrainians who are at a crucial point in their fight to protect their sovereignty and the end of the butchery of Vladimir Putin's brutal invasion, one that makes clear to other countries looking to copy Putin's aggression that they will fail. And one that replenishes DoD stockpiles as well and bolsters our domestic manufacturing. That is crucial to ensure we have secure supply chains when it comes to our nation's defense and that after we send Ukraine weapons we are replacing our stocks with modern American-made arms. And let's be clear, huge supermajorities in the House and Senate favor more support for Ukraine. So getting this funding across the finish line should not be controversial. Meeting this moment also means a package that ensures we stand with Israel as it works to protect its people in the wake of the horrific Hamas attack and deter additional terrorist threats and one that helps us prevent further escalation of violence in the region and address humanitarian needs. It means a package that strengthens our presence and supports our allies in the Indo-Pacific and helps us keep pace as the Chinese government works aggressively to expand its footprint in the region. And of course it also means a package that continues our longstanding and all important tradition of the U.S. leading the global humanitarian response and delivering vital humanitarian aid to save lives in places that are being torn apart by conflict, whether they are in Ukraine or Israel or Gaza. We cannot lose sight of the needs of civilians whose lives have been upended by war and violence around them. Making sure people have food, water, and medical care isn't just the right and moral thing to do, it also promotes long-term stability and security, combating hopelessness that can spiral into new threats. Let me also say this as someone who voted against the Iraq War. I have been heartened to see the President urge our allies in Israel not to fall subject to so many of the same mistakes we saw following the 9-11 terrorist attacks. It is an important message for the President and our country to deliver, as a friend of Israel, to stay clear-eyed and strategic in pursuit of justice. Every country has an obligation to protect innocent life and abide by international law, especially during times of conflict. I'm glad the Biden administration is sending that message and I strongly support their robust efforts to ensure further access to humanitarian relief for the civilians of Gaza. Finally, make no mistake, we need to address all of these priorities as part of one package because the reality is these issues are all connected and they are all urgent. The Chinese government is watching how we respond to Putin's aggression in Ukraine. Putin is hoping the Hamas attack will give him an opening and distract the world from aiding Ukraine against his brutal invasion. And all of our adversaries are watching closely to see whether we have the vision to recognize how these crises are related and the resolve to come together and respond forcefully to them. Our adversaries are cheering for dysfunction. So let's instead show them unity. Let's show them the strength of democracy by passing a robust, bipartisan national security package. Before I turn it over to Vice Chair Collins, let me just say, while we are focused on the global challenges at this hearing, we should also address the needs here at home, the child care crisis, relief for our communities who've been struck by disaster, the fentanyl crisis, the needs at our southern border, and more. And I'm continuing to discuss a separate hearing to address those issues with my colleagues. I know that it's critical to many of us here and next week we will have an opportunity to discuss these issues with Secretary Mayorkas and Secretary Becerra at a hearing in front of this committee on November 7. Bottom line, we face a number of urgent national security issues and challenges here at home. President Biden has submitted requests for much-needed supplemental funding to address these priorities. I urge my colleagues on both sides to work with me on all of these urgent issues. And if we can pass our domestic priorities right alongside our national security priorities, we absolutely should. After all, we are the United States of America. We can stand with our allies around the world and tackle the challenges facing our families here at home at the same time. Now, I'm glad we're holding this hearing today to discuss the vital national security requests the President has submitted to Congress. And I look forward to a thoughtful discussion about what is needed to fight and deter aggression from authoritarian leaders, tackle terrorist threats, and protect civilians. And about what is at stake for America's own security and future if we fail to stand with our friends across the globe and lead. Thank you. And without, I will turn over to Vice Chair Collins. Thank you, Chair Murray, for holding this important hearing. Let me begin by expressing my appreciation to Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin for joining us today to discuss the President's National Security Supplemental Funding Request. I had hoped that Secretary Mayorkas also would be here, but he is testifying this morning before another Senate committee. I very much appreciate that the Chair has scheduled an opportunity next week for Secretary Mayorkas to come before us and describe what is needed in the supplemental to provide effective border security to stem the flood of illegal migrants and fentanyl crossing into the United States. Through the end of fiscal year, as of September 30th, there were a record 2.5 million encounters at our southwest border. This real threat to our homeland must also be addressed. The collective threats that the United States faces from an aggressive Iran in its proxies, an imperialist Russia, and a hegemonic China are also challenges that require our attention and cooperation from our allies. Adversaries in the Middle East are launching attacks not only against our ally Israel, but also against American troops in Syria and Iraq. In Ukraine, the determined patriots backed by the United States, the European Union, Japan, Australia, and others continued to battle Putin's brutal and unprovoked invasion. In Asia, China's dangerous game of brinkmanship is targeting our aircraft flying in the region, rattling savers at Taiwan, and physically challenging claims of the Philippines and Vietnam in the South China Sea. Some have argued for decoupling funding to address these threats and focusing only on the Iranian back terrorists who massacred so many Israelis on October 7. We must recognize that our national security interests are being aggressively challenged by all of these authoritarian actors in an effort to dismantle the international order that we established following World War II. Iran has been Russia's accomplice in Ukraine through the export of weapons and drones that terrorize Ukrainian civilians. Just last week, Russia hosted Hamas, an Iranian leadership where Hamas praised Russia's criticism of Israeli's actions to defend itself following the recent terrorist attacks. China refuses to condemn either Russia's second invasion of Ukraine or Hamas's attacks despite both having committed war crimes targeting civilians and both having stolen children from their families. If we fail to thwart these efforts, there will be dire consequences that will jeopardize our national security. The metric by which I will scrutinize the funding proposed by the administration's request is simple. Does it make America more secure or not? Let me offer a few reflections. When I was in Israel with Senator Graham, Senator Cardin, and several other senators last week, we met with families whose loved ones, including very young children, are being held hostage by Hamas. During the October 7 terrorist attacks, parents were murdered in front of their children. The actions of Hamas are nothing less than evil, and we must stand by our friend Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East. Like Israel, Ukraine was the victim of an unprovoked attack by a repeat violent offender. The United States, albeit slower than many of us would have liked, stepped in with assistance for Ukraine to help repel Russian's battlefield advances. Let's review what has happened since we have helped Ukraine in its defense against Russia's second invasion. No U.S. soldiers have lost their lives fighting in Ukraine. Our adversary, Russia, is weaker. NATO is stronger than ever. Finland has joined the alliance, and I expect that Sweden will do the same soon. Each of these outcomes is in America's interests. Finally, the supplemental request includes more than $30 billion to replenish our military's weapons stockpiles and invest in and strengthen the U.S. defense industrial base in many states. The requested funding will refill the stockpiles and increase the production capacity of key munitions in greatest demand. None of this funding goes overseas or to another country. It makes America stronger by modernizing our arsenal of democracy right here in our country and improving the readiness of the U.S. military to deter any adversaries seeking to harm the United States. Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin, we look forward to hearing your specific justifications. Before we turn to your opening statements, let me reiterate that Chair Murray and I want to enact all 12 appropriations bills, including the State Foreign Office bill and the defense appropriation. As former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates once told me, the most important action Congress can take to bolster our national security is to pass full year appropriations bills to avoid the harm to military readiness that comes from short-term funding patches or sequestration. Secretary Austin, I hope that you will comment on that in your opening remarks. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Vice Chair Collins. And before I introduce our witnesses and move to testimony, I want to take a moment to welcome someone else today, our newest member of the committee. Senator Sinema is someone who truly knows how to work with members on both sides of the aisle. I'm sure she will be a strong voice for our constituents. Welcome to our committee. Madam Chair, if I may echo your welcome to Senator Sinema. We've worked very closely on many bills, and I know she's going to be a great addition to our committee. Thank you. Now back to the business's hand, I'm very pleased to welcome Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin. Thank you both for taking the time today to be with us and to answer our questions. We will now start with opening remarks. And Secretary Blinken, I will begin with you. Thank you very much. Chair Murray, Vice Chair Collins, distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today. You recognize that people feel very passionately, but I ask that we have order in this hearing room and respect our speakers. We will move forward with the hearing and allow the people here and the American people to hear from their witnesses. Senator Blinken. Thank you, Chair. Two and a half years ago, our adversaries assessed that the United States was becoming permanently divided at home, alienated from our allies and partners around the world. Working together, we've demonstrated that America's resilience, its strength, and leadership in the world remain unmatched. We've made historic investments in the source of America's strength at home, our democracy, our infrastructure, our economic and technological competitiveness. We've invested in the modernization of our military, and we've invested in our greatest strategic asset abroad, our network of allies and partners, which is growing larger, stronger, more united, and more capable than ever. We're standing up for our interests and values, not shrinking back. Not in the face of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Not in the face of an intensifying strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific and around the world. If the witness will suspend, and I ask that everyone again respect this hearing, we will suspend until the room is cleared. Thank you, Senator Blinken, if you can continue, please. As I said, we're standing up for our interests and values. Not shrinking back. Not in the face of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Not in the face of intensifying strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific and around the world. Not in the face of terrorism and its state sponsors. And America does not stand alone. We built extraordinary coalitions with friends who carry their share of the burden, which I'm happy to come back to. Our adversaries and competitors alike recognize that our strategies are working, and they continue to do everything they can to disrupt us. We now stand at a moment where many are again making the bet that we're too divided or too distracted at home to stay the course. That's what's at stake with President Biden's national security supplemental funding request. President's request would secure the urgent resources that we need to continue to lead. Secretary Austin and I believed it important for us to be here together today because in this mission, as in so much that we do to advance America's national security, our defense, our diplomacy, our development, must work hand in hand. Committee will suspend. And again, I appreciate that people feel passionately about these issues. I would ask that you respect our witnesses and our committee members and allow the American people to hear their testimony. We will pause until the room is cleared. Thank you, Secretary Blinken, if you can continue, please. Thank you, Chair. The President's funding request has four key elements. First, it provides for our enduring support to Israel and Ukraine, two democracies under brutal assault by actors determined to wipe their nations off the map. It will ensure that Israel can continue to defend its people by building on the diplomatic security and intelligence support that the United States has surged since Hamas' appalling slaughter. I know that several— Committee will suspend. And I again ask that those in the audience respect the people in the room and allow us to continue the hearing. The hearing will suspend until the disruption is removed. Thank you, Secretary Blinken, if you can continue, please. So I was saying, I know that several committee members have traveled to Israel over the last three weeks. They've heard directly from Israeli officials what they need to defend their people and prevent another attack like this one. And that's exactly what the supplemental provides with $3.7 billion for security needs, including to help Israel bolster its air and missile defense systems. The supplemental also requests additional authority to draw down DOD stocks and enhances the security of our embassy. As President Biden has made clear from the outset, while Israel has the right, indeed it has the obligation to defend itself the way it does so matters. In our discussions with the Israeli government, the President and I have both stressed the need for Israel to operate by the rule of— Committee will suspend. Secretary Blinken, you may continue. Thank you, Chair. So I was saying, the President and I have both stressed in our conversations with the Israeli government the need for Israel to operate by the law of war and in accordance with international humanitarian law, and to take all possible measures to avoid civilian casualties. For Ukraine, President Biden is requesting $16.3 billion to supply Ukraine's defense, without which Russia will move quickly to try to seize and exploit any possible opening. And to ensure that Ukraine can sustain the economic base and recovery that its war effort depends on. This funding will not only rebuild Ukraine's economy and offset the damage brought by Russia, but it will also help to reimagine it, investing in new industries, infrastructure, and supply chains connected to Europe and to the world. Secure and resilient clean energy, anti-corruption bodies, civil society, media, to be strong enough to deter and defend against aggressors beyond its borders, Ukraine needs a resilient economy and a vibrant democracy within its borders. Since Russia lost its war, the robust funding supported by Congress has enabled the people of Ukraine in their courageous fight to defend their nation. It's helped make sure that Russia's invasion and strategic. Committee will suspend. Thank you, and before I turn back over to you, Secretary Blinken, I just really want to thank the Capitol Police for their very common professional manner, we all appreciate it. Secretary Blinken, can you please continue? Thank you. So to continue, since Russia launched its war, the robust funding provided by Congress has enabled the people of Ukraine in their courageous fight to defend their nation. It's helped make sure that Russia's invasion is a strategic debacle, making it weaker in nearly every way. And it's rallied the world in defense of Ukraine and of the principles at the heart of the United Nations Charter, sovereignty, territorial independence, integrity, excuse me, and independence. Our partners are making significant contributions to share the burden of assistance, turning our backs on their efforts, but have lasting implications for our own security and our own standing in the world. The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have clear links, as both the chair and vice chair have noted. Since we cut off Russia's traditional means of supplying its military, it's turned more and more to Iran for assistance. In return, Moscow has supplied Iran with increasingly advanced military technology, which poses a threat to Israel's security. Allowing Russia to prevail, with Iran's support, will simply embolden both Moscow and Iran. Second, this funding will enable us to tackle grave humanitarian needs created by autocrats and terrorists, as well as by conflict and natural disasters in Ukraine, in Gaza, in Sudan, in Armenia, and other places around the world. Food, water, medicine, other essential humanitarian assistance for civilians must be able to flow into Gaza. Civilians must be able to stay out of harm's way, a task that's made even more difficult as Hamas uses civilians as human shields. And humanitarian pauses must be considered. Helping prevent a worsening humanitarian catastrophe aligns with our nation's most deeply held principles, including our belief that every civilian life is equally valuable, equally worthy of protection. Without swift and sustained humanitarian relief, the conflict is much more likely to spread, suffering will grow, and Hamas and its sponsors will benefit by fashioning themselves as the saviors of the very desperation that they created. Humanitarian assistance is also vital to Israel's security. Providing immediate aid and protection for Palestinian civilians in this conflict is a necessary foundation for finding partners in Gaza who have a different vision for the future than Hamas and who are willing to help make it real. Third, this funding is critical to out-competing our strategic rivals. This request will bolster deterrence. It will support our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to address threats from an increasingly assertive PRC and to meet emerging challenges. It will uphold our commitment to our allies, including under our trilateral security partnership with Australia and the United Kingdom, AUKUS. And it will help countries, countries and the military and defense equipment that's made in America. The President's request also include resources for the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to provide alternatives to China's coercive financing for our partners in the developing world. It will also help ease the impact of spillovers in Russia's war on food and energy security for the world's most vulnerable. The proposed $2 billion appropriation and requested authorizations would generate almost $50 billion in additional development funding capacity for the World Bank and the IMF, an enormous return on our investment, demonstrating U.S. leadership in meeting urgent global challenges. Fourth and finally, the supplemental will make critical investments to protect the security of Americans here at home. That includes addressing the hemispheric challenge of a regular migration, strengthening our defense industrial base to ensure our military continues to be ready, capable and the best to quick fighting force in the world, and that we remain the arsenal for democracy. More than $50 billion of the security systems funding will replenish U.S. military stocks, strengthen our defense industrial base and will be spent through American businesses. Each of these investments work together to achieve our mission, a stronger, safer, brighter future where America can lead from a position of strength. Let us come together and demonstrate to one another and to the world that we can rise to this moment. I also hear very much the passions expressed in this room and outside this room. All of us are committed to the protection of civilian life. All of us know the suffering that is taking place as we speak. All of us are determined to see it end. But all of us know the imperative of standing up with our allies and partners when their security, when their democracies are threatened. That's what's happening now. We stand resolutely with them even as we stand resolutely for the protection of innocent civilians. Before I close, I'd just like to thank senators for their vote today to send the President's Ambassador nominee, Jack Lew, to Israel at this critical time. And I encourage the Senate to do the same for the 26 other nominees waiting for their vote. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much, Secretary Blinken. Secretary Austin, if you want to begin your testimony, please. If you could suspend until we have the room cleared. Thank you. Secretary Austin, you may begin. Chair Murray, Vice Chair Collins, ladies and gentlemen, good morning. Thanks for the opportunity to discuss our urgent need for supplemental funding to strengthen our national security. On October 7th, Hamas terrorists murdered more than 1,400 Israelis and at least 36 Americans and took more than 200 hostages. It was the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history. It was cruel, hateful, and repugnant. And as former head of central command, it reminded me powerfully of the crimes committed by ISIS in Iraq and Syria. As President Biden has said, any democracy would respond decisively to such a vile terrorist assault. And I traveled to Israel just days after the attack to underscore America's ironclad commitment to Israel's security. Now, we fully understand that Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people and we mourn the loss of Palestinian civilians. And I have repeatedly made clear to Israel's leaders that protecting civilians in Gaza is both a moral responsibility and a strategic imperative. Democracies like ours are stronger and more secure when we uphold the law of war and protect civilians. Now, tensions remain exceptionally high. So let me outline the department's four key lines of effort. First, we'll continue to protect American forces and citizens in the region. Our personnel have come under repeated attack in recent days by Iranian-backed militia groups. And these attacks must stop. At the President's direction, U.S. forces have conducted precision self-defense strikes on facilities in eastern Syria used by Iran's IRGC and its affiliates. If Iranian-backed groups continue to attack U.S. forces, we will not hesitate to take further necessary measures to protect our people. We've also raised force protection measures across the region. And I've deployed a terminal high-altitude area defense battery as well as additional patriot batteries. And second, we're flowing security assistance into Israel at the speed of war. We're providing air defense capabilities, precision-guided munitions, small-diameter bombs, and other key equipment, including more interceptors for the life-saving iron dome system. Third, we're coordinating closely with Israel to help secure the release of every man, woman, and child seized by Hamas, including American citizens. As President Biden told the families of the missing Americans, we have no higher priority than the safe return of their loved ones. And we immediately provided U.S. military advisors to offer best practices for integrating hostage recovery into Israel's operations. And finally, we swiftly strengthened our force posture in the region to deter any state or non-state actor from escalating this crisis beyond Gaza. Two carrier strike groups are now in the region. Last week, an additional F-16 squadron arrived in the region, complimenting other fighter squadrons already in theater. And all this underscores the President's clear warning. No government or group that wishes Israel harm should try to widen this crisis. Yet even as we surge support into Israel, we remain focused on Ukraine. Nearly 20 months into Putin's failed campaign of conquest, the Russian military has been badly weakened. Ukraine's brave forces have taken back more than half of the territory seized by Russian invaders since February 2022. And that was made possible by bipartisan and principle U.S. leadership, in our coalition of some 50 allies and partners. In both Israel and Ukraine, democracies are fighting ruthless foes who are out to annihilate them. We will not let Hamas or Putin win. Today's battles against aggression and terrorism will define global security for years to come. And only firm American leadership can ensure that tyrants and thugs and terrorists will ride or not emboldened to commit more aggression and more atrocities. So our actions today will shape the world that our children and grandchildren inherit. And that's why we've submitted an urgent supplemental budget request to help fund America's national security needs and to stand by our partners and to invest in our defense industrial base. We're requesting $10.6 billion to help Israel defend itself. The supplemental also requests $44.4 billion to help Ukraine continue to defend itself against Russia's ongoing aggression. We're also requesting $3.3 billion to meet U.S. military requirements in our submarine industrial base and to fulfill our AUKUS requirements. Now, this supplemental doesn't just help meet today's urgent challenges, it also invests in our defense industrial base. When we send our friends munitions from our stockpiles, the money to replenish our supplies strengthens our military readiness and we invest in American industry and American workers. That also holds true for funding for Israel or Ukraine to procure a new equipment off the production line. Some $50 billion of this supplemental request would flow through our defense industrial base, creating American jobs in more than 30 states. And these investments will also improve our production capacities far into the future and help ensure that we are ready to tackle security challenges worldwide. And all that means greater prosperity at home and greater security around the globe. And finally, let me thank all of you for your leadership. Your bipartisan support ensures that we can defend America and stand by the allies and partners who magnify our strength. I'm also deeply committed to working with all of you to enact a full year appropriation bill to keep America secure. As President Biden has said, American leadership is what holds the world together. And if we fail to lead, the cost and threats to the United States will only grow. We must not give our friends, our rivals, or our foes any reason to doubt America's resolve. So I look forward to continuing to work with you to keep America secure, prosperous and strong. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary Austin. We will now begin around a five minute questions of our witnesses and I ask our colleagues to keep track of your clock, stay within those five minutes. We have a lot of urgent challenges, getting aid to Israel as soon as possible, continuing our support for Ukraine and addressing urgent humanitarian needs globally. Some of my colleagues in the House and the few in the Senate are pushing to provide only the emergency military funding for Israel and not the rest of the President's request in this security supplemental. Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin, I'd like each of you to address this question. Why is it so important that we provide supplemental funding for Ukraine, the Indo-Pacific and humanitarian assistance in addition to military aid to Israel? And Secretary Blinken, I'll begin with you. Thank you very much, Chair. I think it's very important to understand that the elements of this request work together as a package. As you know, the Defense Industrial Base operates in a complex way. It's an interdependent unit. Making these investments together allows us to do what's needed to strengthen the Defense Industrial Base and to seize the benefits and efficiencies that come from making these investments together rather than making them piecemeal. We also know, as you've heard, that increasingly Russia and Iran are working together to challenge our leadership, to hem us in globally, to pose a growing threat to our own security as well as to that of our allies and partners. They've been partners in a devastating war in Syria. And now we have Iranian proxies firing missiles from Syria in northern Israel. Russia could stop this, but it doesn't. Instead, to the contrary, its government is hosting Hamas for talks in Moscow. Iran is sending UAVs to Russia to attack Ukrainian civilians. So we're seeing the profound connections here. What happens in Ukraine, what happens in the Middle East, also matters for the Indo-Pacific. Beyond Europe, we know that our allies, as well as our adversaries, as well as our competitors, are watching that conflict. They're watching our response. The global impacts of Russia's unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine further stress the importance of ensuring that the Indo-Pacific does not learn the wrong lessons from these conflicts. So the funding request that we put before you is vital to securing a free and open Indo-Pacific in the face of mounting challenges in that region to threaten to undermine the international rules-based order, including things like freedom of navigation. In other words, to put it succinctly, for our adversaries, be they states or non-states, this is all one fight. And we have to respond in a way that recognizes that. If we start to peel off pieces of this package, they'll see that, they'll understand that we are playing whack-a-mole while they cooperate increasingly and pose an ever greater threat to our security as well as to that of allies and partners. And one final thing, I think when it comes to the humanitarian assistance and we can come back to this, it's first and foremost vital because this is who we are. We know that when it comes down to it, in each and every one of these conflicts, people are suffering, men, women and children, parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents. And I think it's profoundly who we are to wanna do everything we can to assist them, to try to lift some of the horrific burden that they're bearing from being caught in the midst of conflict. At the same time, it's vitally important as a strategic proposition that we provide the assistance that we can to help people in need. We've seen Hamas and other groups play the siren song of nihilism to try to attract people to their perverted cause. We wanna make sure that we have a better response, that we have a better answer across the board. That's part of the strategic proposition as well as one that's profoundly humanitarian. Thank you. Very awesome. Thanks, Chair Murray. I think it's important to remind ourselves that what happens in Ukraine and what happens in Israel matters not to just Ukraine and Israel, it matters to us. It affects our national security as well. We also have to remind ourselves that these countries are in a fight. They're fighting every day and there are people dying every day. And in Ukraine, Putin continues to attack civilians and commit war crimes that are despicable. And so these countries urgently need the resources to ensure that they can continue to defend their sovereign territory. And Ukraine, Putin has felt that he could wait us out. And that's part of his strategy, the main part of his strategy. He feels that the West will get tired of supporting Ukraine and he'll soon have his way. If that's the case, if we don't support Ukraine and Putin wins, but Putin will not stop in Ukraine. We know that, we all know that. And so I think it's important to do what's necessary to support Ukraine and Israel and to help them defend their sovereign territory. But as the secretary said, as Secretary Blinken said, this is also an investment in our defense industrial base. It helps us replenish our stockpiles and gives us additional depth and agility that helps us do what we have done over the years, over the centuries, over the decades, excuse me, around the world. And so I think this is very important that we provide the support and it's important that we provide the support now to both in both cases. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. And if my committee members will indulge me, I just wanna ask Secretary Blinken on the $10 billion in humanitarian assistance. Some of my colleagues have raised concern that that could end up in the wrong hands, including Hamas. Can you just walk the committee through the reason why you requested it and how you are confident that evade is provided in places like Gaza will not end up in the hand of terrorists? Thank you very much. First, let's be clear that the needs are desperate. The needs for the most basic things, food, water, medicine, fuel, all of these are literally a matter of life and death, just to focus in on Gaza. And we know that they are running out. Hospitals don't have the fuel they need to operate. Men, women and children displaced, well over a million people displaced in Gaza, about half of them under the care of UNRWA right now. Desperately need the most basic things in order to survive. So from day one, we have been working with the Israeli government, with Egypt, with the UN agencies, as well as with other actors to try to make sure that assistance could get into people who need it in Gaza, but get it in a way that doesn't go to the people who don't need it, and that's from us. So we've set up a system where assistance is coming through Rafa, the gate between Egypt and Gaza. The assistance is checked by Israel at a site that has been established to do that, so that every truck that goes in is verified by Israel as well as by the Egyptian authorities. The trucks go in, these are UN trucks, they go in, they connect to other UN trucks on the other side of the line in Gaza. These trucks then go to distribution facilities that are run by UN agencies. The supplies are then taken from those agencies to various points, to hospitals, to bakeries, because bread is critical, and to other endpoints. Throughout this process, we have an ability, and others have an ability, to track where the assistance is going. We're then able to do monitoring on the other end by contacting the designated recipients to ensure that it's actually gotten to where it's supposed to go and not been diverted. To date, we don't have reports either from the UN or from Israel that this assistance has been diverted from its intended recipients, but it's something that we're going to track very closely. Can I promise you in this committee that there'll be 100% delivery to the designated recipients? No, there will inevitably be some spillage. We haven't seen it to date, but I think we have to anticipate that. But the overwhelming, overwhelming majority of the assistance thus far is getting to people who need it, and we need more. We've gotten up to over 50 trucks a day before the conflict in Gaza, before Hamas's aggression against Israel and its response. The UN and other agencies and other organizations providing relief. We're sending in between 500 and 800 trucks a day. Right now we're up to almost 60. We're trying to get to 100 this week. That is the bare minimum of what's needed, but we've got to do it. And we believe we have mechanisms in place to make sure that that assistance gets to people who need it, not to Hamas. Thank you. Vice Chair Kongs. Secretary Blinken, let me follow up on Chair Murray's question. Does Israel agree that there are sufficient safeguards to prevent humanitarian aid from being diverted to Hamas rather than reaching the innocent civilians whom we all want to assist? Yes, Vice Chair, and this is something that we've worked closely with Israel as well as with other actors involved. And as I said, the assistance that's going in from Egypt into Gaza is first checked by the Israelis as well as by the Egyptians. And then as I mentioned, we have some methods to track it to make sure it gets to where it's supposed to go. To date, neither the Israelis nor the UN have said that the aid has been diverted and we're in constant, almost daily contact with Israel to make sure that the process we've established is working and also to find ways to expand it. One of the areas where we do need to do more and do need to do better is particularly with fuel because hospitals need fuel to run, desalination plants need fuel to operate. This is an area where we're working to find a way forward that meets the needs, but also with the assurances that Hamas won't abscond with it. Secretary Austin, as you indicated in your opening remarks, Iranian-backed terrorist proxy groups in the region have launched numerous drone and rocket attacks against our forces, U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq. According to press reports, there have been at least 20 such attacks and 19 U.S. service members have been wounded. It's imperative that Iran and its proxy groups understand that they cannot attack American forces with impunity. I know that last week, President Biden ordered two U.S. strikes against facilities in Syria used by Iranian proxies to threaten our troops. But the New York Times has reported over the weekend that Iranian-backed terrorists continue to attack U.S. forces in the region even after these airstrikes. Since these U.S. airstrikes apparently have not been sufficient to deter additional attacks on our troops by Iranian-backed proxies, what else is the department doing to stop attacks against American troops? Thanks, Vice Chair. First of all, let me emphasize that the protection of safety of our troops and our civilians is utmost important to me and utmost important to the president as well. We've taken a number of steps to make sure that we increase our force protection posture. We've deployed a number of assets into the region as well. We've been clear. President's been clear and I have been clear Vice Chair that if this doesn't stop, then we will respond. And so we remain, we maintain the right to respond. We have the capability to do that and we will respond at a time and place of our choosing. Secretary Blinken, Israel has every right to defend its citizens from Hamas, including seeking out the terrorists in Gaza and destroying them while also trying to minimize civilian casualties. There's a critical distinction here. Hamas targeted civilians. They kidnapped innocent children as well as people as old as 85 years old. Israel is not doing that. As Israel has begun to respond in Gaza to Hamas's indiscriminate and barbaric targeting of the innocent Israeli citizens, some, and we parted today, have called for a ceasefire. A ceasefire would be a strategic victory for Hamas. It would simply allow Hamas to buy its time and prepare for future attacks and pay no price for the greatest laws of Jewish lives in a single day since the Holocaust. Could you clarify the administration's position on a ceasefire? First of all, Senator, I fully agree with you that no country, no country could tolerate what Israel suffered on October 7th. And it's extraordinary the extent to which that day has receded in memory for so many. I was in Israel shortly after the attack. I've been going to Israel professionally for 30 years and longer than that in my own life. And I have never seen what we have all seen and what Israel experienced on that day in terms of the impact that it has on that society almost to a man, woman, and child. And as we know, it wasn't just the attack itself and the vulnerability that it revealed. It was the nature of the attack with young people chased down and gunned down at a dance party with, as you said, children executed in front of their parents. Parents executed in front of their children. Families in a final embrace burned alive. People beheaded. I could go on. You've seen the pictures, you've seen the video. I've heard from many eyewitnesses to these atrocities, including, and if you'll forgive me, because again, these stories recede so quickly. A family at its breakfast table at one of the kibbutzes. By the way, the profound irony of attacks on kibbutzes, the very people who most ardently believe and want a future of peace between Israelis and Palestinians, a future of two states. A family of four, a young boy and girl, six and eight years old and their parents around the breakfast table. The father, his eye gouged out in front of his kids. The mother's breast cut off. The girl's foot amputated. The boy's fingers cut off before they were executed. And then their executioners sat down and had a meal. That's what this society is dealing with. And no nation could tolerate that. And as we've said repeatedly, as President Biden has repeatedly made clear, Israel has not only the right, but the obligation to defend itself and to try to take every possible step to make sure this doesn't happen again. We've been equally clear that it is vitally important how Israel does this. And the imperative of doing everything possible to protect civilians, as well as to care for those who are endangered by the conflict, is something that we feel strongly. You're of course right that this is a special burden on Israel because Hamas cynically and monstrously puts intentionally civilians in harm's way by hiding behind them, by using them as human shields, by placing its people, by placing its equipment, by placing its ammunition, its weapons, its command posts underneath hospitals, underneath schools, in residential complexes. But for each of us, and particularly for democracies like Israel and the United States, we have to bear the burden of doing everything we possibly can to ensure that civilians are not harmed and to care for those who need our help. When it comes to a ceasefire, in this moment you're exactly right. That would simply consolidate what Hamas has been able to do and allow it to remain where it is and potentially repeat what it did another day. And that's not tolerable, no nation would tolerate it. We do believe that we have to consider things like humanitarian pauses to make sure that assistance can get to those who need it and that people can be protected and get out of harm's way. But we can't have a situation where there's a reversion to the status quo, where when this is over, it goes back to Hamas being responsible for the governance and so-called security of Gaza because that's simply an invitation to repeat what happened. And again, no nation would tolerate that. Thank you, Senator Durbin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Six weeks ago, the Senate on a bipartisan basis gathered with President Zelensky in the old Senate chamber. It was an historic and memorable moment. Many things were said about the courage of the Ukrainian people, which were well-deserved. But I recall one particular statement made by President Zelensky, which I'd like to ask you about this morning. He was asked about the course of the war and said the heroism of his people has been demonstrated over and over again. But he said, without the continued financial support of the United States and NATO, we will lose this war. He was unequivocal. He repeated it. Without the financial support of the United States and NATO, we will lose this war. Secretary Austin, was he exaggerating? He was not, Senator. As you know, we have provided significant amounts of security assistance to Ukraine. And not only that, based upon our leadership, our example, some 50 other countries have come in and worked with us in a coalition to also provide assistance. And so they've provided some $35 billion of their own to this overall effort. And I think our leadership in this effort really, really matters. Secretary Blinken, we know why we're asking these questions. The proposals coming from the new speaker of the House suggest that he would fund the support for Israel requested by the administration, but not fund the support for Ukraine. In the starkest terms, what would that mean if we were to step back and not fund support for the people of Ukraine to repel Putin at this moment? Senator, I think it would do both terrible harm to our values, but also to our core interests. Values because I think all of us are united in wanting to respond to aggressors, to bullies who try to lord it over their neighbors. And in the midst of doing that, inflict incredible suffering on people. What impact would that have on NATO? I'm sorry? What impact would it have on NATO if the United States does not fund support? Well, I'd say two things. First, what we've seen is a remarkable coming together of our NATO alliance, an alliance that's actually grown stronger and larger as a result of Putin's aggression. An alliance that's also stepped up in a major way. It's individual members in terms of burden sharing. We often and rightly have concerns in different conflicts in the past about inadequate burden sharing. This is an instance where we've seen very significant burden sharing that would almost certainly go away if we go away. If you look at it, total assistance to Ukraine going back to February of 2022, the United States has provided about $75 billion. Our allies and partners, $90 billion. If you look at budget support, the United States has provided about $22 billion during that period. Allies and partners, $49 billion during that period. Military support, we provided about $43 billion. Allies and partners, $33 billion. Humanitarian assistance, the United States, $2.3 billion. Allies and partners, $4.5 billion, plus another $18 to $20 billion in caring for the many refugees who went to Europe and outside of Ukraine. So I think what the message it would send, first of all, to each and every one of these countries is if the United States is abandoning ship, well, we may as well do too. And second, our alliance itself is founded on the proposition that we're all in this together. I think they would see this as a retreat from our own responsibilities. Finally, and this is very important, and you've heard the Secretary of Defense say this, there is no doubt in my mind that if Putin is allowed to continue to act with impunity, that not only would he not stop at Ukraine and potentially go to a NATO country next, which would invoke our Article 5 obligations to allies and partners, it would send a message to would-be aggressors everywhere in the world that he can get away with it, so can we. And then we're likely to have a world full of conflict, and that's a world that's not good for the United States. We are much better sustaining our effort now, seeing this to success than having to pay a much higher price later when we have to be able to work full of aggression. Mr. Secretary, it can't be a coincidence that Putin would invite the head of the Hamas terrorist organization to Moscow just days after the October 7th attack, the terrible massacre, which you described in some detail, and I've heard so many depictions. So do you believe there is an allied effort between Putin's cause and the cause of the Hamas terrorist? Putin is very much trying to take advantage of the Hamas attack on Israel in the hopes that it will distract us, that it will divert our focus away from Ukraine and away from his aggression in Ukraine, and that it will result in the United States pulling back, pulling back its resources, pulling back its support, and at the same time, he's allied with the exact elements that are trying to wreak havoc in Israel. So we see these things as being very much joined, which is one of the reasons our request is a joint request. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Graham. Thank you. Secretary Blinken, thank you very much for helping us, the 10 of us who went over to Israel and Egypt and Saudi Arabia, just to kind of tighten things up a little bit. From an Israeli point of view, there will be no ceasefire until Hamas ceases to be a threat to the state of Israel. Do you agree with that statement? I do. Okay, so no ceasefire until Hamas ceases to be a threat makes perfect sense to me. Do you believe it's the goal of Hamas to destroy Israel, not to have a two-state solution? Don't have to take my word for it, take Hamas's word for it. I couldn't agree with you. You agree with that? General Austin. I do, they have said so. All right, so we're finding somebody who's not trying to help the Palestinians, they're trying to kill all the Jews. Would it be fair to say that Hamas is a modern day version of religious Nazis? I think there are different ways to qualify it. I would simply say that, well, is that a good character? I think the best recent analogy, Senator, is ISIS. Is that okay with you, for me to call them religious Nazis? I agree with Secretary Blinken. There's a direct parallel to ISIS. Matter of fact, I think there's two steps. Yeah, well, that's right, ISIS, Nazis is all bad. We all agree with that. Do you agree without Iran's help, Hamas could not do this? In short, yes, there's no doubt that Hamas wouldn't be Hamas. Matter of fact, General Alston, some estimates are that 93% of all the money Hamas receives comes from Iran. Is that correct? I don't know the exact percentage, but I would say the vast majority does come from- Well, all the reports I've seen from the administration is 90%. So Hamas is ISIS, Nazis, whatever you wanna call them. They wanna kill all the Jews. So if I were Jewish, I'd wanna stop them. They're being supported by Iran. Our troops in Syria and Iraq, they're there to protect against the rise of ISIS. Is that true, General Alston? That's right. I mean, they're just not hanging out, no other place to go. They're there because it's in our national security interest that ISIS not come back. You agree with that? That's correct, sir. Okay. Is it a red line for Iran to orchestrate an attack on our forces that kills an American in Syria or Iraq? Is that a red line? Can we tell the Iranians today, in case they're watching, if an American is killed by your proxies in Syria and Iraq, we're coming for you. Can you say that? I think Iran should be held accountable for the activities of these Iranian- Hey, does that mean that we would consider going to the source of the problem, a great Satan is Iran, not Israel, it's not the United States? Can we say publicly to the families who have service members over in Iraq and Syria that we will hit Iran if they try to kill an American through their proxies? Can we say that? What we have said and what we'll continue to say, Senator, is that we're gonna hold... Well, I wish you would be more clear because I'll tell you this. If one of these soldiers is killed, I'm gonna say it, and I hope other people will join me. If there's a attack by Hezbollah in the north, General Austin, that would put the state of Israel at threat, would that be an escalation of the war? It would be an escalation and Israel would be forced to fight on two fronts. I agree with that, and they have over 100,000 precision-guided rockets and missiles pointed at Israel. Is that correct? That's correct. Is it also correct that Iran is the biggest benefactor of Hezbollah? That is absolutely correct. Can we say to Iran, the Ayatollah, who is a religious Nazi, that if you escalate the second front, if you activate Hezbollah against the state of Israel to create a second front, we will come after you? Can we say that? Is that a red line? Whether or not we attack Iran because of a decision on a part of Lebanese Hezbollah, of course that's a presidential decision, and also will require Congressional. I'm running out of time. I'm gonna say it if it happens, I hope it doesn't. Finally, do you agree with me, Secretary Blinken, that one of the main reasons this attack occurred is Iran wants to stop the reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Israel? Yes, those who are opposed to normalization are Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. I just wanna end it with this. I will do everything I can as a Republican to help the Biden administration to achieve reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Israel with the understanding we're gonna help the Palestinian people post Hamas. That is the only way this ends. So I congratulate you. I urge you to continue to drive toward peace between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Do not let Iran win by getting us off track, and General Austin, Austin, I admire you very much, but we need to be clear, crystal clear, as to what happens if Iran kills an American soldier or they open up a second front, and I hope you will let them know what our red lines are. Thank you. Senator Reid. Thank you, Madam Chairman. First point I would like to raise is with respect to our colleagues in the House, their proposal, the Republican leadership, not only do they not fund Ukraine, which I think your testimonies indicates is a vital imperative for the United States. They also want to offset the funding by taking money from the IRS. Obviously, I don't think they read the Wall Street Journal because just a few days ago, the Wall Street Journal reported that in 2021, the Americans failed to pay $688 billion in taxes. So if we don't invest in the IRS, we are giving up billions and billions of dollars. And I think that point has to be recognized as we go forward and negotiate with the House. But let me turn now to the issue at hand. We're talking about the Secretary of Austin sending resources to Ukraine. You are now the civilian secretary of defense, but you were a distinguished army officer and commander of Sankom. If we don't send the resources, does that increase the probability that someday we'll have to send young Americans into the European theater? Absolutely, Senator Reid. I think, as we said earlier, if Putin is successful, he will not stop at Ukraine. And if you're a Baltic state, you're thinking, I'm next, and there's no question in my mind that sooner or later, he will challenge NATO and we'll find ourselves in a shooting match. And so in one sense, this comes down to a choice between lending them the tools to do the job or seeing young Americans facing combat. I agree, Senator. Thank you. Again, Secretary Austin, you pointed out with respect to the efforts in Gaza that humanitarian assistance is not just a good thing to do, it's a strategic necessity for the operations of Israeli forces, is that correct? That's absolutely correct. Now, it would seem to me that they could and should move into position in areas they control, hospitals, shelter and food and make it available to the Palestinian people and do all they can to assist those people to reach those areas. Is that appropriate? Absolutely, Senator. And just so you know, I talk to my counterpart, Benisher of Defense Galant, nearly every day. And every day I talk to him, I remind him of the necessity of getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza. We just had such a conversation yesterday and this is really, really important for a number of reasons, but I'm delighted to see that the flow has increased. But to the Secretary's point, we need to increase it much, much more. I think not only do we need to increase it, but also in terms of the strategy of the perception of the world with respect to Israel is that they have to make it clear that their foe is Hamas, not the Palestinian people, and that they will go, indeed, out of their way to try to protect the Palestinian people. I think that's essential. And it's not just a humanitarian impulse. It's very practical, strategic, operational technique. I agree, Senator. We tried to make this point also, Mr. Secretary Blinken, in our trips. And we suggested that to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia that he can put resources into humanitarian relief. And I would urge you and your colleagues to try to get all of the nations in that area to provide the resources. The Israelis control the ground. They can control the operations. But the money for aid to Palestinian people should come from the international community. Yeah, Senator, I very much agree with that. The United States, as it stands, is, by far, the leading donor to the Palestinians, where we provided $1.6 billion in assistance through various agencies to the Palestinians over the dependency of this administration. And we would like to see other partners, other allies, step up and do the same thing. That's something that we've been very clear about in our own conversations. And I really applaud the members of this committee and others who have been to the region recently and have been pushing that as well. Just the final point. My time is expiring. We have also a necessity to get many American citizens out of Gaza. And can you assure us that you're doing all you can to achieve that objective? We are, Senator. We're working on this every single day. We have about 400 American citizens and their family members. So it's roughly 1,000 people who are stuck in Gaza and want to get out. I'm focused on this intensely. My entire department is as well, both in the region and here. We're working with various parties to try to facilitate their departure from Gaza. The impediment is simple. It's Hamas. We've not yet found a way to get them out by whatever, through whatever place and by whatever means that Hamas is not blocking. But we're working that with intermediaries. We're working that for them. There are also another roughly 5,000 third country nationals from other countries seeking to get out. So this is something that we're intensely focused on. We've been in close communication as best we can with Americans who are stuck in Gaza. We've had about 5,500 communications that we've initiated. Phone calls, emails, WhatsApp, to be in touch with them, to try to guide them as best we can and to work for their ability to leave. Thank you very much. Senator Moran. Sure, woman, thank you very much. Upon the congressional receipt of the president's request for this emergency supplemental, my first request was of our own committee leadership that we have this hearing. And I thank both of you for honoring that request. Congress has a constitutional responsibility to deal with the dollars that will be spent. And I want this committee, as we should do, to treat that in a significant and serious manner. I think a markup would be important, but I would certainly indicate that changes in input from this committee and from Congress are required. One, to make the package better, and two, to make it more amenable toward passage by both the House and the Senate. I was originally and continued to be disappointed that Secretary Mayorkas is not with us, but I'm pleased to know that that is occurring next week. I want the committee and our witnesses in representation of the administration to know that there are many of us who believe our borders are our national security issue as well, that emergency supplemental financial aid should be included. But I also want you to know that we need the administration to work with us on policy changes. The laws and policies at the border, financial support for changes at the border for additional personnel are insufficient. But we need a different approach toward the push and pull of those people around the world who are seeking entry into the United States. I'm interested in seeing a package past the Congress and be signed into law, but I want to make certain the administration knows that there are many members of Congress who are serious about the issues of national security at our own borders. I want to ask a couple of questions and I'll submit more in writing. But I'd like an insurance, and maybe this comes from you, Secretary Austin, of a commitment. I want to make certain that as we assist Ukraine, we are assisting Ukraine in a way that allows them to succeed. I don't want this to be just a stalemate. I do not want Ukraine to have the dollars necessary not to lose. I want Ukraine, with our help and others, to have the opportunity, with their capabilities, their own personnel to win. What would be your response, Secretary Austin? My response would be, my response is, Senator, that that's exactly what we're doing. If you go back to the beginning of this effort here, all of us were saying, or many of us were saying, that Ukraine wouldn't survive Russia's onslaught for more than two days. So here we are a year later. Not only have they defeated Russia in a number of battles, but they've regained 50% of the territory that Russia initially occupied. And Putin is a strategic failure right now. He's not achieved any strategic objective that he set out to achieve. He never conquered Kiev. He's been stuck essentially in the same place in terms of his front line trace on the battlefield for a long time. Now, I think that based upon where they started and where we are now and what they continue to do, I would say that Ukrainians have made remarkable progress. And our goal is to make sure that they can continue to do that. So we're talking to them every week. I'm talking to my counterpart every week to ascertain what his requirements are and we're moving with urgency to make sure that we can fill those requirements where possible. Secretary Austin, tell me if you would, tell us, how does a failure to fund Ukraine emboldened China, emboldened Iran, emboldened Hamas, emboldened Russia? We've had circumstances in our history, including recent history, at least in my view, in which we sent a message to the world that we are not a faithful ally and to our enemies, to our adversaries that we are not a threat. Would the failure to fund Ukraine in this circumstance meet that criteria in which we fail to demonstrate our capabilities, our willingness, our state to it is? And what would be the consequences of that message being sent? As you know, there are those who say that we should be focused on someplace else besides Ukraine, but doesn't our failure to focus on Ukraine create huge and significant problems elsewhere in the world with our adversaries and diminish the support of our allies? I think it sends a horrible message to our adversaries, Senator. I think our adversaries would like to build a narrative that we are not a trustworthy ally or a partner. And we see some of that beginning to play out in the media space right now. They are seeking to take advantage of every opportunity and they would like to prove that the United States is something else other than it is. And we are the world's most reliable ally or partner. And I think it's necessary to demonstrate that we're gonna stick by our partners. Is it more than coincidence that we have so many challenges in this world, all occurring now at the same time? I think a number of things have come together to cause what we're seeing happen. But certainly a failure on our part to follow through with, you know, in support of our allies or partners exacerbates some of the things that we're seeing right now. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Senator Tester. I wanna thank the chairman and ranking member. I wanna thank both you, secretaries for being here today. I appreciate the work you do. I appreciate the difficulty of the work you do. I wanna touch quickly on why we're here. And that's a supplemental to help Israel and help Ukraine with humanitarian aid and infrastructure money for subs in particular. I wanna start by saying the attack on October 7th by Hamas on Israel was horrific. And it is critical that we provide our ally with the necessary tools to defeat Hamas. And I wanna thank you two for working in that way because we cannot allow terror and enemies of democracy to win. And that is why it is critical that this committee shows the leadership so Congress can deliver a package that supports Israel and counters Vladimir Putin. I happen to believe that America is the greatest country that's ever existed on the face of the earth. And we need to support Israel. We need to make sure we're standing up to Russia. And I think we're able to walk and chew gum at the same time. I wanna be very clear today as chairman of the Defense Subcommittee that sets the Defense Department's budget. I'll be working with Republicans and Democrats and colleagues to deliver a package that replenishes America's weapon stock, supports our democratic allies, and sends a clear message to the enemies of freedom and democracy that they will not prevail. My question is this, this for you, Secretary Austin. Can you talk about the supplemental requests for Ukraine? How much of that is staying here to resupply our industrial base in this country? It's being spent in this country for our security to replenish that industrial base. For Ukraine? Yes. Okay, so thanks, Senator. We're asking for $44.4 billion in support of Ukraine. It's an $18 billion of that amount goes to enable us to replenish our stocks. And so we would buy, we would purchase American weapons and munitions from American companies to do that. $12 billion of that amount goes to support the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. And so this is buying new products, new weapons, new munitions from American companies. Five billion of that supports our troops who are currently deployed overseas. We surged a number of brigades to Europe as this began and we have to sustain them. And then 2.7 billion of that amount goes to expansion of facilities to increase capacity and accelerate production of critical munitions. And then finally, one billion for the acquisition of critical defense articles, which includes munitions as well. So this money is going right back into the coffers of America. And it's gonna create jobs. It's gonna sustain jobs. It's gonna provide opportunities for Americans. I think you know, Senator, that the first four supplementals that we asked you for and we received bipartisan support on, over $27 billion of that money that we received was invested in some over 30 states here in the United States. And I think that's real money going in the pockets of Americans. And in the end, this supplemental will make the United States stronger, correct? That's correct, Senator. We've heard a lot about whether Ukraine really needs some money or not. I listened to the talk show this weekend and they said there's not the urgency like there is in Israel. I think there's urgency on both by the way. Could you talk to me about, if we don't pass supplemental that includes Ukraine, how long Ukraine has before Putin becomes successful? It's hard to put an exact timeline on how long it would take, Senator, but I can guarantee you that without our support, Putin will be successful. And while the Ukrainians have done amazing work with our help in terms of the things that we've provided them, if we pull the rug out from under them now, Putin will only get stronger and he will be successful in doing what he wants to do in acquiring his neighbor's sovereign territory. I would just hope that this committee shows the leadership that I know we have sitting on both sides of the dais to do the right thing here and get a supplemental out that works for our national security. Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Hovind. Thank you, Madam Chair. We need to support Israel. There's no question about it. We're fighting for their very existence. We see that. We need to, clearly, we need to help them and support them, not just in this package, but beyond that. I believe we also need to support Ukraine. When you look at history, we understand very clearly that tyrants like Putin don't stop. They have to be stopped. So we need to do those things, but we also need to secure the homeland. And that means securing our border and there's about 14 billion, 13.6 billion in this package requested relative to the border and immigration. Secretary Blinken, last month, 270,000 illegal encounters, people trying to cross illegally at the southern border. That's a record. Two and a half million last year and 169 individuals trying to cross that are on the terrorist watch list. Border security is national security and I'm trying to understand how $14 billion to house, transport, and provide other services to individuals coming here illegally won't just encourage more to come. So my question to you is how is it that you're gonna assure us here today? And we'll ask Secretary Mayorkas in a week that you're gonna secure the southern border because I think for a lot of folks when we're talking about national security, they wanna see how that's gonna happen. And we're gonna wanna be assured of that. How are you gonna assure us that this is gonna actually happen, that it's not $14 billion for more people to come here illegally? Thank you, Senator. First, I think it's important to put this in very brief perspective, which is we are facing a migration challenge around the world of historic proportions. We've got more people on the move displaced from their homes around the world than ever before, ever since we've been actually keeping the numbers on this. More than 100 million people in our own hemisphere. It's somewhere between 20 and 25 million people and it used to be that we would have one crisis at a time, it might be Cuba, it might be Haiti. Now we've got Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Ecuador, Colombia and so on down the list, Nicaragua. And then people coming to our hemisphere from outside the hemisphere, trying to get into the United States. My piece of this, our piece of this at the State Department is the work that we're doing with countries throughout our hemisphere for them to step up and take shared responsibility for this problem. And that means among many other things, making sure that they themselves have a silent systems that works so that people will stay. With all due respect, Secretary, we understand that. How are you going to assure us that you are going to stop the flow of illegal crossings at our southern border? Will you give us that assurance and will you quantify it? We are working comprehensively. I'll just talk about the problem. Will you give us the insurance and will you quantify it? I would certainly defer to my colleagues at DHS and others who are working on the border itself. The piece that I'm focused on is working with other countries in the region. Is it your opinion we should enforce third safe countries? I'm sorry, go ahead, go ahead, sir. Get my time's limited here. Should we enforce third safe country and remain in Mexico protocols? We should work with other countries and enforce every reasonable measure to make sure that the migratory flow is safe, orderly and humane. That's what we're working on. Secretary Austin, we've had more than 25 attacks in the Middle East on our troops just since October 7th. Why are we not striking back more forcefully? Why are we not delivering a resounding message to stop those strikes on our bases and on our troops? Thanks, Senator. As I said, the protection of our troops, the safety of our troops is very, very important to me and the president. And we maintain the right to respond at a place and time of our choosing. And we've said that and we're serious about that. So we're to understand that we will strike back sufficiently forcefully to stop these attacks. We will do what's necessary to protect our troops and deter this kind of behavior. One follow-up question. Senator Moran asked about a strategy with Ukraine that brings this war to a successful conclusion. What is that strategy? Well, from our standpoint, we want to make sure that Ukraine at the end of the day is a democratic, independent, sovereign country that can defend its territory and deter aggression. We also want to make sure that we keep NATO together. I think the team has done a credible job in making sure that we bring our allies and partners along. In terms of specific goals and objectives, I would defer to the Ukrainian leadership to define that. But again, our goal is to make sure that we're providing the support to Ukraine to do what it needs to defend its territory. Thank you. We need to know that we have a strategy as part of this funding. I think it's very important in terms of building support for the funding for Ukraine. Thank you to you both, I appreciate it. Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Madam Chair and Vice Chair for this hearing and thank you to Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin for being here at this really critical time throughout the world. Senator Graham and Senator Moran to some extent both made the case for Iran funding Hamas and Iran's malign activities across the Middle East. But can you also talk about why funding Ukraine aid is important to degrade Iran's activities as well? So Secretary Austin or Blinken? Well, as you know, Senator, we've seen Iran provide unitions and drones to Russia. And Russia has used those capabilities to attack the Ukrainian infrastructure, attack civilians in towns and villages across the land. And so I think making sure that we're dialing back some of the capability, they're connected. So I think it'll have an impact on what Iran is doing for Russia as well. And Senator, I would only add that it's a two way street. It's both the assistance that Iran is providing to Russia for use in Ukraine to further its aggression, but it's also increasingly technology that Russia is providing to Iran to make its own inventory more sophisticated that could and will almost certainly be used either against Israel or for that matter potentially against us, against our forces, against our personnel, either directly or via Iranian proxies that are in the region. So this relationship, this two way relationship is one of increasing concern to us and one that we have to be acting against resolutely in both theaters because they're closely linked. I agree. I think it's very important for us to remind people that degrading Iran and their capabilities means not just supporting Israel, but it means supporting Ukraine as well. Last week I chaired hearing of the European subcommittee on the Black Sea security. I think one of the things we've learned from this war in Ukraine is how important the Black Sea region is to so much of the world and the fact that Ukraine actually, literally Ukraine's grain exports literally feed the world. So can you speak to the interconnectedness between the world's food security and Russia's war against Ukraine and why that's very important and what's gonna happen if we aren't able to continue to open up those grain quarters and provide the food that so many desperate nations and peoples need? Senator, one of the many terrible consequences of Russia's aggression against Ukraine is the impact that it's had far and wide, well beyond Ukraine, well beyond Europe, on people around the world, no more so than when it comes to food security. We all know that Ukraine has been the or certainly one of the bread baskets of the world. It's export of wheat, of grain, of other food products is essential to people in Africa, many other continents, both in terms of the supply of food and also the price of food. And in interrupting, in stopping the export of food and food products from Ukraine, particularly through the Black Sea, Russia's had a devastating impact on food security for people around the world. This never should have been necessary in the first place, the Black Sea grain initiative because Russia never should have invaded Ukraine and then once it did, it never should have blockaded Ukraine's ports and prevented it from exporting. But an arrangement was made, as you know very well, led by the United Nations and Turkey to get an arrangement by which these products could be exported. And while that agreement was in force, while the Russians were respecting it, allowing it to go forward, some 30 million metric tons of wheat and grain were exported, the equivalent of 18 billion loaves of bread. So that's what was at stake. That's what's been now stopped by Russia refusing to allow that initiative to go forward. So we've been working with the Ukrainians, the Europeans have been working with the Ukrainians to find other ways of getting these products out of Ukraine and to world markets, but the Blacks, nothing fully substitutes for the Black Sea. It's why you're so right to focus on it. And by the way, last thing I'll say is we have, as a result of a lot of good work that's been done and very good input from you and from others, a refined Black Sea strategy that we're also sharing with our allies and partners. I think this will be an important subject at the next NATO summit that we'll be hosting here in Washington. Thank you, and I'm almost out of time, but I do wanna ask you about the suggestion that's being floated that humanitarian aid is gonna go through the UN and the UN is gonna take some funding off of that in ways that support the UN and don't support the end goal of that aid. So can you just point out why that is not correct? First of all, that's just quite literally practically not the way it works. The Security Council is not involved in the decisions about how the aid is used or distributed. It's individual UN agencies. Some of the critical UN agencies that are involved in providing assistance, like UNICEF, like the International Organization for Migration, like the World Food Program, happen to be led right now by Americans, in fact, three American women. And so we have great confidence in the ability of these agencies to do the critical work that they need to do and to do it in a way that makes sure the assistance they're providing gets to the folks who need it, not folks who don't need it. Thank you. Senator Bozeman. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all for being here. And I'd like to talk a little bit about what I think is really the underpinning of our own defense security and our ability to provide aid to others, aid to our apartment, and that's our procurement ability. It's not glamorous, but it really is so, so very important. I've learned a lot about it through working with Senator Murray on our military construction efforts, but also Camden, Arkansas is a major player in that space, and they're working really hard. People of Arkansas, people of Camden have really stepped up. Secretary Austin, two years ago in the fiscal year 23 DOD budget hearing, I asked you about possible ways we could strengthen our industrial base to ensure we meet the current day demands and replenish our stockpiles. Since then, from your perspective, how has the industry responded? How is it performing? Are we making the right adjustments and doing so fast enough? Well, thanks, Senator. I'll begin by saying that I'm committed to making, continuing to do the right things to make sure that we're working with the industry to expand capacity where appropriate. We engaged in an industry early on as this conflict in Ukraine started, and for the most part, well, in all cases, leaders of industry were very, very helpful, very willing to increase production, increase capacity, and so we have some good examples of that great work. In terms of whether or not it's fast enough, if you're me, it can never be fast enough. If you're Ukrainian, you can never get it there fast enough, but there are some limitations in terms of how quickly they can do certain things. There will continue to be workforce challenges, and when you expand capacity, there's this issue of the time that it takes to build the capacity and then make sure that the lines are running smoothly. Now, what they've done in a lot of cases to meet urgent needs is double and triple shifts so that they can, in some cases, crank out munitions and weapons at a much greater speed. So the cooperation that we have enjoyed throughout, I think, has been really, really good, and we are in contact with industry leadership nearly daily, and my under for acquisition and sustainment is engaging on a daily basis, and I meet with them frequently, so they are doing the right things. They are being very, very helpful, but it can never move fast enough to answer your question. So with all the global demand now and then the possibilities of looking into the future with such an uncertain world, we've had this global demand for short range rocket motors, pack three missiles, I'm ours, Javelin's, Stinger's, 155 military artillery rounds. Do you feel that the request replenishes current stockpiles to an appropriate level while simultaneously fulfilling current day demands? Do you feel industry is able to meet the higher request if needed? I do, I think what we have in this request is the right amount, and I would say that we're going after capability as fast as industry can produce it, and so we've asked you for $3 billion as a part of this request to invest in helping to expand that capacity with industry, but it's the thing that we need to continue to work. So regarding the Israel portion of the supplemental related to the arm-dome request, the language is structured as a transfer to Israel. I'm hearing from industry that they are currently lacking the investment to help quickly accelerate rocket motor production for the interceptor missile to meet the new increased demand. The Ukraine portion of the request includes language allowing appropriated dollars to support infrastructure investments to accelerate production. Should we include similar language to support infrastructure investments to help meet the interceptor missile demands? Senator, as a general rule, we're gonna do everything that we can to meet the demands that we see in both Ukraine and Israel. As you know, this is the munition that you're addressing is a co-produced munition. Right. And so the American company that produces that munition is a company that I once worked for, so I'll have to take that question for the record, write an answer. I don't have time to address the question, but as ranking member in agriculture, I'm concerned about Russia using food as a weapon, so that's for what it's worth. Thank you very much, sir. Senator Merkley. Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome to both of you. Secretary Blinken, in your testimony, you talked about the worsening humanitarian catastrophe and how the humanitarian challenges are relevant to our deeply held principles that every civilian life is equally worthy of protection and that a failure on humanitarian relief could make conflict more likely to spread. I was heartened to hear that Israel has agreed to facilitate getting 100 trucks a day of aid in, but senior UN and humanitarian agencies, senior personnel both have said that Rafa crossing is not equipped for that type of logistical operation and that the place where the 500 trucks before came was primarily through Karim Shalom, which is also on the border with Egypt, but it's set up to facilitate large amounts of trucks getting through. Are we pushing to really solve, for Israel to solve the logistic problem so we can actually get, and 100 trucks really, it's one-fifth of what was supplying Gaza before, so that's really just the ultimate minimum, but much more is needed. Are we pushing to solve, have Israel solve those logistical problems quickly to get that humanitarian relief in? Thank you, Senator. We're looking at every means possible to get assistance in the Gaza. I think one of the challenges that we have is while we fully agree that even 100 trucks, and we're still not there, and we wanna get there as quickly as possible, is not going to fully meet the needs. There's also an absorptive capacity problem on the Gaza side, given the conflict, given the horrific disruptions that we're seeing. So even if you could get trucks well above 100 going in, you need to have the, on the receiving end, the capacity to actually both take and distribute that assistance. That's also lacking, so we gotta work on that too. Right, that too, but are we pushing just, I'm just looking for yes or no for, to use the additional logistical capacity that is at Karam Shalom. Right now, our focus is on maximizing what we can do through Rafa, but even as we're doing that, we'll look at other ways to get assistance in. Thank you, I'm very concerned on the testimony of other experts that that's gonna be very hard, and the moment is like right now, hunger rising, thirst rising, the potential for disease and conversations with the Red Cross and others, huge because of the contaminated water, the possibility of cholera, et cetera. I wanna turn to an article by Thomas Friedman on October 19th. He said, if Israel rushes headlong into Gaza to destroy Hamas and does so without expressing a commitment to seek a two-state solution with the Palestinian Authority, and end Jewish settlements deep in the West Bank, we'll be marking a grave mistake that will be devastating for Israeli interests and for American interests. And he notes that the impacts include fanning the flames in the West Bank, a risk of a broader war with Hezbollah and Lebanon, eliminating the possibility of any coalition governing Gaza after all this passes, including whether it's Palestinian, Arab League, UN, NATO, so forth, and destroying the probability of normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Those are, that's quite a set of American interests. Do you share Thomas Friedman's concern that without a vision of a two-state solution to address the prosperity and thriving in Palestinian aspirations that were locked into hostilities that will haunt us forever? It's been the policy of this administration from day one to support and try to put in place the conditions to actually get to a two-state solution. We believe that is the only way to truly ensure Israel's security as a Jewish and democratic state and to give Palestinians the state to which they're entitled. So we believe that that's essential. At the same time, we've been working very hard to both deepen and expand the process of normalization between Israel and its neighbors, both far and wide. And these things, not only are- Thank you, I'll slip in one more question. I support the two-state solution, but I think the facts on the ground are making it more and more difficult. And I agree with Friedman's analysis that policy has to change around settlements in order for that to be a possibility. I want to close with a question related to getting the Americans out, the families who are there. I have an Oregon family. They relayed to me how they three times gotten a text message, email saying, drop everything, go to the Rafa crossing. They waited until dark each time. Nothing happened. They weren't interfered with by Hamas, just the gate never opened. NBC has reported on another family in Massachusetts, the Medway family, very, very almost parallel experience. Why can't, with the trucks coming in, why can't at the same time we get those families, those American families who are lined up at the gate, having received notices from the United States to do so, why can't we get them out that gate? Senator, as I mentioned earlier, this is something we're working on every single day. We want to get our fellow citizens out and we're trying to find a way to do that. To date, the impediment has been Hamas and I regret very much that we've had occasions where we thought that we would be able to move forward, which is one of the reasons we were in contact with people and suggested that they get in place to do that, only to find that the necessary procedures that had to be put in place to actually make that work couldn't go forward and Hamas has been the impediment to that. We continue to work on it. We're working on it with Egypt. We're working on it with Israel. We're looking for ways to get people out, but because Hamas controls what goes on, for the most part, inside of Gaza, unless it agrees, then it's going to be very difficult to get that done. Thank you. Senator Moore Capito. Thank you. Thank you both for being here today. I think it's a very important hearing. I want to thank the chair and vice chair for the hearing. I remain an adamant supporter of our allies in Israel and believe that we should continue to back Ukraine against Russian aggression. You both made that point very clear. But I do believe that you've also made clear the point and emphasized how intertwined Ukraine and Israel are important to our own national security. But in your own statement, Secretary Blinken, in your statement, you mentioned one little throwaway line here when you say that includes addressing the hemispheric challenge of irregular migration. I am assuming you're talking about our southern border here. As has been reiterated, 269,000 last month, over 200 on the terror watch list. Americans are right to be extremely concerned about what's happening here and how it's intertwined with everything that's happening globally. And we can't lose sight of what we see. I am sure you, particularly Secretary Blinken, when you see the news of the anti-Semitic rallies that are occurring in our own country and across the globe, it's something I didn't think we would ever see in our lifetime. And it's earth-shattering. So can you make a better, will you please make a better case of why our own homeland security here, including our southern border, is figuring into the equations that you've brought us here today to talk about. Thank you very much, Senator. And I appreciate, as well, your reference to the, as you said, almost unimaginable instances of anti-Semitism that we've seen, as well, by the way, as expressions of Islamophobia and other bigotry that, unfortunately, horrifically surfaces, particularly in times like these. With regard to migration, as I mentioned earlier, we have a genuinely historic challenge. We have a historic challenge in our own hemisphere with nearly 25 million people on the move. What we're working to do from the perspective of the State Department is to work closely with other countries to get them to assume their share of responsibility in dealing with this migration. And that means it's in the budget. With all due respect, it's not working. This is not working. This is, as I said, a problem of truly historic proportions requires a comprehensive effort that we're making and also requires a lot of things, including comprehensive immigration reform, the very first piece of legislation the President put before Congress would have done that. Unfortunately, it hasn't been addressed. Here's what I'm concerned about, and I think a lot, when you see the 200 from the terrorist list, I know we're all concerned about this, that seeds of foment of terrorism could grow in all of, as you see, the sort of seeds of unrest in our own country. As we're watching Ukraine and we're watching Israel, we don't want to take eye off the ball of what's actually happening here. And I'm sure that nobody here wants to see that. I am concerned. I would like to go to another question for Secretary Austin, much like my fellow senator from Arkansas, we do manufacture a lot of the munitions at Allegheny Ballistics Laboratory in West Virginia, where we have over 1,600 people working there. And this supplemental does help build up that industrial base and industrial production at that facility and other facilities across the country. I guess when we see where we are now, would you say that we've learned a lot about our munition requirements because of what's happened in Ukraine? Or would you say that these were issues that had been, I guess, focused on at the Department of Defense, but we hadn't really realized where we were until we have to replenish everything that we've given away or sold and to be able to get our own capacity up to where we want it to be? Thanks, Senator. I want to be clear about the fact that we will maintain, we have maintained and will continue to maintain adequate capability to protect our interests and defend this country. And so as we have drawn down some of our stocks to provide capability to others, it's important to replenish that so that we continue to maintain agility and depth so that we can respond to crisis like we've seen. But our ability to protect ourselves and protect our interests, we will never mortgage that. And we go through a process every week as we receive requests for assistance and we measure what's being requested against what's required for our defense and we make the right calls. And in Ukraine's case, there are some 50 countries, as you know, that are working with us to provide security assistance. Israel, their fight's a different fight and their requirements are a bit different and so they're using different types of things. So we're able to meet both requirements and so again, there is an urgent need to get the supplemental so that we can continue to do the things that you mentioned in terms of replenishing those stocks that give us that flexibility going forward. Thank you. Senator Coons. Thank you Vice Chair Collins and I'll thank the chair in your absence and our two important witnesses today. Thank you for your timely and critical leadership and this hinge point in our role in the world and in human history. It is critical that we meet this moment and provide the full supplemental request presented to Congress by our president. And we have to sustain US global leadership and I would argue it is directly in our national security interests for us to stand up to tyrants and terrorists while meeting humanitarian needs to help stabilize critically impacted communities. The conflicts in Israel and in Ukraine are regional in nature but they have global consequences. As the world questions whether the United States is a reliable trustworthy ally, we have to fund our sustained presence in these fights. We have to see the global impact of a conflict like Ukraine that is having on global food security. We have to recognize we can't just respond to Russian aggression in Europe while Russian proxies are spreading instability around the world in places like Africa and addressing just the humanitarian needs in the Middle East by cutting responses in this hemisphere is not in our interests. We have to address these challenges comprehensively. Secretary Blinken, if I could, I just briefly wanna ask you, humanitarian relief has long been bipartisan. There are some who are questioning whether we are spending too much, whether we are preventing diversion to terrorists. You've addressed that previously. I've been reassured to hear directly from Israeli representatives. They value humanitarian relief in the middle of this conflict. You're only asking for us to sustain our current year funding going forward and it will provide humanitarian relief across dozens of countries around the world that are facing threats of instability. Could you speak to the strategic value of our continued humanitarian relief leadership? Thank you very much, Senator. And I appreciate the fact you've underscored that what we're looking at is to sustain what we've already been doing and also making the point that yes, this would be vital for Ukraine. It would be vital for people in Gaza, but also this would cover situations that we have to address in Sudan, in Afghanistan, Nagorno-Karabakh, and other places. And I think, again, there are two things that are at stake here. One is, and I always lead with this because I think this really is who we are, is the imperative that America continue to be seen as the country that stands with those who desperately need assistance at the most critical time. And this goes to, I think, an impulse that most Americans feel to help. But it's also a critical strategic proposition. I'll give you one example. It's imperative that Hamas be defeated. And it's imperative that Hamas no longer pose the threat that it's posed so acutely to Israel. But there's military defeat. There's also ideological defeat. You can't kill an idea no matter how perverted and distorted it is. You have to be able to offer a better alternative to people who are in desperate straits. Our ability, our willingness to be leading the effort to help them deal with the acute challenges they face in their lives, as well as offering a genuine vision for how life can be better, is a vital strategic interest of ours. Another key piece of this support package, if I might, Mr. Secretary, is the non-lethal support to Ukraine. That's right. We are providing a significant amount, although our European partners are providing dramatically more. We're not just sending weapons or sustaining Ukraine's ability to have a robust economy and government. How critical to Ukraine's sustained war effort and to Ukraine's independence is this ongoing non-lethal budget support? I'd be interested in hearing a brief response from both ways. It's essential. It is essential to Ukraine's success. And here's why. Russia's doing two things. It's trying to go at Ukraine on the battlefield. And as you've heard the Secretary say, Ukraine's had remarkable success. Again, thanks to so much support from Congress over the last year and a half and getting back 50% of the territory seized from it. And of course, there's an ongoing intense battle now in the East and the South. But Russia's also going at what it sees as the soft underbelly of Ukraine. And that is its electric grids, its ability to produce and export food, its basic infrastructure. This is another way by which basically Putin hopes to sap the will and defeat Ukraine. The assistance that we're providing to make sure that it can secure and provide energy for its own people, that it can sustain its agricultural system, that it can sustain its economy and grow its economy to the point where it's got a rising tax base. It can pay increasingly for its own defense and deterrence. Those are absolutely essential to making sure that it succeeds in this war effort. I'll summarize if I might, Secretary, if we only send weapons to Ukraine, but we fail to support their government and their economy, they will lose to Putin's aggression nonetheless. Is that correct, Mr. Secretary? I absolutely agree, Senator. To a closing quick point, there's two billion in this request for support for the Treasury Department to work with the IMF and the World Bank. It would unlock 50 billion in support. I hope my colleagues will look closely at the ways that that would allow us to support critical allies like Egypt and Jordan, as well as other countries around the region and world that are facing instability because of the war in Ukraine. Thank you, and thank you for the chance to be with you. And Senator Kennedy, Secretary Austin, is it not true that the world is on fire in Ukraine, the world is on fire in the Middle East, and that there are embers smoldering in the Indo-Pacific? I would say that it's clearly there are challenges in both the places that you mentioned. And of course, in the Indo-Pacific, we see a China that's increasingly aggressive. Do you disagree with my statement? That the world is on fire? I would describe it a bit differently. I agree with your premise that it's as challenging as we seem. Is it not true? Sorry to cut you off, but we only have an limited time. Is it not true that China, Russia, and Iran have worked between and among themselves to either start those fires, encourage those fires, or create those embers? I would say that we see evidence of them growing closer together since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. I would not, I didn't see evidence of China collaborating with Russia to cause them to launch their invasion on its neighbor. Is it not true that China, Russia, and Iran would like to see Russia dominate central and eastern Europe? I think China would like to see the United States be unsuccessful. They would like to see Russia continue to challenge us and keep us focused on that area so that we have less time and energy and resources to focus on our region. Well, the situation I just described, I appreciate you parsing your words, but the situation I just described would not disappoint China, Russia, or Iran, would it? I'm certain that it wouldn't. OK. Is it not true that China, Russia, and Iran would like to see Iran dominate the Middle East? I certainly believe that Iran would like to see Iran dominate the Middle East. Do you think that would break China's heart or Russia's heart to see Iran dominate the Middle East? I don't think Russia or China would be unhappy about that. Is it not true that China, Iran, and Russia would like to see China dominate the Indo-Pacific and be free to make moves in sub-Saharan Africa and South America? Is that not true? I think that is certainly China's goal to be the dominant player in the Indo-Pacific. And that is not a world safe for democracy, is it? It is not. It's one that would be controlled by autocrats eventually if they were to dominate the Indo-Pacific and if Iran dominated activities in the Middle East. And if we did not stop them, strike them. Do you believe that weakness invites the wolves? I do. I think deterrence, in order to deter, you have to show strength. And if we do not meet these challenges now, do you believe it will be more expensive in terms of America, blood, and treasure to meet them later? I do. I do, Senator. All right, I've got one last question. Mr. Secretary, I'm looking at your and the president's proposed supplemental. What does $16 billion for childcare, $6.5 billion for the Federal Communications Commission to extend high-speed internet and $3.1 billion for the FCC to reimburse telecommunication companies to replace insecure equipment have to do with the world challenges we're facing right now? And why did you make this request? I would defer to other colleagues on those specific aspects of the budget request. Do you support those? I support the supplemental budget request. OK, last question. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your candid answers. But why did the Department of Defense oppose my bill calling for a special Inspector General in Ukraine so we could follow every penny of American taxpayer money? Given the fact that the Inspector General of the Department of Defense has never been able to audit his own department? The Inspector General of DOD has been involved in this effort from the very beginning. Well, I know, believe me, he opposed my bill. And I find that ironic because the Department of Defense is the only federal agency that has never in the history of ever been audited. But your Inspector General insisted that he be in charge. Do you not see the irony there with respect to Ukraine? Senator, I'm confident our Inspector General will do a great job in making sure that we remain on track with our responsibilities in Ukraine and Europe. Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair and Vice-Chair. Thank you, Secretaries, for being here. I don't think there's anyone on this dais who would disagree that we are in a fight against global fascism and that what happened in Israel is Israel's 9-11. It causes anguish. It causes outrage. And hopefully we can achieve some collective moral clarity about moving forward. But Secretary Austin, I want to ask you about the post-9-11 period in the United States. Seems to me that that collective anguish and outrage and moral clarity converted itself into some bad strategic decisions that we are still dealing with in the region. And so my question for you is what kind of strategic advice are you giving to your Israeli counterparts about avoiding the mistakes that we made in the past? Thanks, Senator. Great question. And I have had those conversations with my counterpart. And my advice to them, to him, was to be thoughtful about actions and objectives and what they were trying to accomplish. And really think that through, because if you don't, then the consequences can be long-lasting. And so we shared that with them on a number of occasions. And hopefully that has made a difference. Do you think Israel has completed its strategic deliberations about what comes next? I don't know for sure, Senator Schatz, if they have. Because I'm not privy to their internal cabinet discussions. But I certainly would say that from the very beginning, I have encouraged them to think about what this looks like at the end of the day, what this transitions to, and really to begin to think through many of the things that Secretary Blinken mentioned earlier. Because I think that's really important if you don't. If you don't do things to address the underlying causes of instability, then you create a bigger problem or you have a lasting problem that will just go on forever and ever. Secretary Blinken, let's do a thought experiment. Hamas, at some point in the future, is disabled. I think eliminating is a rhetorical flourish that puts us in a position where we will never stop fighting against some offshoots, some first cousin of Hamas, some place on the planet. So let's stipulate that the objective is to disable them to the point where they cannot pose a threat. Who runs Gaza? Well, I think we have two trolls, if you will. One is we can't have a reversion of the status quo with Hamas running Gaza. We also can't have, and the Israelis start with this proposition themselves, Israel running or controlling Gaza. That's not their intent. That's what they want to do, and it's not something that we support it. So in between those trolls are a variety of possible permutations that we're looking at very closely now as are other countries. At some point, let me be more precise. Sure. At some point, what would make the most sense would be for a effective and revitalized Palestinian authority to have governance and ultimately security responsibility for Gaza. Whether you can get there in one step is a big question that we have to look at. And if you can't, then there are other temporary arrangements that may involve a number of other countries in the region. It may involve international agencies that would help provide for both security and governance. Ultimately, though, beyond that is what we come back to, what this administration believes, which is the imperative of getting to two states for two people. That's where you finally get the kind of sustained security that a Jewish and democratic state of Israel needs and must have. And you also get the state that the Palestinians are entitled to. I think you're both being very thoughtful about this. I want to say that. But I think the worry that I have, and I've heard it bouncing around the halls of the Capitol, is that when we ask about what the end state is, what I have heard is, well, we didn't ask what the end state was in World War II. We just went ahead and fought the bad guys and let us sort it out later. I'm not sure that's satisfactory in this instance. And I think the question of what the end state is ought to be wrestled with at least simultaneously and in an ideal situation, precede the military strategy, because what are we even fighting towards if we don't know what the political objective is? Senator, I think you're absolutely right. And just to reassure you somewhat, we are very much grappling with that. This is a very active, ongoing deliberation both within the government, as well as with allies and partners, including in the region. And everyone is focused on not only what's happening right now in Gaza, but exactly as you say, where this lands, where this goes, and in a way that fundamentally and materially changes two things, changes the security for Israel and changes the situation for Palestinians who have been living under, well before October 7th, a Hamas regime that is, in so many ways, destroying their lives, misogynistic, repressive. And instead of spending the resources that it was getting to better the lives of Palestinians, spending them instead on building tunnels and building rockets so that it could attack Israel. We need to see a fundamental change in the circumstance of Palestinians living in Gaza. And we need to see a fundamental change, I think, in the circumstance for Palestinians that gets to a state of their own. Thank you. Senator Hertzmith. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And thank you both for being here. We know how critical that this hearing has been. And I certainly appreciate your contributions. Iran has long and has a long and well documented history of being the primary funder of Hamas. Iran has supplied Hamas with the funds, arms, missiles, drones, and other equipment, as well as training and technical expertise. I find it extremely hard to believe that Hamas would have carried out its brutal attack on Israel without Iran's knowledge. Secretary Austin, in the immediate aftermath of Hamas's attack, the administration claimed it did not have evidence that Iran was involved. Is this still this administration's position? It is. From the standpoint of we didn't see direct involvement in the planning or the decision to execute this on a part of Iran. Having said that, the point that you made earlier, Senator, that they have funded, resourced, enabled, trained Hamas operatives means that they have a big part in this. So, but in terms of their actual participation in the planning and the decision to conduct this attack, we didn't see evidence of that. Do you think they are the puppet master? And I think they are, they certainly control a number of entities throughout the region. Shia militia, Lebanese Hezbollah, and so that's what they do. They export mischief and use other people's resources to carry that out. And Iran continues to illegally sell more than 150 million in petroleum and petroleum products each day, primarily to China. Iran uses these funds to support Hamas, Hezbollah, and other bad actors while oppressing the Iranian people. What more does this administration plan to do to cartel these sales? And I'll direct that to you, Mr. Blinken. Thank you very much, Senator. First, it's important to note that over the course of this administration, we have sanctioned more than 400 Iranian individuals or entities for things like supporting Hamas. And that's something that continues to this very moment. We're very aggressively engaged in cracking down on financing and support for Hamas, wherever it's coming from and including and notably Iran. We've also taken action against the so-called ghost shipping of oil and trying to cut off the proceeds from that and going against different entities that are engaged in that kind of trafficking. And we have a very vigorous effort underway to make sure that wherever we can, we're cutting off Iran from getting illegal proceeds that then turn around and go to finance terror or go to finance its own activities. And continuing with you, following the Hamas attack, the administration stated that it froze the $6 billion in funds that were cleared for release to Iran in order to secure the release of Americans held hostage by Iran. Is this freeze permanent? And what mechanism is the United States using to freeze these funds? So let's be very clear about this because it's important. I'm afraid that some people have been misinformed and others may be misinforming about the $6 billion. These are funds that accrued from the sale of Iranian oil over many years to an account in South Korea that was established by the previous administration. The proceeds were to be used under our laws and under our sanctions for humanitarian purposes. Those have never been prohibited by our sanctions against Iran and indeed the previous administration set up a mechanism to enable any oil proceeds that Iran was getting to be channeled to accounts where they could be controlled and only used for humanitarian purposes. The money in that South Korean account that accrued from the sale of these proceeds for technical reasons related to Korean banks was unable to be used even though it lawfully could be. So it was moved to an account in Qatar where it could be used for humanitarian purposes just as the previous administration established another account in another country for these very purposes. The money never goes and would never go to Iran. It can only be used for authorized transactions overseen by our Treasury Department and only for things like food, medicine and other authorized humanitarian purposes. To date, not a single dollar has been expended from that account. There are currently no plans to expand a single dollar from that account and in any event that money never touches Iran directly. Thank you, Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Madam Chair and thank you, Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin for your service always, but especially at this moment. You've both commented through your opening statements and through questions about the interconnectedness of the elements of this supplemental package, support for Israel and its fight against Hamas, support for Ukraine in its efforts to repel Putin's invasion, support for humanitarian aid for displaced civilians and those caught in the crossfire, a focus on our manufacturing sector and its workforce needs to ramp up production, among many other elements that this package has. You've also both answered questions about the urgency of congressional action, especially given the fact that House Republicans dropped funding for Ukraine from the current continuing resolution that is keeping government running here in the United States. So against this backdrop, I was really taken aback to see calls in the House for dismantling this package and taking it up perhaps only one or two elements of the package. So in terms of urgency, President Zelensky told us, as Senator Durbin mentioned, when we met with him back in September that without our help, Putin will prevail. And then again, that was followed by a pause in assistance during the current CR. So I just want to ask you, Secretary Austin, to tell this panel in no uncertain terms how urgent it is for us to pass this package in its entirety with respect to keeping Ukraine in this fight. Thanks, Senator. I think it's absolutely urgent as you may have heard me say at the very top, they are in a fight. This is not a notional thing. They're fighting to protect their sovereign territory. They're fighting for their existence. And our help has enabled them to do what they've done to date and they've made credible progress. They have impressed the world with their bravery, with their professionalism, with their determination. And so their goal is to take back as much of their sovereign territory as possible. And I think we need to provide them the ability to continue to do that, and we need to do that urgently. Thank you. Secretary Blinken, I participated in the same briefing that Senator Merkley referenced earlier with the UN Relief and Works Agency, getting an update on the humanitarian situation in Gaza for those displaced and literally in the crossfire. Among the things we were hearing were just an assessment of what's happening in the hospital, the lack of medical supplies, anesthesia, things like that, and the dwindling if any remains in food stocks and storage. You've talked about our efforts to support increasing the number of supply trucks that are able to get in. But again, your own reflections that prior to October 7th and the terrorist attack on Israel, there were five to 800 trucks going in a day, and now we're at 50 to 60. How will this humanitarian aid package assist in our leadership in increasing that, and how urgent is it that we pass that part of the entire package? Thank you very much, Senator. Well, from my perspective and our perspective, it's beyond urgent, precisely for the reasons that you cite. And we are trying to ramp up now to 100 trucks, and my hope is that will happen this week. And as you pointed out, as I pointed out earlier, that's still well less than what was happening before October 7th. But as I also mentioned, on the Gaza side, even if we could get five or 600 trucks, we've got an absorptive capacity challenge in terms of the ability of folks on the ground in Gaza to actually receive the assistance, to distribute it, to use it effectively. So that also needs to be ramped up in the middle of a conflict. We're working on both ends to make that happen. Mr. Secretary, I don't want to interrupt you, but I've been informed that you need to leave at 1230. We have several senators here who have not had an opportunity to speak. I want to make sure we keep everybody's time to have five minutes so they have that opportunity. In any event, yes, it is very urgent. Thank you. Senator Haggerty. Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome both secretaries. Secretary Blinken, I'd like to start with you. I sent a letter last week to both yourself and to Administrator Powell, asking for specific details on the funding that's gone into Gaza, the foreign assistance funding, U.S. taxpayer dollar foreign assistance funding that's gone into Gaza, the recipients and the sub-recipients of that funding. Are you in a position to give me complete answers today to that? Thank you, Senator. Yes, we've got the letter. We're working on it. You asked important and very detailed questions. We need some time to make sure that we're giving you the most robust and accurate answers possible. So in short, we will get that back to you. At a high level, can you tell me the amount of funding overall under your watch that's gone into Gaza? So overall, we've provided about a billion dollars in assistance to the Palestinians through the UN Works and Relief Agency. That's a significant amount of money. I look forward to going through the detailed response from you provided. I appreciate that commitment to do so in a timely fashion. I'd like to tell you why I am asking this. I want to make certain that you can guarantee that not one dime of U.S. taxpayer funding is going to, the funding that's going to Gaza is going to benefit Hamas and their terrorist activities. Has that happened? And I think the question I'd like to ask is, can you guarantee us that no taxpayer money, no U.S. taxpayer money, went to fund the attack that Hamas delivered in Israel on October the 7th? So we have, and we've had from day one, and we'll obviously get back to you in response to this letter, a robust monitoring, inspection, verification system for the assistance that goes to any international organization and including... Can you guarantee, though, that U.S. taxpayer dollars didn't go to Hamas to help fund this attack on October the 7th? So everything that we're doing in terms of making sure that the assistance is used for purposes for which it's designated, not for other purposes, as I said, we have a robust system in place. Can I share my concern, Mr. Secretary, to be more specific about this? In May of 2021, I traveled to Israel after the 11-day war. I met with Prime Minister Netanyahu with his national security advisor. They briefed me and my team on the fact that every humanitarian aid dollar, every foreign aid dollar that goes into Gaza is controlled by Hamas. They either direct it, they tax it, or they divert it. They even take pipes intended for the water system for civilians and turn those into rockets that are aimed at Israel. We've seen Hamas' own videos demonstrating this. I'm gonna come back and ask you, can you guarantee that US taxpayer dollars weren't used in October 7th, is that it? What I can guarantee is that we take every possible precaution to ensure that these resources are not diverted? Second? Let me commit it another way then, Mr. Secretary, because your own internal, your own State Department has made an internal assessment on this. Madam Chair, I'd like to submit for the record a set of internal State Department emails from 2021 that were obtained via FOIA. And Secretary Blinken, I'd like to specifically read from part of that. The assessment of your own State Department in 2021 is that, quote, due to Hamas' overall strength and level of control over Gaza, there is a high risk that Hamas could potentially derive indirect unintentional benefit from US assistance to Gaza. Secretary Blinken, do you agree with this assessment? I do. And here's the challenge that we face, Senator. We have in Gaza, somewhere over two million people, the overwhelming majority of which, virtually everyone, not a member of Hamas, and indeed, increasingly- I'm just gonna talk about Hamas' control over the funds, not the citizenship there. And with respect to their control of the funds, can you guarantee that the US isn't funding both sides of this war, Mr. Secretary? It is important that the one agency that has the ability to operate, either directly or through agencies that it works with, and that we have robust controls in place to ensure that the money- Let me come back. This goes, I need to reclaim my time. I'm losing it. Israel has said that Hamas is diverting foreign aid. Hamas has even demonstrated that with their own videos. Your own department has warned about the high risk. And I've yet to see, but I hope to, that where the actual funds flow is coming to Hamas, from our government to Gaza. But I'm deeply concerned here, and we need to be convinced that we're not funding both sides of this war, that US taxpayers aren't put in a position of funding a vicious cycle. And I think this department, I mean, I think your department needs to confirm that with this committee. We need that level of detail so that as we appropriate a massive request for funding, we can assess the risk ourselves, Mr. Secretary. And Senator, we'll work with you on that and we'll get you the information I want to respond as robustly as we can to your letter. I also want to make sure that we are doing everything we possibly can for the one million children in Gaza, who desperately need. I hear you. I just don't want to see the US taxpayer funding both sides of this war in Israel with Hamas. Mr. Secretary, and I hate to interrupt and I know you will respond to that, but we want to make sure we can tell the senators that are here, Senator Murphy. Thank you, Madam Chair, Secretary Blinken, Secretary Osso, we know you've been working around the clock to protect our friends in Israel and Ukraine. Thank you for your work. Thanks for being here. Secretary Blinken, I want to thank you. At the outset, you described in really horrific detail what happened on October 7th. I think it's important that we be absolutely clear the nature of this brutal terrorist attack. And I share with you the real worry that in this country and around the world, the memory of October 7th, just a few weeks in our rearview mirror has disappeared. It's incredibly important for us to remind the world about how our nation was changed after September 11th, and how Israel has been changed as well by this and how we have an obligation to stand up for them. Secretary Austin, I wanted to talk to you as Senator Schatz did about the lessons that we've learned in our counterterrorism operations. I note a story from this weekend in the Washington Post entitled, US urges Israel against Gaza ground invasion pushes surgical campaign. And I don't want to ask you about the confidential communications you've had with your Israeli counterparts. But one of the lessons that we've learned in our counterterrorism operations is that not done well, you can end up creating more terrorists than you kill. In particular, when you are careless about civilian casualties, those civilian casualties become terrorist fuel. They become bulletin board recruiting material for terrorist groups. And so there's a moral imperative to reduce civilian casualties, but there is also a strategic imperative. And so I want to ask you whether you have a worry that the nature of the Israeli ground operation and the number of civilians that have been killed and will be killed could end up strengthening Hamas or other affiliated anti-Israel terrorist groups in the long run. I agree with everything that you said, Senator. And that is a key lesson that we learned in our, in the fights that we fought over the last 20 years or so. The things that you do on the battlefield could, if you're not thoughtful about them, they could create a resistance to your effort that lasts for generations. And so there is an operational and strategic imperative to make sure that we're doing the right things as we outline our objectives and prescribe our techniques about how we're gonna go about this. So we've had those conversations for exactly the right reasons that you mentioned. Secretary Asim, turning to Ukraine, I think the reason why many of us are so worried about splitting Ukraine aid and Israel aid is because there is an urgency. A real urgency in Ukraine right now. And we know that this place has trouble doing one difficult thing, nevermind splitting it into two or three. I know that we're careful about talking about the urgency because we don't wanna cause panic or damage morale in Ukraine. But I do think we have to be honest with the American people and with this Senate about the consequences of not funding Ukraine. Admiral Rob Bauer of the Netherlands, who you know well, said that the bottom of the barrel is now visible. And so I just wanna ask you a point of question about ammunition. We are really getting to a point very soon where there are not bullets in the guns. We need to be serious with our colleagues about the consequences for the rank and file soldiers in Ukraine if we don't get this assistance soon. The need is dire, isn't it? It absolutely is, Senator. And again, this funds artillery munitions, small arm munitions, you name it. And they desperately need a constant supply of war fighting capability in order to be successful. We would like to see them continue their operations through the winter. I think that's an imperative. They can't do that if we've caused them to pause because there's a pause in the security assistance that we provide. 30 seconds, Secretary Blinken fuel into Gaza. Can we, do we have a process to deliver fuel into Gaza that assures that it doesn't get diverted to Hamas? We're working urgently on that. I'll say two things very quickly about it. First, Hamas has its own supply stockpile of fuel. If it cared a wit about the people of Gaza, it would make sure itself that it used that fuel to have the hospitals be able to operate, have the incubators stay turned on, et cetera. But of course it doesn't. And we have an obligation to do everything we can if Hamas is not going to do it to look out for people in Gaza. So we are working on a mechanism that can get fuel to where it's needed, particularly hospitals, bakeries, desalination plants. I'm going to have to interrupt you because again, you have informed us you need to leave and I want to make sure as many senators as possible have time. Senator Britt. Thank you so much, Madam Chairman. I'd like to start by telling you and the vice chair how much we appreciate you holding this hearing. It is critically important that we have the opportunity to ask tough questions, to get answers for the American people and to do our job. You allowing us to be here today will certainly make great strides towards that. Thank you both for being here before this committee. Before we start in on talking about some of the topics that we're here to talk about today, I want to make sure that we make a point on our border. So the national defense strategy of our nation promises that first we will defend our homeland. In order to do that, we must secure our border. When we are talking about the number of people here and the number of countries, Secretary Blinken, I'd like to add to the countries that you just said, we have people from Iran, people from Syria, people from Yemen, people from Jordan, people from Lebanon. We know the foothold that Iran has in so many of these nations. Now these are the people that we have encountered at the border. There is, exists a problem that we have 1.7 million gotaways into this nation where we don't know who they are, where they're going, or what their intentions are. As we see anti-Semitic behavior rise not only across the oceans, but here in this nation, we must do every single thing that we can to keep our homeland safe and that starts with securing our border. When we look at what's happening in Israel and the atrocities, I want to thank both of you for going and putting boots on the ground immediately. Telling our friends and greatest ally in the Middle East, Israel, that we stand shoulder to shoulder with them, particularly in the face of these barbaric atrocities that were occurred on October 7th. Secretary Blinken, thank you for what you just said. Talking about what actually happened. I hope that every media outlet plays what you testified to earlier and that is that we have seen men with their eyeballs gouged out. We saw children watch their parents be executed. We saw families at their breakfast table be tortured and murdered. This must stop. And in order for people in Israel to be able to tuck their children in at night and people across this globe, we must eradicate Hamas. In doing so, we've got to take the threat of Iran seriously and what they've been doing across the globe, what they've been funding, who they have been training. You said earlier, Secretary Blinken, you agreed with Senator Graham that the normalization efforts with Saudi and Israel, that that was one of the links in the chain that led us to where we are today. My question for you is, do you agree that the strategy of what I would call appeasement from this administration that occurred starting with the Obama administration now to hear when it's easing off of sanctions, even offering to enter back in to talks about the JCPOA, that that type of behavior also contributed to where we are today? Whoops. Thank you, Senator. It won't surprise you that I wouldn't agree with that statement, even though I agree with pretty much everything you said right up to that statement. And again, I just point out that when it comes to Iran, two things very quickly. One. Oh, go ahead. And I know I have a limited time. Very quickly. We've been engaged in going at Iran for its support in a whole variety of ways for malicious activities throughout the region, including support for terrorism, including destabilization. That's involved as I said, in sanctioning more than 400 Iranian entities and individuals over the last two and a half years. And not to cut you off, but I know that she's going to cut me off. So, you know, in order to actually do this, we have to go back to a strategy of maximum pressure. I hope you'll work with your other countries here in G7 to actually do that. Can you commit today that this administration will not resume talks to enter in with Iran to enter the JCPOA? Well, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals about our diplomacy. I can simply say that it was a big mistake to walk away from the JCPOA, because at least it took one problem off the table, which was Iran's nuclear program. Unfortunately, since we've moved out, Iran has turned that back on. And so that just adds to the threat that Iran poses. Obviously, we're going to disagree on that. We're going to be able to deal with one, but at least one problem was a positive. So we have one more minute. Secretary Austin, when we're looking at what is happening across the Middle East there, particularly with attacks on our troops, do you believe that Iran understands you? We more recently heard this administration say that there is a red line. Do you believe that Iran understands what that red line is? Senator Britt, we've been clear that the protection of our troops is important. And we will do what's necessary to protect them. And this activity has to change. If it doesn't change, we will respond. And again, we'll respond at a time of our choosing. Yes, and I just want to make sure that we have, have we been clear with Iran what that red line is. Did they, did they understand that? We have been clear about what I just said, Senator Britt. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Senator Manchin. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. And thanks both of you all. It's been very enlightening. It's been very interesting in hearing you all's approach on this. First of all, we know that Ukraine can't succeed without U.S. support. Can Israel succeed without U.S. support? Yes or no, very quickly on that. Either one. That's correct. My assessment is that if the United States does not continue to support Ukraine, they will not succeed. Right, but can Israel without our support? That's right. Can Israel make it without our support? I think, no, I think we have to continue to support them as they try to. I'm just asking you questions that people are asking me. So they're saying, you know, we've been giving three billion and Israel's very advanced. Ukraine was not, we had to bring them up to speed, be able to fight or fight and we're committed there. And Secretary Lincoln. I would simply say that on the one hand, Israel prides itself on being able to defend itself by itself, but a critical function of its ability to do that is the support that we provide, including through the memorandum of understanding that was negotiated by the Obama administration to give Israel support levels of defense and support. Justify but needed. You're saying it'd be hard to take on all the fronts we're taking all without our support. Next of all, it brings me to the munitions. I know it's been asked about what we can produce is the United States running a risk maybe not having enough to defend ourselves if we're pulled into any of these battles because of what we're basically producing. Are we producing enough here with the trusted allies in ourself producing enough ammunition to defend our own homeland and help our allies too? Thanks, Senator. The first order of business for us is to make sure that we have the capability required to defend our nation and protect our interests. And then above and beyond that, we can... I mean, you think we're producing enough? We're ramping up. I know we're trying to. Yes, we are ramping up, but if we had to only resource ourselves, yes, but we're at a point in time where we're resourcing allies and partners like Ukraine and Israel and it's gonna require more. I'm just asking the question because people are asking me, are we running ourself critically low on our own volume of what we need in our own basically inventory or are we basically overproducing or can we produce enough or are we supplying more than what we can produce to backfill? That was a question. The other thing that's been asked to me, first of all, our commitment to win. Our track record hasn't been too good with Vietnam and basically Afghanistan, Ukraine getting out and result. Are we committed to staying with this to win? Because I believe Ukraine is the most, I just think it's the purpose and the most honorable position we've ever taken in my lifetime of seeing that we were committed to playing the role that the United States plays as a defender of freedom and liberties. And when you have a country willing to risk their own life and put their own people on the line, that's the least we can do to support them. So I'm all in on that, but are we committed to staying to stay all the way through? And next of all, on our support to Israel. Israel's got to take out on us. Israel has to be supported to do that. And with that, are we committed to make sure that happens? So I think it leads into this final question. People have asked me, they said, why can't, are the people and the Palestinian people in Gaza, are they committed to the cause, the Hamas's cause? Basically, and that's why they're not leaving when we've basically been warned that you should leave. Do they are being held hostage by Hamas? Can we not get aid to them making sure it's being used for the purpose of their survivability? And can we not get them out of there? What's holding that back? Senator? Secretary Blinken? We are committed to making sure that Ukraine has what it needs to defend its sovereign territory. That's why we're here asking you for support. No problem, but I'm just saying, is there a way to do that, Secretary Blinken? I know you've been over there quite a bit. So have you all. Senator, very quickly, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians living in Gaza are not part of Hamas, don't support Hamas, and in fact are subject to its repressive rule. But these are impoverished people who have virtually no opportunity, and so no ability. You're saying nowhere to go? So very hard for them to move out of the way, although obviously we're working on that to try to get them out of harm's way. Very little ability to provide for themselves, which is why we're trying to get assistance in. But ultimately, this is their land. We don't want to see them displaced. Very quickly. We do want to see different governance. The problem that we have basically, we're saying that $10 billion for humanitarian aid, and we know we can't even get the aid that we're putting in there now going into the hands. No, no, we can. No, we can, and we are. We're making sure that the assistance going in is going to the people who need it and deserve it. Mr. Secretary, I'm an interrupt, and I apologize to everyone, the Secretary Blinken has said he has to leave. I respect that. Senator Austin, our Secretary Austin has said he'd stay. We have four senators who have not had a chance to ask anything. Senators Rubio, Van Hollen, Fisher, and Murkowski. If you will indulge me, I would like to ask each of those to ask quickly their question for Secretary Blinken to respond to. Can I just have a final? And Secretary Austin will be here and stay here to answer, and those four will call back on you. I have one final comment I want to make to both of y'all. This is a bipartisan. So when you hear all of the Republican colleagues saying about how important it is to secure home borders, I want you to know it's bipartisan. I've got more concern about our own borders from my own people in West Virginia, and I want to make sure that you understand that we will do anything and everything humanly possible to support securing the borders of the United States of America. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to call on Senator Rubio, Van Hollen, Fisher, and Murkowski to simply ask a question. Mr. Secretary, if you can respond to those together, and then I will call on all of you to ask Secretary Austin a question. Secretary, Senator Rubio. Well, since I only have one question, no one else is going to ask you about this, and it's unrelated to this matter, tangentially anyway. We recently did a deal with a Maduro regime in Venezuela in which we lifted sanctions in exchange for free and fair elections that they were supposed to comply with. It's taken them two weeks now. They have violated that. They canceled the opposition's primary election, continued to ban their winner of that primary. They basically wiped out the election. They've broken the deal. Are we going to reimpose sanctions? Senator Van Hollen, a question, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Secretary, in the aftermath of the horror visited upon Israel by Hamas and the ongoing war in Gaza, much of the world has turned its eye away from what's happening on the West Bank. And what we're seeing and our own folks on the ground have been reporting this on a daily basis is that with support of extremists in the Netanyahu government, people like Smotrich and Ben Gavir, extremist settler violence against Palestinians has skyrocketed as more Palestinians are pushed off their land in Area C. As you know, all this does is strengthen Hamas, undermine the already weak PA, and open another front in this war. I know the president has raised this issue with Prime Minister Netanyahu. But according to every report I get, and I know both you secretaries get these, we've seen no improvement. So my question is pretty simple. What is your plan beyond urging that something be done when our pleas continue to be ignored? Senator Fisher, question, please. No question. Senator Murkowski? Given the overlay that we have heard, the interconnectedness between what is happening in Ukraine with Putin's war, what we are seeing truly explode now in Israel by Hamas with the support of Iran, given what we have all been discussing here with regards to the tension in China and Taiwan. We're not talking about North Korea today, but we should always be thinking about North Korea's intentions. This is a simple question that I was going to ask both of you. Given the situation globally and what is at play and how it all intersects, are we at a time and a place where from a national security perspective we are as vulnerable as we have been as a nation in your professional estimation? Mr. Secretary.