Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services" in: publisher
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Hearing to Receive Testimony on National Nuclear Security Administration Management of its National Security Laboratories and the Status of the Nuclear Security Enterprise in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2015 and the Future Years Defense Program: Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 9, 2014
From the statement of Charles F. McMillan: "Recent budget guidance reduces our funding in three key areas: facility and maintenance; security; and our science, technology, and engineering base. Any reduction in facility budgets undermines mission capabilities, especially to sites such as Los Alamos, where infrastructure continues to age and, in some cases, dates back to the beginning of the cold war. Current requirements in the area of physical, cyber, and information security are outstripping our funding allocations and necessitate more prudent management decisions that balance risk and available funding. As I contemplate the body of science needed to continue assessing the safety and reliability of the stockpile in the future, underfunding our science base is increasingly risky today. I understand that budgets will not grow significantly. We've heard your message. Therefore, we must work with DOE [Department of Energy] and NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration] to develop better risk-informed requirements. Let me give you an example: The design basis threats for our physical security posture are a place where I believe we could reexamine requirements. Following September 11, we added guns, gates, and guards to our physical security systems. With security technology improvements that are available today and better threat analysis capabilities, it's possible to reduce the security costs while at the same time maintaining appropriate security stance, but the requirements would have to change." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jeff Sessions, Charles F. McMillan, Paul J. Hommert, William H. Goldstein, Norman R. Augustine, and Richard W. Mies.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2014-04-09
-
Hearing to Receive Testimony on Strategic Forces Programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Office of Environmental Management of the Department of Energy in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2015 and the Future Years Defense Program, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 10, 2014
From the opening statement of Mark Udall: "The purpose of this hearing is to examine the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Program of the National Nuclear Security Administration, or the NNSA, as well as the cleanup programs associated with former Defense production sites of the Department of Energy. We will have two panels today. The first panel will be Mr. Bruce Held, the Acting Administrator of the NNSA, who will speak to the overall NNSA budget. The second panel will consist of Dr. Don Cook, the Deputy Administrator for Weapons Programs; Admiral John Richardson, the Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors; and Mr. Owendoff, the Acting Principal Deputy assistant Secretary, Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy. […] There's no shortage of work to go around in stopping the spread of nuclear material that can harm our country, yet we continue to see a decrease in funding for these programs." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Edward Bruce Held, Donald L. Cook, John M. Richardson, and James M. Owendoff.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2014-04-10
-
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the Military Balance in the Middle East, Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, August 5, 2015
This is a testimony compilation of the August 5, 2015 hearing on "The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the Military Balance in the Middle East" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of John McCain: "This Committee's oversight is focused on the strategic and military implications of the nuclear deal with Iran. Among other things, we want to know how this agreement will affect regional security, proliferation, and the balance of power in the Middle East; what impact it may have on Iran's malign activities and ambitions to dominate the region; what it means for perceptions of American credibility among our allies and partners; and what the consequences are for U.S. defense policy, military planning, and force posture." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John McCain, Jack Reed, Walter Russell Mead, Michael Singh, Ray Takeyh, Philip Gordon, and Richard Nephew.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-08-05
-
Hearing to Receive Testimony on Proliferation Prevention Programs at the Department of Energy and at the Department of Defense in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2013 and the Future Years Defense Program: Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, Tuesday, June 12, 2012
From the opening statement of Senator Kay Hagan: "The purpose of today's hearing is to review the President's fiscal year 2013 request for proliferation prevention programs at the Departments of Defense and Energy. […] We're joined today by three expert witnesses to help us understand these programs that are under way in both Departments. Madelyn Creedon is the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Global Strategic Affairs and she is responsible, among many other subjects, for the policy aspects of these programs at DOD. This is your third time this year before the Armed Services Committee and, as you can tell, we miss you very much. So we're glad to have you back today. Ken Myers is the Director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency at the Department of Defense, which is focused on reducing the threats from weapons of mass destruction. The agency is responsible for the Cooperative Threat Reduction program. He's also the Director of the U.S. Strategic Command Center for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction, located at the agency. Anne Harrington is the Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy. We thank all of you for the service that you are giving to our country and thank you for being here today with us. For fiscal year 2013, the Departments of Defense and Energy propose to spend on the order of $3 billion to help stem the flow of weapons of mass destruction." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Kay Hagan, Rob Portman, Madelyn Creedon, Anne Harrington, and Kenneth Myers III.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2012-06-12
-
Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2014 and the Future Years Defense Program: Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 17, 2013
This testimony compilation is from the April 17, 2013 hearing, "Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2014 and the Future Years Defense Program," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Carl Levin: "The future of the defense budget is in flux due to the Congress['] failure to enact legislation reducing the deficit by $1.2 trillion as required by the Budget Control Act. As a result of that, the DOD funding for fiscal year 2013 was reduced by sequestration in the amount of $41 billion, and unless Congress acts, the fiscal year 2014 DOD budget will be cut by an additional $52 billion below the funding level which is in the President's budget for fiscal year 2014 and also in the budgets passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives. Congress can fix the budget problems by enacting legislation that reduces the deficit by $1.2 trillion over 10 years. That would take a grand bargain, including both spending cuts and additional revenues, that would turn off the automatic spending cuts of sequestration for those 10 years. I remain hopeful we can develop such a bipartisan plan. But absent a so-called 'grand bargain,' surely we can devise a balanced deficit reduction package for 1 year that avoids sequestration in fiscal year 2014. We simply cannot continue to ignore the effects of sequestration." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Carl Levin, Charles T. Hagel, and Martin E. Dempsey.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2013-04-17
-
30 Years of Goldwater-Nichols Reform, Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, November 10, 2015
This testimony compilation is from the November 10, 2015 Hearing on '30 Years of Goldwater-Nichols Reform' held before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of John McCain: "This morning's hearing is critical -- is a critical inflection point in our efforts. Our prior hearings have sought to establish a broad context in which to consider the question of defense reform. We have evaluated global trends in threats and technology, their implications for national security, and what the United States military and the Department of Defense must do to succeed against these complex and uncertain challenges. Today, we begin to look more closely at our defense organization, and we do so by revisiting the Goldwater- Nichols Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. This landmark legislation, which marks its 30th anniversary next year, was the most consequential reform of the Department of Defense since its creation. And this committee played a critical role at every step of the way, from initial study to first draft to final passage. Put simply, the Goldwater-Nichols reforms would never have happened without the leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee. And yet, to a large degree, the organization of the Department still reflects those major decisions and changes made back in 1986. On the whole, those reforms have served us well, but much has happened in the past 30 years. We need a defense organization that can meet our present and future challenges. That is why we must ask, Has the time come to reconsider, and potentially update, Goldwater-Nichols? And if so, how and in what ways?" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John J. Hamre, James R. Locher III, and Jim Thomas.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-11-10
-
Adapting U.S. Missile Defense for Future Threats: Russia, China and Modernizing the NMD Act, Hearing Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, July 23, 2014
This testimony compilation is from the July 23, 2014 hearing on "Adapting U.S. Missile Defense for Future Threats: Russia, China and Modernizing the NMD [National Missile Defense] Act," held before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Philip E. Coyle III: "In my opening remarks I want to describe why it would be unwise for the United States to pursue a missile defense against Russia and China. Here I'm referring to the strategic Intercontinental Ballistic Missile [ICBM] forces of those two countries. There are basically three important reasons. First, U.S. missile defenses, especially U.S. defenses against ICBMs can at best deal only with limited attacks, and even that goal remains a major technological challenge. All missile defense systems can be overwhelmed. All missile defense systems have limitations and those limitations can be exploited by the offense. By definition, it is only if the attack is limited that the defense can have a hope of not being overwhelmed. If the enemy also employs countermeasures such as stealth, radar jamming, decoys, and chaff, as Russia and China do, U.S. defenses are even more vulnerable. The technology simply is not in hand to deal with an all-out Russian or Chinese ICBM attack. The U.S. has experimented with many different ideas for decades hoping to find a way. A few examples are the nuclear-bomb pumped x-ray laser, 'Brilliant Pebbles' (a constellation of perhaps as many as 1,000 orbiting interceptors), and the Safeguard ABM [anti-ballistic missile] system deployed in North Dakota that the U.S. Congress canceled because Russian ICBMs could overwhelm it. These and other systems were canceled as unworkable, ineffective, or too costly as when Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ended the Airborne Laser program." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Phil Coyle, Robert G. Joseph, and James Woolsey.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2014-07-23
-
Iranian Influence in Iraq and the Case of Camp Liberty, Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, October 7, 2015
This is a testimony compilation of the October 7, 2015 hearing on "Iranian Influence in Iraq and the Case of Camp Liberty" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of John McCain: "As my colleagues know, Camp Liberty is the location in Iraq where more than 2,000 Iranian refugees currently live since they were internally relocated from their previous location at Camp Ashraf. The residents of the camp are dissidents who have long since opposed the regime in Tehran, at one time violently so. When U.S. forces entered Iraq in 2003, the residents of what was then Camp Ashraf renounced violence, gave up their weapons, and agreed to come under U.S. military protection as, quote, 'protected persons' under Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions. For several years, the U.S. military provided security for the camp's residents. This responsibility ultimately transferred to the Iraqi government, and things took a turn for the worse, especially in the aftermath of the full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011. In recent years, the residents of the camp have been the victims of frequent harassment, the decreased quality of life, hindered access to food and medicine, and rocket attacks, and violent raids that have resulted in the deaths of more 100 men, women, and children. Most of these attacks are reportedly the work of radical Iraqi military -- militia groups and agents of the Iranian regime." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James Jones, Joseph I. Lieberman, and Wesley Martin.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-10-07
-
State of Public Shipyards to Meet the Current Mission Needs and Investment Strategies to Support Future National Security Requirements, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 5, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the April 5, 2016 hearing, "State of Public Shipyards to Meet the Current Mission Needs and Investiment Strategies to Support Future National Securit Requirements," before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Commiiee on Armed Services. From the statement of Admiral William H. Hilarides: "Chairman Ayotte, Senator Kaine, and distinguished members of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, we appreciate the opportunity to testify about the Naval Shipyards' role in meeting Navy operational requirements. We are here representing the more than 33,000 hardworking, dedicated and patriotic professionals-both civilian and military-who work in the Naval Shipyards. Our Naval Shipyards have been challenged by an increasing workload and the effects of hiring freezes and overtime restrictions that have contributed to some ships being delivered late out of their availabilities. To address this workload-to-workforce imbalance, we increased the size of our workforce and enhanced training and apprenticeship programs to improve productive capacity. Further, we continue to recapitalize our infrastructure to improve workflow and better align the shipyard layout and tooling. The men and women, military and civilian, who work at our Naval Shipyards are right now undertaking these initiatives and tackling these challenges every day." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: William H. Hilarides and Dixon R. Smith.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-05
-
Air Force Modernization, Hearing before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Airland, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, March 8, 2016
"This testimony compilation is from the March 8, 2016 hearing on 'Air Force Modernization' held before the Airland Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the Introduction of the Witness Statement: 'Today's demand for Air Force capabilities continues to grow as Airmen provide America with unmatched Global Vigilance, Global Reach and Global Power. Airmen are engaged defending US interests around the globe, supporting Combatant Commander requirements in response to growing challenges from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, all in addition to the ever present counter-terrorism mission in the Middle East and around the world. While our forces have been heavily engaged in deterring or addressing these operational challenges, our adversaries have taken the opportunity to invest in and advance their own capabilities. For the first time in decades, our adversaries are closing in on our capability advantage. Our efforts to address these increasing challenges have been stymied by reduced and unpredictable appropriations.' Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Darlene J. Costello, Arnold W. Bunch Jr., James M. Holmes, and John W. Raymond."
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-03-08
-
Department of the Navy 2017 Operations and Maintenance Budget Request and Readiness Posture, Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Readiness, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, March 17, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the March 17, 2016 hearing, "Department of the Navy 2017 Operations and Maintenance Budget Request and Readiness Posture" before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the statement of Vice Admiral John C. Aquilino: "[w]e appreciate the opportunity to testify on the current state of Navy readiness and projected changes to that readiness with the Fiscal Year 2017 budget request. This budget submission provides the resources to deliver sustainable deployed forces and supports our continued readiness recovery efforts. The submission also contains the hard choices and trade-offs we were obligated to make in order to achieve future war-fighting capability." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Vice Admiral John C. Aquilino, Vice Admiral Phillip H. Cullom, and Admiral Michelle J. Howard.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-03-17
-
Evaluating DOD Investments: Case Studies in Afghanistan Initiatives and U.S. Weapon Sustainment, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 15, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the April 15, 2016, hearing, " Evaluating DOD Investments: Case Studies in Afghanistan Initiatives and U.S. Weapon Sustainment" before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Vicky Hartzler: "Overseeing the investment of tax payer dollars is extremely important. It is one of the core responsibilities we assume as representatives of the people. […] In the years since September 11, 2001, the Department of Defense has been in a fight against emboldened terrorists. Congress met the increased national security demands by significantly enhancing the department's base budget and the overseas contingency operations fund to address new threats and meet new requirements. Since 2010, Congress has slashed defense by 1.3 trillion dollars however and today we are seeing significant impact based on those decisions." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Charlie Lilli, John Sopko, and Jacqueline L. Wicecarver.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-15
-
Marine Corps Ground Modernization, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 13, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the April 13, 2016 hearing, "Marine Corps Ground Modernization" before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Thomas P. Dee: "Our testimony will provide the background and rationale for the Marine Corps' Fiscal Year 2017 budget request which is aligned to our strategic priorities and budgetary goals. The United States is a maritime nation with global responsibilities. Our Navy and Marine Corps persistent presence and multi-mission capability represent U.S. power projection across the global commons. We seek to move at will across the world's oceans, seas and littorals, and extend the effects of the sea-base deep inland. We enable global reach and access, regardless of changing circumstances, and will continue to be the nation's preeminent solution for employing deterrence through global presence, sea control, mission flexibility and when necessary, interdiction. We are an agile strike and amphibious power projection force in readiness, and such agility requires that our Naval expeditionary forces remain strong." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Thomas P. Dee and Lieutenant General Robert S. Walsh.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-13
-
Archived Webcast and Transcript of the Markup for the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support for FY 2017, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, May 10, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the May 10, 2016 hearing, " Archived Webcast and Transcript of the Markup for the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support for FY 2017," before the Senate Committee on Armed Forces. From the opening statement of Kelly Ayotte: "Today the subcommittee meets to mark up an original bill, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. [...] As many witnesses have testified before our committee, the United States confronts a growing and diverse range of threats, and yet the readiness of our armed forces has declined dangerously. This has occurred because our defense budget is based on artificial budget caps rather than an objective assessment of the threats we confront and a clear-eyed determination of the military we need to protect our national security interests. One of the most significant and important priorities for Congress is to eliminate once and for all the defense sequestration and the artificial budget caps that have increased the gap between the military we have and the military that we need to defend this Nation." There are no statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-05-10
-
Department of Defense Budget Posture, Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, March 17, 2016
This is a testimony compilation of the March 17, 2016 hearing, "Department of Defense Budget Posture" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. Taken from the submitted statement of Secretary Ash Carter: "The President's budget submission accordingly adheres to that budget deal - requesting a total of $582.7 billion for the Defense Department in FY 2017, for both the base budget and Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funds combined. How we plan to invest those funds, along with our planned investments for the next five years - as detailed in the customary Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) that's included in the President's budget submission - are critical to DoD's ability to carry out our mission of national defense with the excellence the American people expect of their military, which is today the finest fighting force the world has ever known." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Ashton B. Carter, Michael J. McCord, and Joseph F. Dunford, Jr.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-03-17
-
Hearing to Receive Testimony on the Final Report of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan: Hearing Before the U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, October 19, 2011
This testimony is from the October 19, 2011 hearing, "Hearing to Receive Testimony on the Final Report of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan" before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support. From the opening statement of Senator Claire McCaskill: "In many ways, the commission has validated our worst fears about the way we were contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The commission found that agencies over-rely on contractors for contingency operations and that inadequate planning and lack of oversight for such contracting have led to an exceptional level of waste, fraud, and abuse. It is beyond distressing to think of how much the billions of dollars that we spent on contracting has been lost. The commission's report and recommendations go to the heart of how we got into this mess and how we can avoid repeating a situation where we are spending billions of dollars, that we needed an understanding and control over where the money is going." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Claire McCaskill; Kelly Ayotte; Joseph Manchin; Frank Kendall ; Brooks L. Bash; Dov S. Zakheim; and Katherine V. Schinasi.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2011-10-19
-
Hearing to Receive Testimony on the Department of the Army in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2014 and the Future Years Defense Program: Hearing Before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 23, 2013
This testimony compilation is from the April 23, 2013 hearing, "Hearing to Receive Testimony on the Department of the Army in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2014 and the Future Years Defense Program," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Carl Levin: "The sequestration required by the Budget Control Act in fiscal year 2013, along with a higher-than- expected operating tempo in Afghanistan, has led to a $12 billion shortfall in Army operation and maintenance accounts, leading to the cancellation of major training exercises and the deferral of required equipment maintenance and repair. By the end of September, only one-third of the Army's Active Duty units are expected to have acceptable readiness ratings. We look forward to the testimony of our witnesses on how the fiscal situation facing the Army is likely to impact military and civilian personnel, families, readiness, modernization, and, as well, on the operations on Afghanistan." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Carl Levin, John M. McHugh, and Raymond T. Odierno.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2013-04-23
-
United States Middle East Policy, Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 24, 2015
This is the testimony compilation from the March 24, 2015 hearing, "United States Middle East Policy," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of John McCain: "The Committee meets today to receive testimony on U.S. policy in the Middle East. […] Last month, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, testified before this committee, quote, '[I]n my 50-plus years in the intelligence business, I don't know of a time that has been more beset by challenges and crises around the world.' Nowhere is that truer than in the Middle East. From Libya and Yemen, to Iraq and Syria, the old order in the Middle East--both the regional balance among states and the social order within states--is collapsing, and no new vision has emerged to take its place. This underlying dynamic is made worse by the failure of U.S. strategy and leadership to shape events in this vital part of the world for the better. Instead, unfortunately, we have too often confused our friends, encouraged our enemies, and created a vacuum for hostile states such as Iran and Russia and vicious non-state actors such as al Qaeda and ISIL [Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant]."
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-03-24
-
Worldwide Threats, Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, February 26, 2015
This is the testimony compilation from the hearing, "Worldwide Threats," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Chairman McCain: "The Committee meets today to receive testimony on the nature and scope of the global threats faced by the United States and our allies. I want to welcome James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, and General Vincent Stewart, the newly confirmed Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Thank you for being with us today. This Committee recently conducted several hearings with some of our most respected national security leaders to explore the need for strategic thinking to address the threats we face. In the course of those hearings, these military and foreign policy leaders all agreed that the current international environment is more complex and dangerous than at any time in recent memory." Topics covered include terrorism, intelligence, and international relations. Statements, letters and materials for the record include those of the following: John McCain, Jack Reed, Vincent Stewart, and James Clapper.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-02-26
-
United States Central Command and United States Africa Command, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, March 9, 2017
This testimony compilation made by the HSDL staff is from the March 9, 2017 hearing, "United States Central Command and United States Africa Command," before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. The purpose of this hearing was to discuss "the posture of U.S. Central Command and Africa Command. […] More than a decade-and-a-half since the September 11th terrorist attacks, our nation is still at war with terrorists that seek to attack our homeland, our interests, our allies, and our partners. […] Our military has gradually eroded ISIS's territorial control and removed key personnel from the battlefield. […] But much to the frustration of the American people, this hard-won tactical progress has not led to enduring strategic gains." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Joseph L. Votel and Thomas D. Waldhauser.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2017-03-09
-
Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for National Security Space Activities, Hearing Before U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 3, 2014
This is a compilation of the April 3, 2014 hearing on "Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for National Security Space Activities" held before the House Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. Testimonies at this hearing discuss a variety of topics, including future capabilities the U.S. will need to employ to ensure national security in space, DoD space programs and policies, and the work of the U.S. Joint Functional Component for Space (JFCC SPACE), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) on national security space activities. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Gil Klinger, Douglas L. Loverro, John W. "Jay" Raymond, Betty J. Sapp, and William L. Shelton.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2014-04-03
-
FY15 Budget Request for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Chemical Biological Defense Program: Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction in a Changing Environment, Hearing Before U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 8, 2014
This is a compilation of the April 8, 2014 hearing on "FY15 Budget Request for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Chemical Biological Defense Program" held before the House Committee on Armed Services. Testimonies in this hearing discuss a variety of topics, including DoD's efforts to counter the threats posed by WMD, updates on the contribution of the Chemical and Biological Defense Program to the mission of countering proliferation of WMD, and the status of U.S. countering weapons of mass destruction (CWMD) programs. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Rebecca K.C. Hersman, Kenneth Myers, Carmen Spencer, and Andrew C. Weber.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2014-04-08
-
Ballistic Missile Defense Policies and Programs, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 13, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the April 13, 2016 hearing "Ballistic Missile Defense Policies and Programs" before the Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. From the statement of Brian P. McKeon: "Ballistic missiles continue to pose a significant security challenge as nations pursue efforts to make them more survivable, reliable, mobile, and accurate at greater ranges. [...] The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action reached by the P5+1, the EU (European Union) and Iran last summer effectively cuts off all of Iran's potential pathways to developing a nuclear warhead, thereby removing the greatest danger previously posed by Iran's ballistic missile program. At the same time, Iran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East and today can potentially reach targets throughout the region and into southeastern Europe. Iran is seeking to enhance the lethality and effectiveness of existing systems with improvements in accuracy and warhead designs." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Brian P. McKeon, William E. Gortney, James D. Syring, and David L. Mann.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-13
-
F35 Joint Strike Fighter, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 26, 2016
This testimony compilation is from the April 26, 2016 hearing "F-35 Joint Strike Fighter," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Frank Kendall III: "The F-35 Lightning II is the Department of Defense`s largest acquisition program, matched by its importance to our Nation's security. The F-35 will form the backbone of U.S. air combat superiority for decades to come, replacing or complementing the legacy tactical fighter fleets of the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps with a dominant, multirole, fifth-generation aircraft, capable of projecting U.S. power and deterring potential adversaries. For our International Partners and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers who are participating in the program, the F-35 will become a linchpin for future coalition operations and will help to close a crucial capability gap that will enhance the strength of our security alliances. Accordingly, delivering this transformational capability to front-line forces as soon as possible remains a top priority. Our overall assessment is that the program is making solid progress across the board and shows improvement each day while continuing to manage emerging issues and mitigate programmatic risks. We are confident the F-35 team can overcome these challenges and deliver on our commitments. In this testimony, we will present a detailed update on the progress that has been made over the past year, providing a balanced assessment of the current status of the program, highlighting both the accomplishments and the setbacks, as well as articulating where we believe risks remain." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Frank Kendall III, J. Michael Gilmore, Christopher C. Bogdan, Michael J. Sullivan.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-26
-
Department of Defense Policy and Programs to Counter Threats to the United States from Terrorism and Irregular Warfare, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, April 21, 2015
This is a testimony compilation of the April 21, 2015 hearing on "Department of Defense Policy and Programs to Counter Threats to the United States from Terrorism and Irregular Warfare" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threat and Capabilities. From the opening statement of Michael Lumpkin: "Chairman Fischer, Ranking Member Nelson, and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. As I speak, U.S. Special Operations Forces -- known as SOF - are deployed across the globe in support of our broader Counterterrorism Mission to defend America, our friends, and our partners, from the threat posed by extremist terrorist organizations. The current security environment is rapidly evolving with new threats and challenging dynamics. In this complex environment, U.S. SOF continue to successfully undertake operations against terrorist organizations. Many of those forces are also doing critical work associated with building the capacity of our partners to conduct their own operations. Of critical importance, but often less visible, the relationships that U.S. SOF develop with partners through persistent engagement over many years are among the most valuable counter-terrorism tools available to the United States." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael D. Lumpkin and Scott A. Howell.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-04-21
-
Oversight: U.S. Africa Command and U.S. Transportation: Hearing Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, March 7, 2013
This testimony compilation is from the March 7, 2013 hearing, "Oversight: U.S. Africa Command and U.S. Transportation," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Carl Levin: "There are three areas I want to call out for special attention. First, the attack in Benghazi last September was a poignant and powerful reminder of our need and the public's expectation for a capability to respond in real time to crises around the world. This committee recently heard from the Secretary of Defense and from General Dempsey on the Department's response to the Benghazi attack. It is clear that AFRICOM [Africa Command] continues to struggle to secure basing rights and access which would allow for such a response or allowing us to conduct day to day certain military operations with partners in the region. Moreover, AFRICOM has received less in the way of resources and support than other geographic commands, and this problem indeed may grow in a resource-constrained environment. So we look forward to learning of the action that the Department has taken to ensure AFRICOM is equipped in the future to respond to or, more importantly, to secure the intelligence to warn of such an impending attack. Second, AFRICOM's efforts to combat the threat posed by al Qaeda, its associated forces, and other violent extremists have seen some success, but new challenges to sustaining progress seem to emerge daily. In Somalia, AFRICOM's investments are showing promise as the African Union forces continue to expand their territorial control and the nascent Somalia government is provided additional time and space to build its capacity and its capabilities." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Carl Levin, James M. Inhofe, William M. Fraser and Carter F. Ham.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2013-03-07
-
Worldwide Threats, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, May 23, 2017
This testimony compilation is from the May 23, 2017 hearing, "Worldwide Threats" before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Vincent R. Stewart: "Today, the United States faces an increasingly complex array of challenges to our national security. We are faced with the rise of foreign militaries with ever-improving capabilities, threats from cyberactors, highly adaptive terrorist organizations, aggressive nonstate actors, and hostile foreign intelligence services-capabilities and intentions that I will assess here in some detail. These challenges must be seen in the broader context of a highly connected and interdependent strategic environment, characterized by the emergence of new political, military, and economic centers and affected by technology and mass communication, mass migration, and urbanization. The threat environment also serves to highlight the critical need for us to operate in close collaboration with our Five Eyes partners, NATO, and other allies across the globe. This Statement for the Record is organized regionally, followed by transnational issues. Taken together, they reflect the diversity, scope, and complexity of today's challenges to our national security". Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Daniel R. Coats and Vincent R. Stewart.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2017-05-23
-
Military Construction, Environmental, Energy, and Base Closure Programs, Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, April 12, 2016
This is a testimony compilation of the April 12, 2016 hearing on "Military Construction, Environmental, Energy, and Base Closure Programs" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the statement of Pete Potochney: "As you will note, the Administration's budget includes $7.4 billion for Military Construction (including family housing), and $10.2 billion for Facility Sustainment and Recapitalization. These are both decreases from last year, as the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 caps overall defense spending. Although this request allows a reduction in facilities risk due to a slight increase in Sustainment funding by the Services, the Department is still accepting risk in facilities. As this Subcommittee well knows, facilities degrade more slowly than readiness, and in a constrained budget environment, it is responsible to take risk in facilities first." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Peter J. Potochney, Katherine G. Hammack, Dennis V. McGinn, and Miranda A.A. Ballentine.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2016-04-12
-
Defense Budget for Fiscal Year 2018 and Onwards, Hearing Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, January 24, 2017
This testimony compilation is from the January 24, 2017 hearing on "Defense Budget for Fiscal Year 2018 and Onwards," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of John McCain: "The world order that America has led for seven decades-which has benefited our people most of all-is now under unprecedented strain. We have entered a new era of great power competition, even as we continue to face an enduring global conflict against violent Islamist extremist groups. Too many Americans seem to have forgotten that our world order is not self-sustaining. Too many have forgotten that, while the threats we face may not have purely military solutions, they all have military dimensions. In short, too many have forgotten that hard power matters. It is what gives our nation leverage to deter aggression and achieve peace through strength. [...] In other words, President Trump is now commander-in-chief of a military that is underfunded, undersized, and unready to meet the diverse and complex array of threats confronting our nation. That is why every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has testified to our committees that years of budget cuts have placed the lives of the men and women of our armed forces at greater risk." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Dakota L. Wood, Thomas G. Mahnken, and Lawrence J. Korb.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2017-01-24
-
Outside Perspectives on the Department of Defense Cyber Strategy: Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, September 29, 2015
This is a testimony compilation of the September 29, 2015 hearing "Outside Perspectives on the Department of Defense Cyber Strategy" held before the House Committee on Armed Services. From the testimony of Mr. Richard Bejtlich: "As a private sector defense strategist and as a former military officer, I assess the new DoD cyber strategy as a transition document. Previous strategies emphasized DoD's role as protecting DoD networks from attack. The current document restates this role, and adds a new albeit limited mission: 'defend the US homeland and vital interests from disruptive or destructive cyber attacks of significant consequence.' Stepping outside the Beltway mentality, it might be natural to ask 'what about OPM?' or even 'what about Sony?' For these reasons I believe DoD's strategy is a step in the right direction, but one that needs to be augmented by additional measures. […] It is true that some national and criminal hacking teams are improving their operational security as a means to frustrate attribution work. However, the explosion in social media across the developed and developing world means the people behind the hacking continue to show more of their actions and personalities in public forums. Just last week two security companies combined forces to use social media and other online sources to expose a member of a military hacking unit in Kunming, China. I assess that improved information sharing will also drive forward the attribution capabilities of public and private teams." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Richard Bejtlich, Dominick Delfino, Lara Schmidt, and Ian Wallace.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services
2015-09-29
