tv U.S. European Command Leader Testifies on National Security Challenges CSPAN April 1, 2022 12:01pm-2:38pm EDT
helps support our nonprofit operations. c-span's spring sale now through tuesday only at c-spanshop.org. scan the code at the left to start shopping now. >> there are a lot of places to get political information. but only at c-span you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, or here, or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> now the head of u.s.-european command testifies on efforts to
support ukraine and increase the u.s. military presence in europe. he responded to questions about weapons systems going to ukraine. this is just over two and half hours. >> [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> call the committee to order. good morning. this morning the full committee on the national security challenges use military activities in europe. we are joined by two witnesses, dr. celeste wallander who's the
assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs in the department of defense, and general tod wolters who is the u.s. air force commander for the u.s.-european command. welcome both of you. before we get started with that, tomorrow will be the last day of working this committee for paul who i think most of you know who is our staff director, has been our staff director for 12 years i think now, has been on the committee for 18. and i really want to thank paul for his service to this committee as most of us know he's also a veteran of the u.s. army, didid bomb disposal in the army before the coming to work for thee government. and we're all going to miss him terribly, me more so than anybody else. he has done a fantastic job for this committee but mostly i'm very happy for him. it's a good move. it's been ever so slightly stressful job for the last few years, so it's a terrific move. also paul is recently married, some big time for him.
and very happy. i can't say enough about the job that is done for this committee. we -- [applause] [applause] >> we are constantly told in this committee, we passed our bill every year going on i think 61, 62, 61 something like that. and certainly there are a lot of people who contribute to the process but nobody more so in the last ten years then paul. he understands what this committee is all about, the fact that we work in a bipartisan manner. the fact that we'rer, here to serve the people who serve our country. we do our job so they can do there is better and he knows how to bring people together.
and i think that's the thing that i've been most impressed about. by the way paul approaches his job as he knows it is about people and about relationships. he cares deeply and personally about everybody involved in this process, makes the seal included and makes us all better at what we do. he has helped build a culture here that enables us to do our job better. and personally i'm sure i i coud have done this job without him. i don't think i could have done it well. what i first got this job i was in a little bit over my head. but paul was d not and he took e time and the patience to sort of guide me and educate me about that. and also to be a good personal friend, to understand it's not just about the job, it's about what's going on anybody lies and you have to understand that if you're going to get the best out of people in the most supportive of it. i could go on at great length but paul needs a great lot to me. he will be missed but again i want to emphasize this is not a sad day. we are very happypy for him. he has served this country well.
he is going to go on to other things in his life into those every little bit as well i am i just want to thank him for everything he's done for this committee, for this continent and for this country.co so thank you paul. we appreciate your service and good luck. it is incredibly important hearing that we have this morning as you all know. there's always a lot going on in the world that is of concern to this committee and concern to the united states defense policy but europe is a central focus right now because of russia's total unprovoked invasion of ukraine and all the implications that flow from that. so really look forward to the testimony from our witnesses today about the situation and a number of different aspects to it. certainlyy we want to get the latest, the update on what's happening in ukraine. i think the president and others have stayed our policy clearly. we need to protect ukraine. basically there's three key pieces to it. we need to do everything we possibly can toen support ukraie in a fight against russian
aggression. we need to make sure we don't stumble into a wider war with potentially catastrophic consequences for the entire globe. we do not want a war with russia and we have to be cautious about how we approach is to make sure we don't't do that. and lastly we want to make sure that this is a strategic failure for putin. a number of people are asking the question how does this end? i think the honest answer is nobody knows. but how it should end is with russia a sicklyan going back whe they came from and ukraine being the sovereign democracy that it is and was and should always be. that's how it should end. now, that's easier said than done but i think that goal as our overall policy should be the central focus. we wantd to know what's going n ukraine and specifically know what we can to beat is supported. the ukrainians have fought incredibly bravely and better than just about anybody expected. we have to give them the help they need to continue that process.
of course there are broader implications beyond ukraine. what is our policy in europe? what are we going to do to shore up defenses in eastern europe? with that question nato is more important now than it has been for a very, very long time and in particular in eastern europe. i met yesterday with romanian members of the senate. they are very concerned. they want our support as you know paul inar the pulpits all f the countries in eastern europe and throughout europe are concerned. we need to have an adequate posture in europe to deter russia for any further aggression. we want to hear how you're going to put together the plans for that one at the same time i want to thank both of the witness today for the leadership that is brought nato together to greater extent than it has been a long time. i think the whole world was surprised the degree towo which our alliance joined together and in unity responded to this russian invasion to our support for ukraine, our support for economic sanctions. i think we've learned beyond any shadow of a doubt that alliances
matter, okay? that america first isn't going to get you very far if you don't have friends and allies and people who can work with you in the world to meet the challenges that we face.le i want to know how we're going to build upon that going forward. and then lastly, budget was released two days ago now i think. how does that affect what you're trying to do? what are the keys? what is theth most important thg you need to be able to provide that adequate deterrence? not the most important thing but what is the package that is going to be necessary to give the support? how are you going to make that work? this is an incredibly important very timely moment to have this hearing. so i look forward to our witnesses testimony and the questions and answersri from members, and with that yielded to the ranking member mr. rogers. >> thank you, mr. chairman and i concur with your observations and also concur with your celebration of our staff director. i would note he has alabama roots which makes an even
cooler. and will be missed. but it want to thank our witnesses, express my appreciation for your service to our country in your preparation for this hearing. we are a a month into putin's catastrophic invasion of ukraine. the russian offensive appears to be stalled. if russian casualties don't exceed 10,000, they soon will. the ukrainians are starting to retake ground. a time to double that is now. but i am concerned that's not going to happen. time and time again this administration has been petrified of putin, and too often that commonsense actions to support our partners and allies may be deemed as dilatory. as the result they were way too slow to get aid to ukraine. we should have started back in thanksgiving with visible aggressivera deliveries of lethl aid to ukraine. instead white house wasted months. the first presidential drawdown package did to startir flowing o ukraine until january of this year.
but the were not any stingers big u.s. stingers didn't make it to ukraine untilti a week after the invasion. paul lens mig-29 offer was rejected by the white house. so logins willing to provide s-300 for ukraine but the defense department can't find suitable backfill for its been going on for two weeks. there are still no coastal defense cruise missilesl even though mayor paul is been fled from the sea. these are a few examples. there are a dozen more. dithering needs to him. we need to flip the script and make putin afraid of t escalatig against the west. here's what i would like your from our witnesses today. i would like to the our policy in ukraine is to win. that means giving the ukrainians the resources to drive out every last russian on ukraine in soil. i'd like to hear that we've identified backfill for the s-300 and is on its way as we speak. i liked your that we have a plan to get coastal defense cruise
missiles to ukraine. i'd like to hear that were ramping up production of stingersta and javelin command launch units. we also need to dramatically ramp up production a small tactical uas systems like switchblade and get more systems and ukrainian hands. finally i like your that we're going to reinforce our allies with permanent bases in poland, romania and the baltics. i been pressing for more dispersed forces and europe for years. we owe it to our allies and a partners especially those on the eastern front. nothing less than a full force support will do. finally, , general, i know your time at uconn is supposed to come to and the next couple of months. it's my hope the secretary austin sees fit to extend your time a little bit and so that you can help see us through this crisis. i don't want to make your wife t mad but we need you, so i really think having the transition at you, right now is not in the best interest of our country. with that i yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you.
dr. wallander. dr. wallander? asst. sec. wallander: thank you for the opportunity to testify in my capacity as assistant secretary of defense for international affairs. i would like to express appreciation for the continued support from congress and this committee and resourcing department of defense efforts in this region. it is another to appear alongside general wolters, an outstanding partner. this time last year, the focus was strategic competition and how that was shaping our world. today, we see that no longer a new theory of strategic petition. we see russia engaging in an illegal use of force against ukraine in the most violent act of aggression in europe since world war ii. the u.s. condemns russia's
unprovoked attack against ukraine and deplores the tragic loss of life, human suffering and indiscriminate destruction caused by russia. the russian invasion threatens not only ukraine, but a threat to euro atlantic security. we must assess our posture in europe to assess the strategic landscape while maintaining our alliance and shared interests in the region, and avoiding escalation with a nuclear power. the department has three priorities regarding the invasion. first, we aim to bolster ukraine's ability to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity, for which congress' assistance is vital. second, we seek to maintain unity with nato allies and partners pay finally, we will continue to deter russian aggression against, and defend every inch of come allied tory. we -- allied -- and defend every
inch of, allied territory. the united states has committed more than $4 billion to security assistance to ukraine since 2014, more than $2 billion inch august 2021 alone. i am proud to say that with a leading role from the u.s., the global response to russia's aggression has been remarkable. with unprecedented sanctions and a wide range of global military and security assistance flowing to ukraine. there have been reversals of restrictions to provide assistance to ukraine. russia's attempt to divide the united states from its allies and partners has failed miserably. after russia's invasion of crimea in 2014, the u.s. with the support congress embarked on
substantial changes to our posture in europe, involving infrastructure improvements, building partner capacity, increased rotational presence, more exercises and training with allies and enhanced, free positioned equipment. we focused on expanding access, basing and overflight permission in europe and increased security assistance funding, especially on nato's eastern flank. all these moves of come into play during this crisis, validating our investments in preparations. in two months, we swiftly repositioned forces in europe, extended specific rotational forces in theater, and floyd significant additional capabilities. these included placing the entire u.s. commitment to the nato response force on heightened readiness, repositioning forces to multiple eastern flank allies, extending
maritime forces and deploying additional air, ground, space and cyberspace capabilities. with these recent limits on the extensions, the u.s. that was approximately 100,000 military personnel either stationed in or deployed to europe and its waters. we are working with allies to ensure nato is prepared modern challenges unable to deter aggression from any adversary. allies deployed extensive forces in the eastern flank and across the nato area. for the first time, nato activated its defense plans and deployed the nato response force in a deterrence and defense role. the people's republic of china is also active in the ucomm alr and we know the prc and russia collaborate in arenas including joint military exercises. this strategic competition is
monitored closely. this work is only possible with stable funding. congressional support for u.s. forces deployed as well as funding for defense initiatives across europe and security assistance for ukraine will continue to be critical to achieving u.s. national security objectives. russia's actions brought to light the contrast between our, craddick values and rules-based values and russia's autocratic, violent vision. the department of the fence and other department send agencies, nato allies and close consultation with congress, we will continue to work for a stable europe. thank you. i appreciate your continued to support to soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and guardians and civilians at the department
of defense who work in the service of the american people. chair: thank you. general wolters. gen. wolters thank you. on behalf of the men, women and families who serve our nation, we extend next year's work. it remains a privileged serve alongside these patriots and our allies and partners. it is an honor to testify with assistant secretary of defense celeste wallander, h aventis -- a tremendous force multiplier for our entire team. also appearing with us is someone who leads from the front in treating people with dignity and respect. we are fully lined with department of defense priorities. everyday, we work to generate peace with allies and partners by strengthening the germans in
defense of the euro atlantic. this is a pivotal moment in europe with generational implications. when testifying before this committee last year, russia was already on the path to intimidate and threaten ukraine while testing the resolve of the transatlantic alliance. russia's premeditated and on provoked invasion of ukraine has galvanized our allies and partners. we admire the courage and tenacity of the ukrainian armed forces and citizens and we specked their sovereign democracy. in the euro atlantic area, nato remains the cornerstone of deterrence and defense as we face the largest conflict in europe in three generations. our transatlantic alliance has responded in all more fighting domains -- all war fighting domains. we have an architecture on the eastern flank that includes contributions from 11 allies. on land, allies continue
deploying additional forces. our standing maritime forces are infused with maritime capabilities to ensure freedom of navigation from the arctic to the south to the ag and see -- agean. we have inherently increased the nato air defense architecture. nato capabilities in space and cyberspace are more closely integrated then add any other time in the alliance's history. the sum of these capabilities underwrites the security of nato's article five guaranty. a protagonist to our commitment with nato begins with our efforts in the u.s. european command. our mission is to compete, deter and prepare to respond to aggression with the full weight
of the nato alliance. our investments in military relationships, training and readiness build unity, resolve, and combat-credible deterrence. u.s. ucomm has sparked the allies to enhance posture along the eastern flank, rapidly deploying three rick gates of combat forces, a carrier strike group and for that fifth generation fighters. this effort is america's efforts, with soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen and, guardians a defense department civilians from all 50 states and territories, some based in europe, others rotating into europe from across the nation. this build is enabled by years of investment through the european reassurance and deterrence initiatives, commonly referred to as eri and edi.
enhancements include facilities, pre-positioned equipment, deployment and all-domain exercises and have improved our speed and utility. thanks to edi had eri, we deployed the entirety of an armored brigade combat team from georgia in the u.s. to germany in just one week. that level of speed is unmatched globally. on behalf of the men and women of the european command, we think congress and the american people for their contributions in this effort. capabilities the department brought to bear in response to this acute security environment required critical partnerships with trans com, cyber com, and the u.s. intelligence community.
this is critical. we are witnessing a historic demonstration of unity and will and an unprecedented effort by allies to strengthen defense while simultaneously helping those in need. just an example, but a critical 1 -- we have seen germany commit to meet the alliance's 2% benchmarking we expect other allies will redouble efforts to adequately invest in defense to generate peace. from turkey in the southeast to norway, sweden and finland in the north, on air -- in air, land, sea, space and cyber, our allies and partners are committing. thank you for this opportunity. i look forward to your questions. chair: general asst. sec. wallander: -- general wolters, one of the central questions is what we can provide for ukraine.
part of it is the balance between giving ukraine help about spreading to a wider war. before the war began, the issue of what should give ukraine was informed by deterrence versus provocation. i would say a concern about giving russia an excuse, and provoking them come is the reason some weapons did not -- were not provided. it is the same reason president trump did not provide those weapons either. we were trying to walk our way through that. but now that the war has begun, how do you balance that? do we take mr. rogers' approach and say we don't care what putin does? we should send troops and tanks and fight in ukraine? what is the proper way to strike that balance and are you concerned about how russia might respond to a given action and spread the war to poland, baltics, u.s. assets in the region? how do you balance that risk?
asst. sec. wallander: as a military commander, my first answer is, constantly. conditions change second second and i bear the responsibility to ensure we don't forget as military commanders the nations of the right to give whatever they would prefer from a unilateral, bilateral, multilateral perspective. secondly, i have to take into account military mission effectiveness coupled with strategic miscalculation. one day is different from the next. we have to adjust. chair: how do you specify the risk of russia escalating? i know it is something you think about. what is the risk and what might we do to provoke it? gen. wolters the risk we have to
gauge is the risk russia first imposes on ukraine. we have to be smart about ukraine's military perspective bent take into account what allies can contribute. we are concerned about the force disposition protection of ukrainian armed forces and citizens of populations on the periphery. chair: outside of ukraine, is there a risk that if we get more engaged, russia would spread the war? if so, how and where? gen. wolters: there is always a risk. as a military mission planner, i have to take into account all those branches and sequels and as a nato commander, i am most concerned about eastern europe as it connects to russia. chair: but we can in fact
provide a lot of weapons to ukraine within that manageable risk, and i think we are doing that. what is most important to your mind in terms of weapons we need to get into ukraine right now? i agree the goal is to push the russians out and win the fight. what of the most important weapons ukrainian need -- ukrainians need? gen. wolters: i can go deeper in a classified session, but i can say, those capabilities that are anti-armor, antitank, and surface to air very important. they have been effective and i suspected the near future, they will continue to be effective. chair: mr. rogers. representative: i would like to correct the record and say president zelenskyy never asked american troops to come and fight in fighting ukraine. nor have i. we will give them everything they asked for that they need to wade this work that is my
position. -- two when -- that they need to win this war. that is my position. -- is that accurate? asst. sec. wallander: i can take that question back to get you an answer. representative: it is safe to say we wouldn't be adjusting the budget to what is happening in eastern europe right now. you have heard me talk about the slovaka 300 that is desperately needed by ukraine. why is it taking two >> we are working with slovakia to identify the requirements for meeting their needs. i can speak in the greater
detail during the classified session but we are working on this and meanwhile we have focused on getting countries that hold soviet legacy systems including as 300 systems that have spare parts, missiles different parts of that 300 system who are willing to send that to ukraine. we have not been waiting for resolution of that offer, but have been working on getting the ukrainians what they need now. >> one is that going to be? >> that is ongoing and we can talk in greater detail in laid the classified session -- and lay classified session. >> you can keep the committee updated at least on a weekly basis. we have what -- talk to many times over the last couple of years about the need for redistribution of our troops in the european command and to establish permanent basing inlay poland, romanian -- in romaine
-- in poland romania to help reassure nato will deter russia. >> congressman it has to change. this is an opportunity as a result of this on behalf of russia to re-examine the permanent military architecture that exists, known only in eastern europe, but in our air policing activity, aviation, in our standing naval groups. we are in the process of establishing eight very coherent battalion groups in late europe that have all of the appropriate neighbors that are accompanied by all of the naval maritime group so that we can comprehensively defend in the east and do so in the north all the way to the atlantic ocean extending to the mediterranean. in so doing the nato nations that are committing that i alluded to in my opening comments are going to be part of
the equation and they are willing to do so to change the presence from a rotational to a more permanent. it will continue to grow and we are working hard with the north atlantic council to do that. >> that is an important point. i talked earlier about ukrainians not asking us to put troops there. they have not asked us to give them anything they are willing to pay for it they just want us to give it to them. in poland, the polish government has offered to pay for us to establish a permanent base there. everyone wants a base but that is the first time i heard of a country willing to pay for it. i hope we see that happen, the rotational troop presence. going back to the chairman's opening statement, the best way that we can solidify and enhance our relationship with our nato allies is to have that permanent base there to show we are committed to the relationship. lastly, on the switchblade, that is what i have examined and it seems to be something that would be effective.
dr. wallander are you familiar with that system? >> yes. we have, like you have been focused on its capabilities and receive the message loud and clear from a ukrainian colleagues that this is required. we have committed 100 switchblade tactical aerial systems to be delivered in the most recent package of presidential drawdown. we have taken, we have heard the ukrainians and have taken it seriously. >> we should remember we passed a $13.4 billion supplemental out of congress signed by the president specifically to deal with ukraine. >> thank you mr. chairman want to thank our witnesses for your testimony today. let me begin with the both of you. i have a question on cyber related. the russian federation is continuing to leverage of cyber attacks and disinformation campaigns against ukraine,
europe and the u.s. we have not yet seen the level of cyber community we have anticipated, we still have to be ready for it. how are you preparing your cyber defenses for a potential attack from the russian federation and i also want to know how your helping us bolster cyber defenses of our european partners and nato to the degree we can talk about in open session. >> congressman, first and foremost we went to the basics with respect to cyber employment. as you well know, a great cyber offense starts with the great cyber defense. i know the general and team were very aggressive with respect to assisting the ukrainian government and the ukrainian department of defense to improve their network hygiene and network defense. those efforts started in the november, december timeframe. the same considerations were given to the european nations in the periphery. we can talk in more detail but
the good defense has been very helpful. it reveals some of the challenges russia has faced with their cyber offense against ukraine and european nations on the periphery. >> thank you. dr. wallander, our national defense strategy calls for us to use the concept of integrative deterrence. it is part of our capabilities in coronation with other deterrence methods. this unclassified setting, agree with what you can, how are we working further with nato to utilize our cyber capabilities in the context of the european a deterrence initiative? >> congressman thank you for your question. integrative deterrence does include the cyber domain and the united states has worked closely with allies to improve their resilience to monitor networks
to share information and that work is ongoing. the challenge of a russian activity and lay the cyber domain is persistent. -- in the cyber domain is persistent. deterrence is not only about capabilities in the nato context it is about the multinational nature of the alliance and the commitment to defend one another and combined together the efforts of nato allies in cyber domain. it sends a strong credible message to russia that helps to the deterrent message. >> thank you. incredibly important to leverage those capabilities. it is possible to work with our allies to strengthen those capabilities. dr. wallander, i want to commend what president biden and the administration and department of defense and european partners and allies for supporting ukraine and stepping up to the challenge to this historic crisis caused by the russian
federation. i agree with the chairman's comment, we need to make sure that russia is pushed back and ukraine stays free and independent. in your view, are there any further ways that congress can help provide better support ukraine? we have talked about this already but, can you elaborate on more thoughts you have? are there any barriers that we can overcome to help you get through? what about when it comes to humanitarian assistance as well? >> thank you for that question. i want to reiterate our gratitude for not only the scale of the assistance of the congress in budget support but the speed with which congress has taken this as a priority so we are able to support ukraine. because of the courage and capability of the ukrainian military forces and citizens, this fight is going to extend
and so looking forward, we do have in addition to the option of presidential and the ukrainian security system and what the next set of package should contain within eye towards not just days and weeks but months of sustainment, perhaps longer for the ukrainian military and ukrainian people. i would defer to the department of treasury and commerce. clearly the ukrainian government in addition to security assistance needs humanitarian assistance and economic assistance now that it is clear that this fight is going to continue for some time into the future. we look forward to working with you on a broad multi agency support for ukraine. >> thank you. >> mr. wilson is recognized. >> thank you, thank both of you for being here today. what a time in history. many of us never anticipated a land war in the europe ever again. but that is where we are. to face it.
putin did one thing totally unintentional, he has unified republicans and democrats. you will see that together we agree with president biden. we are inlay a long-term conflict -- in a long-term conflict ruled by autocracy, or democracy ruled by law. we need to be together and that is why i am grateful that working together with myself with the congressman. the issue that has come up as the delay with providing the equipment to the people of ukraine. how brave they are, standing up to the russian military. has congresswoman -- as the congressman pointed out yesterday, there is body armor awaiting in a storage area inlay chicago -- ii -- in chicago for the u.s. to approve. we need both of you with positions that you have to act
quickly and then particularly, i am grateful secretary wallander that you have been the president of the foundation so you have a knowledge of russia. along with that, as ranking member and my advisors indicated, we should have, months ago, provided the military equipment to the people of ukraine. in fact, i appreciate that he has revealed in august in the kremlin website there was an essay by vladimir putin that in the tradition of mein kampf, adolf hitler, he says the historic unity of russians and ukrainians, that is not what he means. what he means is the unity means no existence of the country of ukraine. so hopefully, general for you, the intelligence provide and how
to best protect the people of ukraine. with that in mind, for each of you what are the weaknesses you see in russian military and/or their diplomatic efforts, what can we do to exploit those weaknesses and try to bring to the people of russia that they are being betrayed by putin? the young people of that country, he is putting them at risk of imminent death, only for oil, money, power. madam secretary? >> on the political military front and the weaknesses, the russian narrative, and you yourself have pointed to, how absurd and non-plausible russian claims as a pretext for the invasion of ukraine are to the international community, so the work of the united states closely with allies and partners to expose what the russians were preparing to do, the pretext in
which, and absolutely without found out -- foundation pretext has galvanized the community more rapidly than any expected in contrast to what the experience in 2014 when they invaded crimea. that is been a key element in weakness in a military sense that has enabled us to pull together the unity on sanctions on assistance ukraine and on diplomatic isolation of the russian leadership. >> thank you. i think it goes back to the point you just made at the beginning. as a military commander i want to do everything i can to strengthen our support to ukraine armed forces based on where they are in the midst of their campaign. from a government perspective with respect to what the nations do to u.s., everything we are doing in the information environment needs to continue and strengthen. >> secretary, indeed.
it is impressive to see nato unified, 21 countries. as the cochair of the eu caucus, to see 21 countries of the european union provide military assistance and we need your influence to. two country should be doing more. israel, which in a destabilized world, it already had three tax in the last week, murderous attacks. india, the world's largest democracy, instability in the world, will lead to catastrophe for the terrific people of india and the prime minister. and the wonderful government needs to understand they need to be standing with democracy and ukraine. >> mr. larson is recognized. >> dr. wallander i want to pull back a bit. it is going to be a lot of ukraine questions. this is more of a nato policy
question. nato is looking to their tech accelerator. i just wanted to get your view on the departments view on the accelerate of the north atlantic project. it is a mash-up, i call the darpa and diu and a few other things. can you update us on where the department is on that? >> congressman i do not have details on the status of the project. i would get back to you with details. what i do know is as nato allies have recognized not just the scale of the fact that russia poses to your -- european security but the multi-domain challenges that both russia and china pose to global security and to nato, the willingness to cooperate more in the area of technology going forward has deepened and has strengthened.
this project is an opportunity to advance that. >> thanks. i wanted to make sure it is on record. this was the opportunity to ask that. general wolters i want to follow up on something that representative wilson brought up. and it is to show how international affairs and local affairs in washington state, we have ukrainian americans, in terms of ukrainians in the country it is a surprise for people to hear that. we ask them -- ask them -- we asked people in the community what they wanted to ask about pay and protective equipment and the ability to deliver that to the population and ukraine. can you give us in detail how that is happening? >> congressman, we have two centers with approximately 100 individuals that continue to iterate in the military with
ukrainian liaison officers that are working in the military dimension and the humanitarian side. it is based off of supply and demand and extends with feelers into ukraine at the ministerial level to make sure that the right stuff goes in at the right time to deliver the appropriate affect. based off access to get in and access to get out. it is not perfect by any means but it continues to improve over time. we will continue to iterate and make sure that we continue to connect with those interlocutors at the cranial level to make sure they get the right gear as quickly as possible. >> is there an issue with moving it into poland or romania now? so it is there instead of in the u.s.? >> by with them through poland
and it is by within through romania. i can talk a little bit more in a classified setting but there are challenges. at the end of the day we always communicate with the host nation to make sure we are doing the right thing. >> sure. to go even more local, the mission is located in the island and there is news yesterday a couple of days ago, that they sent squadron to germany. i presume there is a squadron already in the aegean sea as well. this might be a classified answer to a question but can you give us some idea about either mission, maybe starting with the mission into germany? >> sure. i can elaborate in a separate setting. but when i kanas -- but what i can see is you are right they are coming. >> i look forward to that. what do i do with my last-minute? [laughter]
i yielded back. thank you. >> i know some classified stuff has come up the plan is we are going to be here until 12:30 and then we will start our classified brief at 1:00. we will have a brief break in their. mr. turner's recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. general i appreciate your statements about ukraine, specifically you said we want to strengthen our support for ukraine. i know that your efforts to do so are incredibly important. i want to talk to about the sharing of intelligence. there was a great deal of concern initially when the conflict began that the u.s. had actionable intelligence, that could assist the ukrainians and having the ability to defend their country. and that there were delays in getting that intelligence to ukraine. are you comfortable with the speed at which our ability is to share that information with ukraine and do you think of
looking to strengthen ukraine are there gaps are there gaps or areas we need to address? >> congressman i am comfortable but i wanted to speed up. i was -- i will always say that even if it occurs in one second i want tomorrow it will -- to be have a second. the dni's participation at the very start of this campaign were revolutionary. as what i needed most to do was get the data to the nations to get it to be convinced soonest to make the appropriate moves based off the disposition and periphery of ukraine. as good or bad, it is better than i have ever seen. we have achieved consensus from a native -- nato body than we have in the past. it was a result of the intelligence sharing but it needs to continue to get faster. >> that is a great point. i know everyone is frustrated with the speed of sharing because, there has to be some
assessment whether or not the intelligent -- intelligence is important and whose hands and knees to get into. dealing with ukraine in an area where there is conflict. there -- are there restrictions on geography and the ukraine? as we look at the donbass region, are you seeing instances where we are tying our own hands whether there are limitations geographically within their own country, where the united states is unwilling to share information with ukraine about what russia is doing in its own country? >> i have not seen that. it is just access to some of the far eastern cities. as you all know that is a challenge for humanitarian assistance as well as intelligence sharing. as we image our way through this campaign and we provide our best military advice to her ukraine counterparts, we continue to make them aware of this very issue. they are iterating in an attempt to prove -- improve.
the teary any of time and distance overland -- the tyranny of time and distance overland. >> your ability to generate intelligence is not limited by space. >> it is not by getting the data into the right receptor. >> got it. i want to thank you for -- on page 12 of your report that you included the issue of the balkans i did get that is an area where we have vulnerabilities where we ignore the issue of the republic and the ability to -- of russia to destabilize the area. a needs are increased attention. i appreciate that you continue in your european focus to look at that as an issue. the question for you about ukraine. we do here that the number of refugees and the individuals who have been displaced in ukraine
and the number who have left ukraine we are hearing reports of individuals being taken against their will from russia -- from ukraine to russia. we are not hearing much from the white house about that. what can you confirm about individuals being taken from ukraine against their wealth to russia? -- will to russia? >> i've seen the reports that you have referred to. they are very concerning. i do not have anything, any independent information that i can confirm here. i can get back to you on that. >> we have good news about germany returning to the f-35 where they had initially indicated they were not going to be part of the family. they have agreed to be part of the f-35 and now canada has made the announcement, great effects of russia's aggressiveness. tele strategically how you think -- tell us strategically how you
think the nations committing the f-35 will affect the strategic capabilities of nato and our partners as they face russia? >> they will deliver a tremendous improvement in our strategic ability command-and-control and mission command as already demonstrated by u.s. f-35 that are contributing in the mission at this time. we anticipate -- >> i apologize, mr. courtney's recognize for five minutes. >> thank you to both witnesses this morning and to general walters, again i went and reread your bio. you have been showing amazing leadership, not just in the invasion of ukraine but back to when you took the helm in 2019. again for a lot of us, we remember in 2020 there were efforts to cut u.s. troop levels and lay germany -- in germany and eliminate the rotation of
marines in norway. your steadfast and here is to duty in terms of the value of nato has been valued over the last month or so. i want to publicly thank you for your great service. you mentioned in your remarks about how the u.s. recognizes our allies great collaboration but also their own sovereign ability to gift resources. last saturday, the ukrainian foreign minister publicly stated that based on his conversations with officials in washington and poland he stated that the u.s. has no objections to the transfer of aircraft from poland to ukraine. he went on to say as far as we can conclude the ball is in the polish side. again this was saturday. this was a couple of days ago.
there is a lot of high interest, certainly back home in my district with the large ukraine population. can you clarify for me, for a lot of us, what is the state of play in terms of the decision-maker to get that critical platform to the ukrainian air force? >> sir, at the national level i would suspect it is the prime minister or the president that ultimately makes the decision, given the potential for strategic miscalculation. that is what i have seen in practice so far. in a different setting i can get in some of the more tactical level details that way into the decision. again it goes back to the military mission effectiveness weight against strategic miscalculation, to make sure you take into account the protection of the citizens of ukraine as well as the citizens on the periphery. all of those variables have to come into play. you just described accurately
where i believe the situation currently sits. and nations continue to look at this issue and they will still continue to examine it and we will provide our best military advice and we will do so based off conditions in the environment at the time. >> thank you, your answer was very -- in terms of getting clarity. i think the pilots have done magnificent work. if there are ways we can get them more jets, that would be much beneficial. we have heard some of the back-and-forth regarding the speed with which material is getting into ukraine. dr. wallander you and i spoke off-line a bit about how sometimes overlooked combatant commands which is trans-,. i wonder if you can give a general sense of the speed and efficiency in which the general and her team is proceeding to get material into nato and
ultimately to ukraine. >> yes congressman it is extraordinary. especially since the u.s. has been able to focus on the option of drawdown to be able to pull the kinds of capabilities the ukrainians have been reorganizing from u.s. stocks. and through ucomm. i will credit to general wolters and his team. to move from the moment of approval to actual delivery of the capabilities within days and within weeks. so it has been an extraordinary effort by the u.s. military. it is made a difference on the battlefield for ukrainian forces fighting russia. >> and general omar bradley said strategy is for amateurs. i think trans comm has risen to the task and has risen to the task. >> thank you mr. chairman. secretary wallander i have a
question for you first, these questions are based on the limited information we have been given out, so far on the nuclear posture review. we have seen three paragraphs not a full review. even with that, there are some serious concerns that i have based on the language. it seems that the clara tori -- clara tori -- the policy has been narrowed, only be to -- only to be deterred as nuclear tax, and no mention of deterring nonnuclear strategic attacks or to achieve any u.s. objectives. the more limit that we have on our range of action that gives more freedom of action to potential adversaries. is that a limitation for sure? if so, did you have any conversations with allies or partners about this narrowing of our policy? >> congressman, thank you. to your second question first,
the u.s. has consulted with allies on the nuclear posture review, previewing some of the outcomes. i was in the consultations personally myself, the reports i have were allies were satisfied and did not have concerns about the content of the nuclear posture review. the nuclear posture review language does not apply exclusively to nuclear attacks but it extends to extreme circumstances that would require the united states to defend allies and partners. i am misquoting the precise language but there is a provision that is continuity with previous posture review statements. >> on that we can continue our conversation after we see the full review. that would be very helpful when that comes out. general walt --general wolters i
have a question for you based on the limited information we have on the npr. he has said that the nuclear launch missile can deny potential adversaries any confidence that limited nuclear employment would provide an advantage over the u.s. on its allies and partners. if we are going to limit the or dual -- or do away with the funding for the -- to me that goes against what admiral richard has said about it. do you agree with what admiral richard said about it? >> i do. i know his words were attempting to drive home the fact that having multiple options exacerbates the challenge for the potential enemies against us. >> exactly. so, it would be your best military advice that we continue to
>> it was and i agree. >> thank you and the follow-up question general wolters. the proposed budget of the biden administration would retire the e 83 gravity bomb. as you call it the decision was made a few years ago to keep it in effect until other capabilities would supplement that capability. were you askedfor your best military advice about maintaining the b-83 capability ? >> congressman, i was not on that particular issue. i'm only familiar with it as a result of what's next and admiral richards is making sure there's no gap but that's as far as i can go with that one. >> so can you comment on your best military advice about using the b-83 currently to deter aggression in your ar? >> again, i would concur with
the utilization of that to complicate the challenges of the enemy against us. as long as there's not another system that is in place and i know that's part of the issue with the transition. >> thank you, that's all i have for now mister chairman, i yelled back. >> mister garamendi is recognized for five minutes. mister garamendi is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mister chairman. i might add to that question you just raised, what is the cost of keeping all this and what are the options that may have a higher priority but that's not my question. we often hear hear the words multi-domain. one of the things we occasionally hear is that information is a powerful weapon.
and the question rises about information for the russian people about what is actually happening in ukraine. so my question to both of you is what is the status of our information efforts to enlighten the russian people about what their leader is doing to their brothers and sisters in ukraine? so let's start with miss wolters's thank you congressman. yes, information in the hands of the russian government has been all weapon. it's been a weapon that they been less successful in deploying to the effect they see and that is precisely because as you point to the us allies and the global community have ourselves utilized information which in
our case is true information, facts, atnot disinformation to set the record straight and the impact of that information is made clear by the efforts the russian government made to try to prevent that information adding to the russian people and they're not completely but it is an ongoing struggle to get that information. >> completely missed my point. what is the department of defense doing and larger what is the us government doing to bring information to the russian people? that is to get information passed, the censorship that putin has employed in his country so specifically what are you doing? >> we can talk about this in greater detail in session this afternoon. we defer to that setting. >> general walters, is the answer the same from you at this hearing ?
>> i can elaborate more into closed session but what i can say is the military session we have a large program that targets that very issue. in ukraine and with the nations on the periphery. >> i then will await the classified hearing. with that i yelled back. >> thank you, mister what is recognized for five minutes. >> i'd like to thank our witnesses for joining us. general wolters i want to expound on the point that's we been made about the timeliness of getting these munitions and supplies to the ukrainians . we know this is important as we are working to get those thousands of singer missiles and javelins to the forces there. there is i think sometimes a lack of clarity about how that's being accomplished and what the urgency is with that . i want to get your assessment on the demands signaled from ukraine whereas, is the
demand signal going to get greater and what about from our european allies that are helping sent weapons there and what we're going to do to help backfill some of that. we had an earlier question in those areas and have you evaluated the potential operational availability of things like manned pads in ukraine and look about the aspects of what we can do to help ukraine in many differentways . i argue the tide is potentially starting to turn and what the ukrainians are able to do to the russians. the russians are limited in their maneuver which is a big advantage for ukrainians. the problem is where at one of those tipping points if we don't go all in to help them, then they won't have a chance to defeat the russians. i think defeat, defeating the russians which wasn't on the table i would say 35 days ago is on the table now so give your me your perspective on
the demand signal and backfillfor our colleagues going forward . >> actually want to connect the dots for the demand signal and input and with the input process there are human beings involved in the input process eiand protecting their livelihood is very important so the motive mode of delivery, diversification of those modes and obviously the endgame is getting the right stuff to the right soldier at the right time and all those variables have to come into the equation and i will tell you with each passing day we iterate with greater thinking , greater alliance involvement and greater connective tissue with our counterparts inside of ukraine and that process has to continue and it has to be looked at every second of the day because as the campaign changes over time what's in for yesterday might not be what's good for tomorrow so all that has been taken into account and it's not perfect
and i hope when you get a chance to come visit us that you'll be able to visit some of the troops involved inthis process and they're targeting this very issue . >> i look forward to that visit. doctor wallender, stingers are a tremendously capable weapons platform. the challenge is there circa 1960s at this platform. we're using them at an extra very rate. the question then becomes what are we doing bar going forward to replenish our short range air defense systems, those range tactical weapons are important but we're going to do have a big hole in our inventory so the question is what can we do to replenish those stockpiles? is it smart to replenish them with a search that circa 1960s weapon, are we doing anything in the long term for defense stems so give us your perspective on what we're doing because that while helping ukraine today it does create a challenge for us in the months and years to come.
>> yes congressman, you've identified a challenge that we're grappling with the department of defense and also many of our allies and partners who generously made contributions to ukraine are asking questions also about replenishing their stock. the undersecretary for ans application and sustainment in the department to look at the defense industrial base, to look at our authorities to get funding to address the challenge that's just beginning but you'll begin to hear about this because it is something we have to address. >> i mentioned stingers, that's one part but a lot of the moving parts as general walter talked about are things going into peter, parts moving around. give me your perspective on where the future challenges are not just for stingers but part of our inventory and are there lessons we are learning about logistics in this effort to be able to supply
our friends in ukraine and help our allies in europe resupplied. as general eisenhower once said he said tactics are for amateurs, logistics are for professionals and we want to make sure we understand a just exchanged on this. >> will speak narrowly from a policy perspective, we are doing an assessment of the needs because we're hearing from individual allies and partners about their concerns . we want to bring a comprehensive assessment to congress and work with you on thinking forward and not just running after theproblem . >> i yelled back. >> miss spiers recognized for fiveminutes . we will come back. mister norcross recognized for five minutes. >> it's a fascinating discussion certainly from our
industrial base and the idea of stingers, what we are using our strategic preserves, what other nato members are supplying but incredibly important that we understand that for every stinger that is leaving our inventory it keeps us in a more precarious situation. because we know the line is not hot now, what it's going to take certainly with mister whitman is do we want to re-create the old one or move into new ones and that's the discussion we're looking forward to. but general wolters, i think by virtually all aspects that russia is not doinganywhere near what we neexpected them to do in ukraine . when we look at that, did russia overestimate matheir ability, did we look at their
capabilities thinking they would do better or is it the ukrainian response ? if you could just give clarity on that, did we overestimate what russia has outside of their conventional forces ? >> congressman, i think we have fair agreement in the hardware software and human capacity. i think what we have to take into account is the fact that it's a littlebit of both . the will and determination of the ukrainian citizens, there's 44 million ukrainians and every single one of them is contributing and you take a look at the capability of the russian military and there'scertainly challenges . we all know, we all have plans and when the invasion starts what you thought was going to happen typically doesn't happen and you have to go to alternate codes and that a test of flexibility at
the strategic level all the way down to the tactical level and i contend russia has been challenged in that area andthat reflects their overall performance . >> >>so have we overestimated outside of the ukrainian resistance and what they're doing in the fight , have we overestimated the technical abilities, particularly with the russian armor? >> we may have congressman and i think once we get to the post conflict phase we need to go back to these very areas andmake sure we conduct a comprehensive all domain after action review and find out where our miscalculations were in our forecast . >>absolutely, i have to agree with that . what implications that will mean for our force structure and what we're working on certainly in the european theater but thank you for that insight and ideal back. >> miss mister scott is
recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for being here. i know we've had a lotof discussion about ukraine lately . i think the world owes president zelensky and the ukrainians a great thank you. vladimir putin had no intentions of stopping with ukraine and the russians have been across the border in georgia and mulled over a number ofyears. georgia and moldova have recently officially applied to the european union for admission . could the two of you that particular issue and what that means for european security and if you ssexpect russia to be more aggressive towards thosecountries the cause of that application ? >> thank you congressman for highlighting the development. we're focused on ukraine there are other countries in the euro atlantic space iathat are vulnerable to russia's
coercion and influence, moldova and georgia have long suffered unresolved conflicts that russia uses to keep its own corrupt influence inside those countries and to try to prevent their euro atlantic aspirations but as you noted the people of those countries to continue to hold those aspirations and their leadership continues to work on democracy, rule of law and the russian invasion of ukraine highlights the importance of sustaining those efforts along with our european allies and partners. >> i think it's important to i note assuming ukrainians win and are able to force the russians out, russia is still across the border in other countries and we need to restore those territorial integrity of those territorial boundaries as well for the world believes
thisrussian aggression is over. i do think and i've mentioned this a couple of times . i do think we as the united states and nato needs to be developing a black c strategy because of the importance of the trade that comes out of that region of the world and i don't mean to sound like a broken record but the raw materials for fertilizer and amount of meat and grain that comes out of that part of the world is very concerning to me that transit is shut down and the agreement guarantees freedom of patches for civilians or other vessels during peacetime, my understanding is that that is shut down now, is that correct? the civilians and commercial vessels because of the conflict are not transiting in about whether it because of insurance costs or other reasons. >> congressman, to your first
point i couldn't agree more about the comprehensive defense with respect to all of the regions in europe and what we do in the black c and what we do in the baltic and north sea, we can just get myopically focused on ttoday with what's taking place with ukraine and russia. we have to image ourway through the next five or 10 years and we're doing that . with respect to the black c there's travel back and forth with commercial vessels or the appropriate reasons but turkey is the owner of the montero deck written declaration and i characterize what they're doing in this arena as very very picky with who goes through and they're doing that for justifiable purposes to make sure they too and protect against strategic miscalculations but we need to get back in the black c and it needs to occur sooner rather than later. >> countries like georgia can't export or import
without access to the black c and i just think we need to be paying attention to the other countries as e well. one thing i would mention and i think what has happened in europe has reinforced this with the committee . every year the dod, i'll pick on the airports to this comes with a list of weapons they want to stand down. i have for the last 10 years come to us and said we want to stand down a certain number of mig tends. before we stand down that weapon system should be offered to countries that share our interests . the general, do you think the dod will take a stronger look at sharingthose weapons systems with others who share our interests and values insteadof standing them down
as we put forward ? >> i think they will congressman thank you both . >> idealback . >> now recognized for five minutes. >> i do want to add my congratulations to paul for his extraordinary service to this committee. it's been a pleasure to work with him. to our two depresenters today, thank you for joining us. part of the conversation today has been ithink underscored the fact that we are united on the republican and democratic side . but there appears to me be this interest in wanting to keep poking at the president and i just want to say once again that the former president wanted to remove 20,000 troops from germany and was talking about america first as our old policy. what we recognize now is that a united front and nato's relationship is critical.
general wolters you mentioned yesterday there probably was a gap in our intelligence gathering relative to russia's prowess. do you have any more that you could share with us aboutthat ? when i think about the fact that $69 billion on their military we spent 740 billion , it seems like we should have recognized that they're not up to the task when it comes to training and maintaining their weapons systems. >> congresswoman spiers, there could be a gap and i think what we all our citizens is once we get to a post-conflict environment is to go back and examine that very issue, to make sure if there is in fact a gap we rectify it but at this point
i agree with you that there was a degree of miscalculation and it's evidenced by the performance of the russian military up to this point and i think we need to be prepared to take a good look at it. >> do you think the light air strikes that they have actually undertaken have something to do with the fact that they're probably not maintaining a rate? >> i think they're not o maintaining their fleet of aircraft at the same level of or excellence that we do in the united states. >> doctor wallender, we met withukrainian members of parliament yesterday . not only are they, is russia taking busloads of people hostage to russia, they taken evidently 2000 children who have been orphaned as a result of this war that they engaged in . what are we doing to amplify it internationally, to call them and into question and
recognize the parallels to what was going on in world war ii? >> congresswoman we seen these reports as well and they are both shocking and very concerning. my understanding is the state department is tracking reports of these kinds of atrocities and violations, potential violations of international law and is working with allies and partners globally to track those and press russia to cease any thactivities and lay the groundwork for holding russia accountable in order to reverse what russia is doing but also make sure that the otworld speaks up. i hope that we declassify information we have in this regard . we have to amplify the gross actions by russia. doctor wallender, we've seen
evidence of russia using the so-called vacuum bombing in ukraine which in discriminatory targets nearby by literally sucking the air out of their lungs . i'm concerned that we draw attention to that, that you are able to confirm it is in fact they're using that. i assume those would be crossing the osline into the use of biological and tactical nuclear weapons. can you comment on that? >> we clearly see a change in russian tactics towards for aggressively targeting infrastructure civilian life and indiscriminate use of weapons, artillery, missiles and i believe your referring to the top one. >> i think we have a responsibility to amplify what we know they're doing
with that i yelled back. >> mister day delay is recognized for five minutes. >> general wowolters i'm becoming concerned about intel failures that we were told that afghanistan nationals orfull for at least six months and were told ukraine wouldprobably fall in only a few days . i'm not sure we deemed a scenario the intel community did a great job in protecting the invasion, the amount of troops and number of tanks but here we are in a 34, 35 and i don't know if with games beyond the initial 2 to 3 days and in congress we rely on these assessments to allocate resources and weapons systems, how concerned are you about what ou appears to be intel failures and what do we do to correct those moving forward with looming tracks such as china and taiwan . >> to be fair and i know you know this as her commander
the world of the 21st century until all officers is different. after intel professionals what is so insulting and as we all know is defined as capability and intent, part of that intent is what one human being is thinking and given the structure of how russia operates, it's difficult to determine where president clinton's head was the entire time but i think what we hope each other is once we get the facts about how this unfolded and what was said and what was accomplished, we need to go back and take a look at our soft areas and make sure we fix those and i agree, we had some tremendous work conducted by the intelligence community . this one has been baffling as a result of russia's challenges and the spirit of the ukrainian citizens and their contributions, were probably areas we need to examine one more time to make sure we're aware of their contributions to the outcome of the campaign. >> ungrateful the way nato has stepped up in many ways led this conflict.
just 34 years ago president from tried to destroy nato by asking them to meet their gps s which seems to be prophetic and now in the face of the current conflict , the threat these countries are stepping ie up. you mentioned germany, it's good to see them do that after essentially free writing us security guarantees for over a decade and proposing that russia. how do we prevent a backslide in the event that this turns out the way we want and howdo we keep our nato allies on board ? >> better to medication from senior military leaders like d myself to the north atlantic council to go back over and over again and describe what their contributions when it comes to hardware and software people are doing with respect respect to our ability to defend our nato turf and the more we do it more we maintain positive
campaign momentum and the more we figure out how all this and treats to keeping the citizens more say. it will keep the countries interested in their level of involvement will continue to increase . >> i've been disappointed in the residence almost frantic messaging before and during this conflict. initially sanctions were the deterrent and now we've learned actions were never meant to deter. he had mentioned here recently we would respond in kind to a chemical weapons tt attack and the mention of sending mig's has been brought up several times but it apparently was too provocative but barely bringing up the regime change was not too.provocative so how is this mixed messaging from the president and white house affecting your ability to conduct operations on the ground and what effect is it
having on relationship with our allies ? >> i'll just tell you the alliance unity and nato is powerful as i've ever seen it and my suspicion is that trend is going to continue so in that arena, no affect. >> i have one more thing we can talk about but i'm pleased to hear of your support for the seat launch cruise missile and i guess i would just add if russia did decide to use nuclear weapons is your assessment that they would mike most likely use low yield variety and what are the limits from that of fallout? >> i prefer to address that in a separate venue but what i can tell you is as a military commander i had to be prepared for russia to exercise all options and that's just one of them. >> i look forward to the discussion. >> your recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for your testimony.as you know this
initiative provides targeted defense systems to estonia, latvia and lithuania, are threebaltic allies. securing authorization last year was one of my prize moments in congress and i'm pleased 180 million was included in the omnibus bending package . you mentioned that apartment since fundingto that initiative each year.would you share your perspective on baltic security and how you envision it moving forward ? >> thank you congressman. our baltic allies were among the first and clearest in understanding the challenge that russia poses not only to their security but to european security and they have led think it's fair to say a lot of the thinking in nato about the requirements for effective deterrence and the early iterations of the european reassurance initiative i'll let you mention have focused on creating that rotational
presence that general wolters refer to and in making sure that those former presidents include not just forces but the enablers required to make that turn effective and the baltic countries have done a great job of cooperating with one tanother through the security initiative in order to make that credibility coherent and sort of greater than the sum of its parts. they are interested in sustaining multi-allied contributions and i think that the american ability to elevate the importance of nato allies continuing to support on a multinational basis is something that signals to those countries and their citizens that this is an all out alliance effort . >> thank you, are there any
particular areas where you'd like to see more cooperation with the baltic states and is there more we should be doing to support our allies ? >> i'll mention the focus on sharing and helping build resilience in cyber security which again they were leading voices onthe importance of having y experienced it themselves but they are frontline , the russian government does target russian-speaking populations in those countries so i think highlighting the importance of cyber resilience and their best practices and helping the rest of us learn would be something we need to focus on as well. >> i'm going to ask you about the threats russia poses in the gray zone. t where drawing lessons from the ongoing war in ukraine is we need to ensure partners are to quickly bringing adversaries or competitors to swallow andthat's why worker training is so crucial . recognize we are in this setting what can you share about how yukon is approaching this challenge? are there steps we be taken
to bolster regular warfare capabilities throughout ucom? >> you should exercise, act and train in competition as is closely mirrored to how you anticipate acting in crisis and conflict and many of our operations over the course of the last several years that you're familiar with in estonia, latvia, lithuania have focused on the issue and in so doing taking intoaccount all domains . improve your ability to gain in the deterrence arena with respect to activities in the competition phase and if the flip switch is flipped and we wind up in conflict or crisis , you're in a position to where the muscle memory is correct and you perform better and that's where we've been in 2016 as we kicked off efp battle groups in the baltics and each one of those sensors acthat support those
ffbattalion sized battle groups over time has grown more aware of activities in the gray zone and or aggressive in what we can do with respect to an all domain deterrence. >> it's not just limited to the baltic region. i think we've seen regular warfare can serve as a deterrent but also obviously as a defensive, be a great defensive capability for all of our partners in europe so last question. there is doctor wolters you said switch blades were approved. have they been sent toukraine ? >> those are in the package that is in the process of being delivered. >> in the process as in the actual package being delivered, not the theoretical awarding of the package. >> we can get into operational details in this session but talk about it nextsession . >> etthank you, mister gallagher is recognized for fiveminutes . >> general wolters, we've written about spaces in ucom
that could provide cyber effects, long-range fire encounter with russia. how would marines with those capabilities affect your options as a combatant commander ? >> they dramatically enhance our options congressman and as you know we've exercised response ongoing as we speak. what we're seeing out of the mall is doing exactly what you alluded to. a groundwater force that can move and communicate and is very very expeditionary is priceless for 21st century. >> is this something we've heard about, second marine division working in cooperation with the sixth fleet to do psw operations, fencing operations, could you elaborate on that a little bit. >> all that is ongoing and the guidance is we embrace responses and exercise that
proceeding as we speak is to get all of this to stretch our left and right luis and you can't succeed if you occupy one domain to achieve those so the marines are doing a fantastic job of leading from the front showing the rest of us how to do it right especially in the groundwater environment . >> would you see a lot of promise in the efforts. >>. >> on a similar note as a sidebar this week has diminished, you no longer receive 65 years of a year for crisis response. if the inventory supported it would you benefit him having you that was enabled by both tactical aviation and group five us that's capable of reconnaissance and counter reconnaissance that would be on station 365 days a year. >> i would congressman.
as you know as a commander you never get everything that you want but certainly those capabilities are precious for effective deterrence . >> on a different note, in the month leading up to february 24th the invasion of ukraine by russia, did you consider it part of your mission to deter a russian invasion of ukraine? >> yes. >> and what were you doing in order to deter therussian invasion of ukraine ?>> improving our nato security disposition in all regions and in all domains, not just isolated on theperiphery and inside of ukraine . >> you felt you were part of a interagency effort intended to deter vladimir putin from invading ukraine. >> that's correct, deter and dissuade. >> then separate 24thvladimir putin of course invaded ukraine . >> correct.
>> you could argue the invaded crimea in 2014, he infiltrated the don bass before that but nonetheless in light of that fact, would it be fair to say that deterrence failed in ukraine? >> number one i would say nato's solidarity remained and nato's ability to defectively deter remains and i can't argue with your conclusion . >> deterrence failed in ukraine specifically integrated deterrence failed in ukraine. and i don't bring up to score a partisan point, i just think it's worth understanding why that happened, particularly as we now have anonymous senior pentagon officials bragging to the washington post about the success of integrated deterrence in ukraine. now, it may be true that
right now nato is as unified as it's been in decades. i celebrate that. and the fact that russia has not expanded its war into nato territory is a good thing. but it is also a low bar for geopolitical success and the fact remains that you have just confirmed that we attempted to deter an indication of ukraine largely using nonmilitary instruments of national power. and that failed. it may be true nothing could deter putin. we'll never know. that's a counterfactual but integrated deterrence as conceptualized by the pentagon and as implemented in the specific case of ukraine as a matter of fact failed. and i yield my second. >> thank you, mistercarbajal is recognized for five minutes . >> i too wanted to extend my
thanks to paul for his many years of service. i had gotten to know him over the years and he's just a quality professional individual and i hate to see him go but congratulate him on his next phase in his life . the war in ukraine is reshaping the future of us russia relations and unsupported of the steps the international community have taken to hold russia accountable and isolate him and his oligarchs in the russian economy. one of the areas of mutual interest in extension of the new start treaty. we must not forget about the potential for arms control agreements to lessen the threat of nuclear conflict. doctor wallender, how will the ongoing crisis affect opportunities with russia and perhaps even one step further china .
>> thank you for import and highlighting the importance of arms control as an instrument of security policy. arms control can serve national security policy by reinforcing constraints and especially dangerous weapons in the enuclear enterprise. russia has shown no indication that it doesn't value that treaty and intends to comply with it. the united states will continue to focus on making sure russia complies and we continue to have the arms control dialogue on that treaty. i can't really chinese strategic thinking on this . i think that the message to china is not only that the us values arms control but when russia has violated arms control treaties the united states has called it out and the importance of compliance is a clear message to russia and china.
>> the department made it clear it did not support poland's proposal to transfer mig 29th. due to the effectiveness to take weapons and air defense systems in addition to the concernrussia can mistake this transfer as as a tory . countering russians air capability is critical for not only military operations but to protect civilians . i am the first to say that we must do everything in our power to not escalate the situation which is why i have expressed my concern with calls for establishing a nato enforcement and no-fly zone over ukraine. however the mig 29 if the proposed transfer was deemed unacceptable due to the risk and we sadly continued these civilians being targeted a question for both witnesses,
what can the international community do to bolster ukrainian capabilities to counter russia's airpower and protect civilians . >> the air defense and anti-air capabilities ukraine possesses has been deployed to good seeffect which has been a major focus of us and other countries provisions of assistance. it has enabled the ukrainian forces to prevent russia from achieving air superiority, from holding back russian air operations which not only protects ukrainian military formations as you note helps to prevent attacks on civilians. it doesn't prevent all of them, general wolters canthat but it has played a role . >>. >> just as you said, we have to continue to iterate as the campaign progresses and make sure the process wise for supply and demand to the ukrainian armed forces they
get what they need for campaign effectiveness. and what they may need tomorrow is different and what was last week and if were not prepared to e adjust and iterate to support that, we want to be as effective as we can be to help save lives on ukrainian territory. that's a process we are continuing to work on and we have to make sure we maintain a strong dialogue but we also bear the responsibility to guard against the strategic miscalculation you alluded to so we can't risk for one second. we got a lot to do of work to do to make sure the ukrainian armed forces are creating the right gear at the right time. >> you, mister gates is recognized. >> doctor, were not spending the 82nd airborne inthe ukraine . and regime change in russiais not a policy of the united states . and god for bid if the russians come with weapons we
wouldnot respond by using chemical weapons against the russian people . >> so what is the president keep speaking up against us policy ? >> congressman, the president has made clear that he is not changed us policy on regime change. >> but why does he speak against it . >> that he is appalled by his words as i think we all are. but russia is reading in ukraine. >> how did not confuse our allies and our fellow americans how the president saying the exact opposite of what you just correctly defined as us policy. >> understanding is that they value us leadership and they are confident in american commitments to the nato alliance in particular the president's words that the united states will deter russian attack against nato and defend every inch of nato
territory. >> that's all fascinating but it doesn't get to the question of speaking directly against our policy. does the department of defense assess the president is likely going forward to speakagainst us policy on other matters ? >> congressman, i can't that. i don't believe there's any such incident. >> do we have a plan in place for the next moment because it didn't happen once, it didn't happen twice. it happened three times on regime change and chemical weapons, ending our members into ukraine so i sort of wonder whether or not we have to have contingency plans for a president who seems to be a little confused on these matters and you're saying there is no such contingency plan . >> i tell you congressman that the department of defense leadership is focused on sustaining and advancing american national security policy of this administration
. >> is the department of defense ministry frustratedby the presence davis ? >> i think that is an inappropriate characterization . >> is the department leadership frustrated? i'm not characterizing, i'm trying to ascertain how hard this job must be to get our force roster alliance, and our information operations that in line when you got a president who seems to be misaligned on these questions . >> i can only speak for myself. i think it's appropriate and if you'd like to ask the question but speaking for myself y. >> if you ask a question you got to give her at leastfive seconds to say something , go ahead. >> i'm not frustrated. i afeel privileged and honored to serve the american people and serve this president and this administration. >> are you aware of anyother officials frustrated by this president's misstatements ? >> i am not. >> general wolters,
hypersonic weapon systems have been used for the first time and the committee has received a number of things regarding how far behind our country is in some of these capabilities. how should ucom think about hypersonic's from a defensive capability seeing what we've seen on the battlefield? >> that's a great question y and it's all about strategic speed and posture. and every day i've got to find a way to adjust our indications and adjust our command control and feedback to accommodate not just a mock one target but a target that can operate at mach 4.5 and if we're not doing this in 2022 getting way behind so the efforts are there. we find out what the capabilities are, find out what their locations are, we examine the different courses of action of where the resystems can be utilized and
now we have to adjust our isr to make sure we have the best ability of capturing a potential strike and if we're not adjusting every second of the day making a mistake and it's a constant adjustment in ucom. >> i only have a moment left, will we see an adjustment in the president's proposed budget to accommodate our updated thinking about hypersonic'snow that we've seen them used in europe ? >> congressman, we will. >> ideal back. >> mister keating is announced for five minutes. >> and brad my colleague has acknowledged that the president of the united states. i'm yesterday with several members of the ukraine's parliament who also emphasized the fact that their mothers as well. and these courageous women were telling a story that the soldiers, russian soldiers had been captured or killed
had protected devices and equipment on them dito counter chemical warfare or biological weapons as well. and they were concerned asgiven the fact that also put in has lied about the ukrainians having access to biological or chemical weapons and that could be used as a false flag as well for their use. can you comment in this setting to the best of your ability us to address that issue that they broughtup to me ? >> congressman, we similarly have noted efforts on the part of tsrussian this information operations to lay the pretext for a potential false flag about the lies about biological weapons and chemical weapons so we'vebeen tracking it closely and share your concern . it would be beyond outrageous for russia to step over that bound and we share your
concern and focusing on that issue. >> they didn't describe what particular equipment they had but would you say their concern is justified? >> congressman, i think the fix in this area is get the truth out at speed so you can make a difference and we are dramatically improving our ability to respond quickest in the information domain to arrest a false flag that occur. that's the change we need to make and we are making and i see a high degree of effectiveness grin this campaign that i witnessed before and it's just because we've gone on to your lessons learned fromprevious engagements . >> we talked about strategic miscalculation but i'm also concerned with public reports about the level of communication between the russians and our own chair. these things are in place even in the worst kinds of war or deacon flexion and
similar kinds of miscalculations that can occur. does that seem to be a concern? is it true to the extent you can talk in this setting about the deteriorating communication the highest level of the military which is always there as a safeguard? >> congressman, i can comment about the responsibilities i have to communicate with my counterpart in russia for the purpose of deacon flexion . the attempts have been made constantly over the course of f the last 90 days and at some point as we approach closer to the campaign they initiated without us knowing those conversations broke off . i will speak for the chairman but he's done the same and he's been aggressive with respect to his counterpart for the purpose of safety deacon flexion and those conversations haven't occurred . >> doctor wallender, on
sections. we talked a lot about sanctions in this war and their effectiveness with the t ukraine's spending so much on the ground, nothing compares but these but sanctions sanctions are doing more than affecting the economy. they have a strategic effect on russia's military capability as well . semi conductors kits as well, can you talk to the effectiveness of some of the sections on what they're doing to russia's military capability . >> you rightly point to not just the financial sanctions but the restrictions on technology of the those will have an effect over time. and my understanding from the sanctions package that was chosen is that it was designed both to have the effect over time and precisely russia's future
capabilities so that its ability to launch these kinds of military operations against neighbors is severely impacted. >> i'd like to thank paul for his service and i feel that . >> thanks for your being here. appreciate your leadership. jenna walters, one of those recently retired peers , their singing your praises so thank you for what you're doing . my main feedback to the administration since december or january or february that we were being told yes, russia has decided to attack and a lot of the emphasis on what were going to do after the invasion. i felt like we should put more emphasis on the deterrence. i recommended our air defenses and recommended anti-shipping missiles.
i was told they would be provocative and i think that + people once the invasion occurred now the ukrainians are asking for mig 21, mig 25 and we're resisting the same needs to long-range air defenses. i agree long-range air defenses have been very effective against russian air force but it doesn't do much for the convoys, the tanks. and we got the bill find ukrainians the ability to those 5000 or so our vehicles and brings me to my question, the switch legs. i think it's a cable system 100 isnot enough . would you agree that thousands of these vehicles, you got it increased the ability to go after these convoys, these text armored vehicles to be my question to generalwalters . >> i'm convinced once we get the switch legs and therewill be a request for more .
>> it seems imperative we get them the ability to have these convoys 20 miles back. they could have a tipping point in my next question involves 35 to general walters . how important it the 35 delivery to you atnato boards allies ? >> it's critical congressman and we can talk more than a classified setting . i know you're familiar with a lot of this the us and 35 days that we have are in use and they been very effective at doing some elegant t isr activities and it just reveals to us how much greater capability are going to have once we get our whole leaf on board and as you know the disposition of the nato nations with respect to the f 35 are dramatically growing and i hope this we would have 100 on the continent right now and we anticipate in 2030
growing to 550. >> i'm concerned the president's budget is being reduced. and were going to have to figure out how to do nuclear modernization plus capabilities. i know it's hard to compel on that but there's a real cost if we do reduce 35. my pointis more of a comment . i'm here with my colleague and he did say their number one request is permanent us presence. i know you for that before. request for air defense capabilities and the and lrs. i wanted to make that forthe record parents . my last question deals with russian energy and its impact on our bases in europe . william mcdonald, the new hospital , i think that's unacceptable . how do we build this resilience into the us faces
so that were not dependent on russian gas? that question to either one of you. >> take a shot at first. as you well know the central european pipeline goes to certain agencies and we will continue to try to expand that to the max ever practical europe itself gets 40 percent of their natural gas from russia. we in dod as you also well know over the course of the last decade worked on stock reserve with respect to petrol and stock reserve with respect to generators and in critical infrastructures like the new hospital and current hospital those have to be available so we can really sustain and that's an expensive stuff way to do business but we have to continue to look at ways to take that pipeline and get it out to as many folks as possible. >> i've been preaching this concern for three years because russia turned off their energy and it doesn't
just let make sense. we've got to come upwith a better resilience plan so with that ideal back . >> thank you, mister kim. >> i'd like to thank the two of you for coming over here and i don't want to reach read too much of what's been asked about ukraine but i did want to just point out my strong urge to the administration to follow through on the priority list that ukrainians are providing us in terms of what security senses are there and s on the jackson long-range air defense systems and things of that nature. i think at this stage in the conflict especially what we're seeing our own administration highlighting the war crimeshappening against ukrainian people , that we recognize that this equipment is not offensive
capabilities. their countries are being invaded. these are defensive capabilities . it's not quite as solitary in that same way that we're thinking about this as a defensive effort so i wanted to say that but look, i know you were getting lots of questions but i wanted to raise that i know that we have had so many conversations lately with our nato partners about this new era of nasal and what this means going forward, this new posture we have. i was with many of you at the security conference when we were talking about this before the war started as there's this greater solidarity in nato s i wanted to ask you and i'llstart with doctor wallender .when we look at the threat nato is facing and theincreased investments countries are willing to make , what does that look like? obviously there's the security threats we face with
russia and that's important and something we need to caution towards but we also recognize is the next great threat may not necessarily come in the form of gangs rolling across eastern europe. we've had a lot ofconcern about cyber , about hypersonic's . honestly in this room we talked more about just a greater threat comes to china and the mechinese government going for even more so and have. >> .. answer is yes. the russian aggression china failuree to stand on the right side of history calling russia out for its russian reports that china may be entertaining the thought of russia coping with
sanctions and restrictions has galvanized european leadership and public to understand china is a global challenge and the indo pacific region china like russia through corruption through questionable commercial and economic means and through cyber as well so working with nato and eu it's possible to elevate and global challenge china even as we speak. >> i love your thoughts as well because as we are talking about nato, there is a concern about nato's role when we constitute this european threat but we have also known the transatlantic alliance focused on europe but
there is a global role in something we have in mind when it comes to indo pacific area. i love your thoughts, your conversations with nato and whether or not they understand the gravity not just thinking about russia but more broadly. >> nato is very engaged in secretary leader some at the end of june in spain, he will introduce with the leaders nato 2030 strategy touches on this issue making sure we look inside and outside of our european continent to grasp the issues that could impact security and focus on china as part of that. i am pleased to report nato 2030
strategy would take that into. >> thank you very much, it's important that we think about this in strategic plan not just about the challenge and threats at our door but also is down the road and what might come about. >> judgment time has expired. >> in layman's terms, can you explain an escalation avoidance strategy actually means? >> do not enter into world war iii. >> but what does it mean specifically? define it, how does it apply in this case? >> every action has a reaction and it gets you closer toward sparking starting world war iii, you need to go back to readjust your activity. >> march 25, the news reported the president of lafayette, president bobbitt argued nato reactive more strongly in 2082 russian aggression against
neighboring georgia. in the act annexation of crimea moscow wouldn't have invaded ukraine. he stated he said the appeasement tactics are quote not fruitful. general has u.s. escalation avoidance strategy with russia prevented russian aggression in ukraine? >> and you have nato unity in short greatest piece across the european continent in respect to your question as it applies to ukraine and russia. russia gets a vote on this and russia is responsible for their invasion. >> why could putin decide to invade ukraine rightai now? wynot between 2014 and 2022, why didn't he or did he invade now?
>> i think he felt he had popular support of thear citizes of russia. i also felt he was attempting tf take advantage of fissures that could have appeared in nato as a result of the post afghanistan environment and i also think it has to do with his age and efficacy and combined together where he elected at this time but the overriding variable is the fact that he believes he has popular support. >> russia's invasion has heightened concerns about nato's ability in both the state from apostle possible russian attack. what is your assessment tornado state willingness to respond to intentional or inadvertent attack on a nato member? >> we have changed and will continue to change the military but in all quadrants and that activity is ongoing and the degree of cooperation is as strong as we have seen.
march 11 president zelenskyy completed for the transfer while having support from a bipartisan group of u.s. lawmakers including many of us in this room the biden administration citing assessments from senior american military commanders inn europe said the additional aircraft would offer only minimal value even contested nature of its airspace. do you still agree with that assessment? >> i do, congressman. >> russia is imparting ukrainian civilians ukraine obviously needs equipment for air defense. what equipment should the u.s. tornado provide ukraine to defend itself from russian aerial attacks? >> i'd like to address this more in a classified setting but it goes directly to your.about defining what the problem actually is about space and targeting that problem.
>> understood i look what to those in a classified setting. the traffic administration with the first administration to provide ukraine with javelins significantly increase aid to the baltic state. why is the u.s. tornado supplying more defense systems to ukraine? >> and a classified setting i can give you for contributions for nations in this particular area and i think it might clear the air on what is going to the ukrainians. >> with escalation for effectively supporting. >> nato is concerned about effectively supporting ukraine and very concerned about ensuring we manage escalation appropriately. >> thank you. >> thank you to both of you for being here, i know we are here an hour or two, i can't think of to better people to talk about these issue right now, both of
you. ukrainian parliamentary in town sent to advocate, i met with them this morning and their position is in contrast what the media is reporting about negotiations between ukrainians and russians, the russians are not being benevolent about pulling back from cities and anywhere they are announcing in these areas were ukrainians are kicking them out, can you speak to that, is that correct characterization? we see anything that denotes a pullback by the russians at all in the name of peace? >> some small maneuvering of horses i believe for the purpose of adjusting the campaign to go into a different geographical region and as a military commander as you all g know, i can't trust anything in respect
to a potential flow so we continue to remain vigilant in all areas and we dissipate this area will be readdressed by the russians in the near future. >> we were told a new list of equipment support request is transmitted to the department defense, are you aware of this requestde? either way, who in the department of defense is a seniormost person responsible for metering out the new request from the ukrainians government? >> we have a request as recently as yesterday, i do not know if it's the same list as the one you are handed, i am guessing it is. the responsibility for security assistance assessment is in the office of secretary of defense for policy including my chain of command and it is something we work on everyday. >> is there a unit or task force or some emergency group set up at the pentagon specifically looking for this weapons of a
ukrainians so desperately ask us for? if so, who is the head of that unit? >> that would be led my office and in cooperation with other components dod including joint staff, intelligence community diplomatic outreach. >> so there is a task force in your office? okay, can you give us the official position you've heard a bunch of us asked about the equipment, the soviet era planes, what is the official position on providing or helping facilitate nato -- excuse me, russian-made aircraft ukrainians have asked for? >> the officialal policy is countries who wish to donate have a soviet legacy aircraft, we ask those countries if they are nato allies to consider potential escalation dynamics and the balancing of risks explained so well.
we are listening to ukrainians carefully and what c they need d working to fulfill their requests as diligently as we are able. >> a couple of additional questions, you've talked about watching the china russia relationship and obviously i think for a lot of us here, it is very interesting to think about what china is learning from our office. we know there's military cooperation exercises those things, there's talk between russia and chinese, have you seen any evidence classified or otherwise, yes or no, the chinese are working with the russians are nonconventionalns militaryti means, cyber attack n particular? >> no. [screaming] okay, have you seen other evidence of the chinese are aiding and abetting russians other than the conversation they've been having basic supplies they've been providing,
things like mras? >> no. >> last, i would say there's a lot of interest in the future of nato with finland and sweden making. [background noises] about being interested worth other countries like north macedonia trying to get in, briefly, is there any plan to change the criteria and think differently how fast nato membership grows knowing it's aw very slowde process? >> are not aware of anyss assessment to change thehe timeline, criteria remains the same. the membership is driven by the desire and request of potential new allies. >> i think north macedonia is the one we hope will be broken in sooner rather than later for a bunch of reasons but thank you for your time and i yield back. >> thank you, mr. walt is recognized. >> i want to build on the comments of my colleagues and i think we need to recognize and a
clear eyed wade clearance did fail. the fact that we have cities now leveled, it's notable nato is unified in germany is reversing long-held positions whether on energy or defense spending, we have 4 million refugees and cities level because of deterrent failing. you agree deterrentst failed? >> reference the parameters you talked about, no argument. >> saying our agent allies are unified after it's leveled, we need to apply these lessons and failures and lessons learned on what failed on top of lack of response 20182014. we now had a new start, russians top priority extended with really nothing in return, lack of response, the colonial pipeline and lifting of
sanctions on nord stream two not to mention the germans and others posture beforehand. i think part of that when i was on a visit was continue message we heard in kyiv was the weapons ukrainians were asking for as recently as december would have been to escalatory including the stingers. would it have made a difference if ukrainians had singers months ago and had the opportunity to train on them and had them on day one? that havee made an operational difference in their ability to fight? >> congressman, it could have an as we talked about before in our discussions yesterday as we always do in the military which you are familiar, we got to go back and scrub this cradle-to-grave and make sure in every potential soft spot we look for flaws and make corrections and that very well may be an area. >> we were told we couldn't, t'e
u.s. we couldn't give them singers because we didn't have them. eight weeks later, it was just three screws and a component hah to be taken off and i think we owe that to the ukrainians an honest assessment to ourselves and we talk about how sanctions are biting on the russian logistics, what it has been effective if we had those sanctions six months ago in place and more effective now? >> it could have been and we need to scrub the t as well. >> okay. just switching to the black seek which we talked about as well, do we currently have any u.s. ships in the black seek? >> we do not. >> when did those move out x. >> it was in the january timeframe. >> pre-invasion? a policy decision to vacate the black sea.
>> it was. >> what was the policy decision to essentially see the notion or the black sea, excuse me, to the russian navy? at thes not in office time but i zero you an answer and i'll get back to you with an answer. >> but your assessment now, we are not putting any structure in now. i mean, literally as russian ships are bombarding mariupol and by the way, we didn't give harpoons because though could escalatory sublet speak to the now but i would appreciate an answer and what i understood as a policy decision ships in the black sea would be to escalatory and we didn't want to provoke russians, i think we are seeing a theme here we need to be very careful of as we move forward and a fear of escalation actually invites escalation from the other side but in terms of
ships now and are we flying over the black sea now with military assets? directly over? not onn the periphery but actually -- >> we are overfly black sea with systems and in the southern portion with man systems and commercial -- >> last question, in terms of training ukrainians outside of ukraine, are we conducting any training ukrainians outside of ukraine? >> we are not, congressman. there is some advising taken place with liaison officers to insurance -- >> as a policy matter, why are we not training them? >> i am not aware of any requests from ukrainians to train outside -- >> ukrainians do not want to be trained on the weapons systems we are providing them? >> i believe they are in the country at this time, i'm not
aware of any requests but i owe you a good answer on whether we have received requests. >> we are breaking at 12:30 p.m. so if we don't get to your questions in the public session, we are having classified session at 1:00 and prioritize people not able to ask the question here in the classified session at 12:30 p.m. we will break in a classified session at 1:00. your recognize for five minutes. >> thank you and so many of the chairman's comments -- i'm sorry to see him go. general walters, with the establishment of the buyers command in europe, where the army look to deploy ground-based service indirect fire asset such as irca especially given that currently russian artillery outrage is hours? >> that is a possibility and i go back to post- conflict with what's taking place right now after we have a deep scrub and
review, this will be an area we address the construct is exactly what west need and we are excitd about going forward with that. >> will will these systems expect to meet the needs of these systems in the fires command or arete you going to lk toward ground-based extended range hypersonic projectiles? >> we are look as many domains as we possibly can to use the capabilities. we'll be able to fine-tune our focus once we have post- conflict scrub on this area but again as many domains as possible when it comes to deterrence and defense. >> can you speak more about the importance of having a surface to surface precision buyers capability? >> i'll just state having the
capabilities that impact as many domains as possible with the ability to range with precision complicate the task for potential enemy against us so dramatically improves your posture and that is all positive. >> thank you. further, regarding ongoing war in ukraine we see multiple reports regarding russian military logistical challenges with convoys, abandoned vehicles and strata forces leading to loss of combat power proving that the two russian forces on the ground although taking steps to guarantee infrastructure to allow for freedom of maneuvers throughout the ar, what steps are we taking to ensure logistical efforts will be successful in contested environment, particularly with the world and/or power sources? are we looking at new fuels or power sources to make sure we maintain ourr logistics? >> we are and it starts with the
independence for the basics, electricity andde gas and it gos back to previous discussions we've had. as you know we stopped additional gas and additional generators for the purpose of having expeditionary services to go to in the event certain systems are shut down and we need to continue toee advance tt independent with the areas you eluded to in fact is part oft future plans. >> thank you. with stacked for preparation and supporting ukrainians, under the previous administration we know president trump without javelins contrary to the expectations of this committee, are the javelins proving to be important in the fight now against the russians for ukrainians? >> yes, congresswoman. >> thank you. as we look toward how we will
move united with nato and yukon partners, have you seen this administration working incredibly hard with our nato allies? >> yes. >> has not been an important part in our fight against want to make sure we are isolating russians from the world community? >> it's been vital to isolating russia helping ukraine and setting credible messages to russia. >> as we look to support ukrainians, have we done so with nato allies and have we got ukrainians, much of what they need to be as successful as i have been currently in the fight against russia? >> we been coordinating and communicating with allies and their willingness and we've been community ukrainians convey to us allies to have the capabilities and willing to provide them are able to do so.
>> thank you very much, i was in ukraine meeting with president zelenskyy shorten before the russian invasion and must wash he asked for, singers and javelins and support for emma on the ground, we've provided him it seems successful for the ukrainian people and their fight against russia sonk thank you. >> thank you very much. >> general walters, to follow up on the questions, i am confused about the messaging on what we are doing in poland. a weaker national security advisor said we were doing no training. then president biden said we were and yesterday administration official said u.s. troops helped ukrainian forces poland load weapons and the west gives them and they provide verbal instruction on how to use the weaponry like antiaircraft missiles butut dont leave forces through physical drills. confusingaging from a to all of us. does anyone in the white house coordinate those statements with
you as supreme allied commander in europe? >> no, congressman. >> i'm not asking you to elaborate in this setting specifically we may or may not be doing with ukrainian soldiers, i'll defer that to a classified session, what is your military advice on publicly talking specifically how we train the ukrainians? >> can you want -- i am having a hard time grasping what the question is. >> should we be talking publicly what we aren. doing specifically on the ground tactically with our allies? >> not publicly congressman. >> i think we've witnessed a change in defensive tactics during this invasion of ukraine that few expected. we've all seen decimated russian armor problems and take on a relatively sophisticated fighters buy cheap plentiful weapons. i don't there will be a lot to chew on when the war ends but it
already looks clear the 20th century tactics of warfare not as effective today than when europe was in world war ii. you think the strategy of low-cost high-volume medic weapons is a feasible strategy for future conflicts against competitor nations? >> are not familiar with the parameters of ukrainian strategy but i will tell you one of the things that makes a huge difference is what's in thesu heart of the citizens and their support for military activities and after thiste is said and doe when we look up what transpired, that is one area that's made a bigha difference certainly until now and we have a long ways to go. >> clearly we have all been amazed at the tenacity of ukrainian fighters and i think there's a lot to be tried said for the training was conducteded side-by-side with them. also the high impact relatively
low-cost things like drones and stingers and javelins, it doesn't matter how many tanks, they could be taken out simply with low-tech weapons. you think the calculus of investing in high tech build w times systems will or should shift inn the dod to favor more expendable systems? >> i think i will be an area we have to take a look, and fat mixed with capabilities less elegant need to be factored into the discussion we have to be willing to listen closely on what we have learned and we will make adjustments. >> last question, do you see the possibility of amending our current offense of defensive strategies with lessons we are learning in ukraine? if so, what might those look like? i know it is early to make those assessments. >> i think we have to always be change andadapt to listen to every possible input
every part of any conflict this is one area no matter how insignificant we think an issue might be we have to pay attention to it and if we are a good learning organization which the department is, we will take that into account if we press forward but yes we have to learn from what unfold in this conflict. we still have a long ways to go. >> thank you and i yield back. >> thank you. we are going to take our break at 12:30 p.m. and we will reconvene at 1:00 upstairs for the classified portion of the hearing. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you to both of you for coming in, i want to start by addressing a comment one of my colleagues made earlier about concerns about intelligence failures general walters, he said he would conduct an assessment of where you are soft in the earliest you improve which i appreciate but on both armed services and intel committee, i have to say we
nailed it starting back last fall we set up to determine what was happening and ringing alarm engage in unprecedented public engagement and private engagement with allies, releasing declassified information, getting ukrainians prepared to address this, in my view, this is one of our generations finest intelligence successes something i think we should talk more about and i want to say that and i hope you all agree because we can always improve and that t is the mility mindset. always room for improvement i think it is important to say intelligence community and military did an exceptional job and i wanted to.that out. so i have been in regular communication with ukrainian military b civilian leadership d they have provided a document entailing urgent needs of armed forces of ukraine in a priority
order and list 17 items going into extreme detail and i want to ask you, have you received an are you familiar with this list? >> yes. >> yes. >> is the department of defense looking at this list in a detailed way going down please request? >> yes. >> is the department of defense prepared to classified or nonclassified setting, or on the record, provide thisnd committee and analysis of these requests and what we are able to comply with or not and if we are not, the reasons why we are not? >> yes. >> thank you. >> rubbing out in terms of security cooperation, a couple of weeks ago there was an issue of providing of makes through poland that occurred at the administration came out and you made it clear you thought providing provider fighter jets would notea be appropriate at ts time and yet we continue to hear
this would not be a game changer necessarily but an important element to ukraine's defense to allow them tot project power in the south and the east, mariupol and other places where they cannot allow them to cut off supply lines and they also told me they are rebuilding airfield, logistics support capability and pilots are able to fly they can support it and it would make a difference and it strikes me ukraine's not going to ask for something they can't use in most instances because they are fighting for their survival so could you both tell me, where are we on the fighter jet issue? ishi something we are taking a fresh look at number one? number two, the issue of escalation, because the administration draw a line at vehicles, aircraft and vehicles, is not determined to be
escalatory and we will only provide things short of that? >> i don't believe the position of the department of defense on the policy and military side has changed the assessment although i will defer -- >> on the fighter jets? >> the general issue you raised about have we changed our position on back? on the issue of ruling out certain types of vehicles, i think it is capabilities driven rather than particular kinds of vehicles but we can pursue this and get into more detail in the next session. >> i'll just say, good department allow commanders to provide best military advice and continue to assess and i do know with secretary austin, he expects provide best military advice change courses and that
is not my best military advice in respect to aircraft and i can't elaborate on that a little more in a classified setting. >> so is your best military advice the united states foreign allies should not provide fighter jets to ukraine at this time, is accurate? >> it is my best military advice the u.s.. does not it it's my best to try advice we allow nations to independently make their decisions about what they would like to offer the ukrainiansci from i don't want o forward any about. >> we are out of time and we will follow-up in a classified setting, thank you. >> appreciate that very thorough, we will continue in a half hour with our classified portion. we are adjourned.
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> c-span has uncovered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine bring the latest from the president and other white house officials, the pentagon and state department as well as congress. we have international perspectives from the united nations statements from foreign leaders all on the c-span networks, the c-span now free mobile app c-span.org/ukraine. our web resource page you can ask watch the latest demand
tweets from journalist on the ground. c-span.org/ukraine. >> earlier today congress looked into the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. defense department officials and others testified before the house armed services subcommittee. tonight 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2, online at c-span.org or watch coverage and free video app c-span not. ♪♪ >> american history tv saturdays on c-span2 exploring people and events that tells the american story. 12:15 p.m. eastern, historian christopher nichols looks back to learn from 191819 influenza pandemic 22 america's covid-19 pandemic fatigue, virus searches, lasting infections and new protective mandates, all of which were experienced a century
ago 2:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency part five of our eight part series first lady, in their own words looking at the role of the first lady, their time at the white house and issues important to them. this week we will feature hillary clinton. >> the standards to some extent, expectations and demand have changed and i'm trying to find my way through and trying to pick up how best to be true to myself and fulfill my responsibilities to my husband and my daughter and the country. >> exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturday on c-span2 a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime c-span.org/history. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government funded by these television companies and
more including medco. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> retired general is a former nato commander in europe. he talks about how and when the russian invasion of ukraine and. he was joined by former u.s. ambassador to ukraine, jon and several ukrainian reporters. the discussion hosted by the atlantic runs about an hour. >> good