Hearings to Examine Proposed FY 2027 Navy Budget Estimates and Justification

Acting Secretary Cowell, Admiral Caudle, General Smith, welcome. I want to start by acknowledging the men and women of the US Navy and Marine Corps. They continue to meet lengthy deployments, a high operational tempo, and evolving threats. with professionalism determination and bravery that are a credit to the entire force you know as well as anyone how the operational capacity of the fleet the production capacity of the industrial base and the depth of our magazines are being severely tested today you know how little room or mistakes there is in the training readiness and deployment of the world's greatest fighting force so i must tell you the way the president's request is structured particularly in accounts that matter a great deal to the department of the navy is a mistake and unfortunately it's not a new one last year the ink was barely dry on the one time reconciliation investment in ship building when this subcommittee begin to hear from uniform leaders about budget discrepancies shortfalls and broken glass in major accounts actually this is not a surprise it was the avoidable consequence of treating one time infusions of cash like a substitute for a full year budget spending this is not a mistake worth repeating but the way omb has structured your budget suggests the administration is willing to run even more significant risk in fiscal twenty seven take munitions last year the subcommittee fully funded one of the navy's top unfunded priorities accelerated development of the mays cruise missile this year the budget request would put funds for procuring these new munitions not in sustainable annual appropriations but in a one-time reconciliation slug likewise the budget request strangely splits funding of multiyear per cubic contracts per key navy munitions between annual appropriations and one time reconciliation so gentlemen the entire premise of multi-year procurement is consistent yearly appropriations it's right there in the name how the department expects to send a consistent and reliable demand signal to industry with one all reconciliation cash is beyond me maybe you can explain to be clear i'm glad to see basic things like ship operations appropriately built into fiscal twenty seven base same goes for sustainment of the f-thirty five even belatedly it's good to see this critical platforms operational readiness given high priority but requesting new procurement for this aircraft and one time reconciliation spending is just an unnecessary risk. also on top of aviation i hope you have a good news on the faxx we've seen more than a year's worth of delays and two hundred and fifty million dollars wasted on contract extensions for faxx our adversaries have american air superiority in a cross errors the longer we delay these investments the more our edge he's blunted so admiral carl i know you've been outspoken on the important quote workhouse workhouse horse end quote role that destroyers play in today's surface fleet so i also need to hear you square this request failure to include a second dgg with the continued high demand for their capabilities gentlemen on another topic we'll need to hear from you on is the lessons you're taking from the current conflicts and how they inform your thinking about the navy and marine corps modernization in recent months iran has extracted a price effectively striking us and partner military targets all across the region we've also continued to use exocut interceptors to take down cheap these cheap drones why haven't we adapted more quickly to the modern battlefield two weeks ago iran used small boats and drones against us destroyers in the strait of hormuz threatening these billion dollar warships and the sailors who operate so what are we doing to increase protection while reducing the cost of defending these ships should we be using drone boats to add layers of protection for sailors or are we more prepared to use drones for counter mine operations meanwhile ukraine continues to use drone vessels effectively against russian access in the black sea what happens if iran learns these lessons before we do or when china adopts them a scale at the most basic level what is the what is the department of the navy doing to insure the us sailors and marines benefit from every possible advantage of modern military technology if you ask me one of the obvious ways is to continue to invest in the alliances and partnerships that extend our reach and amplify our deterrent power there's nothing to be gained nothing to be gained from opting out of close engagement with battlefield experts like the ukrainians and with capable and committed partners from the first allen chain to NATO Eastern Front. So, Mr. Secretary Admiral Caudle, General Smith, look forward to hearing your views on these and other topics. We'll turn to you momentarily after opening comments from Senator Coons.

Thank you, Chairman McConnell. Um, thank you all for your service and for being here. We have a number of issues to get through today. Uh, I agree with most of the points just made by the Chairman, so I'll um, move to the things where perhaps I've got something to add. Uh, as we move into Memorial Day weekend, I also wanna begin by expressing uh, my undying gratitude uh, to the sailors and marines uh, who've served and sacrificed and to whom we owe our freedom. Uh, and my general gratitude to the sailors and marines currently serving in conflicts uh, in the Persian Gulf, uh, in uh, the Southern Caribbean and throughout the world. Uh, without them we would not be the nation that we are. Um, so to Acting Secretary Cowell, Admiral Caudle, uh, General Smith, Um, thank you for being here and for the forces that you lead. Um, as a result of Operation Epic Fury, we're now deeply vulnerable in the Indo-Pacific, a theater home to three of our most threatening adversaries, um, the PRC, DPRK, and even Russia. Uh, we've redirected more than two thousand marines and at least one amphibious assault ship, uh, the Tripoli from Japan, as well as the missile defense system from South Korea towards the Gulf. And in one striking illustration, of Operation Epic Furies drain on our readiness, we just need to take a moment and consider um the USS Gerald R. Ford having just returned from the longest operational deployment by a carrier group since the end of the Vietnam War, uh facing a slew of operational challenges, it'll now be out of action for up to fourteen months as it undergoes uh repairs. Our heightened naval presence around Iran and ongoing naval deployments in the Eastern Pacific and Southern Caribbean around Venezuela begs the question how long will our naval assets be deployed in these theaters, at what cost, and with what consequence for our deterrence in the East China Sea, South China Sea, and wider Indo-Pacific. Um, I'm also gravely concerned by another abrupt firing of a senior Pentagon official during wartime, the former Secretary of the Navy, John Phelan. Uh, we have gotten no clear input or answers as to why that happened. There are, in other branches, uh, other senior individuals who've been fired abruptly as well. Um, more broadly the topics I'm gonna want to address in today's conversation is, uh, how to reform our shipbuilding enterprise, how do we proliferate autonomous systems, how do we rebuild our magazine depth, and how do we address your services near-term, uh, operation and maintenance challenges. The department's fiscal twenty-seven request is more than two hundred and eighty-six billion in base funding for the Navy. I'm pleased to see more than forty-three billion, a sizeable percentage increase for the United States Marine Corps. Um, but as the Chairman commented, it relies on thirty-eight billion in reconciliation funding in uncertain and partisan process. Um, and core examples include about half of your munitions, your request, all of the Marine Corps's medium landing ships, the submarine industrial base investments. Um, last year the Navy would have halted sailing worldwide. Had this subcommittee not fixed the so-called broken glass, the reconciliation uh, mistakes uh in our bill, and there was a similar challenge the Marine Corps barracks modernization. Uh, we worked as best we could in a diligent bipartisan way to address that, but it was an unforced error. And this year's department request triples down on the potential risk here. So, um, our experience was that the White House's decision created a host of problems last year and I'm deeply concerned we're doing more to create those mistakes this year. So, as a subcommittee we need to clearly understand the nature and scope of the risks, uh the administration is taking with your funding as i mentioned i'm concerned about readiness levels the navy if i understand properly is gonna run out of run out of ship operations funding in july uh because of unbudgeted operations in south con in southern command and against iran as well as the rising price of fuel that impacts all of us and there will be as i mentioned significant repair costs for the ford and other ships we don't have currently good estimates about what that will cost Um, Commandant uh General Smith, um, this committee's been very supportive of the Marine Corps' forced design reforms. They were thoughtfully put together, executed efficiently, and better positioned Marines for modern combat. Um, you consulted closely with Congress throughout all of this, so we understood your vision and how it would work, and I look forward to continuing to hear about how that work is playing out, and how we can invest in your force readiness. I'm very pleased to see a strong investment in shipbuilding. Uh, I think we are far behind and we need to catch up as best we possibly can. Uh, I'm proud to work uh closely with the Pennsylvania delegation in supporting the Philly shipyard one of a number of shipbuilding capabilities we need to invest in more um I support smart and robust investments in our industrial base, um but that starts with expediting incorporating advanced manufacturing technologies uh I think we need to learn from and partner with the best in class, shipyards in the world um, relatively few of which are in our country. The Navy is making steady incremental progress, uh, but it it lacks in my view the sense of urgency, um, from our partners, uh, in shipbuilding. Uh, we need to understand real outcomes and metrics. We're putting a ton of money into industrial base. Um, and we need to see how that money is reaching the sub-tier suppliers to broaden and strengthen that base. Um, a- and then a clear understanding about what the government's responsible for and what industry is responsible for. Uh, I admire the Deputy Secretary's fierce determination to shake up elements of the system. Paying competitive wages, keeping the shipyard infrastructure in decent shape is industry's job. And they need to prioritize that over paying billions in stock buybacks. And I think collectively we need to hold them accountable. Uh, last, there there's a number of other areas of concern in this request, but I just um, I have to point to you are requesting dramatic sums for a new class of battleship. In my view, the entire concept flies in the face of current naval doctrine. Uh, everything we know about survivability in the current, um, war space, uh, you heard the Chairman's comments about Ukraine and the remarkable uh success they've had against the Russian Black Sea fleet. I will associate myself with those comments. You're requesting over a five year period, I believe, fifty billion dollars. But as I understand it, you don't have a design, you don't know what's gonna be on it, you're counting on multiple unproven technologies, and you don't know how you're gonna build it. Um, in my view, that's a program designed to fail. And we should instead be putting those funds in rapidly characterizing, acquiring and deploying uh critically needed drones that will allow us um below and on the surface and above the sea um to be the dominant force we need to be uh going ahead. So we have a lot of ground to cover today. Uh, this is the start of our conversations for this appropriations year. Uh, and I am hopeful there will be an improvement from last year and that our information sharing will be transparent, thorough, and proactive. Thank you again for your service and thank you, Mister Chairman.

Hmm. Thank you, Senator Coons, uh, we'll ask each of you to make a brief statement. Starting with you, Acting Secretary Kell.

Good morning, Chairman McConnell, Reckon Member Coons, distinguished members of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Coons, thank you, sir, for for reminding us, uh, on days like Memorial Day that freedom is not free, paid for by young men and women who will never see tomorrow. American sailors and marines are currently on the front lines of freedom, in operations to protect our republic. Lincoln and Bush carrier strike groups and Tripoli amphibious ready group with the thirty-first marine expeditionary unit, are in the Arabian Sea protecting merchant ships and stopping illicit shipping by our terrorist regime. Destroyers Arleigh Burke, Bulkeley, Oscar Austin and Gonzales are protecting our allies in the Mediterranean against cruise missile attacks from Iran. In the Caribbean, Iwo Jima, Argmu and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower carrier strike group, a forty nine year old nuclear powered aircraft carrier are stopping narco-terrorists from poisoning Americans with illegal drugs. In the Pacific, Boxer Argmu and Destroyer Squadron seven are enforcing the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. At home, we're preparing Macon Island, Argmu for deployment. On our southern border, our sailors and marines stand watch tonight, saying, " nothing's gonna hurt you tonight, not on my watch. Four weeks ago, I was tasked by President Trump to lead the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps. My three priorities are to take care of our sailors-marines, build ships, and protect our homeland. A hundred and twenty years ago, the great white fleet extended America's reach across the globe. We are currently at the forefront of history with a budget that will create the golden fleet which renews that maritime dominance. We have the obligation to give our sailors-marines the very best equipment In our historic budget of three hundred seventy seven point five billion dollars, we're adding thirty four new ships varying from small to large combatant combatants, a hundred and twenty-three new aircrafts along with five unmanned ships. In five years we will add a hundred and twenty-two manned ships and sixty-three unmanned ships. We're funding the readiness of our fleet to ninety-five percent. We're procuring exquisite munitions that will keep our forces outside the weapons engagement zone, while investing in research and development for the fight of the future. More importantly, we're increasing our service member pays, investing in family and unaccompanied housing, child development centers so that our sailors and marines have a safe, clean, and comfortable place to live, and not have to worry about their families when deployed in harm's way. We have greatly exceeded recruiting and retention goals, and that is due solely to the sheer leadership of President Trump and Secretary Haegstaff. Two weeks ago I was aboard USS Gerald R. Ford, USS Winston Churchill, and USS Bainbridge as they were returning from the eleven month combat deployment in two theaters. Do not believe the fake news that claims food shortages, backed up toilets, or low morale. What I witnessed were motivated and professional young Americans pushing the boundaries of performance for their country. It is imperative that we pass this budget. Ship construction and readiness were bill pairs for Iraq and Afghanistan for twenty years. While our industrial base atrophied, America's peer competitors grew stronger and threatened our sovereignty. Their hundred year plan has one goal, total global domination. Only one thing stands in their way, and that is the United States of America. The Navy and Marine Corps are America's nine one one force, capable of being anywhere as a carrier strike group or marine air ground task force, with overwhelming firepower, as we saw in Absolute Resolve and Epic Fury. A year ago I testified in my confirmation hearing that it would create the most lethal Navy and Marine Corps team the world has ever seen. I will keep that promise, having worn the cloth of our nation for thirty-two years, most of which was in combat. I also do this because I will not allow my oldest son, who will be commissioned as a second lieutenant of the United States Marine Corps tomorrow, to go through war the way I did, without the equipment that we needed. I will not allow this for any of America's sons or daughters. They signed a blank check to to this nation up to include in their lives, and we owe it to them to do our due diligence to fund a historic budget that will care for them and their families while giving them the tools they need to answer the call. I've seen firsthand what communism and authoritarian regimes have done to thriving nations. Members of my family were murdered by communists. In nineteen seventy-five, we had no flag to stand under or country to call our own. But the United States gave us hope and a future. I've dedicated my entire adult life to defend this nation under God, so that we would never see this. And our children and our grandchildren will never experience this ever. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before you. I'm ready to answer your questions, sir.

Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman.

Senator Kennedy.

Forgive me, Mister Chairman, for interrupting. and i say this with respect for you and and and these three gentlemen but as you know we've got a very important meeting at eleven o'clock we're gonna have to leave i would respectfully ask if we could limit the opening remarks so we could get to ask a few questions

yo sir i'm uh uh senator coons has been perfectly alright with taking two on our side first and then they get two so we'll be able to get to both of you

i know but my point is we're gonna start at eleven o'clock i've gotta be there and these gentleman have some wonderful uh prepared statements but i can read faster than they can talk and i'm i was hoping if they could give us the cliff's notes version we might have enough time to to ask you questions

or go ahead and ask the question

do you mind

no

you're buying gentleman

Sir, not at all.

All right. Well, I'll I'll try to be brief. Mister Secretary, thank you for being here. We need more ships. We're gonna give you money to build more ships. You need to get those ships built. Need to build as many of them as you can in Louisiana. But let's get them built. Uh, General. Uh, is Russia our friend?

Sir, they're not.

Between Ukraine and Russia. Who do we want to win that war?

Well, we'd prefer there not be a war. But, obviously, w-

Well, but there is. Who do we want to win?

Obviously, we want Ukraine to stand independently and not be consumed by Russia.

OK. Now, when Putin went into Ukraine, he thought he was gonna roll in and take it over in two days, like thunder on a summer night, didn't he?

I believe he did.

But the Ukrainian people have fought back. haven't they

yes sir they have fought back

and they now have some of the some of the most sophisticated drone technology in the history of the world don't they

sure they do they're doing very well with drones

and and they're giving with the limited resources they have they're giving russia a curb stomping aren't they

i would say they are

in fact they have knocked out with their limited resources forty percent of russia's export ability of their oil. Uh, they since January, using their drones and limited cruise missiles, they have hit uh, oil and and gas facilities within Russia over a hundred times, not on the border, within Russia. Right?

Yes, sir.

And Putin was so scared he almost had to to to uh cancel their military parade. It didn't he?

well i'm not sure that's true but i i will take your word for that sure

ok alright well how how much money now let me just lead you uh the the world has three hundred billion dollars of frozen uh russian assets in escrow don't we

uh i don't know sure

i do it's three hundred billion and two thirds of that about two hundred two hundred and twenty five billion is sitting in in uh Europe, isn't it?

Again, sir, I am not sure of that.

Why I am. And and I'm surprised no disrespect as you don't know. Um. And Europe has asked our permission to take that two hundred to two hundred and twenty five billion dollars. Well, let me strike that. That two hundred and twenty five billion, humor me, uh, just sitting there frozen, isn't not a single penny is American taxpayer money, is it?

i don't believe it is

no it all belongs to russia doesn't it

i believe that is correct

and the eu has asked our permission to take that money and give it to to uh ukraine so they can knock russia in the next week and let's get this war over that's a good idea don't you think

well i think anything that can be done to stop that war is a good idea sure

would would you support giving that two hundred two hundred and twenty five billion no taxpayer money in america to to Ukraine

again sir that's outside my purview as a service chief

ok um Admiral let me let me ask you a question um would it be fair to say based on his public and notorious comments both before during and after the summit between President Xi and uh and president trump that president xi how can i put this he's nervous as a pregnant nun about what we're gonna do on taiwan isn't he

so i do think he is concerned about our capability uh against any invasion of taiwan

i mean talk about talk about telegraphing your insecurities i mean he talked about it right out of the chute He's practically sending us a a television ad saying, " I'm very worried about Taiwan." Now, we don't want a war with China, do we?

Absolutely not.

No. We want stability though with China, don't we?

Yes, sir.

And China doesn't recognize, President Xi doesn't recognize charity, does he?

Um, I can't speak to that, but I would say probably not.

Well, he he he he appreciates strength, doesn't he?

I would say so, yes sir.

If you're in a bar fight with President Xi and you start quoting Socrates like we did under President Biden, you're you're gonna get your rear end whipped, aren't you?

That's probably not a good course of action.

Yes. OK, so why don't we go ahead? Don't you think it'd be a good idea for us to to to gain leverage, to to make weapons sales to Taiwan right now?

Sir, again, those things are very complex, full calculus of all the levers of power that are being negotiated and worked. So generally

But what but j- I I'm sorry. What more do we have to know, Adam? President Xi has tele telegraphed his anxiety, his insecurity, now that he knows that America's really learned how to fight. We want leverage. We want stability, not a hot war. We want leverage. What's his insecurity? Taiwan. Why don't we just go ahead and sell the weapons to taiwan that taiwan wants the president can call president xi and say hey president xi don't take it personally don't get excited don't get your bowels in an uproar but i'm selling these weapons why wouldn't we do that

we definitely want taiwan to be as strong as they can be sir

they'd be stronger with those weapons though wouldn't they

yes sir

don't think we ought to sell them

sir i'm not gonna get in front of the administration's overall calculus on that it's just not a i'm not gonna make a statement on that as a service chief

ok

but i but the the capabilities that we're talking about would make them more effective

i'm sorry to go over i'm sorry i just wanted to get my points in thank you so much mr. chairman i've gotta go gentlemen i'm really sorry and i don't mean any disrespect by being so direct but we're down to it we're down to it

indicated there's a conference meeting which i'm not going to myself there's a number of our side have to attend and so i'll go next to susan and then to

mmm

john Hoeven

yes

probably one of the cheapest

oh we have one more ticket

thank you

thank you gentlemen for your service

thank you thank you very much um mister chairman

if i may interject what we're gonna do is just skip you all's opening statements and go straight to the questions

thank you um in light of the briefing we have this morning i wanna thank my democratic colleagues for also being accommodating. Um, secretary uh secretary hegseth just recently has described destroyers as being the backbone of the fleet. Uh, the fiscal year twenty seven budget request, however, includes funding for only one, D D G fifty one, compared to two in fiscal year twenty six and three in fiscal year twenty five. Such a reduction would send a troubling signal to the industrial base at a time when the navy continues to emphasize the need for greater fleet, capability and resiliency. Bathiron works in Maine, which is one of only two surface combat uh shipyards in the country has made real progress in workforce retention and accelerating production stability due to the steady command and the steady demand signal. Based on the future year defense plan, how can we sustain the current production alone, be sufficient to sustain both shipyards and the supplier base without restoring a stable two DDG per year procurements. And I would mention that when you start contrasting uh the size of our fleet with China's, it should be of great alarm to all of us. China now fields a navy approaching four hundred ships and is expanding Its fleet at a pace that far exceeds ours at the US Navy is down to two hundred ninety-one ships. That is very troubling to me. And to me, this is the last time um that we should be cutting back on the workhorse of the fleet, the DDG's. Uh, which by the way, also have proven themselves in recent conflicts. Um, I remember a bath-built ship shooting down every single missile that the Houthi terrorists, uh, were firing. And it just is something that I can't understand the budget recommendation on.

Chairman Collins, thank you so much for that question, and I share with you the the love of the destroyers. they are the workforce and the backbone of the united states navy uh right now we have eighty ships on contract uh and fifty nine in in construction in bathalone which bath creates amazing ships like you said they've they've been in forefront of this war and and just doing amazing work there in bathalone we have eleven destroyers on contract seven are in construction we haven't even begun to cut metal for the other four yet and so i'm just we're trying to allow the industrial base to catch up and senator if you want to i'll i'll go i'll gladly go up to bath with you to reassure the workforce that their work is valued and we will add the ships in in future years it's just right now i'm trying to give them the ability to to catch up to the work uh uh as as of right now ma'am

what happens as you well know that these ships take a long time to uh construct although bath is fast approaching a production rate of one point five ships a year But what you create is a gap at the steels cutting a stage, for example, if you don't have the steady uh throughput of the ships, and that is my concern. And I would very much welcome uh your visit. Uh, General Smith, I wou I want to uh commend the Marine Corps for its proactive approach to autonomous and unmanned capabilities as part of your broader modernization and force design. I'm encouraged by the decision to leverage existing army investments in robotic combat vehicles and commercially available autonomy systems. Programs such as the M-one unmanned ground vehicle demonstrate a commitment to rapid experimentation building emergency emerging technologies. You're clearly exploring how these platforms can support logistics, reconnaissance, counter-UAS missions and targeting, particularly in distributed Indo-Pacific operations. And we've learned a lot of lessons from Ukraine on how important autonomous and unmanned systems are in trans forming the battlefield. So, I am concerned that if we wait too long and have prolonged experimentation, prototyping, that that's going to delay operational capacity while our adversaries are already integrating autonomous systems into combat operations. How do you see the Marine Corps employing unmanned ground ground vehicles in the indo-pacific over the next one to two years

well ma'am we've got a remote operational ground unit expeditionary our rogue nemesis navy marine expeditionary ship interdiction system uh which fires an uh an anti-ship missile off of a remote uh operated vehicle that is our that is our commitment that's our primary mover of that nemesis system we're gonna continue to expand that we're gonna continue to increase our magazine depth and we're gonna continue to to look into all of the unmanned platforms cause i as an instrument i was taught never send a marine where you can send a bullet

exactly

and i am i am fully committed to autonomy up to the to the leading edge both in drone technology and in vehicle technology

great thank you

yes ma'am

thank you mister chairman

senator hovinds and then we're gonna go to the democratic side and take several of them uh in order thank you for giving us the chance

uh my thanks as well thank you mister chairman uh and uh i'd like to start with secretary uh secretary carl um with the blockade that we have in the middle east right now in the straight away moves how do we continue to make that more effective and uh in your opinion how can we make that sufficiently effective so that we constrain not only constrain iran from moving any of their ships in and out of the Gulf uh but that we open the Gulf for other shipping.

Senator, thank you for that question. You're you're right, I mean uh doing a blockade is very tough and I will turn over to uh the Chief of Naval Operations in a second for tactics techniques for procedures uh while we do that, but you know there's a lot of things we can leverage uh including I think unmanned uh unmanned su- surface platforms will be in important as well as, maritime domain awareness, but I will turn over to the chief of naval operations here

well where i'm going with i mean obviously the pressure on us is is gasoline prices right and and that's what that's really the only lever that iran has left and that's to create enough uncertainty so that the ships can transit the strait but if we take that away and we not only bottle them up but we open up traffic then the the pressure is off us and the blockade pressure continues whatever kinetic entered uh steps we decide to take over and beyond that we'll see what the administration decides. But that truly keeps the pressure on them, increasingly so. And it uh takes it away from us. So, you know, as their uh terrible regime uh says, oh, well, our people are used to suffering. You know, and so they they think they can outlast us. So how do we flip that equation? That's what I'm getting at.

Well, sir, the the blockade is probably been the single most. important military operation we've done to try to get negotiations to the place where they even are.

And we're getting better at it. We're getting more efficient at it.

We are. That comes with really good rules of engagement. We're really good at understanding how to determine this. It comes from uh artificially intelligent um enabled common operational picture, to actually know who we go after, intel, deep intelligence, and then the ability to utilize security forces to board if necessary or disable if necessary leakers. So that's important. But to open the flow of commerce to um partners who want to leave the Strait of Hormuz, and and where though we know there have been mines emplaced, so that's challenging for them. If we go try to do escort with that, we have looked into that, that's a very challenging mission in that narrow strait when it's contested. And so, when you're in a contested environment, to demine the Strait of Hormuz or to do escort duty is not something that's easy to do. So we're gonna have to get to a place that the, that that strait is open with a generally accepted ceasefire before that can be turned on en masse.

So are you saying you can't, it's not, in your opinion, you're not able to completely uh, open the strait and maintain the blockade other than through some type of agreement, ceasefire?

I think that

Militarily, can we do it?

The the no

Are there things that you can continue to do to enhance your ability on that blockade and control the strait to mitigate the risk for ships to go through.

The there are many things we can continue doing to enhance the blockade. And but to actually start doing something where I'm providing escort services through a contested strait will will in my military opinion exceed the capacity of the Navy to do that effectively.

Escorts, I understand, but every step you take that uh, creates more opportunity for ships to flow, other than the ones we blockade, puts pressure on them and relieves pressure on us.

It does,

Would you

and that's that goes down to servicing their mine layers. You know, we've we've shot a lot of them, and that takes a lot of intel and a lot of uh, dynamic targeting to do that effectively, and we continue to do that. We have to continue our expeditionary uh, UUV enabled demining operations. So all those things come together to give us confidence that that commercial shipping can transit that straight safely.

Yeah.

Uh, General uh Smith, um, kind of the same question but reverse. i was in taiwan i've been in japan south korea fairly recently increasingly china is creating a de facto blockade around taiwan just with live fire exercises with you know their uh ship exercises uh aircraft exercises on and on and on de facto they're increasingly doing that other than making taiwan a porcupine what other steps are effective in slowing that down, preventing it, stopping it, addressing it.

Well, so your your last point about a porcupine defense does work. Um, nobody wants to bite into a porcupine.

So back to what uh Senator Kennedy was talking about.

Yes, sir. You wanna have a a deep missile depth. You wanna make it it's one thing to start across the straits. It's another thing to get to the shore of Taiwan. And it's another thing to get from the shore to the capital. And so what we're doing is is we're working closely with our allies and partners to ensure that every step of that possible action by the pr c is contested

the marines at okanawa are doing incredible work and you don't realize how amazing uh the work there is they're doing and and what they're doing on land and sea the whole drone thing is a huge huge part of that and change in everything air and water it's unbelievable congratulations to you guys uh and thanks to all three of you very much Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to our colleagues.

Senator Coons, all about Senator Derby and Durbin and Shaheen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I will defer uh to my friend and colleague, Senator Durbin, and then to Senator Shaheen, and then all questions.

Thank you, Senator Coons. Uh, for a number of us, this is the last time we'll meet in these circumstances. We've announced our retirement from the Senate. I wanted to take sixty seconds just to acknowledge how I got started in the Senate, because it involves the Marine Corps. It involves a man named Paul Douglas. Paul Douglas was the uh senator from Illinois from nineteen forty eight to nineteen sixty six college professor who enlisted in the Marine Corps in March of nineteen forty three forty two I'm sorry March of nineteen forty two Uh what was unique about that it was he's the oldest uh recruit in the history of the Marine Corps. He went through basic training at Paris island at the age of fifty uh and became a captain uh and rank and begged to be in combat they eventually assigned him to okanawa he was involved in combat and lost the use of his left arm which he referred to as his paperweight the rest of his life senator douglas insisted on signing every letter that went out of his office and that meant that some somebody had to sit next to him and pull the letters as he signed them interns that was me and that's where i started in this business but i'm very proud of his service and i wanted to make a record of it uh today in this uh testimony in hearing, thank you for your service to this country. Uh, Secretary Cowell, I think a source, our greatest source of pride in in Illinois is Great Lakes Naval Training Station. To think that every recruit in the United States Navy goes through Great Lakes uh is a great source of pride to us. I was there just last week as we dedicated the expansion of a school for the families that live in the area. Here's a challenge we face which I want you to be sensitive to. Maybe you already are. is the fact that this operation midway blitz or whatever they call it by uh dhs and ice and the like has scared the hell out of many people in that region particularly hispanic population every week we have literally thousands of graduates at at a beautiful ceremony at great lakes who come in from all over the united states my concern is their concern Some of them uh are not citizens of the United States, and yet their sons and daughters are volunteering to serve in the Navy. Uh, we uh have more than a thousand each year that become citizens actually sworn into citizenship at that base. We have warned DHS stay away from Great Lakes. Don't intimidate these families in any way. Give them a chance to have the one of the greatest days of their lives with their sons and daughters. Are you familiar with this issue?

senator thank you for for this question and again i i share your concern of of uh being a refugee to this country and uh serving this nation i i know what what it's like to not have a country to call my own and having to you know having the united states open up their arm arms and that's why i served in in combat for this country for so many years uh i i what i know about the dhs and and great lakes is they're no longer onboard the uh great lakes at all

that's that's what i understand too

so uh Yes, sir. S so but I I'm not aware of midnight blitz or or any other operation within DHS, sir.

I I just wanna sensitize you to the fact that thousands of families come to that base each week to celebrate one of the most important days of their family's lives. Uh, and many of them are in fear that just around the corner someone is going to ask them to show identification. We've got to keep that operation at Great Lakes separate from this midway blitz and ICE agents' uh, uh, assignment. in order to maintain its integrity. So I hope you'll keep that in mind as you, uh, chart your conduct in the future.

I'll keep it in mind, Senator.

I yield. Chris.

Senator Shaheen.

Well, thank you for giving us the opportunity to go ahead and ask questions ahead of you. We appreciate it. Um, thank you gentlemen for being here. I'm sure you will not be surprised, Secretary Cowell, to know that I have a question about the Portsmouth Neighborhood shipyard. I'm sure Admiral Caudle was expecting that. Um, but, but this is distressing because the shipyard has a funding shortfall of sixty-five million since October. Thirty million of that is to cover Secretary Hegseth's directive to provide bonuses to randomly selected workers. So, the idea of recognizing workers I think we can all support. But if we're gonna do that, then the department needs to provide the funding to to make that recognition. And they didn't do that, so the shipyard had to take funds from their existing budget. In addition, DOD is pulling back another thirty-three million from the shipyard for its quote, under-execution of hiring, which doesn't make any sense because as Admiral Cottle can speak to, because we've had this conversation, they were prevented from hiring workers before congress stepped in and exempted them from secretary heg secretary hegseth's civilian hiring freeze it's an issue that i raised with the previous navy secretary which he said he was trying to address it's an issue i raised with secretary hegseth he said they were gonna you all were gonna look into it and yet we still have this funding shortfall that is having a real um impact on the ability of the shipyard to do their jobs at a time when it is critical that we keep the maintenance of our nuclear subs at the forefront and get those ships in and out on schedule. So, Acting Secretary Cal, can you commit that you will restore the funding that Portsmouth has lost because of the actions of the department?

Senator, thank you for that question. I um I share with you that the the workers at Portsmouth are just amazing. And so we need to make sure that they're they're uh paid and and given the bonuses they they deserve. Uh the Chief of Naval Operations and I were talking about this this morning. We will delve into this and take this for record, and I'll personally bring it to your office to to report back, ma'am.

Thank you, I appreciate that. And Admiral Cottle, as you know, Congress has appropriated significant funding to expand the Virginia class submarine production capacity. And that's alongside of our commitment with Australia under AUKUS um to increase the submarine industrial base. We have challenges producing um the submarines that are part of the existing pipeline. So, can you talk about how we're addressing the AUKUS piece of that and how the Navy is spending the investment that Australia is making in AUKUS?

Yes, ma'am. You know, um, the money that Australia has given us, the two billion dollars, will become part of the generalized fund as part of the SIB investment. The summary and industrial base investment is a set of money that I know you know, well, also all too well, goes to improving many facets of the way we do new construction. It goes to improving the tooling and and capabilities there, bringing state of the art robotics. and artificial intelligence into uh drawings and workflows. It goes into recruiting and retaining and developing the best workforce possible. It goes into ensuring the compensation of those workers is is at the at a level that we can drive these retention uh numbers the way they are and they, and we're responding to that. We're seeing that at all of our our private yards. So it is paying off. Um, you know, I like to say we've delivered seven uh Virginia class submarines in the last four years. And while we're not on plan, that's pretty close to, you know, where we need to get to. It's my estimate in the, you know, by twenty thirty to twenty thirty-two time frame, we will be delivering exactly what we need, the two point O for us and the and the summaries necessary to actually make sure that we make good on AUCUS pillar one. So I think the investments are good. They're starting to pay off. We didn't get here overnight and it's taken some time for us to actually get back up on step to where we need to be. But I really do believe we're getting there. And I think the leadership part of this, I'll finish, under our Director of Submarine Programs, which is dual-hatted under Vice Admiral Goucher, has DERPAM submarines and uh programs and the PAE works for the secretary, was a great step there to to tighten up the chain of command there to put the necessary heat and light on the actual shipyard to make sure that we're effectively spending those dollars.

So, you you feel confident that that's gonna help us get the virginia schedule up to where we want it to be

i do the the all the all the trends are positive you know it's not like getting the rudder over on a ship and it turns immediately on something like this but everything i see on every report i see from days of maintenance delay to recouping you know idle submarine that were actually down to zero now and uh in the work you see going on at ports of naval shipyard and that's in the public yard sector, every one of those is actually in a positive trend and actually getting better. So I am quite confident in what I'm saying.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mister Chairman.

Let's go to the second position, I just want to make sure that we have time. We passed, uh, for a while.

Um, thank you, um, and I appreciate, uh, the testimony we've heard so far and I'm, um, looking forward to reviewing all of your prepared statements. Um, I am a huge proponent, as is uh Senator Collins and many of us, of unmanned systems. Uh, and I appreciate the answer uh from General Smith about uh your engagement, but I'd like to hear more about this from the Navy. Um, you're proposing, I believe, two point two billion uh in investments for unmanned systems, and I'm I'm concerned about whether or not we've learned the lessons from past drone initiatives that focused on procuring end items with little or no thought to how they'll actually be employed, or sustained, if you could, Acting Secretary Cowell and Admiral Caudle, how's the Navy thinking about um the deployment and the use of systems in the future to make sure they're fit for um the challenges we face and how are you incorporating the lessons learned from Ukraine and the ongoing operations in Iran, as you just referenced, Admiral Caudle, the um uh unmanned systems for demining um to make sure that these investments in autonomous systems meet our operational needs?

thank you for that question senator again as an eod tech myself i i've used robots my entire career where i'd rather send an uh a robot down than send a uh an eod tech down there with a set of wire cutters and uh you know likewise uh in while we are doing underwater uh demining we use right now the mark eighteen uuv in order to do that um pilots will say all the time that they use that uh unmanned systems for a long time with aim nine and aim one twenty uh so right now we're we're studying to make sure we're we're doing the right thing with specially with MOSA uh the the um open systems architecture we we wanna be able for every system to talk to each other just like my my iphone should be able to talk to to someone else's blackberry uh you know we wanna be able that everything works together we are taking lesson's learn from ukraine the the thing is we have the tyranny of distance ukraine can just put in their backyard and and send it out whereas we have to travel ten thousand miles or or even greater if if we're talking about Indo-Pakom in order to get the systems there and i will turn over to the chief of naval operations to tell you how we we're integrating the systems especially with the TR battle group we're getting ready to go out be the first uh carrier strike group uh to use unmanned systems thank you Admiral Carl

Hey Senator Coons uh sir thank you for that you know first of all let me just say the ultimate unmanned weapon is the SM six the conventional prompt strike missile the heavyweight Mark forty eight torpedo, LRASM, those are unmanned vehicles themselves and they're quite capable and we need to make sure that our munitions you know are fully funded so let me just state that. You know the secretary's got it right, it's you know it's it's one thing to be able to launch unmanned kit which has limited range when you're in an arc of achievability like Ukraine is to their target set, so we have to have a

Well, let me not to interrupt but I'll interrupt, l one of the things that's most impressed and you've heard it from several of us about Ukraine's work is that they are launching successful drone strikes a thousand miles from Ukraine.

Yes.

Uh, part of what has changed the momentum on the battlefield is their successful strikes in Moscow and the stunning success of Operation Spider-Web to deliver significant damage uh to a strategic airlift a thousand miles away. So it it's not entirely true that they aren't covering also the tyranny of distance, given the depth that the Russians are using to launch attacks on Ukraine. So, forgive me.

No, no question, sir, but I've got to carry that kit as a navy to the forward part of the theater, and then get that last thousand miles.

Right.

OK? So I can do that through my own ship, so you can envision what mother ships would look like.

True.

Certainly that would be our medium, uh, uh, unmanned surface vehicle, containerized payloads would, would swarm, uh, drones in that, uh, all types of long-range munitions in that, uh, undersea capabilities in that, so containerization is huge for me to do that. I have to s- I also, not only the distance, I have to have things survivable in sea state.

Mm-hmm.

Monsoon season is about to hit,

Mm-hmm.

so if I tried to go put a bunch of unmanned right now in this monsoon season, it would not be survivable in itself. So, I love the asymmetry and the overmatch that you can get from robotic and autonomous systems. But as the Navy chief, I have to bring that forward in a way that I can launch that into the theater with valid targets that I can't service through other means.

Sir, what what role do you imagine that our treaty allies play uh in this forced projection? Because, you know frankly, the Australians, uh the Philippines, uh Korea, Japan, um they are technologically sophisticated partners, um they are close partners with us, uh and they have the ability uh to support, to service, and to project. The first time I really was struck by what is possible in this was in Australia. I was there last summer for the US-Australia AUKUS related dialogue and visited an facility uh and saw their Ghost Shark product and was really quite struck at what they are deploying um what role do you see our close allies playing in developing, testing and deploying autonomous systems?

Well, thank you again, I I I don't see any world that our allies don't play a prominent role in how we leverage autonomy.

Of course.

I need their ABO. I need them to invest in it. I need to actually work with them and integrate it into the schemes of maneuver and how we do mass fires. So, the it's a vital question what you're bringing up. If we're going to launch and have effective unmanned capability going forward, then that has to be done, I think, in close collaboration with allies and partners. I need to be able to sustain that kit forward to be able to bring it to bear. That will require partnerships with our allies.

My last question this round, if I could um, look, as I understand our shipbuilding uh challenges, um, all of the existing shipyards are working at full capacity. You're asking for more money to increase their capacity, but we are literally years behind. And the best in class shipyards in the world are in Japan, South Korea and China. Uh, fifty years ago we had the best shipyards in the world, today we do not. And I'm a a strong believer that we need to make sure we are protecting America's industrial base and exploring deeper partnerships. You asked for one point eight billion to study using foreign shipyards and foreign designs. That is a lot for a study. If you could just briefly describe what the point is for that much of a study and what extra capacity you think we might look to our treaty allies to provide, both for servicing, to your point of tyranny of distance, uh and potentially constructing ships in partnership with us. I'm a big believer in the AUKUS partnership. I think we need to be looking to our close allies and partners, as long as we are protecting our domestic shipyards and they have robust and sustained opportunities to contribute to this work.

I can remember Coons, that's a wonderful question sir, cuz uh we're the the RDT&E we're getting with that is to see the integration of those uh foreign ships to see how they fit in our formation and if it works we're not buying into foreign shipyards, we're having them invest in united states we we want them to bring their their operations here with the way they're able to crank out a a destroyer in two years and that will create basically five hundred forty thousand jobs in united states and not just to build destroyers and and frigates uh frigates and battleships we're talking about also merchant ships right now we only have a hundred and eighty eight um you know flagged merchant ships and hundred uh five military seal of command ships and we need more in united states we there's the chinese have eleven thousand merchant ships and we need to to build capacity that's why to be able to have them invest over here i mean my my toyota is not built in japan it's built in united states so have them build their their uh uh factories over here sir

hanwha's uh dramatic uh commitment to invest in the philly shipyard is just one of many such investments is it your testimony then that you're not considering any production overseas only investments in us shipyards

well obviously initially we have to see how they build those ships over there and then uh and then bring american workers over there learn the way their their modalities how they they work and how they they're able to streamline processes bring that over here here in united states sir

you've been uh but we've encouraged taiwan to buy arms from us and all of a sudden there's a pause what are you hearing from the taiwanese about the pause

chairman i have not heard uh i have not spoken to the taiwanese however we are we have done some military uh foreign military sales to them and it's just right now we're doing a pause in order to to make sure we have the uh munitions we need for epic fury which we have plenty but we're just making making sure we have everything but then uh the foreign military sales will continue uh when the administration deems uh necessary sir

put another way do you expect the sale to be approved at some point

uh senator uh that would be up to the secretary of war and the uh uh secretary of state sir

yeah well that's what's really distressing um bel belatedly the administration seems to be mad at the europeans for not engaging in the middle east um but as a practical matter without basing its sustainment from nato allies we wouldn't be able to project power in the middle east so what role should nato play out in the indo-pacific

Well, Chairman, uh first of all, NATO playing a role for I would love to see NATO uh doing some uh demining in the, the Straits also. I mean, this is a mutually beneficial for all the world if we can clear the Straits uh right now and and really provide security. And NATO again would be a great ally to us in the in the Pacific uh in it just to to maintain the the sea lanes of communication. We, the United States, are a maritime nation. We depend on the Pacific and the Atlantic. for free trade and the world does also and so this is why we needed to all work together to protect the sea lanes the communications for the world sir

i think the way you think about nato is it's important not only for the europeans and ourselves but for the rest of the world they're looking at nato coming to nato meetings from the pacific um this is a potential framework for us to be the leader of the free world all the world not just europe because we all know who our adversaries are china russia north korea iran they all have one thing in hate in common they hate us so we can either stand up to that or hunker down and hope for the best finally miss secretary uh fiscal year twenty six we funded naval drone and counter drone capabilities by full year appropriations this year's request would only fund navy drone programs and reconciliation do you have some view about that

oh i'm sorry is this you know i'm sorry go ahead would you like to see you know to answer that uh chairman or myself

edmund

Uh, Chairman McConnell, um, you know, it the risk of, you know, not having the the total discretionary and mandatory bill is significant for the Navy. You know, we've we've in the opening statements that have been made by you and others, we take risk in munitions, we take risk in F- thirty-five, and we take risk in physrim to maintain our facilities, our foundry, as I like to call it. So, you know, if if the majority of the counter UAS and counter drone technologies and capabilities are are in the mandatory, and that's not funded, of course I'd take risks there. And so that's why, you know, for me as a service chief, uh, the the passing of the total bill is so vital for me.

What uh specific lessons has the Navy learned from what's going on in Ukraine? Um. which all been described as the silicon valley of warfare i'm wonder if any of the senior navy leaders have been to ukraine and to gather lessons firsthand from the front lines of modern warfare

um chair mcconnell the um there's a lot of lessons um one you know how you command the control forces two how you have great intelligence apparatus sustained ISR and and not only just ISR for targeting and getting valid targets, it actually, you know, crippled the the supply and logistics and and forced correlation nodes of an adversary. But the actual ISR to do battle damage assessment is vital. Uh, we've seen the outsized uh asymmetric effort that's been able to be done by the Ukrainian forces leveraging robotic and autonomous systems. But that comes, that requires great targeting to go do that. And so that's been a piece of that. So, uh, you know, logistics win wars, we know that, and so that's been a big lesson to learn. And we've seen that it takes partnerships, you know, to actually sustain Ukraine, uh, against a, a much larger force at Russia fields. So there's been a lot of lessons that we've incor, uh, we've looked at very hard, and that we will use and leverage in our own fights.

Ballin'.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Um, Secretary Cal, uh, uh, Admiral Caudle, uh, uh, General Smith, uh, thank you all for being here this, uh, this morning. Uh, General Smith, over the last several years this subcommittee has supported the Marine Corps's efforts to transform into a more mobile and capable force prepared to fight in a potential naval war in the pacific can you describe the importance of the medium landing ship to the marine corps' approach to fighting this war

senator i can and thank you for that question the lsm or landing ship medium uh we always have to do landing ship comma medium in the marine corps it's just the way we do it it is an inter-island connector it enables our forces to aggregate and disaggregate rapidly and to go to places that other conventional navy ships cannot go because of beach gradients so it allows us to have access to the totality of the first island chain and it's vital it's gonna bring our medium missile batteries our nemesis our navy marine ship interdiction system it's gonna bring all that to bear in places that otherwise the adversary would not have to calculate when they look at their isr platform when they look at where they where they focusing their intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance now they have to look at the totality of the map

thank you the current requirement laid out by the navy and marine corps is to procure thirty five medium landing ships how critical to the marine corps is it for the us to build at least thirty five of them

ma'am it's vital uh because we're gonna need to move the forces that need to be moved um those forces and three meff third marine expeditionary force are gonna have to be moved and even one meff first marine expeditionary force outta camp Pendleton. Once they move forward, they're gonna have to have the ability to move around the first island chain. And again, the LSM blends itself in with commercial shipping. It looks like any other small ship that's transiting the area. There's some exquisite capabilities that we can put on it that we can't talk about in an open hearing but we can talk about in in a closed hearing that will enable to quote " fuzz it up" so that it looks like any other tramp steamer that's out there.

And then, uh, the Navy to be building medium landing ships for about the next decade. At the same time, uh, President Xi has directed the People's Liberation Army to be prepared to take Taiwan by force as soon as next year. So, time is of the essence if the US is to maintain our military edge in the Pacific. Do you believe it is important to, uh, Marine Corps' readiness to acquire medium landing ships as quickly as we can?

Absolutely, ma'am. There's a saying that if your neighbor says he's gonna kill you, you should believe him.

Yeah.

So

Um, thank you. Um, Secretary Cowell, um, I am very concerned that the Navy's request for funding to procure six medium landing ships was included in the the partisan and mandatory spending part of the department's budget request that request is outside the jurisdiction of this subcommittee and is in serious danger i think of not passing this year um that makes me question the navy's commitment to maintaining this program so what is the navy's backup plan for procuring medium landing ships if the administration's partisan spending request fails to advance

sir i could share your concerns that we we need this whole one point five trillion dollars the navy and marie corinth has taken lot of hits over twenty years in iraq and afghanistan ma'am and so that's why we need we need this one time budget in order to fix all these things however you appropriate to this us whether one bill or two we're completely gnostic to that uh as a navy and marine corps we we need that in order to build uh these uh medium landing ships uh again think terry is gonna turn it out quickly and and i know that's why we're going with a design that's already proven it's already built and we're not gonna deviate from that like we did with the previous uh models that's why we it's so imperative that we get the one point five trillion dollars especially for the navy and marine corps to get to three hundred seventy seven point five billion dollars ma'am

yeah but uh well president trump and uh this administration talk a lot about wanting to build more ships in america and i absolutely agree with that but bringing back our domestic shipbuilding industry requires a consistent demand signal and decisions like these jeopardize the stability of the medium landing ship program and the thousands of jobs um including those in wisconsin um which depend on it so do you agree that consistent demand is important to our ship building industry and if so why wasn't the request for the medium landing ship funding included in the navy's base budget like all other battle force ships

Senator, again, we we need however we'll get this money, we need we need it all for for to fix the Navy Marine Corps. And and I know you weren't here for my opening statement, but my son's gonna be commissioned a United States Marine uh tomorrow from the United States Naval Academy. I I cannot have him go to war the way I did. We we we just can't do this to our sailors and Marines. These are American sons and daughters, and we owe it to them to give them what they need. And this is why we we just need to get this out. But when when we're balancing the needs of uh qual quality of life, quality of service, housing for them, uh, pay and everything else. It just it's just the way the uh the budget was laid out, ma'am.

Yeah, it's it's it's a problem that it's laid out that way, cuz the Navy and Marine Corps both emphasize the importance of procuring the medium landing ships quickly. Do you support uh uh procuring them as quickly as our shipyards are able to build them?

Senator, I I do support building them as quickly as possible and getting as many as we can possibly get.

OK.

let me try again on the question i asked you earlier about which of the navy leaders have been to ukraine

sir uh i can't tell you uh in total how many navy leaders have been there i have not been to ukraine But I do know that the commander of naval forces, Europe and Africa, uh, which headquartered out of Naples, Italy, and commander Six Fleet, uh, um, have been there.

Mm-hmm.

And if they haven't been there exactly on boots on ground, they certainly have been to all the Black Sea states that surround it. And they work very closely every single day with the Ukrainian Navy and, and their entire joint force to support their needs to the extent the United States Navy can.

What about the civilian leadership?

Senator, I have not been to to Ukraine yet, but I've I've in my previous life, when I was in uniform, I did send send uh some of our operators there. I'm very well very familiar with uh with the research development we're doing in Ukraine. I know the former US Naval Forces, Europe and uh Africa, was one of my longtime mentors uh admiral stew munch he he knows that area extremely well and he's uh his forces operated there both as nato and us forces sir

i know you guys are not policymakers but let me say again that uh effort to cut off help for ukraine is not gonna work in the senate or in the house um we put in four hundred million dollars last year and we had to embarrass the administration in public to get them to actually spend it uh we're gonna have additional ukraine money this year i would say to the policymakers at the white house and at pentagon the american people are in favor of us helping ukraine republicans are in favor of us helping ukraine democrats are in favor of helping ukraine we're pretty together on this issue so we're not going away one final question what are the specific objectives of us strategy up in the arctic what role will allies like denmark and norway play in achieving them

sorry i can address some of that um You know, I'm a huge proponent uh of the Arctic and my job at UN police forces, uh you know, as the NORTHKOM component commander, I I think played a vital role with the NORTHKOM team to enhance our presence in the Arctic. Uh, we do that in partnership with the European command and Indo-Pacific command commander. I kind of break it down a couple ways. Uh, one, it's important to um have presence there. you gotta you gotta walk the battlefield, so that means operating above the arctic circle consistently with surface ships, with aircraft carriers, and of course our submarine force. Second, you have to have special capabilities to be successful up there. Yeah, it means communication systems that can work at high latitudes, it means um systems on board that can handle those temperatures, and it means understanding uh flows of marginal ice zone and the weather conditions up there that are significant and and the climate is quite something. And the third thing, you have to have partners and allies. And the Arctic Council team is is, you know, the the we are all are part of NATO now, with the exception of Russia. So partnerships matter above the Arctic circle. So Finland, Sweden, Norway, of course. And a big one is Canada, of course. And we do a lot of operations with them. Well, you know, we just came off our biannual exercise called ISAX, where we're just there with, you know, where we do that every two years. Uh, we know the the Russians want to actually, you know, call it their own. They had like a nine dash line around the North Pole, and we're not gonna let that happen. We know that China wants to call the Arctic a near, you know, Arctic nation state. We're not gonna let them operate up there without being contested either. And so it's very important, and this goes to what we're doing in Alaska and the recapitalization and the facilitation of some of the places where uh working in with the senators from alaska this goes to collaboration with the coast guard in what we're doing to rebuild their ice breaking fleet and how we sustain their operations so uh the arctic is extremely important trillions of dollars of minerals natural gas oil and rare earths and uh the united states have to has to have a presence there sir

speaking of denmark after the suggestion that somehow we wanted to take greenland um How are we getting along with the Denmark NATO member?

So Denmark is a very close naval uh ally. Uh, we do a lot with Denmark. They punch way above their weight class, very sophisticated set of capabilities that they bring to bear. And I think our relationship uh with them is very close. They know that from a Navy perspective how important Greenland is, has key terrain and our ability to operate in and out of Greenland to protect the Atlantic-GIUK gap. from outer area russian deployers is extremely important they know it's important from a early warning radar system to understand icb em threats and other threats that could approach our homeland

so whatever uh concern there may have been anything is blown over

sir i won't speak to the political aspects of that uh but i can just tell you navy to navy we're strong with denmark

good

thank you mister chairman and um Thank you for your testimony today. I'm just gonna pick up on a theme that you've heard from all of us, from the first questions from Senator Kennedy to the last questions from the Chairman to that recent engagement. With our allies, we are strong. With our allies, we can project force. With our allies, we can deter China, Russia, Iran, DPRK. They are increasingly aligned, but we increasingly are not. Uh, I led a bipartisan delegation, a bipartisan the same week our president threatened to take Greenland by force from our NATO ally, Denmark. I appreciate your testimony, Admiral, that at the Navy-to-Navy level we're strong, but their capabilities are not just terrific. Um, their service alongside us when we asked in Afghanistan was outstanding. And their sacrifice as we come to our Memorial Day, we should not forget. Fifty-two Danes died in service in Afghanistan. And as Senator Tillis and Senator Murkowski, uh, and Senator Durbin and I were there at the memorial to the Danes who served and died alongside us, we should not forget that when our president says we never asked NATO for anything and they never did anything for us, that's heard loud and clear by our NATO allies. I am gravely concerned that in the Arctic, where the Canadians are stepping up and investing, We're walking away from a decades-old partnership with them. In Europe, where Russia is the single greatest threat to our security and stability, we're putting at risk the trust that we've earned by abruptly announcing withdrawals of thousands of American troops, in a way that is not clearly planned or executed. And the chairman referenced the four hundred million dollars. When the secretary was in front of us, he got asked by several of us, we appropriated four hundred million dollars. Last year for Ukraine. Has it been spent? No. When will we get a spend plan? Last week. Do we have it today? No. I know this is above your pay grade, but, Mister Secretary, I hope you will convey, as you've heard from many of us, from the first questions from the Chairman to my last question now, you're submitting a budget that puts things across the line, from base budget to reconciliation. Munitions. shipbuilding, the LSM that is essential to your ability uh to fight and win in the Western Pacific. If the reconciliation piece of this doesn't go through, we are gonna have even bigger problems this year than last. So let me just briefly ask about those two things. Um, Commandant, how important is it that you have the LSMs in the year ahead, and how What will you do if that does not come through in reconciliation? How will that impact your war fighting capability?

Well, we'll be less mobile, we'll be less able to aggregate and disaggregate, and we'll be less able to contend with the PRC.

A and is the major adversary for whom you are currently planning and for which we are currently investing, in the Western Pacific, the PRC?

It is, sir.

Admiral Caudle, um, we spoke before and you've spoken now about how the Ukrainians have demonstrated remarkable mastery uh of naval drones. And in fact, they've pushed back uh Russia's Black Sea fleet uh significantly. Um, what happens to the Navy if your significant munitions request, which is divided between reconciliation regular is denied and you don't get those munitions? And what does that do to shipbuilding, drones, and munitions for this coming year?

Sir, that's why it's so important, you know, the way I put it into a context, my base budget is about two hundred and seventy billion. About a tenth of that, one tenth is is in my mandatory, you know, so, uh, you know, the way it kind of looks across the entire budget, it's like a third is over in mandatory. But for me, the Navy, a tenth of my budget is there. A lion's share is in discretionary. So, But I need both, to your point, I need both. And so to the specifics of the risk, as I stated earlier, it is an F-thirty-five procurement, it is an LSM, no question that's where all six live, and the risk of munitions and the risk in the FISRAM, we need to sustain our bases and our infrastructure.

So the the reason I mentioned this in my opening, I'm I'm mentioning it now, is that last year the lack of coordination produced billions of dollars in what we call broken glass, problems that we had to fix because they were not fixed by the White House. And I recognize it's the White House, OMB, the secretary's office that are making these decisions. But you've now heard from a whole series of senators, Republican and Democrat, um, that we've got clear priorities, that we are at risk of not meeting. I also mentioned in my opening, I am really struggling, Mister Secretary, with the Navy's headlong rush towards a Trump class battleship. We have never previously named a class of ships. for a currently serving president. In your opening you referenced the great white fleet of a hundred years ago, which helped project naval power for the United States. But I don't see how a new class of battleship, at a cost of fifty billion dollars over five years, meets our operational needs at a time when most of our exchanges have been about how the lessons learned of Ukraine and the likely lessons being learned by the PRC are about the urgency of moving towards distributed autonomous systems. What operational problem are you trying to solve that isn't met by carriers and destroyers submarines and autonomous systems being deployed at a greater scale, Mister Secretary?

Ranking member uh Coons, yeah I I sh- I understand your your concerns, sir. As far as I can remember, um, just even re- looking at popular mechanics back in july of eighty eight it said uh the battle cruiser two thousand basically this large arsenal ship uh when i was in upnav in ninety six the surface warfare division in in two thousand eleven we had a requirement for a cgx a large combatant we've always had a requirement for large combatant the problem right now is the ddg's are completely decked out uh the the only ship with the uh slick thirty two victor seven is the uss pinckney it looks like this chipmunk with a cheek full of nuts right now because it's it's just so big It's you can't add more more to that ship. So we're looking at large combatant in order to put those those systems in there, to to have two hundred VLS cells, to have conventional prompt strike, as well as the speed necessary to get from point A to point B. Uh that's why we're looking at the the uh nuclear power for that. I mean look at the Ford, she was able to go from Venezuela to the uh to Mediterranean in five days. That's what we need right now, to be able to bring an arsenal out there quickly, with a lot of firepower and and launch missiles and and return back.

Yeah.

So

If we look at just I I look in nineteen eighty eight in popular mechanics that might have been an interesting proposal. If we just look back at the abrupt cancelling of the frigates, if we look back at the LCS and what's happened, we have a profound mismatch between ship design, ship building capability, and our capacity to deploy ships at scale. I am profoundly concerned that this is a fifty billion dollar boondoggle. where the delivery timeline is a political timeline, not a practical timeline, and where the clear lessons of Ukraine and the clear threats facing Taiwan are not being well served by that investment. You've been asked by Republicans and Democrats, should we sell to Taiwan the weapons that have already been promised? I say yes, and you've been asked by senators, both Republican and Democrat, are we learning the lessons of Ukraine? And to show that we do, we should prioritize drones over massive battleships. My view is that Ukraine today is on the front lines of freedom, and we need to act like it. I carry this in my pocket every day. It was handed to me a month ago in Odessa by a Navy chaplain from Ukraine. We've got more lessons to learn from then than we have learned, and this budget doesn't in my view reflect that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

alright we'll insert your opening statements in the record um this'll complete our hearing today I wanna thank you for coming up we'll have a week to submit additional questions for the record senators may do that and we'd like to have them responded to uh promptly the subcommittee meeting is adjourned