Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee consider Army Gen. Paul J. LaCamera to lead U.N. Command, Combined Forces Command and U.S. Forces Korea, May 18, 2021.

Transcript

here into water. Good morning. The committee meets this morning to consider the nomination of General paul La camara to be the next Commander of US Forces. Career, United Nations Command and the Republic of Korea. United States Combined Forces Command General. I thank you for your continued service and willingness to lead in this very important position. I want to welcome your wife, Teresa, your brother Michael, your son Jack, your daughter Law Amanda, and your nephew Mitchell. We thank them for the continuous support of your service to our nation. Over many, many years. Their career spans nearly 36 years with distinguished service across multiple theaters and command experience at all levels. You have most recently served as the commanding general of U. S. Army pacific and experience that will serve you well in this new world, North Korea has vexed US administrations for decades, maintaining peace and stability on the korean peninsula must remain a priority for the Department of Defense. Though, solving the long term challenges posed by North Korea will require all elements of national power, According to the 2021 global threat assessment produced by the Director of National Intelligence. The intelligence community assesses that North korean leader, kim jong un to use nuclear weapons as the ultimate deterrent against foreign intervention and over time intends to gain international acceptance and respect as a nuclear power. The assessment also maintains that kim jong un probably does not view the current level of pressure on his regime as enough to require a fundamental change in its approach. The biden administration recently completed an interagency review of our nation’s policy towards North Korea. The ultimate goal of US policy remains the denuclearization of the korean peninsula, But senior administration officials have explained that we are not seeking a grand bargain or an all or nothing approach. Instead, the administration intends to pursue a calibrated, practical approach to diplomacy with the North, with the goal of eliminating the threat to the United States. This approach will require smart and firm engagement with the north Koreans, but more importantly, it requires coordination with our allies and partners in the region, none more so than South Korea and Japan. The biden administration has already invested significant time and attention to our relationships with both Japan and South Korea and an effort to foster greater trilateral cooperation and coordination on this issue and other issues of mutual concern. I would note that the president has already hosted Japanese Prime Minister Sugar last month and South korean President Moon set to visit later this week. China also has a role to play in addressing our mutual concerns about north Korea. So it must decide what role it wants to play. According to recent testimony by the Director of Defense Intelligence Agency, china will likely continue to balance international sanctions enforcement with its overall objective of maintaining stability in North Korea General a camera, I hope you’ll offer your views on the partnership between the U. S. Japan, South Korea and other regional partners in addressing North Korea’s destabilizing activity. And to what extent you believe, there are opportunities to more actively engaged with china on these issues. As you know, the one key factor that makes the United States military the greatest in the world is people, troops and their families are on the glove served with remarkable selflessness and those in Korea bear the burden of service far from home as heavily as any. This has been especially true during the past year as career was an early epicenter of the pandemic and it remained particularly isolated ever since leading our uniform personnel and their families on the peninsula, while ensuring that their needs are met will be a tremendous responsibility. Lastly, the highest priority of any military commander is ensuring the readiness of the forces under their command to perform their mission. I hope you’ll share your views and how U. S. Forces career can maintain readiness through training and exercises with the south korean counterparts while avoiding miscommunication or unintentional escalation in tensions with the North General. If confirmed, you will lead us forces career and incredibly consequent potential time. We thank you again for your continued willingness to serve and let me now recognize the ranking member center in whole. Thank you Mr Chairman. I first of all, generally the camera, we thank you for all your service and and I enjoyed meeting your family. I’m glad they’re here today. So they know what you’re going to be undergoing and the great job that you’re going to be doing since its release. This committee has used the 2018 National Defense Strategy and bipartisan India’s commission report this blue book as the blueprint for our defense work Since uh since 2018. I’ve been asking every senior defense official, both military and civilian whether the 2018 NDS is still accurate and relevant and important work and every one of them is confirmed that it provides a solid foundation and priorities to help them advance our national military interests. They told us that accurately reflects the strategic environment and if anything, the threats have gotten worse in a camera. I’ll be interested in your views. One area we see things getting worse fast as in Afghanistan. Just last week, a girl’s school in Kabul was bombed. Lives of our Afghan translators who helped protect our troops will be in much greater danger after our troops leave. This is in part because we abandoned the conditions based approach that congress has supported for the last decade. Instead. Unfortunately, the biden administration has adopted a calendar based approach trades real security for politics. I fear that we’re seeing only the beginning of an emerging humanitarian disaster in Afghanistan. You know, a camera I understand from our discussion in my office that Korea, we have another situation that can either be conditioned base or calendar base and that is the transfer of wartime operational control. Look forward to your views on that. Emerald, actually, no who is The new commander of in no pay calm as 30 April who The committee just recently that the United States Republican, the Republic of Korea alliance is ironclad and serves as a linchpin for peace and security in the north, in the korean peninsula. And I totally agree. As I have said last week on the floor of the Senate, strong military is the foundation of our alliances. In fact, strong military enables us to have strong alliances and as we see threats to our nation get worse. We need both, not one or the other. So I look forward to your testimony today and working with you in the future. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Thank you very much. Senator Inhofe. General locker mirror please your testimony. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Chairman read ranking member Imhof and distinguished members of the Senate Armed Service committee. I’m truly honored to appear before you today and thank you for the opportunity to testify and more importantly, have confirmed to continue my service leading America’s most precious resource. I want to thank President biden for nominating me to serve as the commander, United Nations Command, Combined Forces command in the United States forces Korea. Additionally to Secretary Austin General Milley for their confidence and recommended me for the opportunity to continue to serve our nation. There are too many people to thank for what brought me here today, but there are select view without their support. Not only would I not be here would not be worth it. I am joined here today by Theresa, my wife of over 35 years. She’s the mother of four wonderful Children and grandmother of two. An army brat U. S. Military Academy graduate and army veteran Theresa is the heart and soul of this operation. Our true north, my strength and the one exercising civilian control of the military. My son Jack, a Navy veteran, now pastor and his wife Amanda who recently became U. S. Citizen join me here today. Three daughters, Brand and her husband, john Katie and Fiance Brandon and Maggie are here in spirit and I have no doubt they will watch and provide feedback as required. I’m extremely proud of the adults that they’ve become representing our extended family and my sister’s tracing Caroline is my brother Michael and his son Mitchell. I’m grateful for their tremendous support over the many years, especially during combat deployments and our families. There are too many people and veterans from the world war One through Vietnam to our current fights to personally thank for their service and for their support and selfless service. But I would like to recognize my sister trace also a military academy graduate, A retired army officer and her late husband, major general bannister for their almost 60 years of total service in peace and in war. Most importantly, thanks to my parents, my mother, Loretta and my late father john whose love and support along with the values and discipline and still in me made me who I am. They were my first teachers of leadership. By example, final recognition goes to some of my personal staff here with us without their dedication and professionalism along with countless others through the years, I would not be here. It’s an honor to serve with them every day Today. The danger and complexity across the globe have only increased in department defense China’s are pacing threat. Having spent the last 19 months as commander of us aren’t Pacific. I’m aware of the challenges involved with competition and shaping the environment to prevent crisis from escalating into conflicts. I recognize the need to maintain readiness not just for conflict but for competition and to compete daily. Being ready to fight tonight means maintaining capability and creating time and space to enable the diplomatic process preserving options for leaders. I’m aware of the most sacred trust given to me to prepare our service members to fight and win On the most dangerous piece of ground the last 100 m. This remains a critical period in northeast Asia and Korea as we face persistent challenges with the development of nuclear and advanced missile systems, cyber capabilities, asymmetric and military technologies. The foundations for success is a strong and effective integrated deterrence posture that brings to bear the unique capabilities and capacity of the entire joint interagency and combined community. If confirmed, I intend to capitalize on the trust built with senior military leaders in the region while commanding us. Aren’t pacific, maintain the trust of sending states and my inter agency colleagues and most importantly build on the trust and bonds forged with national treasure over second decades with our korean allies. As my predecessors have done, I endorse the four long standing United Nations command, combined forces, command and United States Korea priorities sustaining and strengthening the alliance, maintaining the armistice, transforming the alliance and sustaining the force. These priorities remain relevant. But if confirmed as any incoming commander does, I will make adjustments based on new facts, changes in the environment, input and guidance from our leadership and Rock partners and my own observations to keep our alliance ironclad, I will keep this committee informed. Catchy catchy to we go together. The Rock US alliance remains the cornerstone of stability and security in northeast Asia and that partnership continues to grow through economic cooperation, mitigating threats to regional stability and fulfilling our commitments to allies and partners in the region. Finally, I would like to recognize General Abrams and his wife, Connie for not only their leadership on the korean peninsula but also their lifetime of dedicated service to our nation. I wish them well in their next chapter. I’m deeply honored for this opportunity to command one of the most vital regions of the planet. Thank you for considering my nomination and I look forward to any questions you may have. Thank you very much. General. As is customary, there was a series of questions which each nominee must respond to. Please respond to the questions as I asked them. Have you adhere to ethical laws and regulations governing conflict of interest? Yes. Chairman. I have. Have you assumed any duties to taking any actions that would appear to presume the outcome the confirmation process? No, I have not exercising our legislative and oversight responsibilities. Makes it important that this committee, its subcommittees and other appropriate committees of Congress received testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other information from the executive branch on a timely basis. Do you agree if confirmed to appear and testify before this committee? One requested? Yes. Chairman. I do. Do you agree when asked before this committee to give your personal views even if your views differ from the administration? Yes. Chairman. I do. Do you agree to provide records, documents and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested by this committee, its subcommittees or other appropriate committees of Congress and to consult with the requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing such records? Yes. Chairman. I do. Will you ensure that your staff complies with deadlines established by this committee for the reduction of reports, records and other information including timely reporting to hearing questions for the record? Yes. Chairman. I will. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers in response to congressional requests? Yes. Chairman. I will. Will those witnesses and brief is to be protected from Reprisal for their testimony or briefings. Yes, they will. Thank you very much. Well, general uh eyes well say I’ve had the privilege of knowing you since you lieutenant colonel commanding a battalion and combat. And you’ve had an impressive career, selfless dedication to the country and extremely uh aggressive attitude of protecting the soldiers that serve underneath you. And I compliment you for both of those activities. Uh your new assignment and career is going to be a significant challenge. I think you recognize that and I believe you’re well prepared forward. One of the things that’s been happening over the last several years because of political dynamics has been the curtailing of training, particularly operational training with troops in the field in your opinion. How should we balance the need to maintain readiness or our forces, which I assume includes large scale exercises with our efforts to engage North Korea and you believe we’re striking the right balance chairman, I believe. I know General Abrams uses size, scope, volume and timing right now. I’ll take a look at that. Um in my current position, in a previous positions I’ve used, you know, live virtual and constructive, I think, um as you know, the trade spaces, we give up certain things, turning those dials on live virtual and constructive training to make sure that we can train at the right levels to make sure that, you know, from the squad leader on up to to the general officers understand what they can do. So if we can’t do it live, that’s obviously the gold standard. We we will work. I will continue to work if confirmed to do it virtual and constructive to make sure that we’re meeting the standards and ready to fight tonight. Uh Are there are limitations in terms of access to training ranges and airspace? Uh I mean your view right now? Yes. Mr Chairman. Um currently right now, in my current position, we are bringing Apache pilots off the peninsula to train back in the United States based on limitations with training training ranges. Uh and are you prepared to open up that issue again with your South korean counterparts and see if we can minimize that? Yes. Mr Chairman. I I every time I meet with the Rock content and in Honolulu and I just recently met with the the chief of the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of the Rock Military and we had this discussion. Thank you. In March, the United States and South Korea agreed to a new six year special measures agreement that increases South Korea’s contribution to the course of stationing U. S. Forces in the country approximately 14% and negation negotiations rather over this agreement, as you know, were significant irritant over the last several years. Do you support the new special measures agreement? I do mr Chairman, waiting on the ratification by the Koreans. Are there ways outside of the social measures agreement that South Korea provides support to U. S. Forces in the country? Again, my perception of some of the debate was it was just reduced. Simple too. You know, you’ve got to pay us money and not other contributions that the South Koreans may. Can you cite some of those contributions? I asked Mr Chairman um The General Abrams has moved, his headquarters are in the process of moving his headquarters down to camp humphreys, the construction of the housing um and the buildings that are housing our soldiers, the barracks headquarters etcetera were built um you know, by the Republic of Korea, That’s one example. And there are others I presume to. Yes, there are. Yeah, just, uh, final question is just a brief view of the security situation on the peninsula. All right, right. Mr Chairman. I mean, it’s it appears quiet given all the other things that are going on. But I have no doubt that the adversaries to the north or, you know, he has, he’s trying to preserve his, you know, his country and he’s trying to preserve his legacy. So, I think General Abrams, and if confirmed, one of the things I’ll have to monitor is all the his combat capabilities, both conventional nuclear and unconventional that pose a threat to our mission. Thank you very much. Again, thank you for your distinguished service and thank you to your family for being with you every moment. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr Chairman. The I mentioned in my opening statement, the The NFS and I’m going to quote now, keeping in mind that this was actually printed in print when in 2018, uh, quote, North Korea seeks to guarantee regime survival and increased leverage by seeking a picture of nuclear, biological, chemical, conventional and non conventional weapons and a growing ballistic missile capability to gain who cursive influence over South Korea, Japan and the United States. Now, that was In 2018 when asked if the NDS accurately assesses the current strategic environment in the indo pak calm the new commander, Admiral broccolino, said, quote The 2018 NFS provides a candid assessment of the strategic environment and I take that as a yes general. Like a camera. Do you agree That the 2018 India’s accurately assesses the environment with North Korea and sets the right priorities for our national security? Yes, Senator I do. However, as you know, there’s other things that happen um in other combatant commands and if confirmed my responsibility to make sure that as things happen in resources or modified um that I’ll have to identify the risk and have that conversation with my boss on on where that risk is and who’s gonna buy it. Our chairman brought up the idea about the concern that I’ve had all the time about the training limitations. Uh and you answer the question, but is that which way is that trend line going? Are we going to be able to handle those limitations that are quite obvious now? Yes, Senator. We currently have, but as time goes on, um you know, I will if confirmed, continue to monitor to make sure that we stay within the Band of Excellence of readiness and then have candid conversations with my rock counterparts on making sure that we can train. My concern isn’t just for U. S. Forces. If we’re having challenges. One of the things if confirmed I’ll be looking into is what how does it impact others ability to train and and where does that put the mission at risk? Yeah that’s that’s been our concern. I had one last question. The South korean president Moon wants to accelerate the transfer of wartime operational control to a by national command led by a South korean general with a U. S. Deputy. The current arrangement is that the in the event of war south Korea soldiers would be under the BI national command led by the U. S. General by a US general in your opinion should transfer of wartime operational to a South korean lead command, be conditioned base or calendar base and why Senator the conditions based up con transfer should remain. It’s bilaterally agreed upon and I believe that it should remain as a conditions based approach and we need to be prepared to respond the agreement. My assumption is that as they came to this bilateral agreement they analyzed identified the risk and this was the best way to to reduce that risk and I support it. Well I think we most of us support the condition base and somebody that’s worked in the past. Thank you. Mr. Chairman thank you senator in off now I’d like to recognize via webex. Senator Gillibrand excuse me via webex and a kurono. Thank you. Mr. Chairman thank you general for your service as commander of U. S. Army pacific you’ve been doing a good job there and I expect that your confirmation will enable you to do a good job in your new position as a part of my responsibility with all the committees that I sit on. I asked the following two initial questions which I will ask of of you since you became a legal adult. Have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? No senator would not. Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this plan of conduct? No Senator. I have not. General. The 2019 Missile Defense Review identified the homeland Defense radar Hawaii HDR H. As a requirement for deterring and discriminating against inbound missile threats from an increasingly capable North Korea. Congress appropriated 133 million for fiscal year 2 2021 to keep its development on track. General, do you consider H E R H. As apart As a part of the region’s layered missile defense system to protect Hawaii in the lower 48 from long range missiles from Korea. Especially in light of North Korea recently warning of an impending and I quote prices beyond control. I guess senator I do. I believe that it’s part of A multi Ashkelon many capabilities approach to defending not only Korea, I mean not only um Hawaii but the lower 48 in Alaska. Thank you. In a recent report, a group of experts opine that US rok alliance continues to serve as an essential tool for pursuing mutual interest in Northeast Asia and beyond. This was echoed in a statement made by Secretary of State Lincoln in a speech at the U. S. Embassy in the republic of Korea, in which he said, we must weave together broader coalitions of allies and partners because the more countries with complementary strengths and capacities that can unite to achieve shared goals the better and there is clear benefit too strong alliances in the region. And it will be important to continue to build on the existing relationships as we as well as develop new ones. And I know that you stated that you wanted to make sure that we create the space for diplomacy, diplomacy. I I completely agree with you. I am interested in how you will incorporate initiatives to bring together allies in the region to achieve shared goals specifically if confirmed. How would you continue to develop relationships in the region to build greater collaborations between US forces and our allies? Yes, Senator. Thank you. Uh as stated in my opening statement, um you know, I’ve been able to build trust with our partners and allies um in the region as the US aren’t pacific Commander and I will continue to to use that trust built. Um and in wearing one of my hats as the U. N. Commander. I believe there’s opportunities there. I’ve had engagements both bilateral with the Republic of Korea. And then just recently I know General Milley had a face this first face to face meeting with both the Japanese Tchad and the Republic of korean Tchad and so using our partners allies in the region. I will look for those opportunities um and work with Indo pak um going forward. Well especially I think we need to do what we can to improve the Japan RK relationship because there are historical reasons why this relationship between those two countries, two important allies for us. It’s not what I hope it could be. But if confirmed, do you see a role that you could play in strengthening the trilateral? That would be Japan South Korea us and the Japan South Korea relationship. And what would you do specifically to foster that communication and relationship between the south Korea and Japan Senator? I would build, I would build on the things that have already done. We’ve had, I’ve already had engagements in this, in my current position uh, to talk multi domain operations and cross domain operations with the Koreans and with the japanese. And I would seek other opportunities going forward, whether in theater or back in the continental United States. Those multilateral training opportunities at our great training ranges that we have in the US general. Generally, I would say that the mil to mil relationship among the trilateral countries, that’s um, that is a uh, maybe that the word is not easier, but that relationship is stronger than the diplomatic one. So would you be working closely with Secretary Blinken to have more of a whole of government approach to fostering better relations between the south Koreans and the japanese? Yes. Senator. My experience as uh the chief officer. Security cooperation is part of a country team. I look forward to working with the charge a and what my other inter agency colleagues to continue to move forward over. Mr Chairman. I think my time is up. Not sure is it? Yes, ma’am. Thank you very much. Thank you. Senator Hirono. Now I’d like to recognize via webex. Senator fisher. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Okay 10 o’clock so let me show you how to do this for good. So we’ll be false. Senator. Thank you. General. Could you talk about the importance of our nuclear deterrence commitments to the U. S. Rock alliance and the value of bomber over flight missions in terms of deterring adversaries and also reassuring our allies. Oh yes, Senator. The bomber over flight missions are part of the nuclear triad. And I think it’s one way that uh using all three and and not just the nuclear but the conventional deterrence. That’s extremely important to demonstrate our commitment to the alliance on the peninsula. And what do our allies think of that? Have you had conversations with him? I have not, Senator. I have not specifically in my current position had any conversations discussing nuclear deterrence with our partners and allies. Thank you. In recent years we’ve seen significant additional investment and that’s been made to improve our missile defenses on the peninsula and address shortfalls in municipal munitions and S. R. What is your assessment of progress that’s been made? And are there other capability gaps that concern you at this point, Senator I know that General Abrams focuses a lot on force protection. I think early warning systems are extremely important. Um C four I SRT um is extremely important on the early warning and then the focusing on the training and readiness. Um If confirmed, I look forward to getting over there. I have a good understanding of the army position. Uh What I lack is the true visibility on the remaining part of the joint force from what you know at this point. Do you think that there is sufficient is are on the peninsula? Uh Yes, Senator I do. I’d like to get some, get some of your impressions on the 1251 report. Um The report’s primary purpose is to enhance capability is necessary to deter china and I assume many of its investments would also enhance deterrence on the korean peninsula. Could you discuss the inter relationships there and what elements you see as having particular application to improving deterrence towards north Korea? Yes, Senator, I I think oversimplification of china’s role on the peninsula and in the region um may get us in trouble. I think they play a role in both the north and the south. China uh uses all the elements of national power, diplomatic information, military, economic. Um They’ve used it um successfully putting pressure on our on Iraq allies. Um and I think based on my previous comment of working with my inter agency colleagues, it’s extremely important for me to understand the levers that they’re pulling because I don’t think it’s necessarily going to be a military that that will have impact on the security situation. And my last question would be that I know that U. S. Forces Korea has established some unique partnerships with industry and academia and innovation hubs within the D. O. D. Enterprise such as D. I U. X. And DARPA. What what are your views on the tools that are available to commanders to develop and field these innovative solutions to emergent problems within the A. O. R. And do you see these partnerships continuing to play a significant role? I guess, senator, I think uh we also need to use all elements of national power and I will operate within the ethics rules to ensure that we maintain those conversations we’re having. Uh we’re thinking about things differently and we’re looking at multiple ways to confront the threats uh on the peninsula. Thank you. General. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Fisher. Now let me recognize by a Webex. Senator Gillibrand, I was really glad to, yeah, I was really glad to see your dedication to diplomacy on the korean on the korean peninsula. Uh and we all agree it is the route we should be pursuing for a safer korean peninsula and pacific region. Of course, as often the case with diplomacy, the devil’s in the details. Um, do you have a position on whether we should be pursuing a large scale comprehensive deal with North Korea or if we should seek incremental agreements that lead us towards denuclearization senator? I believe uh, that that’s really between the secretary of state and I will, if asked, I will provide my best military advice to the Secretary of defense and the end up a com commander as we go as we go forward. But you don’t have any advice or guidance right now. Not at this time. No sooner. So it’s been a few years since the Sony hack and North Korea’s ransom of Sony’s intellectual property? Your testimony indicates North Korea should still be considered a significant cyber threat. In the last few months, we’ve seen attacks that have made Sony’s hack pale in comparison. Your written testimony indicates that North Korea continues to be a significant cyber threat. Do you believe you will have adequate cyber resources to counter these threats? And if not, do I have your commitment to let congress know what resources are lacking and how we can fix it? S Senator, part of my preparation for testimony, I believe we have what we need. But if confirmed, I look forward to getting on the ground and identifying what those issues are. And yes, I will I will provide this committee. The information. Um unfortunately President Trump’s negotiations were unsuccessful after some encouraging signs in 2018, one of the chips he gave up was our training exercises with rok troops since 2018 are large scale theater exercises have been held virtually due to the pandemic. Those exercises were virtual again this year. However, President biden has indicated that next year’s exercise maybe in person. Do you have any position on the importance of these exercises generally? And whether or not they should be virtually or in person. You are okay. Conscription forces are usually for a term of less than two years. Does this set up a dynamic? We’re missing everyone. Every even one year’s worth of exercises set back our readiness. And if not should we view this as a potential option for cost savings. Senator. I you know we did I know the general Abrams and team and as part of U. S. Army pacific we did participate and uh C. C. P. T. Um If confirmed one if confirmed I will get the opportunity uh potentially to exercise that. And that will give me a good understanding of just where uh where they are in the process. As it come to your comment on the conscription in the turnover at the lower level. Um I look if confirmed, I look forward to getting on the ground and just seeing what their true true capabilities are. We have turnover in our formation, focusing on the basics at our tactical level is extremely important. So I think it’s really a multiple um layered question when you talk tactics tactical level and operational level which will be the focus um at the general officers staff level. But I look forward to seeing where they sit when it comes at the tactical level. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. Senator Gillibrand. Now let me recognize via webex. Senator rounds. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Uh General first of all, thank you for your many years of service to our country and for agreeing to continue that services Commander USFK Uh huh. General as we discussed during our call last week, an issue that concerns me is the recent talk, a lot of potential reversal of us landmine policy. I’m curious about how you see this issue and would appreciate your discussing the precautions. Our field commanders take our usage of self destruct and self deactivate technology and how a change in policy would impact our deterrence efforts and our ability to win on the battlefield in Korea. Thanks senator for the conversation the other day. The landmines I mean is I don’t know the exact number but I know that the demilitarized zone is protected by landmines and as we discussed in our phone conversation, landmines without you know, observation and coordinated with some kind of Overwatch. Um you know, does create hazards. Uh it will allow the enemy to penetrate if they could breach through it. But also um as discussed, it it provides an opportunity. Um It puts the local civilian population at risk. Um It’s a very integrated defense right now. Um If confirmed a change in policy would create risks that I would have to come back and identify how we would mitigate it in other ways. Thank you. Sure. And also like you to talk to me about logistics, the well the distance involved in rearming and in maintaining and the policies possibility that if the worst happens in Korea you may be in competition for resources with another theatre of operations. You talked a little bit about the seriousness of this and uh what the different uh possibilities are that we may very well faced with regard to the logistical challenges. Yes senator in my current position as the commander us aren’t pacific, one of my responsibilities is to set the theater. We spent a lot of time and effort talking about sustainment but I would argue that it’s not just set the theater when it comes to sustainment and medical as a subset of that. But the other war fighting functions of intelligence, uh fires et cetera going forward. So I have a very good uh working knowledge of what that is. My eighth um theater support commander um has uh made great inroads in that in that piece. I do recognize there’ll be competition with others. Uh but I also recognize that there is capability not just on the peninsula but in Asia. And we have to look at other ways of how we would get our resupplies, our logistics. Thank you. Mr. Thank you. Mr Chairman, I’m pretty close to my time. I’ll go back at this time. Thank you. Thank you very much centered around now. Let me recognize Senator King. Please thank you. Mr Chair ranking member Inhofe in general. Look forward to working with you. I’ve been on the committee for nine years and discussions about Korea. Kind of have a groundhog day um, sensibility about them. We see the cycles of provocation by North Korea. We get engaged. The provocations kind of a bait. And then it seems like if we turn our attention elsewhere, almost as if to get our attention. Provocations ratchet back up. And I have been thinking about President Moon’s visit. President Biden and just thinking about would there be a way to kind of break out of the coldest act that we’re in? So let me throw an unusual idea on the table that might have been considered. But then I want to ask your military opinion about the military dimensions of it. The armistice to end the Korean War was entered into in July of 1953 between China, the US North Korea. South Korea did not sign the armistice. It was a cessation of hostilities and the idea was that there would then be the negotiation of a peace treaty that’s never happened. So We are nearly 70 years past the armistice in a ceasefire but without a peace treaty. Um North Korea uses that. That there’s never been a peace deal. And South Korea didn’t sign the armistice and there’s troops amassed on our border. They use that to sort of create a mythology in North Korea about the need to be overly militarized because the work could start again any minute. There’s not a peace deal. South Korea didn’t even sign the armistice. What if the U. S. And South Korea where to just declare we are at we are not at war with North Korea. We have no desire to be involved in hostilities with North Korea. We have no desire to to get any of North Korea’s territory are only desire is to live in peace with North Korea. The U. S. Presence in South Korea is as a valued security partner to help South Korea deal with whatever security challenges it faces. From a military standpoint, a declaration of that kind would not limit the U. S. Ability to carry out the mission that it’s currently carrying out in South Korea. Would it as the U. S. Forces command? Um I don’t believe it would Senator. And as far as you know, from a military standpoint, the U. S. Has no desire to be engaged in hostilities with North Korea. Doesn’t no senator. And from a military standpoint we have no desire to annex or take North korean property or or land do we? My understanding senator is that that is not our policy. I think these things have what you stated are elements of US policy for a very long time. We don’t want to be in hostilities. We don’t have evil designs too. You know, help anyone ourselves or anyone else take over north korean territory. Um, The notion that were 70 years into a ceasefire without a peace deal. The peace negotiations with North Korea is very complicated as we know. But why can’t we just put South Korea declare we’re no longer at war with North Korea? We have no hostile intent. We only want to live peacefully with all of our neighbors. It would seem if we would do that, we might reverse some of the polarities that North Korea uses to gin up this notion that work and start again any second. They would still not like us presence in South Korea. We would still want to get them to denuclearize, but we would be negotiating not as adversaries, you know, at the brink of war, but we would be negotiating as sovereign nations trying to solve problems. And I guess I’m just I’m just wondering whether there’s something that can be done that the U. S. And South Korea could do together without playing Mother May I with North Korea. Is there something we could do together that would take away the north korean narrative of a ceasefire, but no peace deal and a war that could begin any minute. Um, and I I recognize from your answer to Senator Gillibrand that some of these are in the diplomacy space, not in the military space, but I think your testimony on the military dimensions of it are accurate. We don’t have any desire to be an aggression with North Korea. We don’t have a desire on there territory. We would we would obviously want there to be peace on the peninsula. I hope that maybe the president and President biden, President Moon might contemplate whether a change in diplomatic approach such as that could um break a logjam that has been um persistent for nearly seven decades. And I thank you for your service your testimony today and I yield back Mr. Chair thank you. Senator Kaine. Uh let me recognize in a cotton via webex please thank you. Mr. Chairman General thank you for your service. Congratulations on your nomination of this important post earlier this year. You said on a panel and I quote, our daily focus is on competition. We’ve got to be ready to respond in crisis and we’ve got to be prepared to win in conflict. Um, I wanna thank you for those comments. It’s increasingly rare that we hear senior military leaders talk simply about winning in combat. So I want to commend you for those comments and keeping your focus on the military’s primary mission which is fighting and winning our nation’s wars. Um, and I want to start with a question about our number one threat and competitor china. Um can you please explain again to the committee how you believe the chinese role uh, or how the chinese view the role that north Korea plays and U. S. China relations. Yes, senator and thanks thanks for the time last week. I think north Korea is another arrow in the quiver or another lever um in their diplomatic information, military economic levers that they that they would pull. I think it’s a, what I don’t have and and maybe in a different setting um can talk about is, you know, just, you know, what the things that they’re doing to to maintain pressure or to to pull uh to get KJ you to do things for them? What do you think is a greater irritant to the Chinese Communist Party? The presence of nuclear weapons in north Korea or the presence of american troops in South Korea? Senator, I I really can’t answer for the chinese on on what they think is a is a greater irritant. I think uh I think both of them give the Chinese Communist Party reason to pause. Um and I do know that the chinese do not want them to have nuclear weapons. I also know that they don’t want us in their region. I want to turn now to the operational plans on the peninsula. What’s your view of the role that joint long range precision fires play to support the plan on the korean peninsula? And how important is it that our military continue to modernize and put these forces uh with next generation combat arms? Yes. Senator. The long range precision fires uh you know, gives us not just at the tactical level but at the operational level. Um it gives us the ability to do operational maneuver and again it gives us another all weather um arrow in the quiver that we have uh to be able to facilitate uh maneuver at various levels. Thank you. Um And then finally what’s your assessment of the status of the efforts to transform transfer operational control to the republic of Korea? Uh can command combined forces. Yes. Senator. I know that General Abrams is working with of the Rock military on a day to day basis to assist them in acquiring the capabilities and to meet the bilateral agreement if confirmed. Um I recognize that one of the missions are one of the jobs I’ll have will be to continue to assist them and moving forward so that we can achieve this. Do you think we need uh see large scale joint training exercises return to the peninsula to be best prepared for the transition? Yes. Senator um training and readiness is extremely important and um live training is a lot better than the virtual and the constructive. Um but I recognize that that in negotiations or that that that it is uh a potential bargaining ship going going forward and and my job will be to identify that risk and then figure out a way to reduce it. Thank you General. Thank you Senator Cotton. Now let me recognize Senator King. Thank you very much. General. Thanks for being with us today. I want to just emphasize a point that Senator Hirono made and I know you’re not in the diplomatic business, but in many ways you are um helping to foster the relationship between Japan and South Korea I think is an important part of anybody’s job that has a responsibility in in in in Korea. Uh that relationship seems to be one step forward and two steps back in recent years and I hope that that’s something that you will work with your State Department counterparts and your military counterparts in both countries because I think that’s a very important part of our strategic position and deterrent in the region. Do you agree? Hi. Yes. Senator. I do. I hope that that’s something that you can continue. Uh The other point that I think is important is that we always talk about north Korea in terms of nuclear weapons. That’s the popular discussion here in the US and by popular I don’t mean approved of. I mean, common in the press. I was surprised to some extent shocked driving from Seoul to the DMZ, how close it is. And one of the concerns is that it would not take nuclear weapons or even missiles to inflict enormous damage on soul from the north korean border. And I understand there are artillery batteries that are poised to do just that. Talk to me about the conventional threat, particularly to the city of Seoul. That I think we should we should realize that this isn’t only A nuclear issue, but there are some 25 or 30 million people at risk from conventional attack that could be triggered at a moment’s notice. Yes, senator and I’m very well aware of that threat. Um as a major, I was stationed along the demilitarized zone within mortar range and artillery range and it was something that that one said, it kept me up at night. But uh what was a concern and as you stated, the conventional threat and their ability to put many rounds in the air and create um panic just in the conventional side is concerning. And as you stated, it appears that soul is growing to the north even closer. Thank you. One of the things that concerns me, particularly in a place like uh south Korea or the south china sea or Taiwan or Ukraine is the risk of accidental war of conflict which escalates out of control in a hurry. one way to try to ameliorate that risk is of connections and communication links between potential adversaries. Do we have mil to mil contacts with the north Koreans in order to be able to discuss something which may be an accident and unintended low level conflict so that it doesn’t of spin out of control. Senator, I’m not aware of the exact reduction. I do know that the joint security area at Panmunjom is, is one way of communicating, but I’m not fully aware of all the capabilities of the communication links. I would hope that that would be something you could look into. And of course, talk to the State Department because if you look back through history, wars often start by accident. The guns of august uh, nobody thought that a single gunshot in Sarajevo was going to plunge the world into the conflict that it did in World War. So one way, as I say, to ameliorate or mitigate that is having a pre existing, uh, contacts, particularly on the mil to mil level where you can say, hey, that was not an intentional incursion or that incident was a rogue individual. I hope that that’s something you might consider because you are going to one of the world’s tinderboxes. Yes, Senator, I will. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman Senator King. Now let me recognize via Webex. Senator Tillis. Thank you. Mr. Chairman General, thank you for being here. I’ve been in the Senate for 6.5 years now and and virtually every Senate Armed Services hearing, uh, we’ve had china come up and about 6.5 years ago. Um, we were worried about their quantity, countering our quality and now we see that they’re still moving on quantity, but they’re improving on quality. So, um, with that erosion are the narrowing of the advantage that the United States has. What are the things that you’re most concerned with, particularly as it relates to maybe a reduction in defense spending and and this and possibly another budget cycle. Senator. I would, um, I think we have to think about, I think we have to think about things differently. Um You know we want to to your quality and quantity comment, you know we want to go after the arrow. Um How about we kill the archer? Um and how do we do that? There’s I think the multi domain task force that we’re currently experimenting with big multi domain operations gets at that. Um And it’s about uh as we look at the joint warfighting concept and other things. It’s one of the things that we need to do to create multiple dilemmas for our adversaries. Uh something else I wanted to touch on. I assume you’ve you’ve read maybe even contributed to the 1251 report that Admiral Davidson submitted in his testimony. Uh Just a few weeks back, he he cited a couple of budget priorities. The Guam defense system ages the shore site, the mission partner environment, which is a classified I. T. System to communicate security securely with partners and allies and upgrades to connect and improve our training ranges. Do you share his concerns that these are priorities that at least at the time of that hearing do not look like they’re going to receive the funding needed? I guess. Senator I do. What are the consequences of letting that slide to the right by 246 years Senator. It creates vulnerabilities and risk not just to the military formation um you know but the U. S. Citizens and in our interest. And uh we have to identify other ways to to reduce that risk. Another question that really comes back from my personnel subcommittee hearing we had about a week ago. The vaccination rate among uh really all levels in the military seems to be relatively low with the supply there and limited takers. Do you view that as a potential readiness threat? And what do you think that we need to do to get more people to actually be best prepared to take the fire? Go to a fight if we have to have one. Well senator given the status of of the vaccine, it’s a choice that our soldiers have to make. I think it’s incumbent upon commanders and leaders at all levels to talk to our soldiers about. This is just another personal protective measure that they can take. Um, going forward. We have dealt with non battle injuries since I think the first battle we ever fought. Um, and I think Covid is just another one of those things that we have to identify and and continue to, to look at ways to protect our formations. I think with the numbers relatively low. It is uh to me it’s like so much other training to have the best prepared. I view it as a threat. Now, hopefully it’s going to get a little bit better. But uh I think it’s important that every level from the top down communicate the importance of taking this threat off the table. Last thing is just what do we need to continue to do to hold on and improve relationships between South Korea and Japan? What sort of things that we need to do differently? Are we moving okay. Current course and speed are what more do we need to do to redouble our efforts to make sure that that relationship between those two allies is as strong as it can be in a very important part of the world. Yes, Senator, I we need to continue to look for um multilateral um or trilateral training operations to bring them together and then look uh I had the meetings that morning with the Rock chairman and then the Japanese chairman. But before I met with the Japanese chairman in the afternoon, he had met with the bilaterally with the Rocks. And I think we need to look at ways to continue to bring them together militarily. General. Thank you for your service. I look forward to supporting your confirmation. Thank you Mr Chair. Thank you. Senator Tillis let me recognize via webex Senator Rosen. Well, thank you. Chairman read ranking member Inhofe for holding this hearing and I’d really like to thank General La Gomera for his lifetime of service and for testifying here today. So general while of course a tremendous amount of your focus in this role will be in combating potential north korean aggression, china cast a large shadow on the korean peninsula as it does throughout the indo pacific and increasingly around the globe. So what issues did china’s belt and road initiative expanding, Beijing sphere of influence throughout the region beyond create and retaining and gaining allies in the indo pacific that are critical to the U. S. Forces korean mission and the broader needs of our military in East and South Asia. Yes. Senator, I think we need to understand um the levers that the leverage that they have um on the korean peninsula and quite frankly with not just um are rock allies but our other partners and allies in the region um where they can put pressure on partners and allies. Um as we continue to try to train west of the international date line well, um you know, you you talk about our partners and of course with the event of the chinese expansion towards the korean peninsula uh in the same vein as they’re moving in the south china sea with Taiwan, How would you have confirmed respond or advise the south korean defense apparatus to respond to any possible expansions? Senator, my if confirmed, the best military advice I would give them is to make sure that they understand the risk that it provides to the security of their own country as they work um as the chinese attempt to provide influence and and or reduce the influence that that the United States has. And I think it’s our my job to to demonstrate that our way of life and our our alliance, it remains ironclad and that we remain the cornerstone and the example quite frankly for other alliances. I appreciate that. And so could you speak broadly about any possible plans? You might have an unlimited a chinese defense and economic encroachment on the korean peninsula uh, Senator. When it comes on the economic side, I’ll continue to uh, you know, I will consult with my um State Department colleagues um on what those diplomatic and quite frankly, the economic arms are that they can use on the military side. You know, we have an alliance, uh, the three commands that I’ve been nominated for has really as one mission which is to defend the Republic of Korea. And my focus will be to work with uh with the Rock military to ensure that we can defend them against any adversary. Thank you. I want to talk about an adversary that may be hard to detect but has great uh tremendous impact and often devastating impact. And those are our threats of cyber threats, cyber ransomware, cyber attacks, uh, blocking service, all of the kinds of things that we can imagine. And we’ve seen with solar winds and the recent colonial pipeline attacks, they’ve awakened all of us to just how vulnerable our systems are. And really the cyber aggression that we’re beginning to see or continuing to see from abroad. It’s one of the reasons I’m working with Senator Blackburn to invest more in our cyber resources, including potentially creating new civilian cyber reserve for D. O. D. And D. H. S A V A bipartisan legislation we introduced last month. And so can you talk a little bit about your cyber posture and what you might do to prove really prevent uh, and uh, really do that threat hunting. We need to stop any provocative attacks on our systems. Senator I will I will continue to work with cyber com. Um, and if confirmed in position that I’m going to um on truly understanding what that what that threat is. And I think the recent activities that have occurred uh should give all of us pause on what that what those levers are and the damage that it can do. Um, and really in the non kinetic space. Um, and it’s not just the disruption. I think it’s also the concern is ensuring that we have information assurance on the information being passed is in fact accurate and true and has not been modified. Thank you. I couldn’t agree more. Uh Mr Chairman, my time is up. Thank you. Thank you very much. Senator Rosen. Now let me recognize the orange please. Yeah, thank you Mr Chair in general, the camera. It is great to see you again and thank you for your service to our nation and that of Teresa’s and your families as well. Thank you for being here. It’s not lost on me. Certainly if those that are watching, if they could see the right sleeve of your uniform, the years of service that that represents with you serving away from your family in difficult circumstances and all of us want to make sure that we are recognizing that sacrifice and the sacrifice of your family. So thank you um through your experience and record of success, many years of success, you are superbly qualified and the right selection to lead the United States forces Korea into the future. And I have just a few questions and I’m gonna go back and reflect on what Senator Hirono was leading into as well. Um in the strategic competition of our current security environment, the korean peninsula is part of a larger regional contest that encompasses all elements of national power and in your advanced policy questions, You discuss the various relationships that exist in the region and specifically the relationship between South Korea and Japan. This is what Senator Hirono was discussing earlier. What recommendations would you provide on how to move forward with these relationships? If you could explain that a little bit more in detail? I asked senator and thank you for recognizing my family, the uh the rock, uh you know what the military relationship is extremely important. We rely um if confirmed or in my current position now is us, sorry, pacific commander. Um you know, I I talked to U. S. Forces command Korea and uh U. S. Army Japan to make sure that you know, we have the capabilities and to uh two to support General Abrams and I think we need to look at other opportunities. We have the Security Force assistance Brigade that we can send to the different locations to share uh tactics techniques and procedures. We have the training national Training centers that we can we can bring them to. We are developing an arctic strategy. I think both of them have cold weather environments and high altitude that I think, you know, we could we could leverage back back inside us aren’t pacific or even back in the continental United States. And I think that is important. Um we we look to reassure our allies and deter those competitors. Um so employing our our military and demonstrating through these actions again is a reassurance. Um do you believe that through those actions um involving our allies, other nations, is there a way that we can project to them that we are the partner of choice in the region and who would the other partner of choice being? Why is it important they continue to come to us yes soon. All right, well, I think when you look at it, our adversaries, um, whether it’s china Russia, north Korea, Iran, the violent extremist organizations, you know, they’re looking to change the international rules based order that, quite frankly, that we’ve established, um, and helped enforce with both the japanese and the republic Korea and other other allies and partners in the region. And I think it’s what we need to continue to demonstrate is that our, the way we do business is the right thing, and we need to continue to highlight how our adversaries are not operating in those countries best interest. And certainly with with china as being one of those large regional competitors. Oftentimes, we find that they’re offering a bunch of goods, but then when the, the allies get the bill of sale, there’s a lot of strings attached to what they’re selling. So, um, I really appreciate it. I know that my time is running out. You did mention the S. Fab. Um The security forces assistance Brigade. Can you talk a little bit more about just very briefly their role in the region and how they’ve been able to close some of the gaps that we have had. Uh Yes Senator the in in this region there interoperability has really been not not so much training because they are the countries we work with, they’re the experts in this region in the environment and so we’re really learning from them but it’s the interoperability and it’s the communication piece that allows us to uh to be effective in a fight. Yeah thank you. And my time has expired. Thank you. Mr. Chair thank you. Again General appreciate it. Thank you. Senator ernst uh Senator Kelly. Thank you. Mr. Chairman General. Ah It’s now been over two years since the U. S. And the Rock forces have engaged in a large scale joint field exercise. Um I participated in the joint exercise that was formerly called Teen Spirit. Been 30 years. So when I was serving in the navy in the Western pacific and I view these exercises where our forces have the opportunity to work side by side and evaluate our combined skills as a key measure of our readiness for any conflict. What we learned from these exercises should inform the structure of our continued security partnership with South Korea. In your view, do current large scale exercises, support shared security goals including the improved interoperability of us and South korean forces. And if confirmed, would you advocate for the resumption of these joint exercises? Yes. Senator. Um They’re extremely important to build to build readiness. They’re also extremely important to allow that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, guardians, coast Guardsmen get an opportunity to work with our Iraqi allies and see just how good that they are. And so at the very low level of tactical level, it’s an opportunity for them to build that trust between each other and then at the senior level, um, with turnover and everything else, it’s an opportunity for us to exercise and uh, and to learn and continue to burn, build on, on lessons learnt. Do you see any other opportunities to further strengthen our relationship? Interoperability relationship in order to keep pace with any emerging threats? Yes, Senator. I mean, in my current position, we’re going to bring rock forces to the National Training Center, um, and so at a much lower level, we can build that interoperability and and see it at a small scale. And then, you know, what does it look like at the larger scale. But I think we need to continue to look for those opportunities. Um whether it’s a table top exercise or a simulation. Um But it’s that again, building trust between service members is extremely important. Yeah, it’s been it was invaluable at the time. I remember, you know, doing a simulated cast mission on the korean peninsula with the U. S. Ground fac. And a rock Forces as well. And there is, you don’t want to be doing that for the first time when it’s real. You know, that’s always been clear to me. Um you know, on another subject, general, when we spoke last week, you mentioned the asymmetric threat posed by the North korean special operations forces, which adds a complexity to an already unpredictable actor. North Korea and the North korean Special Ops forces, they’ve got a pretty large force. And as someone who’s commanded Special Ops Forces yourself, can you speak to the unique threat that North Korea’s sizable special Operations forces poses in the unfortunate scenario that we enter into a conflict on the peninsula? Yes, Senator. I first of all, I believe that all warfare’s asymmetric. I’m not looking for a fair fight and I’m fairly certain my adversaries or not. Um I think my experience um in Special Operations gives me a unique insight into what those threats are and how we could defend against him. And more importantly, how could we uh take offensive up, you know, action against them to uh to deter or to to prevent them from being able to do a harm, any sense for how capable, how well trained they are. Uh At this time I I do not um I do think that they view their people a little bit different as far as uh think of it as a fire and forget weapon system. Um You know whereas we plan for withdrawal off a target on a raid. I’m fairly certain that they’re not they’re not prepared to bring them back. Well thank you General. I look forward to uh having the opportunity to vote on your confirmation. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Senator kelly. Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Mr Chairman thank you General for your service and your family Of what they go through being a football coach 40 years. Never at home. It’s hard to miss practices and all those things that go on. But I can’t imagine with the travel that you’ve had over your lifetime. So again thanks for your servicing. Congratulations on your re appointment. North Korea tested their first nuclear weapon in 2006 Uh first intercon intercontinental ballistic missile in 2000 2017 and currently have long range ballistic missiles and development. All those steps were taken during the previous administration to improve our relationship with North Korea. Do you believe that we have the defense mechanisms and missiles and assets to defend the korean peninsula? Uh an indo pacific as we speak. Yes, Senator, I do. Thank you. Uh what specific systems other systems would you like to see that you need every day? Defense of the korean peninsula? What what would you think that you need? Wish list? A wish list Senator. Given what I know that’s on on the peninsula right now is to maintain the early warning system, make sure that we have uh the C four I the I. S. Are the intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance needed to be able to do it. Not just the technical piece, but I think the human making sure that and I think if confirmed when I get over there I’ll take a hard look at what uh what what’s needed to make sure that we can protect and defend the peninsula. Yeah, let me ask you this question. Do you believe that re implementation of the strategic patience adoption of a US first no use policy and the sanctions would deter north Korea in future being aggression. You think that would be a deterrent senator? It’s hard for me to come on on what would be a deterrent. I do believe he’s a rational actor. I do think that we need to make sure that we’re looking at all levers of the of the diplomatic, information, military and economic um power that we that we have to continue deter him. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Mhm. Thank you. Senator Tuberville uh Senator Duck Worth. She right being webex. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Thank you. Mr Chairman General La camara, I I would like to congratulate union nomination and thank you for your 35 plus years of service to our country. And I look forward to meeting with you later this week to discuss some of the biggest challenges facing us forces in the rok. Well, we’re closely watching the covid 19 case rate in ASIA in order to protect our friends in the region. I am currently leading planning to lead a bipartisan caudal to the rok and Singapore with my colleague and fellow member of this committee. Senator Sullivan, our top objective for this trip is to send a message that our commitment to AsIA is strong and bipartisan and that our presence in the region will not waver with changes in administrator in administration or control of the Congress. We are prioritizing this trip and the chance to engage extensively with the top leadership in South Korea specifically because this alliance is so important to the continuation of free and open indo pacific region. Of course, our forces in Korea play a pivotal role in deterring north korean aggression. But I do believe that a sustained US presence in Korea also sends a strong message about our commitment to the broader indo pacific for all of our regional allies and partners furthermore, any improved skills and coordination that developed during a bilateral training with South Korea’s military multiply. When South Korea participates in multilateral exercises with other regional partners, A general, a camera of course U. S. Forces Korea must never lose focus on the korean peninsula. But you noted in your advanced policy question that given the global role of the U. S. Military and increasingly the international reach at the South korean military opportunities are emerging for alliance cooperation beyond the korean peninsula. Can you please elaborate on these comments? What opportunities do you see and if confirmed? How would you encourage underpaid calm and our korean allies to capitalize on these opportunities? Yes, Senator and I look forward to our conversation, the No as in my current role as the U. S. Army pacific commander. This is our large uh our year for defender pacific 2021. And as we reach out to our partners and allies, we look for opportunities um multilateral those obviously need to be engaged um and negotiated with the host nations. Uh but we are looking for you know, to our partners and allies and looking for the training opportunities whether tabletop exercise, a simulation um or or live um live exercises. And we’ve got several of those this uh this summer. Thank you. I am particularly concerned that our logistics and sustainment operations will be highly vulnerable in particular in a contested environment. As you discussed in your advanced policy questions. Posturing a combat credible force is key to deterrence on a peninsula and force is not a combat credible if we can’t realistically sustain it in a contested logistic environment, ensuring that US military services are fielding sufficient logistics capability and capacity to meet in dope. A calm and U. S. Forces Korea requirements is key. However, I do believe that we need to consider additional measures to reduce the burden on vulnerable supply lines such as prepositioning stock and leveraging our alliances and friendships across the region to access critical supplies. General a camera based on your past experience, what is your assessment of our ability to sustain a combat credible force on the korean peninsula? Yes, Senator, I share your concerns and in my current role as the US aren’t pacific commander responsible for set in the theater and uh I’m working with uh not just General Abrams but Commander, Indo pak um and the other services, The army is responsible for better than 50 of the common items. And so we’re looking for unique opportunities um on not just the preposition, but what are the other things we have? We have to continue to experiment And that’s what these exercises allow us to do. Are there other ways for us to resupply? What can we get on the local economy? Um and uh and quite frankly, I don’t think our adversaries will allow us um you know, to build the iron mountain. So we’re gonna have to protect those assets once once we get there. Thank you confirm. How would you recommend we enhance our logistics capabilities to ensure U. S. Forces, Korea can fight tonight? Senator if confirmed. Will look at you know the stock EGE um on the korean peninsula. Look at the capability of um the peninsula to be able to to generate um resupply and then look at the multiple avenues uh to allow those uh that we supply to occur and to keep the lines of communication open. Thank you. General. I look forward to supporting a confirmation. I’m out of time. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you. Senator Douglas. Now let me recognize Senator scott please. Thank you. Chairman General, thank you for your service. Thank you for all the men and women that serve with you. Um do you believe that the credibility of american deterrence against communist china’s aggression has eroded and continues to erode as china continues to greatly increase its military strength and two and threat and to threaten and imitate intimidate its neighbors. Right? No, senator. I do not. I think we’re in competition with them. Um and I think we compete with them every single day. Um but I don’t think that we can afford to to rest on our laurels. We need to continue to demonstrate to our partners and allies that were the partner of choice. So if if that’s true, why are they, why is coming to china so comfortable? Um you know, with their aggression against Taiwan because it seems like it’s gotten worse. It hasn’t gotten better. Senator, I can’t answer that question. If confirmed, I will look at what that impact would be against the korean peninsula and how it would affect my mission. Thank you. In Admiral Davidson’s written testimony recently wrote that the committee’s efforts to establish the pacific deterrence initiative has created the opportunity to regain the advantage, but we must remain diligent. From your perspective. Do you see the need for the pacific deterrence initiative to prioritize efforts to improve US force posture and ability to deter bad actors and pacific and do you believe we’re on track to do that? Hi. Yes, Senator. And I appreciate the support that this committee has provided to this initiative. I think it’s extremely important to allow us to compete every day. Do you think we need to be clear, more clear that they will clearly defend um Taiwan than what we have been in the past? Our policy against um Senator. That’s I believe that’s for the diplomats and for the Secretary of Defense to answer that question, do you think if we were more clear, it would make it easier for you to be able to to ensure that we have a good deterrence against communist china? I think Senator, I mean, ambiguity is, it provides um there’s advantages and disadvantages clarity also potentially boxes in commanders and quite frankly I think it boxes and policymakers also do you believe we’re prepared to defend Taiwan against chinese aggression in my current role as the US aren’t pacific commander? Yes. Do you do you believe we currently have the right forward posture in the end of Pacific need to accomplish the objectives of the 2018 National Defense Strategy? I think, you know, Senator Covid has had impacts on our ability to operate west of the international date line. We continue to look at unique ways of maintaining that those building trust with our partners and allies, but that has caused challenges for us. Uh but we continue to adjust and modify as required. If we didn’t defend Taiwan, what would happen to our ability to deter communist china and Japan or south Korea or anyplace else? Guam whatever. Yeah. Senator. If it would just change the facts bearing on the problem on how we operate in the pacific in the pacific do you think we would we would continue to have the ability to deter them against aggression against Japan and South Korea and in Guam If we if if we had not defended Taiwan against communist china, I think that is a question that our partners and allies would have to to answer based on our actions. But you think we have enough forces there today to be able to uh to deter chinese aggression. We have forces in place. I can’t answer for the president of china on how on whether or not he’s deterred or not. Right? All right thank you. Thank you. Mr Jim. Thank you. Senator Scott. Senator Hawley, please. Thank you. Mr. Chairman General thank you for being here. Thank you for your service you’ve been asked. I’ve noticed quite a few china questions. I want to start there as well. Uh Do you agree with the secretary of determined Secretary Austin? That is his determination that china is the nation’s pacing threat. Would you agree with that? Hi Senator. So let me ask you in light of that Beijing we know has spent decades developing the capabilities required to try and seize control of Taiwan. Senator Scott was just asking about that. We’ve been told on this committee, we’ve received testimony from Admiral Davidson among others. There’s reason to believe they may try that within the next decade. My question is how would that impact your forces ability to deter north Korea? Should you be confirmed to this new position and to defend themselves on the korean peninsula? If china were to seize control of Taiwan, let’s say and station their own forces there, Senator, that’s a it would all depend on what resources I would lose and what risk is created to to do that. Um My experience on the battlefield has shown that resources are not limited or are not unlimited and that commanders uh make decisions on those. My responsibility will be to identify that risk um and uh and present that back to the end up a com commander, the chairman and the secretary defense. But the Republic of Korea forces are very capable uh formation and we’ll just have to identify that risk And and that’s my responsibility to provide that feedback back to my boss is very good. I want to ask you about resources. Uh Actually 11 I just ask you now, I mean if north Korea or if china rather attempted an invasion of the invasion of Taiwan, do you think that the north Koreans might view that as a window of opportunity and that we might then uh find ourselves if we were drawn into a crisis with china and certainly as that’s our resources that you might traditionally rely on were no longer available. I mean, what kind of a bind would that put us in if North Korea then looked at that as a as a window of opportunity for aggression? Mm. Senator, I think North Korea will have to weigh not just the US peace but the Republic of Korea’s capabilities on on their ability to to move south. Um, and quite frankly, uh sending nations of the United Nations command et cetera going forward um, on the south korean peace. Would south Korea assuming greater responsibility for deterring the north, improve our ability to deter northern opportunistic aggression in the kind of scenario I was just hypothesizing senator. They have, I mean, they have complete control of their military on a day to day basis. Um um and again, I think this is a calculus that the north korean leadership would have to not just the north korean leadership but japanese etcetera of how we would bring a formation of coalition together to combat to maintain the stability on the peninsula. Let me ask you about something, Secretary Austin said recently, he said that the U. S. And South Korea and I’m quoting him now continue to make progress toward the eventual transition of wartime operational control to a South korean commanded, future Combined Forces command. Uh now, just to understand that that transition of operational control would put U. S. Forces under South korean command during a contingency with the North. Is that right? If I got that right, the yes with uh and my role would change to become the deputy commander of the combined force. So my question is what would happen if the United States found itself in simultaneous conflicts with China and North Korea? Would this operational control arrangement provide us with the flexibility we would need to re task or reposition forces if we find ourselves found ourselves with the simultaneity problem. My current understanding is, yes Senator, very good. Um Are you concerned that China might target U. S. Forces in Korea as part of a broader campaign to seize control of Taiwan? For example, I think it’s an area of upper it’s their area. I I don’t know how china um defines their area of operation interest or influence. I think that they would that we would be vulnerable and take the if confirmed to take the necessary steps to protect the force? What what plan would you how would you plan to protect our forces on the peninsula In the event of such a contingency senator? It’s hypothetically I would have to look at what you know what threats exist against that and whether it’s the missile defense or local security. I think it’s I think everything is on the on the table and um we’d have to take a look at what those threats are and take action appropriately. Very good. I may have another question or two for you that I’ll give it to you for the record. Thank you for being here. Thank you. Mr. Chairman thank you. Senator Holiday. Let me recognize Senator Sullivan place. Thank you. Mr. Chairman General Good to see you again. Congrats on your finishing up a really important tour in the end up a calm region and your next very important billet. I want to commend you and then ask some questions about um our arctic cold weather, high altitude operations. You played a really important role in the army’s um recent arctic strategy. And you know, when you look at great power competition, oftentimes at least in the last several decades, Korea has been a key area of that um with Russia, with china. But it’s also when you look at our great power competition, the likelihood of some kind of conflict in a cold weather environment, whether it’s north Korea somewhere in Russia, somewhere in china Ukraine, these are all things that I’ve been concerned and I know you share it that we’ve lost that capability to have large scale, consistent military operations in these very difficult areas in which to operate mountainous, extreme cold weather. You know, we recently celebrated the 70th anniversary, the chosen reservoir battle last December. And that was a very tough battle. The marines and army took part in in Korea with the chinese, with the Koreans 30 below zero. Um Given the Republic of Korea’s physical environment, what is your perspective regarding the army’s arctic strategy and other forces and our capability to fight tonight in those kind of climates? Thanks Senator, Thanks for the time. And I trust you enjoyed your visit this past weekend. I as we’ve discussed in previous meetings that, you know, we have fought and operated at altitude and cold weather in Afghanistan Over the last almost 2020 years. But it’s not in the depth as I sit in my current position, us aren’t pacific and in the forces in Alaska were coming. You know, they were doing their training center rotations in the uh in the winter time. So we weren’t really getting the uh the reps and sets that we needed to truly understand what that capability is. Uh General Abrams and his forces. I mean the Koreans are you know born and raised on the on the peninsula so they truly understand it and they have that opportunity. Um So I have no doubt that they’re prepared but it’s the follow on forces that um we need to make sure that they have the proper equipment and training to be able to operate. How important is it that we not just have the army’s arctic strategy out there and the Air Force’s arctic strategy and the Navy’s arctic strategy but to actually implement them. The secretary of defense in his confirmation here, he said he would fully resource these strategies. How important is it that now we just fully resource but implement what the army has worked on. And I think it’s a very good beginning. It’s it’s important given um in my current role as the U. S. Army pacific commander in in the different environments. We’ve been used to a very um stable is not the right term but you know, desert environment and um but the Asia uh the end of pacific region has multiple different environments and our soldiers need to be prepared to operate and along with our other service members in the Joint Force. Let me ask. I just hosted the in europe, a calm commander mm broccolino in Alaska. This weekend we’re finishing up Northern Edge, which was a very impressive exercise Over 240 aircraft, an entire marine expeditionary unit and an Oregon, entire navy carrier strike force. Um And of course it highlighted some of the forces in Alaska, the 4-5 for striker brigade Soon to be over 105th gen fighters. Um What force posture capabilities do you think are needed? Or missing in Alaska? Now that relate to your mission on the korean peninsula is, you know, those forces are probably some of the closest to the korean peninsula. Any we have in the entire region, regardless of where they’re on the international date line. Do you have a sense of that and the training capabilities that as we are restrained still on the korean peninsula? The ability that was just shown by northern edge at jay park and other places could be phenomenal training for our forces on the peninsula, including the Koreans, including heck, even the Japanese as they sometimes work together in red flag, Alaska. Yes. Senator. What we have in Alaska could be used whether it’s the strikers of the airborne brigade that’s, that’s up there um, is used on the korean peninsula. Yes, sir. Um, as we look forward to the future on what the formation will look like. Um I think the the environment of the korean peninsula can help inform the army on any changes or modifications that they want to make. That that’s for Alaska. But I think in the Continental US we have the, you know, another reach back capability. I think it would be important to bring them through Alaska to train for that environment that they may face on the korean peninsula. Thank you. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Good luck, General, thank you very much. Senator. Sullivan than you. Nothing General, thank you very much for your testimony, but more than that, thank you for your service, which has been uh outfront ahead of your forces. Uh And as I said before, not only your example, but your dedication to the welfare of the men and women who served underneath you is, uh, the highest, I think, demonstration of the ethic of a military officer professional. We thank you for that and we look forward to your confirmation. With that. No further questions. In order, I will adjourn the hearing. Thank you, Mr Chairman.