Opening Statement (As Prepared)

Click here to stream the hearing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, Chairman DesJarlais – and congratulations on your first Strategic Forces subcommittee hearing as Chairman. I also want to thank you for beginning this session with a very bi-partisan series of briefings to bring us all up to speed on some of the most consequential issues before our Congress today. Let me also echo your welcome to Representatives Bell from Missouri, Crank from Colorado, Hamadeh from Arizona, Mesmer from Indiana, Van Orden from Wisconsin, and Whitesides from California. Lastly, welcome to our witnesses, and thank you for your continued service to our country during this difficult time when many general officers are under attack. General Cotton: Thank you for your dedicated service to our nation for the last 39 years. Your particular focus on helping us understand the strategic dynamics of deterring two near-peer adversaries will have lasting impact.

As we sit here today, I cannot ignore the fact that this Administration has put our national security at risk. The Secretary of Defense broke the law when he put operational details classified Top Secret, according to DOD guidelines that could not be more clear, on an unclassified platform specifically targeted by China and Russia. What a boon it would have been to either adversary had they gotten those time-on-target details to the Houthis in time to use their extensive anti-aircraft missile arsenal against American pilots. When Pete Hegseth left Fox & Friends to become the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in history, by the narrowest vote margin in history, he said, and I quote, “Accountability is back.” Any of us who have served know that there is nobody more despised in the military than those who lead by the opposite of example, enforcing rules they don’t follow themselves, and having zero accountability for their own actions and behavior.

When Secretary Austin made a mistake far, far less serious by not properly notifying the top of his chain of command of his surgery, I did not hesitate in saying publicly that President Biden should fire him. It’s worth noting that Secretary Austin’s transgression, while serious, did not put any of our troops in immediate danger; while improper, did not violate the law; and he didn’t lie about it. He told the truth, he answered questions before Congress, and he put new procedures in place to ensure it would never happen again. Secretary Hegseth has done none of that, and to be clear about what Democrats are saying publicly, and Republicans are saying privately, he should be fired.

Of course, rather than fire a criminal, the President has fired the head of the NSA, who’s received tremendous, bipartisan praise from this very committee. Don’t think for a second, Mr. Chairman, that our witnesses aren’t sitting here today, trying hard to do their jobs, wondering if they will be next.

While U.S. stocks are cratering, our adversaries’ stocks of nuclear weapons are increasing at an alarming rate. The Chinese Communist Party’s ICBM fleet has exceeded U.S. intelligence estimates, and they have deployed several hypersonic weapons that can carry nuclear weapons. Russia is developing a treaty-violating, space-based nuclear weapon that would destroy nearly all the satellites we rely on for GPS and communications every day. And despite Trump’s promise to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours, war criminal Putin continues his criminal war, using nuclear brinksmanship on the offense for the first time in history.

North Korea and Iran are comparative side shows in the nuclear realm, yet they still have the potential to kill millions of people we know their leaders would like to be Americans.

All that to say, the mission of this subcommittee is growing in scope, importance, and urgency.

I sometimes ask my Democratic colleagues what is the greatest existential threat to America because they often say “climate change.” I’m no denier of science, but let’s be clear: our greatest, most existential threat is nuclear war. Yet, it’s been a long time since most Americans gave it a second thought. Trump’s “Golden Dome for America” is the most significant change to the strategic landscape the U.S. has proposed since the Cold War—and it merits careful consideration. If he wants to replace the doctrine of Mutually-Assured Destruction, he and his team need to propose an alternative. Otherwise, his Golden Dome could instigate a further nuclear arms race, bankrupt DOD, and be about as strong as the gold leaf glittering atop various capital domes, which flakes off regularly at great expense.

Missile defense has a mixed legacy. President Bush’s withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Trump thoughtlessly touts in his order, actually helps disprove his case. As a result of that decision, Russia and China began an arms race to get around our interceptors, which is why we are struggling to catch up on hypersonic and other novel delivery methods today, all of which make us strategically less safe.

Perhaps a better, time-proven approach, is to follow in the footsteps of Reagan and Kennedy, and use our economic power to drive negotiations to reduce nukes on all sides. Although it’s far in the future, and only achieved through mutual agreement, the day when nobody has active nuclear weapons is the day that it is least likely they will be used against us.

General Cotton and General Guillot, we have discussed both privately and publicly how we should think about a world with two near-peer nuclear adversaries, and how that might adjust your requirements. We might be strategically stronger by building more new Sentinels than interceptors, while the Administration is proposing the opposite, but the underlying point is that we should only spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars based on serious strategic doctrine, not the whims of someone who always wants the golden version of things his friends already have.

Our subcommittee’s other major concern is space, and while we can’t say much publicly, I will continue to press the Department to make sure that we can explain to our constituents why we must invest billions in space because it could not be more critical.

America’s strategic defense, the bedrock of our national security, must remain a top priority despite everything else going on in Washington these days. Even the right weapons with the wrong policy can be de-stabilizing, weakening our national security. I look forward to working closely with the members of this subcommittee and our witnesses to make America stronger and more secure. We often say that our nuclear arsenal must be safe, secure, and reliable. Our country should be the same.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.