Thank you, Senator Inhofe.  I would like to welcome back our former colleague Director Coats as well as Lieutenant General Ashley who is making his first appearance before the Committee as the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The new National Defense Strategy states that the central challenge facing our nation is the “reemergence of long-term, strategic competition” with Russia and China, and that this competition replaces terrorism as the “primary concern in U.S. national security.” 

Without question, both Russia and China pose a serious threat to our national security.  In order to counter these threats, we must better understand their objectives and the means through which they will seek to achieve them.  In doing so, we must consider the full spectrum of capabilities of our potential adversaries – from high-end platforms to low-end hybrid or irregular warfare approaches.

The Kremlin is aggressively pursuing strategic competition across the full range of capabilities, from nuclear and conventional military modernization to asymmetric operations below the level of military conflict intended to undermine the foundations of our democracy and enflame social divisions.  We need a clear-eyed understanding of President Putin’s intentions in asserting Russia’s claim to Great Power status and using every tool at his disposal to destabilize the rules-based, international order that has promoted strategic stability for decades.  Most pressing is that the intelligence community fully agrees that Russia is already launching an assault on the U.S. mid-term elections later this year.  Yet we have repeatedly heard from Administration officials that the White House has not directed the intelligence agencies or the relevant DOD components to disrupt or blunt Russian cyber and other attacks against the fundamental institutions of our society.

In the case of China, we need a whole of government approach that counters the economic, diplomatic and military competition we face.  In other words, a military response alone will not be successful.  China is a large, entrepreneurial country with a long-term vision.  We must also endeavor to ensure that China adheres to the rules based order from which it has benefitted so greatly.  I am deeply concerned about the continuing militarization of the territorial features in the South China Sea, its illicit theft of U.S. technology and intellectual property, and its coercive activities against its neighbors, including the economic retaliation against South Korea for accepting the THAAD deployment necessary to defend itself from North Korea.  China should work with its neighbors, instead of destabilizing the region through its actions, to resolve its disputes peacefully and through the legal mechanisms that exist.

Great power competition may be the current geostrategic reality, but we must not neglect other, equally complicated, challenges.  I believe it would be harmful to our national security if we exclusively focused on great power competition at the expense of the ongoing threats posed by rogue regimes, terrorist organizations, and other non-state actors and criminal organizations.

For example, we face a clear and present threat from North Korea that must be contained and deterred.  A preemptive war with North Korea would be catastrophic for the people of South Korea, and the region.  Instead, we must come up with a robust deterrence strategy that layers strong missile defense with strict sanctions and sustained diplomatic effort.  We must also pursue a robust counter-proliferation effort.   Our strategy must be multilateral and globally coordinated.  We can contain the threat that North Korea poses without going to war if we engage in a consistent strategy and adequately resource our government agencies, especially the State Department, in the coming years.

According to all reports, Iran is complying with its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.  However, Iran continues to play a destabilizing role in the Middle East through its development of ballistic missiles and support to proxy groups – particularly in Syria and Yemen.

While the so-called “physical caliphate” previously enjoyed by ISIS has been dismantled, the group has not been defeated.  ISIS-directed and inspired attacks will remain a persistent threat for some time to come.  Likewise, al Qaeda has proven resilient and continues to seek new sanctuaries from which it can launch spectacular attacks against the West.

In Afghanistan, the coalition continues to confront a variety of threats from the Taliban-led insurgency as well as the variety of militant groups that call South Asia home, many of which have proven resilient in the face of significant military pressure.  The National Defense Strategy calls for a more “resource sustainable approach” to efforts in Afghanistan; however, the Administration is set to increase the number of troops in country, which follows on the heels of last year’s increase.  At the same time, we hear reports that countries like Russia may be seeking to expand efforts to engage with our adversaries in the Taliban, possibly to play spoiler to our efforts. 

It is clear that we are living in complex times.  I look forward to your testimony on these issues.  Thank you.