Hearing of the Senate Armed Service Committee - The United States Pacific Command and United States Forces Korea Budget

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and General, Admiral, thank you for your service to our country. And thank you for being with us today.

Admiral, there's a lot of discussion around here about the next general bomber, which is scheduled to be fielded in the year 2018, and I'm just wondering if you might comment on the importance of long- range strike as a deterrent capability in your command's area of operation.

ADM. KEATING: It's a critical element of our operational planning and conceptual planning, Senator. We're very interested in the Air Force program. The particular platform is of less consequence to us. The capability is, of course, where our focus remains.

So a short answer to your question, we're very interested in that long-range penetration capability, and it is an important element of our planning.

SEN. THUNE: Admiral, the Chinese have recently undergone an incredible leap forward in terms of their air defense capability by fielding a lot of systems such as the SA-10, SA-20, SA-N-20, SA-N-7, HQ-9 and HHQ-9.

What are the capabilities and survivability of our legacy fighter and bomber forces versus these advanced surface-to-air missile systems, and are you concerned about these and other Chinese anti- access technologies?

ADM. KEATING: Senator, we are concerned about the Chinese surface-to-air capabilities. It is a source of discussion between those of us at Pacific Command and our counterparts, when we visit China, and on those rare occasions when they come visit us.

We have state of the art equipment that we can deploy if we need to. That said, we also are flying some airplanes that I flew when I was still doing that sort of thing as a younger man. The electronic countermeasures we enjoy are in most cases sufficient, in some cases insufficient.

So writ large, we are concerned with the Chinese electronic warfare developments. And it has been a topic I've discussed with the Joint Chiefs within the past couple months, expressing our concern.

SEN. THUNE: Okay, thanks. And Admiral, let me just ask a question, too, if I might, regarding some of China's claims with regard to -- they claim that they don't have a -- that there's no threat to U.S. interests. But on the other hand, there have been -- there's been this issue with cyberintrusions that originate in China and attempt to gain access to various U.S. institutions that deal with national security, ranging from the Pentagon to think thanks.

What's your opinion of the message that China is attempting to deliver, at least publicly, and how that conflicts with some of the things they're doing? And have you communicated that with the Chinese military leadership about how these intrusions -- about these intrusions? And what's their reply when you ask that?

ADM. KEATING: We have communicated out concerns, Senator. We asked them to try and describe for us their intentions in the warfare specialty they call informationization. They study it in their war colleges. They have books upon which they -- the subject of which is informationization. It's a concept a little foreign to us, but fundamentally comes out of asymmetric warfare, computer network attack, computer network defense.

They acknowledge that they are pursuing these specialties and subspecialties. They do not acknowledge, at least to me, their engagement in those activities. It is clear they are engaging in those activities. We have expressed our concern. I know that the State Department, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense all have efforts to provide better protection for our networks and to be able to determine conclusively who it is conducting the penetration.

SEN. THUNE: General, as the ranking member on the Readiness Subcommittee, I'm interested in the preparedness of the U.S. forces on the Korean Peninsula. How would you rate the preparedness of your units? And are there enough exercise venues and events to effectively train on the peninsula, or do you see a necessity to deploy forces more for training events?

GEN. BELL: Senator, last year I was getting nervous about this. But I've got to tell you, over the last year I've seen a lot of emphasis placed from off the peninsula to ensuring my readiness on the peninsula is where it ought to be. We've just concluded a major exercise, both command-post exercise driven by simulation, but real field training exercises, land, sea and air. And all of those were done in a very, very professional way, a very pleasing way to me, and reiterated for me I think the capacity that we've achieved in the last year.

Our air forces ashore are ready. We've gotten upgrades to our F- 16 fleet that's very impressive. Our Army forces ashore are very ready. However, they do not have all the equipment that I wish they had, given our lessons in Iraq. For example, up-armored wheel vehicles -- if you walked amongst the 2nd Infantry Division right now, you'd see a very ready division without up-armored vehicles. So that piece, given what we've seen in Iraq and that vulnerability, does concern me. And we're working with the Army to get in line to make sure that we get this equipment over to Korea pretty quick.

But I'm pleased with our readiness ashore, and I would put it at a high level right now. It's very good.

SEN. THUNE: Well, great.

Let me ask both of you -- I'd like to explore, just for a minute, to the Korean ballistic missile threat. Where do you see the biggest gap in defense against that threat, and how do you propose that we solve it?

GEN. BELL: Shall I start?

SEN. THUNE: (Chuckles.) Yeah.

GEN. BELL: North Korea has a range of ballistic missiles, obviously. They cross all the spectrum of missile capability, from relatively short-range missiles, which they've just begun to field a modern version of -- it's called the Toksun (sp) missile, KNO2 -- solid fuel, very mobile, and if you're aware of it, it kind of -- something like our multiple-launch rocket system or our ATACMS system -- pretty sophisticated -- all the way up through their traditional scuds, which are liquid fuel but very reliable. Every time they test them, they work. They kind of land where they're supposed to go. They're working hard on a Nodong -- I mean, they have the Nodong missile, which is an extended range scud.

The Musadong (sp) they have in R&D, which is a medium-range missile, which could threaten Guam and certainly threatens all of Japan, all the way out to their hard work on an intercontinental ballistic missile called the Taepo Dong II, which has failed in its last flight test. So they got the whole range, and we have to protect against all those ranges.

Ashore in Korea I've got today eight Patriot batteries. That is adequate to protect my U.S. force. Our Republic of Korea ally does not have adequate theater ballistic missile defenses on their peninsula. They recognize this as a shortcoming. They're now purchasing Patriot systems, believe it or not, from Germany, and they're fielding Aegis cruisers that could have an air defense capability as well.

My biggest concern would be not for theater ballistic missiles coming at South Korea. I think we are adequately prepared for that. It's the off-peninsula missile capability that they are developing and have to either threaten Japan, Guam, Hawaii or even the continental United States that is the biggest issue for us to address right now. And I will hand that off to Admiral Keating, because he is more aware of and into the layered defense that we have to defend against that threat.

SEN. THUNE: Admiral?

ADM. KEATING: The Lower 48 and Alaska and Hawaii can be well- defended against intercontinental ballistic missiles from North Korea with our ground-based midcourse interceptors and increasingly by our sea-based ballistic missile defensive capabilities. I'm more concerned about protecting -- helping our allies protect themselves. As you know, Senator, the Japanese just conducted a successful -- one of their Aegis ships, the Kongo, Japanese ship Kongo, launched an SM-3 missile and intercepted a target intercontinental ballistic missile over the Pacific missile range facility, successfully destroyed that target ICBM.

So Japan is developing the capability themselves, but there are other countries of course that do not have any capability throughout our area of responsibility. So helping our allies protect themselves is a source of some concern to us. I am not -- I am satisfied that we have the development -- continued development of the integrated system to which B.B. alludes. It is important for the 48 states, Alaska and Hawaii, and we're working with our allies for their own self- protection.

SEN. THUNE: Thank you, gentlemen, very much for your service.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source