Hearing of the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee - Africom

Press Conference

Hearing of the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee - Africom

HEARING OF THE DEFENSE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: AFRICOM
CHAIRED BY: REP. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR. (D-GA)
WITNESSES: GENERAL WILLIAM E. "KIP" WARD, COMMANDER, U.S. AFRICA COMMAND

Copyright ©2009 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.

REP. BISHOP: This morning the committee will hold a hearing regarding the United States Africa Command, AFRICOM. We are pleased to welcome General Kip Ward, AFRICOM's commander.

General, thank you for your service, and thank you for being here this morning. You've had a long and distinguished career, and I'll just say to the committee that I was extremely proud to be able to witness the emotion and the excitement when you received your fourth star. So it's a very special privilege to have you and to welcome you to our subcommittee.

With AFRICOM fully functional for six months, this hearing offers a timely opportunity of the subcommittee to get an update on how the stand up of this new command is progressing and on the challenges and opportunities it is confronting in Africa. For too long the United States has paid Africa very little attention and focusing on the continent only long enough to respond to crisis.

Within the Department of Defense, responsibility for Africa has heretofore been dividing among three separate commands; European Command, Central Command, and Pacific Command. With everyone responsible for Africa, no one is responsible for Africa. And U.S. attention to the continent has been uneven, inconsistent, and poorly organized to adequately anticipate, prevent, or respond to the crisis on the continent.

Africa occupies about three and half times the size of the land area of the continental United States and is home to nearly 900 million people and 53 nations. It's rich in human and natural resources, and Africa's strategic importance has never been more obvious than it is today, a fact that the United States has been somewhat late in recognizing. Over the last decade, China, Iran, and al Qaeda have all made significant and growing investments in Africa. It's in this context that AFRICOM was conceived to create one uniform -- unified command and to maintain a consistent focus and coordinated DOD policy toward the vast and increasing -- important continent.

But AFRICOM -- the debut of the Africa Command has not gone smoothly. First, in the context of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a lack of outreach to African leaders allowed suspicion to grow with potential African partners who feared that AFRICOM was the first step toward the establishment of a large, permanent U.S. troop presence on the continent. Not surprisingly, only one of the African nations, Liberia, publicly expressed a willingness to host AFRICOM's headquarters, which are still located in Stuttgart, Germany. No government agreed to host any one of the five regional integration teams, the small, lightly staffed mini headquarters that would've allowed AFRICOM to maintain closer, more consistent contact with African leadership.

Second, unfortunately, the Rumsfeld Pentagon declared that AFRICOM would be taking the lead on all U.S. policy toward Africa. Now, that was a stance that was not only untrue, but it was also unhelpful in persuading the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development to share with AFRICOM the advice and expertise that AFRICOM has sought from those interagency partners.

Finally, AFRICOM's purpose, mission and organization were not adequately explained to this body to assuage the concerns that the new combatant command was not just one more in a long line of instances where the Department of Defense was taking over responsibilities that rightly belong to the State Department.

Questions from members of the committee will very likely address these issues and many others, and I think that we can look forward to a very interesting and useful question and answer session.

General Ward, before we hear your testimony, I'd like to call on a ranking member, my good friend and mentor, Mr. Bill Young, for any comments that he would like to make.

REP. BILL YOUNG (R-FL): Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and I want to welcome General Ward here. And this is a very important issue. Africa is a very important part of the world, and our presence there is extremely important. I know the general knows that at one point there were those who -- in the Congress who thought that the Africa Command should be disbanded and eliminated. We resisted that because we think it's important, that the work that you do is very, very important and is good for the United States and our relationship with the African communities.

So general, thank you for being here today, and we appreciate the good work that you're doing.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you, Mr. Young.

General Ward, please proceed with your summarized statement, and your entire statement, of course, will be placed in the record.

GEN. WARD: Well, Congressman Bishop, thank you very much, sir, and I -- it does seem like almost three years ago when I pinned on the four star, was only yesterday, but in other respects, it seems an eternity ago. Three years has, in fact, gone by, have gone by quickly.

Mr. Young and distinguished members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to provide this -- (clears throat) -- excuse me -- this overview of the United States Africa Command. And with me today are Ms. Mary Pleffner from our Department of Commerce, as well as Mr. Jerry Lanier from our Department of State.

Today United Stated Africa Command is executing our mission of conducting sustained security engagement through military-to-military programs and military-sponsored activities to promote a stable and secure African environment. We work in concert with other U.S. government agencies, as well as international partners to ensure that our activities are harmonized. Our strategy is based on military-to- military efforts to enhance the security capability and capacity of our African partners.

In many engagements with African leaders during my time as commander of U.S. African Command, and previously as deputy commander for United States European Command, the consistent message that they gave me is their intent for African nations to provide for their own security. Most welcome our assistance in reaching their goals for security forces that are legitimate and professional, have the will and means to dissuade, deter and defeat transnational threats, perform with integrity, and are increasingly able to support international peace efforts.

We work as a part of the overall United States government effort.

We work closely with the Department of State, the chiefs of mission and country teams, the United States Agency for International Development, the Departments of Treasury, Commerce, Homeland Security, Agriculture, and other agencies that do work on the continent. And like Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen, I fully support enhancements to the capabilities of our interagency teammates.

Similarly, we reach out to international partners, including Europeans, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, private organizations, and academia. Their perspectives on the situation in Africa are valuable. The United States Africa Command is involved in military training, education, sustainment and logistics support among other activities that occur throughout our area of responsibility.

The combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa headquartered in Djibouti conducts training, education, and civil military assistance that helps prevent conflict and promote regional cooperation among nations of Eastern Africa. Operation Enduring Freedom Trans Sahara is the military component of the Department of State's counterterrorism partnership with North and West African nations. Africa Endeavor is an annual communications and interoperability exercise that this year will include 23 African nations.

We support the State Department's African contingency operations and training and assistance that trains roughly 20 battalions of peacekeepers a year. The peacekeepers have deployed on United Nations and African Union missions across the continent. Recently, we've helped deploy Rwandans and some of its cargo to the United Nations mission in Darfur. Continuing deployments of the Africa Partnership station provide training to the navies and coast guards of maritime nations in the Gulf of Guinea and the east coast of Africa, helping them better secure their own territorial waters.

Given the lack of infrastructure within the Africa and the island nations, our sustainment infrastructure, forward operating sites, and in-route infrastructure are vital. I endorse upgrades to these activities and keeping these key infrastructure nodes in service. The enduring presence at Cate La Moniet (ph) in Djibouti makes possible our engagement in East Africa and other parts of the continent, as well as supports our U.S. strategic goals in that part of the world.

It is my honor to serve with our uniformed and civilian women and men of the Department of Defense, as well as our interagency teammates who are making a difference on the continent every day. Their dedicated efforts are a testament to the spirit and determination of the American people and our commitment to contributing to the wellbeing and security of our nation and the people of Africa.

Again, thank you for your support, and I look forward to further participation in this important hearing.

Thank you, sir.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you very much, general. This is a very, very significant and important command that has been stood up, and certainly, I think can and will play a very, very vital role in our national security.

The Appropriations Committee noted in the report that accompanied the 2009 Defense Appropriations Bill that traditional U.S. military operations are not an appropriate response to many of the challenges that are facing Africa, including poverty, famine, armed conflict, political corruption and the spread of HIV/AIDS. And, of course, the -- AFRICOM has responded to this concern by saying that your programs are driven by the 3-D strategy; diplomacy, development and defense, which aims to balance and align the full spectrum of our national security resources to meet the challenges that Africa faces today.

Would you state for the record for us what the 3-D strategy is and how it's being used by AFRICOM and why it's important to incorporate the diplomatic development efforts into the planning and operations of the Combatant Command, and where there's a conflict, who the final arbiter is when DOD, State, or USAID disagree about a course of action? And who pays for it?

GEN. WARD: Thank you, sir. First, the -- as you pointed out, we clearly understand that when you looked at the 3-D -- defense, diplomacy, development -- those activities worked, in my mind's eye, in a very harmonious way.

And Mr. Bishop, I will tell you it didn't just occur to me in this assignment how critical those linkages are. Beginning with my time being on the continent almost 20 years ago, going through my time in the Balkans as I commanded the stabilization force for NATO, my time in the Middle East working activities there -- what's very apparent to me is that in order to produce stability in an environment, in an area, security has to take hold so that development and diplomacy, those actions and attitudes of elected representatives who do things in support of their people -- they have to be occurring together.

And so the 3-D strategy recognizes the importance of a coherent approach to what we do that causes elements of security to be closely supportive of those things that need to go on in the field of development, as well as diplomacy, institutions of government that take care of its people so that they are, in fact, working as effectively as they can work. Our role in that is not to do development, not to do diplomacy, but to assure ourselves as best we can that those activities that we perform in the defense arena are as supportive of those other two legs of the triad as possible.

Everyone who would be involved in that would, in fact, pay for their part of it. The activities that we do are obviously paid for by our Defense budget as a part of our role in accomplishing that 3-D strategy. I think I would say that when you look at what we do compared to the totality of what's being done on the continent, our portion of that budget is very small. I can't cite the numbers, but I can cite an example. If you look at a program, just one, the PEPFAR, the Initiative for Prevention of HIV/AIDS, that program -- well in excess of $6 million on the continent. Our total program of activities on the continent -- much, much, much less.

And so we do not have numbers in our Defense activities that in any way compare to what's going on in those other activities, development and diplomacy. Where we look at doing our efforts -- we work very closely with the Department of State, USAID, so that our activities are, in fact, complimentary to what's being done by the other elements of our government.

And most significantly, the ambassadors and the country teams who have a very heavy say in what we do to the degree -- if an ambassador or country team recommends against doing some particular military or security activity, we don't do it because our activities fully support our -- and are aligned with our foreign policy objectives, and we look to our ambassadors, we look to our work that we do with -- inside the -- the relationships that we have with the Department of State, what's also inside the U.S. Agency of International Development to ensure that our work compliments theirs and not contradicts theirs.

REP. BISHOP: Yeah, I have to agree with you. I think your FY '09 budget was $400 million, and USAID spends $6 billion.

GEN. WARD: I said -- no, yeah, I meant billion. I'm sorry.

REP. BISHOP: Yeah. Just on the HIV/AIDS. When there is disagreement, though, who's the arbiter? You defer always to the ambassador?

GEN. WARD: Quite candidly, we get to resolution prior to getting to the conflict. And I'll tell you how I try to do this, senator. As we developed our campaign strategy, our theater plans -- and this -- and we did this now beginning almost a year ago. At the onset of planning right here in Washington D.C. we met with the Department of State, USAID so that as we developed our strategy and we are now developing our campaign plans those agencies are apart of our planning process so that as we move ahead we aren't coming up with programs and projects that are outside the parameters of what they would see as important activities for us to accomplish in support of development and diplomacy.

We carry it a step further.

When it comes to execution of those plans and programs, working very closely with the ambassadors and the country teams -- and then ultimately, if we go through all of that process -- and when it comes to execution on the ground, for timing reasons or atmospherics of a particular situation -- if the ambassador says I don't think we should be doing that just yet, then I would say we would not do it. And so who resolves the conflict? Typically, we don't have conflicts, but if something were to occur that would say that doing a particular military activity at this point in time is not wise, and that comes from our diplomatic community, I would defer to that recommendation.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you, general.

Mr. Young?

REP. YOUNG: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

General, the -- a lot of things going on in Africa that are troublesome to the United States and troublesome to the world and troublesome to anyone that is civilized. And I'm talking about Somalia, and I'm talking about the piracy off the coast, the kidnapping, holding for ransom, the taking over of ships with oil and arms and things like this. Do you play a role in any of these -- in these issues?

GEN. WARD: Thank you, Representative Young. Yes, sir, we do. The at sea portion of our counterpiracy effort is conducted by U.S. Central Command, the at sea portion. So we are fully aware of those activities. We are fully involved in what they are doing, the work of that combined task force at sea, that coalition of international forces from various nations who come together to conduct naval patrolling at sea.

When it comes to the suspected pirates that may be apprehended as a result of those counter piracy actions, we play a role as those pirates are then brought ashore on the continent working with the governments of East Africa for their taking those suspected pirates into custody and further adjudication of the particular case. We also are involved in the work that we do as we work with -- and if you talk about East Africa, the nations of East Africa and helping them to increase their capacity to provide better control over their territorial waters -- which, in fact, is a counter piracy measure, as those nations have better control over their sovereign territories. We do that.

We know that for Somalia, in particular, the lack of an effective government is clearly the root of why we have these pirate activities to the degree that they occur. Clearly, they could occur anywhere. Piracy is not a new phenomenon in this world, but to the degree that they occur, the lack of a effective government in Somalia is a part of that. To that degree, we clearly support the -- our -- again, our stated foreign policy objectives of support through this transition, federal government, and what is done there to help them be more effective in governing their territory. And should our policy dictate otherwise, we then would be involved, as so state by our foreign policy.

So we see that lack of effective governance as one of the root causes of the piracy efforts. We support those counter piracy efforts that go on as we work with our friends and neighbors, both our fellow agencies, including Central Command, as well as working with the nations in east -- in the east of Africa to adjudicate suspected pirates once they have been apprehended.

REP. YOUNG: General, the Navy, of course, has the primary responsibility of -- in dealing with the pirates. But in the Somalia area are you called on to provide any direct or indirect military support of any of the activities in or around Somalia?

GEN. WARD: My command is not, sir.

REP. YOUNG: Say that again, please.

GEN. WARD: My command is not.

REP. YOUNG: Oh, is not.

GEN. WARD: Is not.

REP. YOUNG: Okay. Your --

GEN. WARD: Then --

REP. YOUNG: But your military presence actually as far as personnel under your control -- you have a very small command actually, don't you?

GEN. WARD: Very small command. We do not have a military presence in Somalia, my command.

REP. YOUNG: Yeah, yeah. Well, you have a military presence in Stuttgart, Germany. Several of our staff members paid a visit to your headquarters last year, and what they found was a headquarters that was relatively inefficient, wires strewn across the floors in trying to keep all of the electronics together. Do we have anything in a budget request to improve or make more effective your headquarters in Stuttgart?

GEN. WARD: I think we do. That is a work in progress, Mr. Young. What was seen a bit ago -- every day improvements are made. I count it a victory when I can pick up the phone or -- and send an email and it goes to the same address, and we are getting more and more that way. I think the renovations to our IT infrastructure, our force protection requirements -- we have seen steady progress now over the year and a half that we have begun to renovate our facilities, and we do -- we have a bit more to go, and some of that additional work is, in fact, in the budget submission that we've -- that we have sent forward.

REP. YOUNG: Yeah. Yeah, I'm aware that there's no real consideration of moving your headquarters to Africa, but is there any consideration of moving it to another location other than Stuttgart?

GEN. WARD: Not at this time, sir.

REP. YOUNG: Okay.

GEN. WARD: And I will say that the work that we're doing there in Stuttgart is work that -- because Stuttgart is one of our enduring communities overseas, that that work, regardless of my commands being there for another three, five, or ten years, whatever the case may be, I have no -- or permanently -- I just don't know. There is no consideration, but regardless, those enhancements to that infrastructure would be used by whatever U.S. government activity that would fall in on it because it is one of our overseas enduring locations.

REP. YOUNG: Okay, general, thanks for what you do. We appreciate the importance of what it is that you do and what your command does. And thank you very much for being here today, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you, sir.

(Off mike.)

REP. KILPATRICK: Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

General, good morning.

GEN. WARD: Good morning, ma'am.

REP. KILPATRICK: I am most proud of you.

GEN. WARD: Thank you.

REP. KILPATRICK: I've watched it since the announcement in last February '07. The former Administration announced the new command. I know that you -- fully operational in October just recently of '08, a year and a half, as you say, just under a year and a half. And I've watched your career. Most proud of what you've done for our country, as well as in your new command assignment.

I was going to ask the Germany question on Stuttgart, and you've explained it. It's one of our best partners over the years, probably since World War II or beyond. But I didn't understand why weren't moving it, and I understand it takes time to get up. You said three, five, ten years from now. Do you foresee us having the command on the continent ever? Is it necessary?

GEN. WARD: Thank you for that, Ms. Kilpatrick.

Two things -- there's clearly a potential that the headquarters could be somewhere located on the continent of Africa or some portion of the headquarters. In today's environment, it's not essential. It is not something that is important for now in what we're doing. It is, from my perspective -- our work that we do is the important thing. Our programs -- the important thing. Our staff headquarters, the planning that it does, is -- quite frankly, could be done from anywhere, that planning function.

Right now we -- Africans see us as partners and allies, not as part of their problem. And so for many reasons being on the continent today is not something that's either necessary, nor has been sought after because it is not the essential part of doing what we need to do to bring value added to our programs on the continent.

REP. KILPATRICK: Thank you.

GEN. WARD: Our presence on the continent as leaders of Africa have told me, as our ambassadors and country teams have told me, is better realized through our offices of security cooperation. Those programs that we implement, the support that we provide, not the headquarters function, the planning function --

REP. KILPATRICK: Okay, hold it. All right. Thank you, and I appreciate that.

GEN. WARD: Yes, ma'am.

REP. KILPATRICK: So when I was reading military-to-military, mil-mil, I guess, as you call it, what exactly is that as it relates to my former question? Is it mil-to-mil toward governments of the world? And I know throughout this you called them states in that country, and that -- must be a reason for that. We call them countries. You call them states. Is there a reason for that?

GEN. WARD: There is no reason. I'll call -- they are countries. They're nations.

REP. KILPATRICK: And they have their own hierarchy and whatever. What is the mil-to-mil? What does that really mean in the capacity that our commander, in Africom serves? What does that mean to me?

GEN. WARD: It refers to the work that we do with the militaries of the nations of Africa as they attempt to increase their capacity to be more professional, to be able to conduct themselves as legitimate militaries with integrity. So the work that we do from training to providing the sorts of orientation, to how militaries perform in legitimate societies. It's young soldiers, sailors, airmen --

REP. KILPATRICK: Okay.

GEN. WARD: -- Marines, sometimes civilians working with the militaries of these nations to increase their capacity to be more effective in providing security for themselves.

REP. KILPATRICK: Okay.

GEN. WARD: It is helping them understand proper techniques --

REP. KILPATRICK: Okay.

GEN. WARD: -- for boarding. if they see something in their territorial waters that ought not be there. How do you board a vessel that has not been transmitting its intent to ensure that your personnel are as safe as they can be, as well as protecting those with whom you're about to interact. It is our program called the Africa Deployment and Assistant Phase Training where nations of Africa and their quest to provide for their own security -- (inaudible) -- we will volunteer and we will support peacekeeping efforts in places like Darfur, Somalia. But we need some help to get there.

So this is training assistance that we provide. When they pack an airplane or they load a train to conduct a rail movement, the training to determine how you properly secure cargo, how you properly pack the back of an airplane so that what's being loaded is loaded in a way that doesn't cause some unintended explosion, because you don't pack flammables with foodstuffs or ammunition or things like -- it is that sort of military professionalization enhancement activities that this military-to-military work that we do is about --

REP. KILPATRICK: Okay.

GEN. WARD: -- that that is the focus of that -- military exercises, interoperability so that they can work better as neighbors.

REP. KILPATRICK: And bring the confidence and the exactness they need as well. I appreciate that.

GEN. WARD: Yes, ma'am.

REP. KILPATRICK: Then finally, when we started on -- I think the chairman alluded to that. We didn't have any countries who would want that cooperation. Have we moved in our diplomatic relationships with them to have a better understanding, a relationship whereby that might now be possible?

GEN. WARD: That's a great question, ma'am. Ironically, even at the outset when we had this debate about whether or not they wanted the command on the continent, they've never said they didn't want that level of cooperation. That level of cooperation has always been desired, and that was the point about it that was so -- because they never said we don't want to cooperate with America. They have never said that. The programs that were in existence prior to the creation of United States Africa Command being conducted as Mr. Bishop indicated heretofore through three different commands -- our message was we will not see any degradation of those programs because that was a fear that they would have, that they had.

And so that's why the focus on adding value to the programs was my focus, as opposed to a focus about where we might station our headquarters that created the misperceptions about what our intentions were. And so therefore, that whole argument was not helpful to promoting our national security interests or in supporting the interests of the Africans in increasing their capacity to provide for their own security.

REP. KILPATRICK: I like that. I think that's exactly the way to proceed.

Thank you, general, for your service.

GEN. WARD: Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

REP. KILPATRICK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: Mr. Frelinghuysen.

REP. RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN (R-NJ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

General, thank you for your service. Apropos of your discussion with my colleague, the issues of expectation with a new administration -- not pointing fingers at the last Administration. There's an expectation that we'll be concentrating more of our efforts -- not only military, but a lot of the people behind you -- looking at the needs of the African continent and understand that the -- there are many sovereign nations. And there are also expectations on the African continent that -- we will be more involved in critical issues.

Some of the greatest crimes against humanity have occurred in Africa, and periodically we hear calls for intervention when humanitarian crises reach, you know, the extremes that some of these cases have. I just wonder. Are you prepared in that regard? I mean, there's been talk of, you know, no fly zones.

I mean, this is more than transporting, you know, members of the African Union and troops, but are you ready, and do you perhaps anticipate that we may be doing more there than we are now?

GEN. WARD: Thank you for that, sir. Two things -- the forces that we use to do our engagement, which is the preponderance of our activities, our theater security cooperation, our military-to-military engagement, our forces that could range from individuals up to small sides of groups, squads, platoons, ranging ten, 15 --

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: What I'm talking about is that we see, obviously, cases of incredible horrors and deprivation --

GEN. WARD: Right.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: -- unbelievable starvation, and people are saying here at home why aren't we doing something about it? And in some ways, you know, you could use the I.D. You can use the State Department. But in reality, you often need the power and might and mobility of the military to sort of get the job done. And I just wondered how you're putting into your overall calculations that as a possibility.

GEN. WARD: What we do, sir, is -- you know, our development of plans addressing contingencies, be they disaster assistance relief, humanitarian assistance -- but our planning them identifies the resources that would be required to execute that plan. I do not have forces assigned to those missions. I would be required to submit a request for forces that would then be received by joint staff and acted upon by the secretary of Defense because it would require the allocation of forces to conduct the military work that would be required to do -- in order to satisfy, you know, a situation that you described.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Okay. Weapons of mass destruction -- I mean, there's a feeling that some of those that have been operating in the Middle East will find fertile ground in certain countries. Have you found evidence of that? I know you work pretty closely with the intel community and a variety of others, DEA, Drug Enforcement Agency. What have you found, and how are you dealing with it, since many countries don't have the ability, quite honestly, to stop that type of trafficking or development of this type of activity?

GEN. WARD: Yes, sir.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Don't have the military or perhaps the political will to do anything about it.

GEN. WARD: Well, the first thoughts -- I would say here that I have no direct knowledge or evidence of that occurring. What we do --

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: One of the reasons a command was set up, though, was because of the possible proliferation or advancement of weapons of mass destruction, finding them -- their way to the African continent in those countries that might be somewhat conducive to that type of activity. Correct me if I'm wrong.

GEN. WARD: No, no, no, that is clearly a part of our mission set, and the work that we do in working with the host nations and their security structure and apparatus -- that's specifically designed to address their capacity to, in fact, deal with that should it arise. As I was saying, I see no evidence of that at the current time, but our ongoing effort, our persistent engagement is, in fact, designed to help them increase their capacity to prevent that from occurring.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Just for the record, you see no evidence of that type of activity?

GEN. WARD: Correct.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

REP. BISHOP: (Off mike.)

GEN. WARD: But sir, if I may, the threat is clearly there, and the potential was there. And so therefore, the work that we do with these nations is to address that threat and to hopefully prevent it from occurring.

REP. BISHOP: Mr. Moran?

REP. JAMES P. MORAN (D-VA): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

And General Ward, thanks for testifying. More importantly, thank you for your service on one of the few continents that despite conditions seems to look up to the United States for leadership. The budget for AFRICOM took a big hit last year in this subcommittee largely, I think, because there was insufficient coordination, explanation, et cetera of what you were planning. And so the subcommittee wiped out most of the budget from $300 million and plus million down to about $80 million that was restored in conference with just a $40 million cut, as I recall.

But I think this is something that -- we need to get a better understanding of what you're doing. And frankly, if we are going to adopt the so-called smart power premise that it's more effective, then this is the kind of activity that we need to invest in. I know China's doing it, particularly in Africa, but also in South America and any number of continents, and they're making progress and establishing relationships.

We had a very substantial study done by CRS, if anybody's interested, and we can share it, but this is a clear strategy with a substantial investment on China's part. But one of the problematic things about China's involvement is that it is amoral. I'm not saying they're immoral. They just have no moral compass with which they make these decisions. And that becomes abundantly clear in their relationship with President al-Bashir of Sudan. One of the reasons Khartoum is as prosperous as it is is because of China's investment, frankly. And so our sanctions would have very little effect.

I was just at a conference on Sudan, and the situation is getting much grimmer because the international criminal court has indicted Bashir. He has chosen to take it out on the Darfurian people by withdrawing all of the aid, the agencies, the nonprofits, the NGOs. So it will continue the policy of genocide. Perhaps in a less direct, but equally effective way, it will be a genocide of starvation, of unclean water, unsanitary water, which will spread disease, and of course the lack of healthcare of -- one outbreak of -- whether it Meningitis, whatever in those camps, it spreads to everybody.

We know about the dramatic instances of genocidal activity sanctioned by the Khartoum regime, the gang rapes of every woman regardless of age from the very youngest to the oldest. Something has to be done. We now have a presence on the continent, but really no intervention in what Bashir has accomplished with regard to the genocide of the Darfurian people. Three hundred thousand have been killed all told, about two and a half million in that country. And it looks as though if there isn't some intervention, as many as another one and a half million are vulnerable to the same fate.

I've gone on for a few minutes to give you an opportunity to compose your thoughts. How do you think we as a nation should address this outrage against humanity occurring in Sudan?

GEN. WARD: Well, sir, you know, thank you for that. You know, like all of us, I think it's absolutely terrible that these crimes, the rapes, the killings committed against any human being -- and it is something that we abhor as any person would that -- absolutely disdainful and horrible treatment of a human being.

I think from the standpoint of how we approach it, it's something that you point out, the role of the world community in addressing those sorts of things. I think it certainly required that type of a consensus, because otherwise, the gaps that might exist in whatever may occur could be filled by someone else who would not have the same sentiment. So I think from that regard, it does imply a consensus approach to solving a very complex and terrible situation.

Obviously, I don't sit in those circles, sir, so as our policy formulations are determined, you know, where there are military aspects to that, then because of where that country sits and my area of responsibility, then I will be clearly be charged with taking the appropriate action to deal with the military aspects of whatever policy that might be determined.

It is something that -- world community, I'm sure, is paying attention to. I know we are paying attention to it. And as that discussion continues for determining what those activities would be, I think it makes good, good sense for us to be prepared, to be ready, to do whatever part of that we're asked to do in support of, you know, that policy decision.

REP. MORAN: General, that's a -- oh, can I have one -- (laughs) -- further question on this?

REP. BISHOP: (Off mike.)

REP. MORAN: I know that. I thank the indulgence of the chairman. That's a perfect answer. It could've been just as well given by any diplomat with the State Department. It's just what -- exactly what you're supposed to say. But we have sent somebody over, nice guy. We've told him to go jawbone, which will have zero result, as you know. You're very well informed. You're experienced. And from what I can gather, you're pretty much a caring person as well.

So you must have come up with some ideas in your mind, and, I mean, if you don't want to share them publicly, I'd like to hear them. If, for example, the President was to pull you aside and say general, what do you think we should be doing with regard to Darfur -- that's what I'd like to hear. Now, you may want to be discrete and tell me afterwards, but that's what I'm trying to get your perspective on, because it's tough to just stand by and see it happen and with our hands in our pockets, you know.

GEN. WARD: Yes, sir, and the thing that I was -- I'd happy to share some of that with you, sir, but the thing that I would say is that no one thing -- it's a combination of things that are required here. The military piece of it would be only a single piece.

REP. MORAN: Right.

GEN. WARD: There are many things that would need to occur, and I think we out to be approaching it in that very holistic way, sir, because to address it in only a single line without considering those other lines would only achieve, if at all, very short-term results.

REP. MORAN: Wise answer. Thank you.

GEN. WARD: Yes, sir.

REP. MORAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: (Off mike.)

REP. TIAHRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, General Ward, for serving the country. I know you could do a lot of things, but serving the country is what you've chosen, and I appreciate it very much.

GEN. WARD: Yes, sir.

REP. TIAHRT: Recently I visited the Command and General Staff College in Fort Leavenworth, and I met a young man who's an officer from one of the countries in Africa, and I can't remember the country off the top of my head, but I hope that you will find those officers and go through the school and continue a relationship with them because many of them become eventual -- eventually their countries' leaders, and they can become tremendous allies.

I was reading in Time Magazine -- in a -- this latest issue had ten trends that they see coming in the future, and one of them was the economic expansion in Africa. And they highlighted a lot of involvement by the Chinese in purchasing businesses. And I was wondering what your perspective is of the Chinese presence in Africa. Is it militarily -- is it economic? We know that from a -- this recent spy who is -- who defected to America from China -- that they're conducting a lot of activities in the counter-intelligence area, but also trying to penetrate our economy as well as our defenses. And I wondered if their presence in Africa was very -- military wise, is it very large? Is it small? Or what do you -- what's your perspective on that?

GEN. WARD: Sir, I thank you. From what I determined, the Chinese presence in Africa is largely geared to -- towards economics, access to resources. I don't see a great presence militarily. I do see military -- Chinese military personnel on the continent. A lot of that is -- those are involved in infrastructure sorts of activities, engineers doing engineering sorts of work, roads, building buildings, et cetera. I think that's being done in response to their desire for access to resources there on the continent.

The point that you made to begin with, sir, with respect to, you know, the officer at Fort Leavenworth as apart of our international military education and training -- I too think that is a very important program. I think it's one of the things that quite candidly provides us our best long-term return on investment with respect to militaries and security structures on the continent of Africa that perform with integrity because of the exposure of those men and women who come to our country, participate in that training, and carry those experiences back to their countries.

So I am a firm supporter of that, and the point that you made with respect to keeping in touch with those individuals is an extremely critical one to me as well.

REP. TIAHRT: One other tool that I think is available to us is -- in a lot of our third world countries if we develop -- trade with them in their governments in the form of defense products, sometimes that's a long time trade relationship that becomes a political relationship. It becomes a good ally. And there's some hardware available, like it's called a AT-65 that may be a good tool to move them. It's a light aircraft. It has great ISR capability. It may be a tool that you want to look into as far as what you use as -- in assistance -- that as well, but certainly could be an open door for a lot of these governments that need to become good allies in the future, and I hope you take a look at that.

GEN. WARD: Thank you, sir.

REP. TIAHRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you.

Ms. Kaptur?

REP. MARCY KAPTUR (D-OH): Thanks, Mr. Chairman, very much.

Welcome. Really good to have you before us this morning. I wanted to ask from your vast experience, General Ward -- just comment about the changing nature of religious practice across Africa, the different faith groups, Islam, Christianity, different maybe tribal religious practices. You can comment country-specific or just overall. What kind -- as you look at the sweep of history, what do you see happening across Africa?

GEN. WARD: Well, I thank you for that, ma'am. I don't know if I would be an expert on that though. I would offer a few observations. Clearly, the role and -- of the tribe, the clans, and the historical and cultural attitudes still are very, very predominant regardless of what the religious may be, Christianity, Islam, or other. I think that is still to this day very, very instrumental in whatever religious belief that may be being practiced.

I think there are clear groupings, and there is -- and religion remains a priority. It remains a focus. Most nations in Africa pay attention to religion in ways that define their society based on their culture. One of the things that -- for our command -- very important -- this notion of how we understand cultures, how we understand the society, how we understand the people because of how that influences who they are, and then quite candidly, how it should be guiding our interactions with them so that we approach it from understanding who they are as a people.

Recently, in South Africa my command participated in a world wide chaplains conference where chaplains from various militaries from around the world -- to include from the continent of Africa -- gathered to discuss the role of religion in military societies -- correction -- in the military institutions, not so much from the standpoint of directing or guiding, but does it have a role in the values, the morals, et cetera, et cetera of a religious -- correction -- of a military institution?

The fact that the meeting even occurred acknowledged that there is a role to be played. There's a place for this in military units.

And again, not promoting one religion or another, but drawing upon those common tenets that might be there from, as I said, you know, treating people with dignity and respect, the value of a human being, values in a more broad sense, professionalism, what that contributes to professional militaries.

So there is an awareness of it. I think there is a discussion, an ongoing discussion of the role that the militaries could play -- correction -- religions could play in a military.

REP. KAPTUR: Well, if I could interrupt, general, in a nation like Kenya, for example, if one looks at the political instabilities there and you try to peel off the different layers of what might be contributing to that, the role of religion and of religious affinity, rising fervor among some groups I think would be very, very important to understand, and in the work that AFRICOM may be about here. And I don't think we as a country are very good at understanding that in other nations. And sometimes we try to contain it in a very inappropriate ways, and we end up shooting ourselves in the foot.

So I think, particularly across Northern Africa -- I'm not an expert on the nations of Africa, but I have noted kind of an inability to accommodate what is really going on in some of these societies. What you said about tribes is very interesting. You know, is the tribal loyalty first? What draws people? And I've often thought that, for example, from our country many of the organizations that I'm aware of from our state of Ohio that are working in Africa are doing much better work -- many of them have religious underpinnings of some sort -- much better work than the government of the United States in building lasting friendships and really helping people, particularly those who are desperate.

So, you know, I just place that on the table, and I'm sure that my time is expired here, but I thank you very much, and I do hope you pay greater attention to that. Thank you.

GEN. WARD: Thank you.

REP. BISHOP: (Off mike.)

Ms. Kilpatrick?

REP. KILPATRICK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman -- (inaudible). Usually don't have a second time at this. The Combined Joint Task Force in the Horn, Djibouti -- you have a special program that deals with counter-extremism and a strategy of -- they're calling it cooperative conflict prevention. Talk to us about that. The Horn is a very important part of the continent. What about that program? Is it helpful in that the Horn may be doing other things?

And I understand yours is a military command, and what we need on the continent are all kind of agencies working together to rectify some of the things that are wrong in that part of the world where over 800 million people live, and similarly, around the world where many other countries are in conflict, and we have severe conflicts on the continent. That's why I'm glad you're there, that we are there in a military capacity, not to mention that all the other things are not needed. We need them too.

But in the Horn specifically, and as it relates to the cooperation conflict prevention strategy -- I want to call it -- you may call it something else -- what exactly is that?

GEN. WARD: Thank you for that, ma'am. Two things -- first, what we have found is that when we bring together various nations and their military structures, we bring them together sometimes for the first time to work together, to cooperate, to see a regional issue through a common lens, so, for us this notion of cooperative conflict prevention describes the fact that together, they can in fact address a common threat; but to address that common threat requires some degree of collaboration, cooperation, working together building trust and confidence among themselves, not just on a bilateral way with us.

So, this program that exists in the Combined Joint Task Force, Horn of Africa, whereby we conduct seminars, training exercises; bring in nations who are neighbors but might not otherwise be exposed to one another and in so doing, something that might arise as an issue doesn't because they are talking, they are interacting.

There within the command there in Djibouti, we have a robust liaison program whereby the nations that are a part of the East Africa Region -- the Horn of Africa -- bring their officers into the command as well as liaison officers; sharing back and forth with their home government what's being done. Again, increasing confidence, increasing trust among themselves, increasing understanding.

In so doing, that cooperative arrangement serves to help prevent something that might otherwise occur in the form of mistaken perceptions, misunderstanding of intent; it reduces the likelihood of that when you come together and you work in a cooperative way. It just takes away some of the potential for some of those conflicts that may have been unintended.

REP. KILPATRICK: (Off mike.)

GEN. WARD: (Off mike) -- we do it -- others do it as well, but we clearly recognize that it is a very important part of our engagement strategy.

REP. KILPATRICK: (Off mike) Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: (Off mike) -- ask you General -- (inaudible) -- AFRICOM --(inaudible)-- 25 percent of the staff positions -- (inaudible) -- DOD agencies and as of March 1 of this year, it appears that that objective has been abandoned and only two percent of the AFRICOM staff works for agencies other than DOD.

By the end of March, 29 of the 1,058 (field positions ?) will be occupied by interagency staff including five from USAID, five from the Department of State and others from Commerce, Justice and Homeland Security.

Why has Africom abandoned the original goal of 25 percent of -- (inaudible) -- staff -- (inaudible) -- DOD versus non-DOD staff. Is it difficult to recruit staff from the other agencies? How does that shortage of the non-DOD staff affect your ability to execute strategy?

GEN. WARD: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Two things; I wouldn't say we abandoned it. I don't know if Kip Ward ever had it as a goal. I think as the command was going through its formulation, as our transition team was considering how the command might be organized, how it might be formed, what its dynamic my be -- I'll be very candid with you -- this was just kind of thrown on the table as a goal.

It's been (rooted ?) more in the ability, some budgetary considerations, but I will tell you that today, from my perspective, what we are receiving from our interagency partners is very adequate to our work in ensuring that the perspectives of what goes on by our other governmental agencies are represented in our command.

Because of the way we have matrixed our organization, because of the way that we are looking at how we integrate those members from the interagency who are a part of our command into our structure from the highest levels, including as you know, one of my deputies, through echelon as we work our various groups and committees.

We are working with the interagency; it is not just those who are there in a permanent way. There are those who come in on a continuous basis and a TDY function to come in and work to understand the role that they could play --

REP. BISHOP: You think that the balance is sufficient? You want to increase the non-DOD or do you think it's good the way it is?

Do we need to help in that regard?

GEN. WARD: It is continually evolving sir.

I think that there are additional spaces that we think would be good to have in the command, but again, we're learning about that. As we learn about it, then we go out, we request it and in most instances, the agencies are providing the support that we would see.

REP. BISHOP: I raise that question because the concern that was expressed in the report language and by the committee in the '09 bill reflects the fact that we're not completely clear of the role that the non-DOD agencies are playing and that they really don't want DOD to be assuming functions of state and USAID.

Of course, if you don't have the staff to perform the USAID work, it would appear as if you would have to do it or it doesn't get done; if it doesn't get done, that defeats your mission.

That was the reason I was trying to go there. If there is something we can do to help, just share that with us.

Mr. Frelinghuysen.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for another bite at the apple.

I'd like to sort of follow up where Ms. Kaptur was going a few minutes ago.

General, in a speech to the United Kingdom Royal United Services Institute back in September -- we monitor you each and every day here -- you said, and I quote, "A lot of activity goes on in a continent through our non-governmental organizations. Academia is involved. I showed you early on this thing about knowledge development. When I was in previous assignments, someone came to me with talk about, 'Well, Ward you need a cultural anthropologist on your team. You need to have someone to help you understand the human dimension; you need to have some human terrain analysis.'

As you know, we do have such groups; recently better advertised perhaps in ways that are not so positive.

I hear that the Army's human terrain system, or something like it, may be headed to Africa and I understand that actually advertisements have already gone out with help wanted ads for a new socio-cultural cell within your command. I quite honestly think it's a positive development. I think that's great.

Can you tell us what we're doing and why you're doing it? I think we know why you're doing it; lessons learned from Iraq and Afghanistan. But, can you put some flesh on the bones?

GEN. WARD: Yes sir; thank you.

That's pretty good there, sir, that you can go back to that RUSI and I --

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Just because you're in Stuttgart doesn't mean you're out of our line of sight.

(Laughter.)

GEN. WARD: Exactly, sir.

I've not changed my impression. We need to have a better understanding of those with whom we deal if we are to make a difference that makes sense from their point of view and unless it does, it won't last.

Our intent, sir, is to cause out activities to create the lasting enhancements to a secure environment and we don't do that if we don't understand our partners. This business of socio-cultural awareness, human terrain analysis -- I probably shouldn't be using all those buzz words, but it's about how we understand one another.

For us -- and its not lost on me nor those of my command -- when we sit with our partners and we look at ways of moving ahead, if we don't see things from their point of view, then we'll miss the mark.

This endeavor, as we look to build within our intelligence and knowledge development directorate, not the typical J coded structures -- J1, J2, J3 -- that you hear in most organizations, but intelligence and knowledge development as we attempt to build our base of understanding so that when we deal with our partners and our various partner nations, we can see things from their perspective a little bit better.

It impacts sometimes patients. We Americans are very impatient; we see things typically in hours and days where for many of our African partners its years and decades. It's an appreciation of the culture.

So, these entities -- be they cells or teams -- are designed to help us as we sit and do our planning to have a clearer understanding of our partner so that we proposed activities, engagements, strategies, it reflects what's meaningful to them, obviously in line with our objectives and hopefully, achieving desired and permanent result that leads to peace.

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: I'm glad you're moving ahead with it and it doesn't in any way negate the good work of those team members you have behind you who in some ways, do some pretty serious intelligence and economic and social investigation and obviously come up with recommendations.

I think having these teams on the ground, is indeed reassuring and let me just say, parenthetically because we're sort of contractor centric around here; its not always their contractors and their contractors and sometimes pulling together these people, does necessitate some outside help that might not be innate with a governmental structure.

Thank you for what you're doing in that regard.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BISHOP: Ms. Kaptur.

REP. KAPTUR: Yes.

I would just like to offer an opinion. It's a good thing about being elected and having some seniority; you can offer an opinion and no one has to listen to you.

How the United States approaches its presence in places with high levels of what we term, economic poverty; I don't think we're very good. If one looks at Latin America, some would say today there's a growing divide between the nations and Latin America and the United States, despite the investment by our country in billions and billions and billions of dollars, in military assistance and organizations such as -- (inaudible) -- formally School of the Americas.

As I listen to you, General, talk about connections with the military of various nations, my mind goes to the kinds of structure that we have funded for a long time relative to Latin America. Something hasn't quite happened there in that as you look at elections of leaders in that part of the world -- despite our efforts to try to stop it -- leaders and their followers turn more and more against the United States.

I think its very instructive as one looks at new command and this enormous continent of Africa, which I view tragically as a continent that has been exploited for centuries; whether it's the export of labor or the internal movement of labor within the African continent today.

If you look at the spread of AIDS in Africa, from South Africa up to Kenya; if you look at the diamond trade and you start understanding a little bit about that; you go oh well, here we go again. There's an economic underpinning to the exploitation.

You mention oil bunkering on Page 6 of your testimony. I think about Nigeria, the role of the oil trade and what's happening there; and I mentioned the diamond trade; and other resources. There's a lot of extractive exploitation that has gone on by interests outside the boundaries of the nations of Africa.

I look at our country and I think to my self -- we were in Pakistan about a year ago and we have this command over there you know from Egypt all the way to beyond Pakistan and we think that somehow we're going to manage all of this. You talk to the leaders of those countries and you find their understanding of poverty within their own countries is almost zero.

Yet as you embrace Africa, first you embrace poverty and the movement of people away from Africa just seeking a better life because their governments can't function. I say to my self, "What's a better model for us to embrace societies that are very different than ours, that have been historically exploited?" I don't we think we have it.

I think if you go down the path of --(inaudible)-- you're not going to succeed. I think you're better off to go back to George Marshall's, spend some time down at the George Marshall House down there in Fort Benning; I think that's in Congressman Bishop's district if I'm not mistaken. Just sit there and read his works; you've probably done a lot of that anyway, but we are missing the boat.

We don't seem to be able to transfer Democratic practices very efficiently. We had somebody in here the other day from the Army and Marine Corps and they were saying that what they're going to do in Afghanistan now is they're going to take our soldiers who come from rural areas and they're going to equip them with machine guns and they're going to teach the people of Afghanistan how to farm.

I sat here and I listened to that, and I thought, "Good luck."

I think that we -- I would just urge you to be a very harsh judge of what the Department of Defense has done in the past, with very good intentions, but if one looks politically at what's happening, the proof is in the pudding that its not working.

I thank you very much --

REP. BISHOP: I've got one other question I wanted to ask General Ward and I appreciate the gentle lady's remarks.

AFRICOM is one of our combatant commands that's designated combat command plus. I think the plus is because of the development and diplomacy that is really so much a part of it and its really a unique approach; I think only (SOUTHCOM ?) has really utilized that approach in the past.

General Ward, I don't know if you have any thoughts about it, but some are thinking that this might be a new model for our military engagements as we try to improve our national security around the world; particularly in place like Africa and the other commands where we are.

Let me just ask you one question about your regional integration teams. In 2008, you cancelled your plans to open five offices to house a small regional integration team of five or ten staff people, which would have been dispersed across the continent.

Why did you cancel the plans for those teams; which nations or regions did you ask or approach to host those regional integration teams; given the expense and logistics requirements of moving staff around the continent and how big the continent is, isn't it important to have a presence in those regional locations? Do you have any plans to try to reestablish or go forward with the regional integration teams in 2010?

GEN. WARD: Thank you, Chairman.

If I might, Representative Kaptur mentioned about this integration issue and before I get to the -- (inaudible) -- what I would say is that we recognize that the long term viability of a nation rests in the -- as I mentioned -- the integration of those three elements; security, development and diplomacy.

Our part of that triad is the security part. It needs to be happening hand-in-hand with the work being done in the development arena, as well as in the diplomacy arena, with representatives, of some effective governance taking care of its people.

So, we fully recognize that those are integrally linked activities; only one of which we are responsible for -- the defense, (correcting ?) the diplomacy, the development falls with other agencies of our government and that's why my point about -- I clearly endorse their capabilities being required as much as ours are needed because without that, then we don't get the lasting benefit of a stable environment.

With respect to the regional integration teams, it's kind of like the notion of how many interagency people do you need. Again, that initial planning team with that concept -- it was a concept. Quite candidly, one that one as I thought about it more and more, and as I listened to our on-continent presence -- the ambassadors as well as the nations with whom we were dealing -- that's not what they felt was most important.

What they thought was most important was when it came to executing programs in their countries, having an element in place that could provide a day to day assistance to them. That wasn't being provided by these regional integration teams; that's provided by our offices of security cooperation.

So, therefore, my priority is to reinforce, to buttress, to build those teams because that's what is important in our delivery of programs on the continent. The planning function, the integration of our activity function, is done at my headquarters, within the headquarters -- this notion of how we look at the various regions of the continent -- we're taking care of that.

And, given the infrastructure on the continent, getting around, is not facilitated quite candidly, by being on the continent. Most infrastructure travel to Africa requires movement through Europe, Frankfort, Paris and so it's not facilitated by being there from that coordination point of view outside of the particular country you're in.

REP. BISHOP: Sir, I admit I'm glad you touched upon that; that's a good --(inaudible)-- on your transportation challenges.

Of course, 11.7 million square miles is a pretty big area to cover and we appropriated in 2009, $30 million for operational airlift support. Of that amount, $17.5 million was provided to your air component, which is 17th Air Force, for military airlift support and $12.5 million of that was for U.S. transportation command TRANSCOM for the purposes of contracting for AFRICOM staff travel support.

What are the travel requirements for AFRICOM leadership and senior staff two and from your area of responsibility and how much of your travel requirements are taken care of by military air and how much of it is contracted out with commercial services?

GEN. WARD: Right now sir, the -- my staff travel is required for our coordination, our exercise planning; we conduct the various in- process reviews as we prepare to conduct major seminars.

That is a pretty robust travel requirement for my staff to move around the continent. The funds that you describe there include also the funds for moving military supplies and equipment as these exercises are conducted.

So that portion that was provided to by 17th Air Force, takes care of transporting our military equipment, personnel in pursuit of exercises, relief activities, logistic sustainment --

REP. BISHOP: You haven't had a lot of that though have you?

GEN. WARD: Haven't had a lot of it.

We did Flint Lock, we did Africa Endeavor and we certainly look to have that increase because, again, the point that Ms. Kilpatrick made, our partner countries are asking us for more. So this would be very helpful in that mobility requirement that we have for moving around the continent.

REP. BISHOP: That's the military air portion.

With the TRANSCOM portion, are the services that are contracted for your staff use private air service or is it commercial air service or -- what kind of air services are used with the TRANSCOM contracting?

GEN. WARD: The TRANSCOM contract is both.

We just received word of a private contract that hasn't started just yet -- it will start at the end of this month, the first of next month -- for helping with my staff's travel around the continent. That will start, I think, the first of April, sir, that TRANSCOM has done that contract for.

REP. BISHOP: Finally, with regard to that, do you have any challenges, do you foresee there being challenges in your having to utilize commercial transportation for mobility around Africa?

GEN. WARD: Yes sir, there are challenges.

The challenges are in routing, scheduling and frequency of schedules. I had a case of one of my staff missed one of the twice a week departures and had to spend an additional four days because of just the infrequency; I think there's one African carrier that's authorized to travel from Africa back to our continent.

So, there are challenges in the commercial airline scheduling regime --

REP. BISHOP: Is that why you have to -- you need to rely on the private?

GEN. WARD: That's why we need the dedicated travel in order to do our coordination for building the relationships, yes sir.

REP. BISHOP: Thank you, General.

Mr. Rothman, do you --

REP. ROTHMAN: No (off mike)

REP. BISHOP: Thank you.

Ms. Kilpatrick, do you have anything else?

Good. General Ward, thank you very much for your testimony today.

The subcommittee is adjourned until it reconvenes this afternoon at 1:30.

END.

Source