Preventing CCP Aggression on Taiwan

Deterrence Amid Rising Tensions: Preventing CCP Aggression on Taiwan

AI-generated summary and notes. Check quotations, numbers, and important claims against the source video. Captions may contain errors.

Watch the source video on YouTube

Estimated reading time: 131 minutes for the text on this page.

Summary

The Select Committee on the CCP discusses escalating tensions between China and Taiwan, focusing on military readiness and potential economic impacts. Urging immediate deterrent measures, the hearing highlights China's military ambitions under Xi Jinping, who aims for Taiwan by 2027. The panel examines cyber threats and the importance of allied cooperation to counter China’s aggression. Emphasis is placed on Taiwan's economic and strategic significance, especially in semiconductor production, with voices calling for bipartisan support to enhance military capabilities, bolster cybersecurity, and engage diplomatically.

Highlights

The importance of Taiwan in the global semiconductor market is a key issue, highlighting the stakes of potential Chinese aggression. 💾🏝️
China's ambitions to capture Taiwan by 2027 demand immediate action to fortify U.S. and allied defenses. ⏰🛡️
Bipartisan cooperation is necessary to effectively address the challenges posed by China's military buildup and to support Taiwan's sovereignty. 🏛️🇺🇸
Cybersecurity is a critical component in countering China's influence and preventing potential conflicts. 🖥️🛡️
Alliances with countries like Japan and Australia are vital for creating a unified front against CCP aggression. 🌐🤝

Key Takeaways

Taiwan is a key player in the global economy, especially in semiconductor production, making its security crucial for the U.S. 🇹🇼💻
China's 2027 window to seize Taiwan poses a serious military threat, requiring urgent deterrent strategies. 🚀
Bipartisan efforts are crucial to strengthen U.S.-Taiwan relations and ensure regional stability. 🤝
Cyber threats from China are significant, highlighting the need for robust U.S. infrastructure and cybersecurity measures. 💻🔒
Collaborating with allies like Japan, South Korea, and Australia strengthens deterrence against Chinese aggression. 🌏

Overview

The Select Committee on the CCP met to discuss the increasing tension between China and Taiwan and the potential for aggression by the CCP. The meeting stressed the urgent need for the U.S. and its allies to implement deterrence strategies before China fulfills its 2027 goal to take Taiwan by force. With Taiwan's semiconductor industry being a vital part of the global economy, the looming threat from China could have widespread consequences.

Members emphasized the multifaceted approach needed to counter the CCP's threats, focusing not only on military readiness but also on economic partnerships and cybersecurity. The discussions highlighted that China's ambitions are backed by its military build-up and require immediate attention from Congress to enhance defense capabilities and logistics to ensure Taiwan's readiness.

The hearing also underscored the importance of U.S. partnerships with allies in the Indo-Pacific and beyond. With testimonies influenced by the ongoing tensions, there was a strong call for bipartisan cooperation to support Taiwan's independence and secure its critical position in global markets. Overall, the hearing emphasized that failing to act could lead to severe global economic disruptions and a threat to democratic values.

Chapters

00:00 - 04:00: Introduction In the introductory chapter, the text sets the stage for the topics that will be covered in the book. It provides context and outlines the objectives and significance of the material, preparing readers for what they are about to learn. Key concepts, themes, and the overall direction of the book are highlighted, making it clear why the subject matter is important and what readers can expect to gain. This chapter serves as a roadmap, ensuring that the audience is engaged and informed about the journey they are embarking on.
04:00 - 57:00: Opening Statements The chapter 'Opening Statements' begins with an audio check, indicating a test of the audio equipment with a simple repetition of 'one two test one.'
57:00 - 134:00: General Flynn's Opening Remarks The chapter titled 'General Flynn's Opening Remarks' contains the transcript 'two audio check one.' This indicates it is likely an introductory segment for ensuring audio equipment is functioning correctly before General Flynn speaks.
134:00 - 205:00: Admiral Montgomery's Opening Remarks The chapter opens with Admiral Montgomery preparing to make his opening remarks. There is a brief pause as a technician conducts an audio check.
205:00 - 269:00: Dr. Campbell's Opening Remarks The chapter begins with Dr. Campbell's opening remarks, though the actual transcript content primarily notes '[Music]' with no further context or dialogue provided. As such, no detailed summary of spoken content can be discerned at this time.
269:00 - 526:00: Questions and Discussion The chapter, titled 'Questions and Discussion,' opens with a seemingly routine sound check, as indicated by the simple transcript 'Check. Check. One, two.' This suggests a casual or preparatory atmosphere, possibly preceding a session of questions and discussions. Given the lack of further transcript details, it's plausible that the chapter is setting the stage for a lively exchange of ideas or inquiries, where participants are readying themselves for a more substantial dialogue. The brevity and simplicity of the excerpt highlight the anticipation and focus on the forthcoming content.
526:00 - 621:00: Taiwan's Economic Ties and Military Cooperation The chapter discusses the economic and military connections between Taiwan and its global partners.
621:00 - 777:00: Chinese Military Threat and Strategic Alliances The chapter titled 'Chinese Military Threat and Strategic Alliances' discusses the growing military capabilities of China and the perceived threats it poses to regional and global security. It examines how various nations are responding to this threat through strategic alliances and partnerships. The chapter delves into the dynamics of military power in Asia, highlighting alliances such as the Quad and AUKUS, and explores how these alliances aim to counterbalance China's influence. The discussion also covers the strategic interests of countries like the United States, Japan, India, and Australia, and their collaborative efforts to ensure regional stability.
777:00 - 997:00: US Defense Capabilities and Policies The chapter likely discusses various aspects of the United States defense capabilities and the policies that guide these capabilities. It may cover topics such as military strength, strategic defense initiatives, technological advancements, budget allocations, defense strategies, and international collaborations. Furthermore, the chapter could delve into historical context and current defense policy trends, examining how these influence both national security and global geopolitical dynamics. The mention of [Music] implies introduction or transition segments, potentially highlighting key themes or providing context for the discussion.
997:00 - 1133:00: Infrastructure and Cybersecurity Challenges The chapter "Infrastructure and Cybersecurity Challenges" likely delves into the various obstacles and issues encountered in the fields of infrastructure and cybersecurity. It may explore topics such as cyber threats, vulnerabilities in infrastructure systems, and strategies for protecting against attacks. Given that the transcript begins with "[Music]", the transcript itself does not provide specific information about the chapter content, requiring summarization to focus on broader themes inferred from the chapter title.
1133:00 - 1267:00: Role of Allies in Indo-Pacific Security The chapter discusses the strategic importance of alliances in maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific region. It highlights the roles various allies play, including their military, economic, and diplomatic contributions. The chapter also covers the challenges and opportunities faced by these alliances in adapting to the evolving security landscape. Key alliances and partnerships, such as those involving the United States, Japan, Australia, and India, are examined, along with their collective and individual impacts on regional stability. The chapter concludes with insights into future directions for enhancing cooperative security measures.
1267:00 - 1376:00: China's Strategic Competition and Global Influence The chapter examines China's strategic competition and its impact on global influence. It begins with an audio check, indicating the start of a discussion or presentation.
1376:00 - 1500:00: Closing Remarks and Adjournment The chapter 'Closing Remarks and Adjournment' is likely to contain final thoughts, reflections, and conclusions drawn from previous discussions or subjects addressed in earlier chapters. It may also involve expressing gratitude, summarizing key takeaways, and ending the discussion formally. The actual phrase 'two, three' doesn't provide enough context to determine its specific relevance or thematic link to the chapter's themes.

Deterrence Amid Rising Tensions: Preventing CCP Aggression on Taiwan Transcription

00:00 - 00:30
00:30 - 01:00 audio check one two test one
01:00 - 01:30 two audio check one
01:30 - 02:00 two audio check
02:00 - 02:30 [Music]
02:30 - 03:00 Check. Check. One, two.
03:00 - 03:30 [Music]
03:30 - 04:00 You did not.
04:00 - 04:30 [Music]
04:30 - 05:00 [Music]
05:00 - 05:30 Doing another check real
05:30 - 06:00 quick. Audio check. One, two, test. One,
06:00 - 06:30 two, three.
06:30 - 07:00 Testing 1 2 3 4 5 6. Testing one, two,
07:00 - 07:30 three. Awesome. Thank
07:30 - 08:00 you. Mic check. Mic check chat. One,
08:00 - 08:30 two,
08:30 - 09:00 three. Testing. Testing. One, two.
09:00 - 09:30 Mic check. One, two,
09:30 - 10:00 three. Testing. One, two, three,
10:00 - 10:30 4. Testing.
10:30 - 11:00 567. Mic check. One, two,
11:00 - 11:30 three. Good morning. M check. One, two.
11:30 - 12:00 Today is Thursday. Mic check. One, two,
12:00 - 12:30 three. One, two,
12:30 - 13:00 three. Testing.
13:00 - 13:30 456. Testing. Testing. Testing.
13:30 - 14:00 789. Mic check. One, two,
14:00 - 14:30 three. Last mic check on the top row.
14:30 - 15:00 Last mic check on the top row.
15:00 - 15:30 Might check. Might check. One, two,
15:30 - 16:00 three. M check.
16:00 - 16:30 456. Canon caucus room. Mic check. One,
16:30 - 17:00 two. Testing. Testing. 1 2
17:00 - 17:30 3. Testing. 456.
17:30 - 18:00 Might check one
18:00 - 18:30 two might check 456 this meditation
18:30 - 19:00 center because I'm going to live there
19:00 - 19:30 at least the next year. You want to live
19:30 - 20:00 in Taiwan?
20:00 - 20:30 Check. Check check.
20:30 - 21:00 M check. One,
21:00 - 21:30 two. Testing. Testing. One, two, three.
21:30 - 22:00 Testing 456.
22:00 - 22:30 Witness mic check 123. We're here to
22:30 - 23:00 check out this meditation center because
23:00 - 23:30 I'm going to live witness check for at
23:30 - 24:00 least the next year. You want to live in
24:00 - 24:30 Taiwan?
24:30 - 25:00 Final mic check. Thank you.
25:00 - 25:30 Mic check for the reporters. Testing.
25:30 - 26:00 One, two, three. Mic check for the
26:00 - 26:30 stenographer. Testing. 5 4 3 2 1.
26:30 - 27:00 Member mic test for the stenographer.
27:00 - 27:30 Testing one, two, three.
27:30 - 28:00 Mic check. Testing. One, two, three. Mic
28:00 - 28:30 check. Testing.
28:30 - 29:00 [Music]
29:00 - 29:30 about this meditation center because I'm
29:30 - 30:00 going to live there for at least the
30:00 - 30:30 next year. You want to live in Taiwan?
30:30 - 31:00 [Music]
31:00 - 31:30 meditation center because I'm going to
31:30 - 32:00 live there for at least the next
32:00 - 32:30 year. This meditation center
32:30 - 33:00 because for at
33:00 - 33:30 least this meditation center because I'm
33:30 - 34:00 going to live there. We're
34:00 - 34:30 [Music]
34:30 - 35:00 meditation center because I'm going to
35:00 - 35:30 live there at least the next year. You
35:30 - 36:00 want to live in Taiwan.
36:00 - 36:30 This meditation center
36:30 - 37:00 [Music]
37:00 - 37:30 We're here to check out this meditation
37:30 - 38:00 center because I'm going to live there
38:00 - 38:30 for at least the next year. You want to
38:30 - 39:00 live in
39:00 - 39:30 speak. Just hit the talk button and you
39:30 - 40:00 can speak right into it once you're
40:00 - 40:30 done.
40:30 - 41:00 Select committee will come to
41:00 - 41:30 order. Uh good morning and thank you all
41:30 - 42:00 for being here today. And this hearing
42:00 - 42:30 today is not just another discussion
42:30 - 43:00 about long-term competition with China.
43:00 - 43:30 is about a very real near-term threat
43:30 - 44:00 and the narrowing window we have to
44:00 - 44:30 prevent a catastrophic conflict in the
44:30 - 45:00 Indo-Pacific. Sometimes this is referred
45:00 - 45:30 to as the 2027 Davidson window after
45:30 - 46:00 former Indopaccom Commander Admiral Phil
46:00 - 46:30 Davidson. But while Admiral Davidson did
46:30 - 47:00 warn us about Xi Jinping's ambitions
47:00 - 47:30 this decade, 2027 is not an American
47:30 - 48:00 date, but a Chinese
48:00 - 48:30 one. She has ordered the People's
48:30 - 49:00 Liberation Army to be ready to take
49:00 - 49:30 Taiwan by force by 2027.
49:30 - 50:00 She's directive is backed by the largest
50:00 - 50:30 military buildup since World War II on
50:30 - 51:00 land, at sea, in the skies, in space,
51:00 - 51:30 and across
51:30 - 52:00 cyberspace. And that date, 2027, also
52:00 - 52:30 marks the end of this Congress. That
52:30 - 53:00 means that the 119th Congress may be the
53:00 - 53:30 last full legislative session with a
53:30 - 54:00 chance to alter she's calculus.
54:00 - 54:30 We cannot delay. We must close critical
54:30 - 55:00 gaps now. Weapon stockpiles, forward
55:00 - 55:30 posture, contested logistics, cyber
55:30 - 56:00 defenses, and Taiwan's
56:00 - 56:30 readiness. Every decision we make on
56:30 - 57:00 defense spending, arms deliveries,
57:00 - 57:30 posture planning must be driven by that
57:30 - 58:00 urgency because deterrence delayed is
58:00 - 58:30 deterrence denied.
58:30 - 59:00 We have a great group today to deliver
59:00 - 59:30 this critical message and discuss our
59:30 - 60:00 plan and our path forward to deter the
60:00 - 60:30 Chinese Communist Party's catastrophic
60:30 - 61:00 ambitions. So today I'll be asking tough
61:00 - 61:30 necessary questions, questions every
61:30 - 62:00 member of Congress should be thinking
62:00 - 62:30 about. What does China's military
62:30 - 63:00 buildup really tell us about its intent?
63:00 - 63:30 How do we help Taiwan turn its strategy
63:30 - 64:00 into
64:00 - 64:30 reality and actually get US systems
64:30 - 65:00 delivered on
65:00 - 65:30 time? What are the most urgent gaps in
65:30 - 66:00 US force posture and
66:00 - 66:30 capabilities, especially across the
66:30 - 67:00 First Island
67:00 - 67:30 chain? What cyber threats could blind or
67:30 - 68:00 our response before a shot is
68:00 - 68:30 even fired?
68:30 - 69:00 and what steps can we take now with our
69:00 - 69:30 allies and partners to build
69:30 - 70:00 multilateral deterrence that she can't
70:00 - 70:30 ignore. We are trying to prevent one and
70:30 - 71:00 prevention only works if she believes
71:00 - 71:30 that the cost of aggression is too high
71:30 - 72:00 to bear. That requires action. serious
72:00 - 72:30 enough, visible enough, and fast enough
72:30 - 73:00 to shift the risk calculation in
73:00 - 73:30 Beijing. That's the work ahead. This
73:30 - 74:00 hearing is part of that, and I thank our
74:00 - 74:30 witnesses for helping us to get it
74:30 - 75:00 right. So, let's begin. I now recognize
75:00 - 75:30 ranking member Raja Krishna Mory for his
75:30 - 76:00 opening statement.
76:00 - 76:30 Raja. Thank you, Mr. chair and thank you
76:30 - 77:00 for convening this important hearing on
77:00 - 77:30 this critical topic. The deep ties
77:30 - 78:00 between Taiwan and the US and the CCP's
78:00 - 78:30 growing threat to Taiwan and by
78:30 - 79:00 extension America and the world. But
79:00 - 79:30 first, there's a problem we need to
79:30 - 80:00 address, Mr. Chairman. Americans don't
80:00 - 80:30 know much about Taiwan. Take this scene
80:30 - 81:00 from the latest season of the hit HBO
81:00 - 81:30 series White Lotus, which takes place in
81:30 - 82:00 Thailand. But one of the leads,
82:00 - 82:30 Victoria, confuses it for somewhere
82:30 - 83:00 else.
83:00 - 83:30 We're here to check out this meditation
83:30 - 84:00 center because I'm gonna live there for
84:00 - 84:30 at least the next year. You want to live
84:30 - 85:00 in Taiwan?
85:00 - 85:30 At least she confuses Thailand for
85:30 - 86:00 Taiwan, not China. But Victoria is not
86:00 - 86:30 alone in her geographic illiteracy.
86:30 - 87:00 Three years ago, I had the privilege of
87:00 - 87:30 visiting Taiwan for my first time with
87:30 - 88:00 then Speaker Pelosi. After the trip,
88:00 - 88:30 this poll by Morning Con consult was
88:30 - 89:00 taken asking Americans if they could
89:00 - 89:30 find Taiwan on a
89:30 - 90:00 map. It turns out that only 34% of
90:00 - 90:30 Americans can correctly identify Taiwan,
90:30 - 91:00 which is that green dot uh on the map. A
91:00 - 91:30 lot of people thought Taiwan was in
91:30 - 92:00 other places where these yellow dots
92:00 - 92:30 indicate even up in the Arctic Circle in
92:30 - 93:00 Russia. This hearing is um important for
93:00 - 93:30 many reasons, not necessarily to teach
93:30 - 94:00 geography, but as an opportunity to
94:00 - 94:30 clearly explain to Americans why Taiwan
94:30 - 95:00 is so important. First, I want to talk
95:00 - 95:30 about values. When I've been to Taiwan,
95:30 - 96:00 I've been bowled over by how amazingly
96:00 - 96:30 vibrant Taiwan's democracy is. Let me
96:30 - 97:00 show you this scene
97:00 - 97:30 here. This is the celebration in Taiwan
97:30 - 98:00 after President William Lie was
98:00 - 98:30 inaugurated last May. Now, Mr. Chair,
98:30 - 99:00 you and I were in Taiwan right before
99:00 - 99:30 this particular celebration, and I'm
99:30 - 100:00 upset that we missed the party with
100:00 - 100:30 street dancers, tiger costumes, and that
100:30 - 101:00 big blue horse. In contrast,
101:00 - 101:30 this was the CCP's recent celebration of
101:30 - 102:00 Xi Jinping getting an unelected third
102:00 - 102:30 term, setting up to be dictator for
102:30 - 103:00 life. So, here you have the contrast. On
103:00 - 103:30 one side of the straight, you have a
103:30 - 104:00 one-party
104:00 - 104:30 dictatorship. And on the other side is
104:30 - 105:00 Taiwan, a democracy doing everything it
105:00 - 105:30 can to make sure that, in the words of
105:30 - 106:00 one great Illinoisan, government of the
106:00 - 106:30 people, by the people, and for the
106:30 - 107:00 people does not perish from the earth.
107:00 - 107:30 This brings me to my second point, which
107:30 - 108:00 is about the economy. A lot of Americans
108:00 - 108:30 may not appreciate just how essential
108:30 - 109:00 Taiwan is for our own prosperity in
109:00 - 109:30 America. Taiwan is America's seventh
109:30 - 110:00 largest trading partner and it is a
110:00 - 110:30 huge, huge market for US exports. Take
110:30 - 111:00 my home state of Illinois for example.
111:00 - 111:30 Taiwan, believe it or not, is the second
111:30 - 112:00 largest importer of Illinois corn and
112:00 - 112:30 the third largest importer of Illinois
112:30 - 113:00 soybeans. Soybeans, it's dusty.
113:00 - 113:30 Taiwan is also a major investor. Since
113:30 - 114:00 2022, Taiwan's investment in America has
114:00 - 114:30 skyrocketed, surging from 1 billion in
114:30 - 115:00 2022 to 14 billion just two years later
115:00 - 115:30 in
115:30 - 116:00 2024. This includes the first
116:00 - 116:30 installment of $165 billion in
116:30 - 117:00 investment that one Taiwan semiconductor
117:00 - 117:30 company alone is going to make, namely
117:30 - 118:00 TSMC. This brings me to my final point.
118:00 - 118:30 Before Taiwan's election last year, the
118:30 - 119:00 CCP said that the results would mean
119:00 - 119:30 quote peace or war. I showed you how
119:30 - 120:00 Taiwan celebrated its successful
120:00 - 120:30 democratic election, but the PLA
120:30 - 121:00 responded just a little differently,
121:00 - 121:30 practicing a blockade and a missile
121:30 - 122:00 attack on Taiwan. This is a clip
122:00 - 122:30 courtesy of Chinese state television.
122:30 - 123:00 A little omin ominous if you ask me, but
123:00 - 123:30 that's how they greeted the results of
123:30 - 124:00 the election. We know that Xi Jinping
124:00 - 124:30 has ordered the PLA to be ready to
124:30 - 125:00 invade Taiwan by 2027. And that clip gave you a visual of what a prelude to a possible invasion could look like. According to a recent study, a conflict over Taiwan would be absolutely devastating for the world.
125:00 - 125:30 It would drop global GDP by a staggering $10 trillion or 10% in one single year. And as you can see, a war over Taiwan would be much, much worse than even the COVID pandemic at its height. Losing access to Taiwan semiconductors alone would push the US into a quote immediate great depression. People would die and our economy would crash. America, as the
125:30 - 126:00 chairman uh mentioned before, America does not want a war over Taiwan. A CCP attack on Taiwan would be unacceptable for our prosperity, our security, and our values. Chairman Shei, know that America on a bipartisan basis stands for peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, we will not tolerate actions that put peace at risk. Thank you, and I yield back.
126:00 - 126:30 Thank you, ranking member. Uh if any other member wishes to submit a statement for the record without objection, those statements will be added to the record. Now, I'd like to introduce our witnesses today. Uh I want to start with uh General Charles Flynn is the former commanding general of the United States Army Pacific, a four-star command that made him the Army's senior official in the Pacific. We're grateful for his decades of service and for joining us
126:30 - 127:00 today. Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery is the senior director FDD's Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation. He previously for more than 30 years in the United States Navy, including as director of operations at US Pacific Command and as commander of Carrier Strike Group Five. And finally, we are joined by the Honorable Kirk Campbell, who most recently was the 22nd United States
127:00 - 127:30 Deputy Secretary of State. He currently serves as chairman and co-founder of the Asia Group. Want to welcome all of you and appreciate uh you being with us. Uh with that, I uh want to recognize General Flynn. You're now recognized for your opening remarks. Chairman, ranking member, and uh distinguished members of the committee, thanks for inviting me to testify today. The threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is no longer distant or theoretical. The urgency to restore
127:30 - 128:00 credible deterrence in the Indoacific has never been greater. Taiwan's security is not only about protecting a vibrant democracy. It is about preserving regional stability, defending US interests, and maintaining the credibility of our alliance network from Japan to the Philippines, from Australia to India. It's about defending our homeland and gaining forward positional advantage. The People's Liberation Army, the PLA, is China's primary instrument for forcibly invading and unifying
128:00 - 128:30 Taiwan. And among its branches, the PLA army is the decisive force. We must stop pretending that this is just a naval or air power problem. If the PLA army cannot land, cannot maneuver, cannot hold ground, and cannot subjugate the people of Taiwan, it cannot win. If we can prevent them from even attempting to cross, we deter the war altogether. For far too long, we've invested in exquisite systems to fight a sea and air
128:30 - 129:00 campaign, but left ourselves exposed where it matters most, on land. where wars are won or lost. Land power not in isolation but as the backbone that enables the interdependencies of the joint force is what enables deterrence. It creates persistence, builds partnerships, is resilient and develops the deep infrastructure that sustains the fight, providing the operational endurance we need. No other service delivers long-range fires,
129:00 - 129:30 integrated air and missile defense, theater sustainment, command and control, and mobility across scale like the US Army. These are not future capabilities. They are being fielded now through multi-dommain task forces, logistics hubs, and joint fires networks in Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Australia, and beyond. But we need to go further and faster. We must establish a distribute distributed resilient land power posture across the first and second island chains backed by rapid
129:30 - 130:00 access agreements, robust joint exercises and prepositioned equipment that accelerates our response times. This is not just a US Army issue. Our most capable partners in Asia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, India, and Indonesia all field large and capable armies. If we integrate them, if we train and network them to operate with US forces, we create an Indo-Pacific landpower network that multiplies deterrence tfold. The
130:00 - 130:30 PLA does not fear our ships and aircraft. In fact, they expect them. It has built an A2 AD arsenal to deny them. What it fears is a credible force that can counter its army on its flanks, in its interior before it assembles and loads, and before it ever reaches Taiwan. That's what forward positioned allied land power brings to the table. This approach is more sustainable and
130:30 - 131:00 more affordable than betting on billion-dollar platforms that are vulnerable to missile saturation, electronic warfare, fragile supply chains, and other emerging threats. Instead of chasing perfection, what we need is persistent presence, hard to kill, hard to ignore capabilities anchored in both geography and partnerships. This includes asymmetric defense investments by Taiwan. I support President Li's emphasis on mobile
131:00 - 131:30 survivable systems, but these must be paired with deep civil military integration, reserve reforms, territorial defense strategies, and above all, training, training, and more training. A resilient society helps deny the PLA the quick clean victory exceeds and shifts the cost calculus back onto Beijing. Now, how do we operationalize this? Let me highlight three key Army capabilities that matter most in the Indo Pacific. First, mobile groundbased strike systems like Typhoon and HIMARS
131:30 - 132:00 can disrupt PLA planning and decision-making. We need more of these longer ranges, reloadable, mobile, and fullyworked into a joint fires web. Second, the Army's multi-main task forces. They bring together long-range sensing, cyber, space, AI, electronic warfare, and fires into a seamless operational construct. These units provide targeting, deception, and control across all domains and must remain a top investment priority. Third,
132:00 - 132:30 none of this works without sustainment. The Army leads in logistics, medical support, engineering, depo level supply maintenance, and inland transport. It's the backbone of the entire joint concept. without army sustainment, agile combat employment from the air force and expeditionary basing cannot function. We must push forward AI enabled manufacturing, co-production, maintenance and preposition stocks now, not later. Army forces also build
132:30 - 133:00 lasting regional partnerships that no other service can. These relationships secure terrain, both physical and human terrain, and they build the security architecture that binds the region together. That's real deterrence. So, I'm going to urge this committee to consider a strategic realignment, expand joint campaigning with Armyled partners, invest in long-range precision fires, integrated air and missile defense, AI, EW, resilient networks, and theater logistics, build and strengthen the landpower co coalition that already
133:00 - 133:30 wants to work with us, and recognize the PLA army as the decisive threat vector for Taiwan. You can't invade Taiwan unless you can generate an invasion force. And that is what we must prevent. So let me close with this. Deterrence is not a speech and it's not a flyover. It's not a sanction or a carrier patrol. Deterrence is the sum of this equation. Posture plus capability plus messaging plus will. It requires persistent presence. It demands deep partnerships.
133:30 - 134:00 And it is the certainty in the mind of the adversary that aggression will fail. We still have time to prevent war and we must. But time is not on our side. A focused land power strategy integrated with our allies and synchronized across the joint force is how we deny the PLA its objective. Preserve peace in the Indoacific. Thank you chairman and members. I look forward to your questions. Thank you General. Uh Admiral Montgomery uh please proceed.
134:00 - 134:30 Thank you Chairman Monar. Member Krishna Murthy and distinguished members of the committee. Um, this hearing today I think is really well timed. Uh, as we speak, America's ability to defeat a Chinese attack on Taiwan is eroding. Beijing's military readiness has benefited from a 30-year investment focused on advanced technologies that specifically target US vulnerabilities. In the face of this threat, America's ability to deter China
134:30 - 135:00 is withering, and thus the risk of a conflict is growing. One of the biggest challenges that the United States and Taiwan face is that we need to prepare for the most dangerous scenarios, the crossstrait invasions, the maritime blockades. But in addition, we have to prepare for the most likely scenario. That's a comprehensive cyber enabled economic warfare campaign. Because a crossstraight invasion or blockade would cause the most destruction on Taiwan, I think Beijing will want to force Taiwan's capitulation
135:00 - 135:30 through less drastic methods like a comprehensive pressure campaign that targets the financial, the energy, and the telecommunication sectors. And I think this will be facilitated by malicious cyber activity and military faints that further stress Taiwan's societal resilience. And back here in the American homeland, China is also going to employ the same malicious cyber activity to weaken our critical infrastructures and paralyze our American military mobility and readiness. China is also certain to conduct influence operations aimed at
135:30 - 136:00 weakening Taiwanese and American public support for action and freezing our national security decision-making processes. But as tough as things may look, continued congressional action can reverse these dangerous trends. My written testimony identified 20 recommendations across two broad lines of effort that Taiwan and America can take. That first line of effort is about siege proofing Taiwan and enhancing its ability to defend itself. Because no
136:00 - 136:30 country can or should do more to prepare Taiwan to defend Taiwan than Taiwan. To confront the most dangerous scenarios, Taiwan has to properly resource its military forces. That means Taiwan needs to spend 3% of their GDP on defense this year. And they need to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2028. And this money should be used to build both counterintervention ground forces to oppose that crossstrait invasion as well as fund air and naval capabilities to oppose a blockade.
136:30 - 137:00 Deterrence will only work if Taiwan credibly prepares for both the most both of these most dangerous scenarios. But organizing and equipping Taiwan's forces will also require the United States to be a better, more effective partner. The stories of egregious foreign military sales delays are not anecdotal. They're persistent. And alongside that foreign military sales, the US should maximize its military assistance to Taiwan through FMF, presidential draw down authorities, and Congress's new Taiwan security
137:00 - 137:30 cooperation initiative. Taiwan is too small to handle the Chinese challenge alone. We should also preposition munitions in Taiwan by establishing a stockpile program similar to the ones that we have in Israel and Korea. And we should expand our joint training and exercise programs. And I'd start by growing the joint training team developed by General Flynn out to about a thousand people. Alongside this military oriented preparation, Taiwan also has to prepare for that most likely scenario, a cyber
137:30 - 138:00 and economic campaign designed to break Taiwan's societal resilience and force Taipei to bend the knee without a damaging ground war. The second line of efforts about us, protecting America's ability to respond to and win a war in the Western Pacific. China is prepositioning disruptive and destructive cyber capabilities and US critical infrastructures. They're also developing cruise, ballistic, and hypersonic missiles that can impact the US homeland. Beijing wants to disrupt
138:00 - 138:30 America's ability to fight, and we must not let that happen. In the cyber realm, the United States needs to improve the security of our rail, aviation, and port sectors to ensure that we can reliably move forces from forts to ports. Congress should investigate using the National Guard to conduct some of this defense of America's critical assets. Similarly, we need to build our societal resilience against Chinese malign influence. Last year, Congress wisely took a critical step by requiring the sale of Tik Tok. Any White House effort
138:30 - 139:00 to save Tik Tok must ensure bike dance is divested of its control over the Tik Tok algorithm. In missile defense, the Golden Dome effort could be a great first step if it focuses on a long-term space-based approach to defending the homeland. And we need to double down on America's investments in hypersonic defense. At this moment, we have no answer to Chinese maneuvering hypersonic missiles. Finally, we need to create an independent cyber service in order to maximize cyber force generation and
139:00 - 139:30 allow US cyber command to compete with China's exploding cyber capabilities. Thanks for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much, Admiral. Uh Dr. Campbell, the floor is yours. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. Um, let me commend this committee for the manner in which you've undertaken your business. It's been bipartisan in an environment that there's scarcely uh very much cooperation. The work that you've done has been pathbreaking and
139:30 - 140:00 informed our work um over the last several years and it continues uh today and I want to just suggest to you that it's it is a model of how we should undertake uh our work. Uh it is also the case I first of all I'm grateful to be joined with such wonderful patriots who've devoted so much of their careers not only to the maintenance of peace and stability in the western Pacific but also to American power in the in the Indoacific. I I will say that that this peace and stability which we enjoy
140:00 - 140:30 across the Taiwan Strait is largely a result of legislative action. This is the example of legislative leadership beginning with the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, continuing with the work subsequently enhancing Taiwan's defense capabilities, ensuring that both parties remain vigilant to the threats and the challenges and that we stand firm behind uh Taiwan. Uh so that needs to continue. I think it's critical and vital. Um,
140:30 - 141:00 second point just very quickly, uh, the ranking member described Taiwan. The the truth is this is an enormous achievement by the Taiwanese people, but we should take some credit for that. What Taiwan has achieved technologically, democratically, the resilience of their society. To be honest, I can remember visiting several years ago during a very difficult election period, thinking, "Oh my gosh, look at the challenges that they're facing. Their democracy in many
141:00 - 141:30 respects is more resilient than our own. This is a remarkable achievement. They are a partner with us in so many different ways and this should be commended and embraced. Third thing just to underscore. For decades, it was only the United States that was recognizing and supporting Taiwan's importance. But over the course of the last several years, something remarkable has happened. Many of our allies and partners are joining with us in engaging
141:30 - 142:00 Taiwan and they are speaking out publicly that they too have an interest in the maintenance and peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Now the gentleman sitting next to me can tell you all the important elements of deterrence on the military side. But I will also tell you Beijing takes notice in how other countries respond. And the fact that we've gone from one or two countries talking about the importance to Taiwan to absolutely dozens now is an enormous achievement not only of this
142:00 - 142:30 body but the United States and that should continue. Fourth, just quickly on capabilities, you've heard a lot about what needs to be done with respect to the indigenous military and defensive capabilities Taiwan. and I stand with uh the gentleman here on those issues. I would I would differ slightly with the general. I believe that this is a naval theater, but that's probably sort of an interural thing that we can get to. I'll talk to you mostly what I think is as important as anything else. The Taiwan
142:30 - 143:00 Relations Act uh insists that we maintain the capabilities to maintain peace and stability to respond to challenges in the Western Pacific. And I do fundamentally agree with my colleagues that we need to do more about our own capabilities. And I'll just from my own experience over the past 30 years working on these issues, I'll just tell you where I think the big issues are uh focused. First of all, I do not believe we can take this challenge on by ourselves. We need much deeper engagement with our allies and partners.
143:00 - 143:30 And that means Japan, that means South Korea, that means Australia, that also means increasingly countries like India and Vietnam. And I will also tell you countries in Europe who also believe that the maintenance of peace and stability is in our interests. We need much greater integration militarily and strategically. We need to embrace these part these partnerships that go way beyond what we've done in the past. I think that's critically important. ship building, something that you all have
143:30 - 144:00 focused on that we've struggled with, critical munitions. I was struck very early in the Ukraine crisis at how difficult it was for us to produce what we needed domestically. We're going to need to do this more with allies and partners. And so while I think it is critical that you focus on what Taiwan needs to do and how we need to support Taiwan, remember that we are the ultimate backstock and we must keep our capabilities shifting more of our
144:00 - 144:30 capacity to the Indoacific recognizing that this is where the ultimate challenge to American power is in the 21st century. Last thing, I'm going to say this carefully if I can. I agree that we are facing enormous challenges uh from Beijing, but we must be honest that some of the biggest challenges that we're facing are debates here in the United States. We occasionally hear discussion about spheres of interests and influence and maybe this is too far for us and it's in another major
144:30 - 145:00 authoritarian country's neighborhood and we should look at this differently. Those concepts are contrary to our strategic interests. They are unamerican and they do not uh align with our historic responsibilities, our commitments and what we all believe in. And so I'm asking not only are you uh inviting us in today to discuss with you, I'm asking for this committee's leadership to make clear that our interests stand clearly with continuing
145:00 - 145:30 our vibrant support uh of the Taiwanese people and what they've achieved technologically uh politically and strategically over the course of the last 40 years with our strong support. Thank you very much, Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Campbell and and all three witnesses. Uh now we'll move to questions and I'd like to begin uh with General Flynn. Uh in your testimony, you mentioned that America's window for strategic decisionmaking is
145:30 - 146:00 closing and that we must accelerate our own preparations. Can you better help us better understand the stakes in the starkkest terms possible given your decades of service? And are we currently moving with enough urgency uh to as you put it uh accelerate our preparations? Chairman, no, we're not. Um let me uh I guess I'll just describe, you know, from 2014 to 2024 when I left
146:00 - 146:30 command, what the Chinese military were doing uh 10 years ago compared to what they're doing today is dramatically different. And that trajectory that they're on is what we actually have to slow down. Um the problem is that our organic industrial base is a precursor to our defense industrial base and they're anemic. And so when uh Mr. Campbell mentioned about precision munitions and
146:30 - 147:00 ship building, I'm I'm for all of that. In fact, we need that. In fact, the region needs it because they don't have big army uh big air forces and big navies. The US Navy and the US Air Force must keep the global commons open. But part of the problem is that the thing I lacked as US Army Pacific Commander and I would say that the combatant commander did as well was sort of persistent logistics hubs forward where you could have stores
147:00 - 147:30 co-production. You could have uh distributed uh and agile uh locations to be able to draw on those stores. And of course, this requires a really important dance between the Department of State and the Department of Defense to have those locations open and available. Although we have things available today and so I just think the um the window uh chairman is narrowing, but it's also narrowing for uh for China as well. Um
147:30 - 148:00 so it's not all bad news. You know, he's president Xi is is 71. He'll be 81 in 10 years. And I know that this window of 27 is still, you know, sort of on the table. Are they rehearsing? Are they preparing? Absolutely. But I also think that we're in a very good position to be be able to counter them because we have this advantage and that advantage is the partnerships of the allies and partners in the region. So when we can bring them
148:00 - 148:30 together as a counterweight to the thing that they try to fragment and fracture every day is our network of allies and partners. So in summary, what I would say is our organic industrial base and defense industrial base. We need your help to get those things moving much faster. But that's not going to get us out of the problem because China is still moving with great speed. Therefore, we have to put capabilities forward, gain positional advantage
148:30 - 149:00 forward in the region, and we have to do that with our allies and partners. The thing that we enjoy most, and I'll make the point on the ground, on the ground where people live out in these countries, out in these districts, out in these various interior lands in the country. That's where army forces along with special operations, along with Marines, along with the sizable armies that are in this region. I mean, one one statistic that I want to put on the table right now, the Philippines is 7
149:00 - 149:30 and a half thousand islands. It's an archipelic nation. 70% of its military is its army. They have more divisions than the US Army does. They turn to their armies. They turn to their land powers to be able to to uh protect their territorial integrity and protect their national sovereignty. And what I'm saying is if we match up with them, we're going to be in much different place in terms of assurance and deterrence because those things are going to have to happen on the ground.
149:30 - 150:00 And back to the organic industrial base, the more we bring systems forward, the more that they uh become closer by way of interoperability. I just read yesterday that the Taiwanese did their first live fire with HIMAR. They just bought 29 highimars. And you all know where we're going with high mars. I had that comment at my in my uh my opening. That is an incredibly important system. The Japanese, the Philippines are each buying long range anti-hship missiles.
150:00 - 150:30 So the point being that uh that's the connection between technology, the organic and defense industrial base and the work that we actually have to do on the ground to have hard power forward. Thank you. Thank you. And uh just quickly uh Admiral Montgomery, you talked a little bit about cyber and resilience for our cyber security. What two or three things could we be doing to help with that? So the most important thing for us
150:30 - 151:00 is to get our rail, aviation, and port systems secure. And the way we do that is through legislation. And that legislation will need to address and appropriations. It'll need to address the sector management agencies. That's US Coast Guard, Transportation Security Agency, and FAA. These are not normally what you think about in a war with China, but they're going to be the front line in the war with China. They have to be properly resourced in order to build the partnerships with the critical
151:00 - 151:30 infrastructures. And the other problem we have is these ports, rail systems, and aviation. We're not talking about these are county executive, you know, county and state-run authorities. They don't have two wood nickels to rub together. They're going to need access to grant programs to fix the problems as long as they do an assessment according to a a government standard. Find a, you know, find that flaw and fix it. But the government's going to have to get involved in this because the military needs these systems to function so that we can get, as I said, from the forts to
151:30 - 152:00 the ports and overseas. Thank you. Uh, now I recognize ranking member Krishna Morphy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think people in my district and across the country are uh a little bit on edge economically today. They're worried about access to social security, Medicare, Medicaid. They're also worried about rising costs in a potential recession. But Secretary Campbell, I feel that US economic ties with Taiwan are one of the few bright spots in otherwise economically uncertain world. Wouldn't you agree with
152:00 - 152:30 that? Very much so. And I would just underscore as you yourself uh mentioned uh what Taiwan provides uh to us technologically uh is unique globally. They are the most important ingredient in the global economy with respect to TSMC. But unlike other countries that would hoard those capabilities, as you well understand, they are building fabs now as we speak in the United States to
152:30 - 153:00 help with that supply. They are really an outstanding partner. I think they believe fundamentally in the partnership with the United States. Um I completely agree that their role in the global economy should not be underestimated. Let me show this graph. Um it shows the remarkable increase in Taiwan's investment in America in recent years which as I mentioned before spiked to 14 billion last year. But this is just the beginning. Apparently the numbers are going to skyrocket mostly uh helping my
153:00 - 153:30 colleague uh Greg Stanton in Arizona. But basically uh they just announced a hundred billion dollars in further investments TSMC did in the US which will allow us to produce 30% of the world's most advanced semiconductors shortly. Let me turn to my next topic.
153:30 - 154:00 [Music] This is an air raid a sound of an air raid siren. It goes off three times a day in Taiwan when Chinese war plananes fly dangerously close to the island. Imagine Russian planes approaching American airspace. Last year, Russia flew war plananes into America into Alaska's air defense zone 36 times. In contrast, last year, Chinese warplanes
154:00 - 154:30 flew into Taiwan's air defense zone more than 3,000 times. This is what it looks like. These red lines around the island are basically the path of Chinese warplanes as they traversed the air defense zone surrounding Taiwan. Admiral Montgomery, by doing this, the CCP is trying to wear down Taiwan's defenders and probe Taiwan for weaknesses. Right. Exactly. This is what we would call a
154:30 - 155:00 maximum pressure campaign. They use these military tools, cyber tools, and other financial and energy tools to put a constant pressure on Taiwan's societal resilience. And then at some later date, they can just dial that up when they see that there's no Western response. Let me turn to my last topic. While these while these air crossings happen almost daily, making invasion seem possible, a more likely scenario is a CCPled blockade of
155:00 - 155:30 the island. And here's how it could unfold. Step one, the PLA calls snap exercises like those after Speaker Pelosy's 2022 visit. You see all these ships surrounding the island. Step two, instead of leaving, PLA warships stay in place and then Chinese Coast Guard and militia vessels fill the gaps, creating a de facto blockade, which of course is an act of war. Step three, the real test
155:30 - 156:00 comes when imports like corn and soy from Illinois, Michigan, and of course, South Dakota try to reach Taiwan, as you see here, but they are stopped by the CCP. In that moment, we are on the brink of war. In the Cuban missile crisis, we were famously quote unquote eyeball to eyeball with the Soviets, and the Soviets blinked first. But we don't want
156:00 - 156:30 to get to that point where we need to be eyeball to eyeball with the CCP. So, um, General Flynn, you'd agree with me that one way Taiwan can deter a blockade is by stockpiling, uh, for instance, corn, soy, natural gas, and so forth, right? Yes, Frank member. Absolutely. What more, Secretary Campbell, do we need to do to show Xi Jinping that he should never think about trying to blockade
156:30 - 157:00 Taiwan because it would fail? Thanks. It's a multi- uh strategy. Frankly, Congressman, I completely agree with uh my colleagues about the things that we needed to step up both Taiwan and our capabilities. I will say that deterrence comes with a recognition that if such steps were taken that China would face the most brutal financial uh uh steps taken against it, not just by the United States but by other countries
157:00 - 157:30 as well. We also need uh more stepped up military capabilities. The I think the scenario that you paint uh congressman is the most likely. Our answer to that frankly is our submarine force uh more than anything else. It is our jewel in the crown. Uh the what you all have done recommending that more steps be taken here. I'm a huge supporter of AUS. I believe if the United States, Australia, and Great Britain can step up our joint capabilities, that is a major deterrent.
157:30 - 158:00 We need to keep that area of advantage where we are still 10, 15, 20 years ahead of Beijing and in operating in the undersea domain. As long as we have that, it would be very difficult to affect a successful blockade against Taiwan with those capabilities. That's the area that we need to double down on. Sir, if I could add one cost-free idea, um that's we need to begin practicing escorts and reflagings with Taiwan. the
158:00 - 158:30 other, you didn't mention it, but LNG, liquid natural gas is the real I think that's the first thing that's going to tighten them up uh during this and we need to ahead of the event do um re ref flagging and convoy escorts with the Taiwan Navy practicing with LGs and even try to pull the Japanese into that as well who are equally vulnerable to this. To me, that's a good cost-free way of signaling to China we're not going to let this happen. I I would I would add that uh the picture you paint also is
158:30 - 159:00 why it's so important for training on the ground in Taiwan for them to be able to see that picture and then be able to paint what they can do by way of countermeasures. Um this again this is not just a US problem. This has to be a Taiwan problem, a Japanese problem, a Philippine problem. It's got to be the entire first island chain to include South Korea. And there are angles and things that we can do from areas to counter what you were just outlining
159:00 - 159:30 there with the air and the maritime pressure um from Taiwan. And that's why that training on island and the technology integration with those forces is so so important. And again, I'll just remind people that at the end the objective is to invade it. And that's the most dangerous scenario. So you can't get that force across a 100 miles without us seeing it. And my point would be that we have to have the indications
159:30 - 160:00 and warnings of what's actually happening in China with the invasion force. So we watch a lot of the air and we watch a lot of the sea. And I agree with this. The the the submarine force of the United States is there's nothing close to it. However, to be able to extend our indications and warnings, we have to collect on the very thing that they need to actually invade, and that's the forces that are in the Eastern Theater Command. And I'm just saying, if we want to increase our indications and warnings
160:00 - 160:30 and buy time for diplomacy and political intervention, then we need to be watching the thing that they need to actually invade because they're not going to invade with the Air Force and they're not going to invade with the Navy. you need a gun on the ground to be able to sub subjugate those people and that's the most difficult thing that they can do and my point is we need to be watching that and putting the technology against watching that so we buy more time for the United States and others to say please what are we doing
160:30 - 161:00 here we don't want another war thank you uh Representative Bar thank you Mr. Mr. Chairman and General Flynn, you do make a powerful case for land power and uh collecting uh intel on the invasion force in advance uh as part of enhancing deterrence in the Indoacific. Uh I'm I'm particularly interested in your uh testimony and the um uh the operations to place systems like Typhon and Himars to deter PLA
161:00 - 161:30 planning uh deployment in the Philippines uh shifting the the the Chinese calculus. I've read about the Bellose response from um Beijing um related to deployment of these systems in the theater. Um so we've got them rattled on that. That's a piece of deterrence. I am curious to know your thoughts on cooperation from our partners in the Philippines and Japan on prepositioning those assets at the EDKA sites in Japan. I mean in in the
161:30 - 162:00 Philippines and then given um I know the J we were just in Tokyo the bipartisan group their cooperation is is spectacular but with the potential relocation of the Marines from Okinawa to Guam. What what is the cooperation we need on these systems in the south of Japan and in the Philippines? I'll thanks sir. Let me start in the Philippines. First of all, the benefit of having nine EDKA sites is
162:00 - 162:30 exponential. And uh I'll use another example in Agila Harbor in Subi Bay. Uh we lease 3 million square feet of of warehouses. And so we were trying to establish a joint theater logistics center there to be able to have commodities that we could use often. That's one location. And it's not an EDA site, but it certainly benefits the United States, benefits the Philippine government, and benefits really the
162:30 - 163:00 network of allies and partners to be able to have those capabilities there on the ground. On the ground, you can do co-production, you can do maintenance forward, you can fix forward, you can arm forward, and then you can distribute to the nine EDKA sites in the Philippines. So you can see how valuable that port and and it's a deep water port and the warehouses are. You know, you mentioned Tokyo. I'm going to go to Japan for a minute. Last year I was down in uh outside of the metropolitan uh uh Hiroshima area. There's two army ports
163:00 - 163:30 down there and five uh different uh uh small installations that were built by the Japanese after the Second World War under the US uh leadership. that we're only using about 40% of the storage on the ground in those facilities. Never mind outside of Tokyo. Never mind the stores that we have in Kadina and Okinawa and of course the preposition equipment that we have in Korea. I guess the point I'm making is
163:30 - 164:00 that we have we have physical access right now. What we don't have and what I mentioned in my testimony is that we're not putting the equipment on the ground fast enough. One example, there are seven vessels that were loaded with pre-positioned equip equipment a float in the Pacific. We were taking those vessels and just having the equipment float out there. My point was, let's get it on the ground and keep it distributed and give those ships back to the Navy to
164:00 - 164:30 recap them. Well, General, thanks thanks for your service. And I I represent the Bluegrass Army Dep Depot, part of the Army Material Command. We we need to do exactly what you suggest and preposition uh over in the uh the theater. Um let me ask a quick question to uh Deputy Secretary Campbell. Um strategic ambiguity, this has been a diplomatic debate. Should we abandon strategic ambiguity? Would deterrence be served by
164:30 - 165:00 uh uh shifting to clarity uh as a as a policy of deterrence? Congressman, my own view would be that the policy that we've adopted um over the last 40 years of um which I believe has substantial elements of clarity within it, but our declaratory position that you described, I believe has served our strategic interests and I believe there's still uh uh elements of that
165:00 - 165:30 that can and should be sustained going forward. So, I'm I'm more um focused on the steps that we're talking about here in terms of preparation, but I also believe we've been unmistakable strategically in our public declarations about what we stand for and what we Let me drill down on a detail of that. Uh as you know, the PRC uses UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to isolate Taiwan by misinterpreting the resolution to justify its fraudulent one China
165:30 - 166:00 principle. Although the resolution makes no mention of Taiwan, does not authorize the PRC to represent Taiwan in the UN system, and certainly does not state that Taiwan is part of the PRC. What should be the US position on China using 2758 to claim that Taiwan is part of China? We should resist that at every possible uh effort both in uh New York, in Geneva, and all the other uh UN activities uh that we're undertaking.
166:00 - 166:30 Look, the the the truth is that the UN is a pretty important battleground for hearts and minds in the global south. We're frankly hurting our ability to operate in many of those capacities. I think one of the reasons to engage here is that it is essential that we get all these other countries in Latin America, Africa, and elsewhere that are buying into this approach to understand that it's contrary to their interests as well. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you, Representative Molton. Thank
166:30 - 167:00 you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank the distinguished witnesses for your years of service to our country. And uh and I tell you, we've had uh I've certainly have had a lot of interactions uh especially with General Flynn and and uh uh Mr. Campbell, and you've uh always been incredibly bipartisan and and thoughtful and really focused on the national security concerns of stake here. So So thank you for that. Um, the senator, I'm sorry, I mean the ranking member is right that many Americans
167:00 - 167:30 don't know where uh Taiwan is. But what's most dangerous is how many don't understand why Taiwan is so important. Don't understand how many chips they carry with them every day that can only be produced on this tiny island. Now sitting on the Armed Services Committee and the China Committee, I can tell you I am confident that if Ci Jinping and this and the Chinese Communist Party do what they have promised to do and try to take over this island, try to start this war, we will win it. We will defeat
167:30 - 168:00 them. But hundreds of thousands will die. We could lose the satellites that enable GPS. So no more Google Maps to get home. And it would be a horrific worldwide economic calamity. So the point is that we have to succeed at deterrence. Now General Flynn, you said that deterrence is the sum of posture, capability, messaging, and will. I would posit that you can win without posture. Armies have won throughout history without the best capability, and we
168:00 - 168:30 don't often have the right messaging, but my concern is will. I don't think it's helpful to have a president equivocate on whether we would defend Taiwan as President Trump has. Given where we are today, how do we ensure that Ci Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party understand America and Taiwan's will to fight? Uh sir, I think we this is why we have to have uh positional advantage
168:30 - 169:00 forward. There's no substitute for hard power being forward. And as cited earlier, the typhoon system and others that are in the Philippines, they get the attention of President Xi. That's a good answer. And I think what we're trying to do is seow doubt and feed paranoia there because they did not calculate for those systems being brought in there. Admiral Montgomery, what do you think? Sorry, we don't. Uh I agree with I agree with your you know
169:00 - 169:30 your assumption that your presumption that we need to deter them. What I would say is is that I I do think that uh it's the real deterrence would be is us in Taiwan becoming more integrated. I I don't share General Flynn's optimism about Japan, Philippines, Australia actually contributing. They may give us access during combat. I'm not sure they can contribute. The one country I know will contribute to the defense of Taiwan is Taiwan. And currently our military coordination is that our military
169:30 - 170:00 interoperability is down at the deconlicted level, the lowest level. We have to raise it the coordinated, integrated, and eventually unified. And this this normally takes 10 to 15 years. Do this in the next two to three. Thank you, Secretary Campbell. Um, frankly, I'm much more uh optimistic about the role of our allies. I've seen over years countries like Japan, Australia, South Korea, even Okay, but how do how do we reinforce this will? Um, are you talking about the will will
170:00 - 170:30 domestically? Yes. Frankly, hearings like this, we we we need much more discussion flankly just having people understand that our economy grounds to a halt without our access to the key technologies of Taiwan. This is an educational effort. I will also say um I think the the real strength of what we've seen in our uh engagement in the Indoacific, it has been largely bipartisan. It needs to stay that way
170:30 - 171:00 and major policy things need to be debated and discussed and not sort of decided from on high without appropriate consultation. Thank you. Uh just a quick diversion to Ri Montgomery, your comment on on Golden Dome because I think it's really important that we're investing in the right things here. How long will it take us to design, build, and deploy this capability? Look, if we do it right, we're going for the long term. The worst thing we can do right now is go by, it's been estimated 15 years. How long do you think it will take our adversaries to I think the spacebased
171:00 - 171:30 system is now 5 to 8 years and and they would be both search and tracking. If one of our adversaries is willing to launch a massive attack against us, which this system is designed to to stop, thousands of intercontinental ballistic missiles, don't you think they'd be willing to detonate just a single missile to take out every LEO satellite to take out that defense system? So, this is not about stopping a inter a nuclear exchange. The stop what will stop a nuclear exchange is mutual assured destruction. are what we need
171:30 - 172:00 Golden Dome for is the hypersonic missiles, cruise missiles, and not and conventionally armed ballistic missiles that China and Russia are now building. What you just said, I think is incredibly important and it's and it's lost on a lot of people in understanding uh Golden Dome. So, thank you for that, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you, Representative Dunn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the witnesses as well for the testimony today. And let me just say, Mr. Chairman, you've uh you've put together an incredibly distinguished panel uh
172:00 - 172:30 this morning. It's a real pleasure to drag myself out of bed just for a chance to talk to these gentlemen. Uh it's incumbent upon us in Congress to decisively put a stop to the PRC's plans to forcefully annex Taiwan. Uh Taiwan is our strategic partner, share similar commitment to democratic values and we cannot allow the PLA PRC to continue to run a muck bullying and jeopardizing the security of our allies throughout the
172:30 - 173:00 world. To accomplish this, we have to optimize and revitalize America's defense industrial base and the defense workforce to maintain competitive military readiness. And America has to close the gap in defense production capacity. Otherwise, our enemies, China, Iran, Russia will continue to threaten our allies throughout the world. As policy makers, we must continue efforts to establish comprehensive security
173:00 - 173:30 strategy that prioritizes a readied military posture. And I'm a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I'll present a report uh on the need for defense industrial base shifts in America, Canada, and in uh Europe uh at the upcoming NATO PA summit next week in Dayton uh Ohio. The US has to lead these global efforts I think including in cyber deterrence strengthening
173:30 - 174:00 partnerships and I mean beyond the five eyes intelligence alliance to build collective uh defensive alliances. We've heard through our previous work in this committee uh that the PRC will stop at nothing to control, dominate, and exacerbate any and every vulnerability to carve out a strategic advantage for itself. And it remains critical that we establish comprehensive security strategy to respond to that. And I look
174:00 - 174:30 forward to continuing this work with my colleagues and with our allies. And I let me say I think this panel exemplifies the American commitment to that goal. General Flynn, good to see you again, sir. Uh first, could you talk about the uh critical infrastructure challenges in the Indo-Pacific and how they impact the military's ability to operate throughout the region? Um Admiral Montgomery mentioned uh the I'll I'll just refer to them as power projection platforms. They're
174:30 - 175:00 vulnerable. they're vulnerable to cyber um attacks and infections essentially that are on those networks. Um I would also say that um as I mentioned in my remarks because it's part tied to the comment you're making our ability to have the raw materials of steel, aluminum, magnets, batteries, um even the microchips as he held the phone up uh Representative Molton, right? those
175:00 - 175:30 come from the rare earth elements that we need. So, we're not going to be able to get this organic industrial base back on its feet until we can gain access into those markets and make sure that we have those here. So, the combination of our ability to project power is vulnerable from cyber um and then our ability to actually move the power is tied to our organic. Thank you for calling attention to the basics. I mean really is blocking and tackling
175:30 - 176:00 sometimes. It's not just you know high tech. I do want to say also Admiral Paparo I'm sure you know commander uh US Indopaccom gave China's armed forces last month high marks for their ability to prevent the US forces from achieving air superiority in the first island chain. Do you think that's true? Yes, I do. Ouch. Uh hey can I correct can I add to that? I think that's true for the first two weeks. Um, our goal and maybe only one week, our goal, the war, our plan is to roll back Chinese air power.
176:00 - 176:30 If we can't roll it back in under, you know, 7 to 10 days, in my mind, the ground forces that Charlie's been talking about, the Taiwan ground forces will get overrun by a Chinese lodgement. So, I I think we really have to get it back pretty rapidly. We We have to get it back, but the challenge that we're talking about is getting it back is at what cost? We have work to do. I do want to get to the honorable Kirk Campbell, uh, the one man who may have spent more time in Indo Pacific than everybody else in the room put together. Uh, it's good
176:30 - 177:00 to see you again, sir. Uh, could you speak about how investing in our allies, partners, and particularly through infrastructure projects uh, impacts America's competition with China uh, specifically in Indoacific. Great. Thank you. And I very much appreciate the comments that you've made, Congressman. I I do want to just underscore one other point that um was just made about investment into the United States. If you look over the last five years, the countries by and large that have dramatically increased their
177:00 - 177:30 investment in our infrastructure in the United States, enhanced battery projects, semiconductors, just down the list, it's Taiwan, South Korea, largest investor of any country in the world in the United States, Japan and Australia. So those trends are very positive th that work is well underway. I do want to just point out something that you um you you I think alluded to but something that we have to take seriously um in
177:30 - 178:00 this form. If you ask me what is the most for formidable partnership uh militarily strategically on the planet today it's not the United States with any of our allies. It is Russia with China. And the fact is what Russia what China is doing to help Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine is truly concerning. But remember it's the reverse that's going to affect us as well. Russia has capabilities, hypersonic capabilities, silencing of
178:00 - 178:30 their submarines, uh things that they're going to provide to China that are going to pro provide a real uh threat to us. And so understanding that this relationship is affecting not only peace and stability in Europe but in the Indoacific as well. The only thing I would say look I understand what we're doing trying to balance the books on some of our trade engagements. Frankly I'm more focused on that relationship with Beijing than I am going around and
178:30 - 179:00 hitting some of our allies really hard. I would be much more focused on seeing what we can do in partnership with them. infrastructure, technology, military. I'm I'm more ambitious and more bullish about what we can do together. I think we've turned a corner with many of these countries who see the threats on the horizon and frankly they want to be with the United States and I want us to be up to that challenge. You've been you've given us sobering thoughts to to leave with. Uh I look forward to continuing
179:00 - 179:30 this conversation. Uh I yield back. Thank you, Representative Takuda. Thank you, Mr. Chair. General Flynn, aloha. Good to see you here. Um, so I sit on the Armed Services Committee, so I understand the need to be hawkish in this particular environment, but I have a basic question for the panel. Does China even need to invade Taiwan to achieve its reunification goals? I mean, could they just economically isolate Taiwan as the US imposes and threatens
179:30 - 180:00 it with 32% tariffs? Could they undermine Taiwan's democracy through intensive disinformation campaigns? We know that China is using generative AI to ramp up their disinformation campaign and conduct what is ultimately, I think, is you said, General Flynn, psychological warfare that divides Taiwan's people. Um, we also recently shut down the State Department's foreign information manipulation and interference hub, which was key for us to coordinate with allies and expose disinformation. We've also eliminated the US Agency for Global Media that was
180:00 - 180:30 our counter messaging arm to get at this disinformation. Could they literally force Taiwan into submission by causing Taiwan to question its, you know, the US's commitment to its defense as a result of our actions and words in the region and in places like Ukraine? Simply without even firing a bullet, as a result of our action and inaction in this particular case, could China achieve its goal? That that was the in my testimony. That's pretty I agree with you completely. That's what I laid out.
180:30 - 181:00 In my mind, the most likely scenario is they're going to try this cyber enabled economic warfare campaign abded and facilitated with cyber malicious activity and with military faints. And what they do is just drive the pressure up on uh Taiwan and try to break their societal resilience. Taiwan the president lie and his team feel this is the most likely scenario as well and they have set up a task force on societal resilience to deal with it. It includes information operations, cyber, financial, communications, and energy.
181:00 - 181:30 We've run tabletop exercises in Taiwan and with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee looking at exactly this issue. We're happy to run them with you to show you exactly what will happen in an energy in an energydriven uh cyber enabled economic warfare campaign. You're exactly right. I I'm If you don't what I would say is that yes, however, the threat is very real. So from a military perspective we have to take the actual military instrument that they
181:30 - 182:00 have built and what they do with it and we have to counter that. So it it the ultimate you know the goal would be to uh subjugate Taiwan without invading. However we cannot discount the threat that they pose by what they do with their air, maritime and ground forces. So or cyber space etc. So that has to be countered in a very real way and that's my position is forward positional advantage gives us hard power forward to
182:00 - 182:30 deter that. Absolutely. Maybe Dr. Campbell if you could elaborate briefly. You mentioned the China Russia relationship in this area in particular. Are we underestimating that particular bond and their ability to use their joint assets to really come at Taiwan and create this divide? Yeah. At the same time that Russia is deeply and actively engaged in this brutal, illegitimate campaign in Ukraine, they're also increasing their operational dynamics with China in the
182:30 - 183:00 Western Pacific operating around Japan in the Taiwan Strait. You've seen uh statements from Russia indicating that they would be prepared to potentially participate with China in actions there. Look, I agree ultimately we've got to step up our deterrent capability, but um I would also say the real challenge that we face if we have a faltering of of our will, if we have statements that somehow
183:00 - 183:30 gee, we're not as interested in this or gee, let's let's figure out how to get along with Xiinping. Ultimately, what that will lead to are questions in Taiwan about the United States, about our role and our commitment. And that's what China wants. That's what China wants is not to cut a deal with us, but to have us signal somehow that we're waning in our commitment. And they will then use that to go to Taiwan and say, "See, your backer has lost its will."
183:30 - 184:00 That is why the work of this committee is so important. Well, you set me up for my next quick question because I know I'm running short on time. I mean, clearly we know this. The CCP is the single greatest threat to global peace and and security. We all agree on that, but across the world, we also know right now our allies and our partners are increasingly worried about us. Uh, a poll this spring in Japan showed that 48% of Japanese respondents believe that the international community cannot rely on the US. A shocking 77% doubted that
184:00 - 184:30 they would come to Japan's defense in an emergency. In Taiwan, a poll showed similar trends. Over 57% of Taiwanese respondents felt that the US was no longer dependable. And a Brookings poll showed similar declines in perception and trustworthiness, dependability, and favorability in South Korea towards the United States just in the last few months. Given this lack of trust, given the talk we had about the willingness to fight that Representative Molton talked about in our allies and partners and in Taiwan, does this concern you that these
184:30 - 185:00 perceptions are there in the first, second, and third island, Jane? Is that to me? Whoever wants to answer, I know I'm short on time. I I'll what I would say is on the military side, that's not what I've seen. I've seen nothing but strengthening in our partnerships. the fact that we were actually there and um and that confidence that's gained by us being in those locations. Uh I've seen nothing but a tightening of that uh at
185:00 - 185:30 least the militaryto military partnerships and in a period of time where diplomacy is fractured or there's political fracturing. This is the power of having a miltomill relationship and being able to overcome some of those, you know, rough waters. Yeah, Mr. Chair, I know I'm out of time, but I will just say again, this is public perception, not the military action. It's what I'm getting at. The war will be fought on multiple fronts. We are secure in the defense side. We know that, but it's the war of the mind and it's the the war of the people and their will. I I would just say right now I think the biggest
185:30 - 186:00 challenge we face terms of maintaining peace and stability is if our allies and partners lose confidence that we are the America with all of our warts and flaws that they've known for the last 40 or 50 years and that we're backing away from our commitments to the maintenance of peace and stability. If we lose that edge then I think the global circumstances will be very dangerous. Yes indeed, Congressman. Thank you. It is about trust. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
186:00 - 186:30 yield back. Thank you, Representative Johnson. When the ranking member, the chairman and I were in Taiwan uh more than a year ago, I had the sense I mean, I was hearing all the right things. It seemed as though the the government had taken major changes uh with regard to the compulsory service, moving back to a 12-month period. Uh lots of I think important conversation about increasing defense spending. We've had some conversations about that today. I had the sense that the likelihood of an invasion was moving down and that maybe the window of opportunity was being
186:30 - 187:00 pushed further into the future. I think the last 6 or 12 months maybe has brought that window of opportunity a little closer. And in fact, last week when I was reading The Economist, there was an article that uh in essence said that uh the quote that struck my eye was, "If America weakens its commitment to defending Taiwan, then Taiwan may lose the resolve to resist. And if Taiwan is not prepared to defend itself, America will be less likely to come to its aid. I think that in my mind that really
187:00 - 187:30 brought forth this idea that uh the will of our country and theirs uh interacts with one another and we can get kind of a dismal feedback loop uh if there isn't the will to fight and of course the capability to fight. So, General Flynn, I know you're not an expert on politics, uh, but you talked about the president lie understanding the importance of mobile survivable systems. Of course, Taiwan's a split government. It's always a little harder to get things done in that
187:30 - 188:00 environment. What is your assessment? I mean, is there broad consensus around that idea? Um, thanks for the question. The way I would frame it is this way. I'm I get asked the question a lot about their will to fight. I actually I don't know because until somebody puts a bullet through the person next to you, you're not sure if they're going to fight. But what I can tell you is this. In my view over the last three and a half to four
188:00 - 188:30 years, their will to prepare like to go to practice every day and to train and to get better from the political side and the military side. In my view that is moving in a very very positive direction. We have momentum and we can ill afford to lose the momentum and therefore being able to give them a system like a high himars that I mentioned that's interoperable with our systems then we have a much easier way of being able to network these forces together so that they can do the things
188:30 - 189:00 that they must do enabled by the United States. Is everybody on board with that? I mean, I know in in in years past, there was a sense that maybe the military and the government was more interested in exquisite systems, right? Really expensive, shiny platforms. Is there a broad consensus around your your recommendation? I I think it's getting there, right? I'll I'll use this example. We can give them 400 harpoon systems, but they if they don't have 400 crews that actually know how to man
189:00 - 189:30 them, use them, employ them, sight them, and have a primary, alternate, and supplementary firing position, it doesn't matter how many things they have. So my point is training and training and more training allows them to understand how to actually do a defense in depth. And this is where our value as a as a training body is so important. I I let me add to that that we absolutely have to grow the joint training team in Taiwan so they can do that's a US team there that's about 500 people now it needs to be a thousand if
189:30 - 190:00 we're going to give them billions of dollars in assistance sell them tens of billions of dollars worth of US gear it makes sense that we'd be over there training and working your Taiwan enhanced resilience act directed the department to do it I would say gently they've been slow so the answer question is we can drive their preparations we can help their preparations but it but it's going to take US engagement and involvement in this um to to kind of get them to the point where they really have a true counter intervention force. So, Admiral, you talked in your testimony
190:00 - 190:30 about the importance of siege proofing and how that's really tied to being properly resourced. Uh you talked about 3% again in divided government. It doesn't look like maybe everybody's uh on the same page there yet in Taiwan. Then you talked about stepping up to 5%. Did you choose that number because you think that's what's politically possible or does that number actually get siege proofing accomplished? So it it's based on three things. One, it does get siege proofing accomplished. That kind of budget will do it. It'll buy them not just the systems they need, but
190:30 - 191:00 readiness. They will get to 3% this year. They're going to spend several billion dollars on readiness. That is actually small arms equipment, things like that, the training ranges Charlie mentioned and that he advocated for in his last job. And the other thing about the 5% is historically looking at democracies, that's about where democracy can end up. The only one that's been above that is Israel. And in fact, it went below it before October 7th. I mean, it is aggressive though, right? I mean, the United States is there. Poland, I think, is now there, but is kind of anybody else at 5%. We're
191:00 - 191:30 not there. We're 3.4%. Oh, yeah. Right. Sure. South Korea in some respect. South Korea is 3.5%. Um 5% is going to be the three the three Baltic states, Poland, Israel, and Taiwan when they get there. One last thing I'll say is I keep hearing like people in the administration say 10%. 10% would mean they would have to buy $40 billion worth of FMF from us every year. I think you all are well aware we can't crap out 3.5 billion worth of FMF a year. So unless our FM excuse me FMS unless our foreign
191:30 - 192:00 military sales program gets absolutely you know revitalized and improves 1,000%. They're not going to be buying they're not going to be at 10% of GDP. Thank you. I'll add one thing about or so part of that lift in their investment is also there's some indigenous capability that they need to get up and running right now in Taiwan. So it's not just about bringing stuff in from outside. It's also about them creating the capabilities inside to be able to feed their stocks and stockpiles and
192:00 - 192:30 stores and have some reproduction and uh and manufacturing capability forward. Representative Brown. Thank you uh Chairman Molinar and Ranking Member Christian Morphy for holding today's hearing and thank you to our witnesses for being here today. Um the topic of today's hearing could not be more timely or consequential. uh with President XP Xi Jingp directing the People's Liberation Army or PLA to be prepared for a Taiwan contingency by
192:30 - 193:00 2027, the window for strategic investment and deterrence is narrowing fast. As a member of this committee and as someone committed to strong federal oversight and forward-thinking technology policy, I want to focus today on how we align policy, posture, and planning to meet this pivotal moment. I represent Ohio's 11th district where families, workers, and veterans believe in the promise of democracy, the value of peace, and the need for safety. And
193:00 - 193:30 they deserve to know that their communities and this country are protected not just from the threats they can see, but from those they may not often think about. Threats that advance online and infrastructure or across the Pacific. Today's threats go beyond missiles and military drills. They include cyber attacks, disinformation, and gray zone coercion by the Chinese Communist Party. These efforts are designed to disable our networks, divide our alliances, and destabilize
193:30 - 194:00 democracies like Taiwan, all without firing a single shot. We've seen what the CCP is capable of in cyerspace. The FBI recently disrupted Chinese state sponsored malware planted inside American routers and infrastructure. The malware is prepositioned to disrupt US logistics and communications in a crisis. We cannot afford to ignore that. Our digital defenses must be as strong
194:00 - 194:30 as our physical ones. At the same time, we've passed $ 8 billion in new Indoacific security investments. I investments. I supported that funding, but money alone isn't enough. We need urgency in implementation. Taiwan still faces a year'slong backlog in arms deliveries. And if our own systems remain exposed to cyber attacks and our deterrenes could be derailed before it ever gets started. At its core, this is about defending
194:30 - 195:00 freedom. Taiwan is a vibrant, self-governing democracy. And the CCP's aggressive posture, military, economic, and digital, isn't just a threat to Taiwan's autonomy. It's a challenge to the idea that free people have the right to choose their own future. That principle is worth standing up for and that's why today's hearing matters. So, General Flynn, you've spoken about the role of Army forces in the Indoac
195:00 - 195:30 Pacific. Given growing cyber threats to our logistics and communication systems, how should Congress support efforts to harden military infrastructure and enforce and ensure our forces and our allies can operate even under cyber duress. Um so a couple of couple of ways first of all having uh cyber support teams forward uh again as part of the multi-dommain task forces that I mentioned. um each one of these
195:30 - 196:00 countries also including Taiwan they're looking for how to organize their forces to do that and then also how to I'll say improve their technics uh tactics and techniques on how to operate in the cyber domain just the simple uh act of being able to uh perform forward to be able to do that is incredibly important and then of course being able to share uh information intelligence um and uh some of the
196:00 - 196:30 nefarious activities that are going on on their networks with these countries is incredibly important and it also shows the value of what we offer them by being able to see a broader landscape of what's actually happening against uh their vulnerable networks and the those vulnerable points with which they are attacking. Thank you, Deputy Secretary Campbell. What more can the United States do either through diplomacy or reg and regional coordination or otherwise to counter cyber enabled
196:30 - 197:00 coercion and disinformation from the CCP? And how are we working with allies in the region like Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan to ensure grayzone attacks result in real consequences? Great. Congresswoman, can I just commend you on focusing on this critical dimension? My colleagues have already mentioned it. The cyber dimension is the area that frankly we have not been as attentive to. I think we've doubled down with the support of this committee and others on working on our own defenses. The challenge is that
197:00 - 197:30 as you point out some of the areas where we are most vulnerable uh requires a partnership between frankly the US government and private entities. Uh some of that work is frankly yet to be done. Uh it is also the case that some of our closest allies face similar cyber challenges from the PRC and other actors. We've uh increased our ability to work with those countries. I think we've been able to address some of the
197:30 - 198:00 challenges, rebuild systems with greater resilience in them. But at the same time, I I I would just have to say that this is a work uh that is barely in progress that needs much more effort over time. And you are cor you're absolutely correct. We can take all of the steps that we're discussing here. But a few flips of a few switches in a couple of places uh in Beijing can basically disable some of the things the critical infrastructure in the United
198:00 - 198:30 States which um is frankly essential to our ability to respond. And Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the admiral that I'd like to submit for the record and thank you for the extension. My time is expired. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Representative Jimenez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and u and it's been a really interesting um hearing. Um, I don't really care to fight China's war or fight them in their own their own neighborhood. Um, and please correct me
198:30 - 199:00 if I'm wrong, but would you say that that find China's weaknesses are food, energy, and exports? Somebody want to debate that? I would. Okay. You don't think you think they are they are capable of producing all the food they need? No, they're not. Are they a capable of producing all the energy that they need? No. And the export they they have a full a totally dependent uh economy based on exports
199:00 - 199:30 because their their capacity to produce far exceeds their capacity to consume. Is that correct? I would I would agree. So would it behoove us to take the fight further out? In other words, if they're if they want, you talk about blockading Taiwan, what do we blockade them, but not right next to them, but blockade them way out. All right, so you can't get their food supply, they can't get their energy supply. And what if we
199:30 - 200:00 develop partnerships mainly with Europe? I mean, uh, and say if you in indeed attack Taiwan, then we'll put an embargo on your exports and wreck their economy. Would that be a deterrent? Yeah, I think it would be. I I think, you know, we we've been looking at what kind of economic security authorities we should pass ahead of time. In other words, I think it's incumbent on Congress to say to the president, if these things happen, this is what we expected. These are triggered. If you do
200:00 - 200:30 that, that's that strong deterrent effect that says to China, if if you attack, we will you will feel this economic pain. And I do believe that we could use legislation to then pull in our allies and partners to agree to that and create the kind of deterrent effect that gets it exactly what you want, which is pre-boom. If you don't mind, I I that's why I think these relationships that I'm talking about, like we're not we're talking a lot about Taiwan. I mean maybe because the hockey playoffs are going on
200:30 - 201:00 like Taiwan's like the puck but there's a whole game going on around and the movement elsewhere in South Asia the work we're doing with India Thailand uh Vietnam the work that we're doing with ACSEAN countries the work that we're doing out in Oceanana the work that we're doing in Northeast Asia all of these areas are having massive pressure put on them by China and so our partnerships and again geography and partnerships matter and That's why having those forces out there to stay
201:00 - 201:30 engaged. You know, again, this is where the Department of Defense and the Department of State are have to be handin glove with these different areas because we can put pressure on China by that network of allies and partners and then countering them in each one of these areas where they are absolutely putting their thumb on the scale trying to uh disrupt and fragment and fracture our network of allies and partners that we enjoy. I mean if if Xi Jinping wakes up one day and says, "Hey, the math the
201:30 - 202:00 math doesn't work." I mean, even if I take over Taiwan, the the the impact on China as a whole, yeah, is much greater than the gain that I get from China. Um then, you know, maybe you know, it's not just about, you know, uh you know, treasure, you know, blood blood, okay? It's about and the number of men they're going to lose and the assets they're going to lose. It's about, hey, this is really going to hurt China. I mean, right right now when uh just with the threat of uh of high tariffs, you know, orders ceased and China was looking at
202:00 - 202:30 full warehouses and then people getting out of work, right? So, the pain inside of China is going to be much worse. Hey, all right, I got Taiwan. What's the gain to that versus what's going what's going to be the the pain inside China if the world stands up and says, "No, we won't tolerate that." Yes. Uh could I could I just give you one other way to think about this, Congressman? I appreciate the the approach for 30 years uh since China's opening the logic of global
202:30 - 203:00 economics was a massive investment in China and so as a result until a couple of years ago the greatest interdependence economically between any two nations is frankly probably between the United States and China. And if you ask what two countries are more interdependent but more uncomfortable with that interdependence, it's both the United States and China. And the only thing I would say, Congressman, I, you know, we often discuss among ourselves, can you take this act and hurt them and
203:00 - 203:30 put them under pressure? I have a different reading of what played out over the course of the last couple of days. I don't think it was just China that re-evaluated. I think both countries blinked because the truth is if we take dramatic steps to distance ourselves economically, it will have consequences in both countries. The way I think we got to go about doing this, we need to invest more in capacities in the United States. We need to work more
203:30 - 204:00 with allies and partners. We have to diversify these supply chains. But that is not an easy process because we built up this interdependence for 30 years. and it will take more than just a couple of days to um to separate us. That is the direction that we're going, but it's going to be harder than we realize. Congressman, um just I know my time's is up and just my one comment is this. It took us 30 years to become addicts. All right? And we're not going to, you know, wean ourselves off the uh off this drug,
204:00 - 204:30 you know, really quickly. But wean ourselves, we must. Thank you, and I yield back. Thank you, Representative Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Chinese aggression can come militarily or economically. We've heard a lot about military threat today. But the second coercion without violence should also be of great concern to this committee. America's American commitment to Taiwan security is a commitment to defending American economic and national security interests. Taiwan has a special
204:30 - 205:00 relationship with the United States, especially with my home state of Arizona. Taiwan is Arizona's third largest trading partner, and for decades, the two democracies have collaborated in key sectors like technology and defense. America has depended on Taiwan, the world's top manufacturer of semiconductors to power everything from consumer electronics to our weapons systems. Now, Americans overreiance on Taiwanese chips chips has long been a bipartisan concern, one this
205:00 - 205:30 Congress has sought to address, especially through our bipartisan chips and science act, which encouraged chipmakers like the Taiwanese Semiconductor Manufacturing Company to build more in the US, more specifically in Phoenix, Arizona. TSMC's investment in Arizona, $165 billion under construction and announced in total, is the single largest direct foreign investment in American history. They've broken ground
205:30 - 206:00 on three fabs that are poised to make some of the most cuttingedge chips in the world. Chips that will propel advancements in century defining technology like AI and make sure American defense systems remain the most sophisticated in the world. This much is clear. The strong economic ties between our two nations has been a boon to Arizona's economy and to American national security. As ranking member Christian Mory pointed out, a war over Taiwan would drop global GDP by 10
206:00 - 206:30 trillion dollar and losing access to Taiwan semiconductors would put the United States into an immediate Great Depression. The strong economic ties also act as a deterrent to Chinese aggression. whatever form they take. We can take a step now to strengthen that economic relationship between the US and Taiwan by getting rid of double taxation. The House passed bipartisan legislation to do just that in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote in January and now we call on the Senate to act immediately. Taiwan is the United
206:30 - 207:00 States largest partner without tax treaty. This limits TSMC suppliers ability to easily invest in the United States and with it limiting the strength of the US conductor ecosystem. Secretary Campbell, can you expand upon this a little bit? Why are economic ties between the US and Taiwan so critical to curbing Chinese aggression? Great. I first of all, let me commend you and this committee and this group on the work you did on the double taxation treaty. I think as you probably
207:00 - 207:30 understand, you had allies inside the US government that thought that this work is long overdue. We have certain agencies in the US government that were reluctant to take this on. Through your support, I think we've seen the wheels start moving. I also join with you in calling on the Senate to take these actions. To be to be clear, this should just take place no matter what because um we have every possible interest in increasing and deepening the economic
207:30 - 208:00 integration between the United States and Taiwan. I think what we saw for years is Taiwan's primary engagement economically and commercially was with uh China and those ties continue. But what we want to see is a diversification not just with the United States with others other allies and partners and that's uh that's taking place. If uh there is only one source of engagement economically and commercially that creates the ability for another country
208:00 - 208:30 to put a a strangle hold on Taiwan. That's not in our strategic interests. I also want to just commend you, Congressman. I know the work that you have played in Arizona. We've faced some challenges over the course of the last couple years. It's been your intervention carefully building bridges with Taiwan, both on the industrial side and the political side that has helped us overcome some of the challenges. I commend you on that. I appreciate you saying that. It was a bipartisan effort. Arizona, but I I can you can take a
208:30 - 209:00 compliment. Thank you. Uh, I believe that this administration's tariff policy has really hurt trust in the United States around the globe, sending unnecessary shocks through the markets, creating whiplash with each declaration, pause and hike. And they stick a fork in the eye of our allies, the very allies we need to work with to compete against the Chinese Communist Party. That's not speculation. According to a recent poll in Morning Consult, tragically, China's global standing has surpassed that of the United States in 47 of the leading
209:00 - 209:30 nations across the globe. As America retreats from our alliances, we leave open a void that CCP is all too happy to fill. Secretary Campbell, how does damage from the tariff tariffs lower Taiwan's economic resilience to the PRC propaganda and economic coercion? So look, um, there have been some other discussion, Congressman, about public sentiment globally. I think we're all concerned by that. But it is important that I think the world understands that Americans believe in these partnerships
209:30 - 210:00 and these relationships, and they hear voices like yours and others that speak out about how this is, frankly, a bipartisan commitment in the United States and has been for decades. Ultimately um uh my own uh concern is countries particularly in the Indoacific they're going to be prepared to make steps uh to take steps if we put forward a predictable policy and they may not like all the tariff stuff but if they
210:00 - 210:30 have an understanding of what is to be expected they'll respond accordingly even our closest allies the challenge is the changes so the administration in the last three months about 55 to 60 different tariff actions. Changes sometimes announced in the morning, changed in the afternoon. That's not the way. And most if you had a business people here, they would say the same things. Need greater predictability. I I commend the administration on the steps
210:30 - 211:00 they're trying to take in a number of venues to try to reestablish a careful dialogue. We should see that uh through in the next couple of months, but we've got to get out of this like, you know, we're going to raise it in the morning and then we're going to change it tomorrow. Um that that creates an environment where it's impossible for both governments and businesses to plan. Thank you. Thank you. I yield back. Representative Mor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses today. Mr. Secretary, Admiral and
211:00 - 211:30 General, thanks for your important conversation. uh our strategic partnership with Taiwan is in my opinion one of the most uh important and it's one that we must strengthen in the face of the threat of invasion and frankly uh because China is trying to isolate the United States and exclude us uh from influence in that region across the across the board. Uh the US has to take steps to stop that and to bolster our ally. In January, as Representative Stanton mentioned, we took a really
211:30 - 212:00 important uh step in the House by passing the US Taiwan Expedated Double Tax Relief Act. I would join his call for the Senate to take action on that matter, to pass it, and to get it to the president's desk. This legislation stops the double taxation of American workers, reduces dependency on China, and provides a pathway for a more robust economic partnership by establishing a tax treaty with Taiwan. But this is just the first of many steps. You guys uh I know Admiral and I have had lots of
212:00 - 212:30 conversations. It's a multiaceted approach as you know. It's not just economic but it's diplomatic. It's a military approach. It's a holistic approach that we have to take to push back on the CCP's malign influence across the world. I'm really glad that ranking member Christian Morphy emphasized the importance of the long-standing trade partnership that we have between the US and Taiwan, which is mutually beneficial. over 90% of Taiwan's energy needs and approximately 70% of its food are imported as you know and a lot of that happens uh in in and
212:30 - 213:00 out of Texas. Uh I want to ask Dr. Campbell, Secretary Campbell, other than importing more LG from places like Alaska and Texas, how can Taiwan increase their energy resiliency? So what I'd really like you to do is ask the admiral the question. One of the things that he's worked on is uh efforts to strengthen uh energy uh independence and capacity inside Taiwan. There are challenges on nuclear energy, but I
213:00 - 213:30 believe some of the work that the admiral has done in deep engagement with our colleagues in Taiwan have opened the door for certain new areas of cooperation. Um there is uh uh I think there are plans uh uh underway to think about major new investments in natural gas in Alaska um that could be important for Taiwan, but ultimately um they are facing some urgent needs over the next 5 to 10 years. Maybe if I could. Yeah, Admiral, pick up the ball from there and
213:30 - 214:00 and talk more about the work that you've done because it's critically important. So yeah, I agree that there the abs of their three sectors, te telecommunications, energy and finance, I think the one that's most vulnerable and will break their societal resilience is energy. They have I I they get one LG ship a day. Once they've missed five LG ships, they're going to be out of LG, right? That's a problem. Um let's look at natural gas. You know, from my point of view, they need to bring the two nuclear power plants back. They're
214:00 - 214:30 shutting down the their final one today. In fact, they need to bring them back. that'll bring back about eight or nine% of their grid. Um, and then we need to figure out how to protect LNG. That means we need to set up, as I mentioned earlier, convoy schemes, reflagging schemes. We need to work with Australia and we need to work with Alaska because right now they're heavily dependent on Qatar. And despite, you know, whether we get a 747 for them or not, I think in the middle of a crisis, China is going to turn to Qatar and say, "We buy 15 times more LG than Taiwan. You need to
214:30 - 215:00 stop delivering to one country." and and Qatar is going to choose very quickly to stop delivering to Taiwan. So, we need to get them secure in LNG. General, I'm going to come to you because this idea of partnerships and collaboration around the world with our allies is a theme that I'm hearing from each one of you. So, let's talk about it militarily. We know we need to strategically partner with uh folks that were mentioned earlier uh like Australia, Japan, Korea, India, Vietnam in the economic world, but talk about the military world and how important our alliances are with uh
215:00 - 215:30 Australia in particular, but also Japan and Korea and what we need to do to strengthen those partnerships. Well, since they've not been talked about much, I'll talk about Korea and Australia. I'll start with Australia. I mean, Australia, first of all, the AUS pillar one and pillar two are really important. I think we need to be paying more attention to pillar two. Sometimes it's AI, robotics, quantum computing, machine learning. By the way, the Australian uh military in the last number of years has basically decided to buy the ground and air uh systems of uh
215:30 - 216:00 the United States Army as well. So, it's not just the subs that are working uh together. That interoperability is strong. And I'll just jump to Korea very quickly. Um, in my time out there here recently, I in my time previously, I never saw Korea, South Korea, allow us to use equipment and capabilities from the Korean Peninsula into the region. But last year and the year before that, they did. And that is a that is a sizable
216:00 - 216:30 step forward because South Korea needs to be seen in the region because of the strength of the alliance that we have between the United States and South Korea. And South Korea's presence out there in the region. Again, when you when you look at South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Australia, that right there is the connection of a couple of continents. Okay? But more importantly, the militaries there all share uh interoperability. And those
216:30 - 217:00 interoperabilities are both human, technical, and procedural. So the value of that as a counterweight to what the Chinese are doing in my view that's slows this trajectory down that they're on of their, you know, sort of irresponsible, insidious, and and uh incremental path that they've been following for the last number of years. So it's incredibly important. And I think Secretary Campbell has one more comment to make and I'll let you have the last word, but I will say I I love what you guys are saying today because
217:00 - 217:30 it's not just a check the box on any one specific action that will do everything we need. It's not just an economic act or it's a military act or diplomatic, but it's continuous, multiaceted, multi-reional approach across the board to box China in and to keep ourselves from being boxed in. Secretary Campbell, I'm going to give you the last I was going to say what the what the general described is uh uh I think a process underway in each of the countries. But what he what he underscored what happened in the last couple years in
217:30 - 218:00 Korea uh allowing US forces to be used in regional contingencies or training extraordinarily important. So I am more bullish about what's possible if we continue to build. I do want to just make one last point. Can you make it quickly? I will. I will very quickly I'll do it very quickly on energy and the importance of natural gas. Uh in the immediate aftermath of the attack uh on Ukraine from Russia in which there there were huge shortfalls in natural gas
218:00 - 218:30 heating uh in a desperately cold winter in Ukraine. What countries stepped up immediately to provide and defer their shipments of natural gas from the United States? Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. And so, don't underestimate this linkage between the Indopacific and Europe. They understand what happens in Ukraine is going to have significant long-term implications about what happens in Taiwan. Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr.
218:30 - 219:00 Connor, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Secretary Campbell, the big news today is Walmart CEO saying that they will have price hikes that are unprecedented in Walmart's history. Basically, Americans, Walmart is saying, are going to pay more for their groceries, their toys, and ordinary products. And Walmart CEO is saying these blanket tariffs are hurting ordinary Americans. Do you agree with
219:00 - 219:30 Walmart CEO? Uh I I agree with what he said and his statement and this is going to happen and so I think everyone has pointed out it the the tariff efforts are like a wave on the horizon like we've seen it coming and then now it's going to hit and we're going to see it in a variety of different things. Last couple years we had problems with eggs and baby formula. This is going to be across the board. We're going to see price hikes in a number of areas. Senator Campbell,
219:30 - 220:00 you've seen a lot of presidents, other presidents have faced external shocks. OPEC uh does something that causes inflation. Pandemics cause inflation. Have you ever seen Republican or Democrat a modern president implement a policy that ends up causing inflation and hurting ordinary workingclass Americans? You know, I'm personally, look, there were there are problems. The economy
220:00 - 220:30 that President Biden handed over in terms of in uh inflation, but overall the engines of the American economy were humming pretty well. I I I am concerned about some of the steps that have been taken, the erratic nature, the the start and stop, and and I do think it's going to have impacts on our economy. And if you're going to take some of these steps, you got to make preparations. You got to have stockpiles and stuff. We we we've done none of that. And so, yes, I
220:30 - 221:00 am I am concerned about the last next couple of months. And what I'm also concerned about, um, you didn't mention this, but the people that are going to be hurt are the poorest in our country. Um, and and that that's that's something that we have to be really concerned by. It's going to be people who shop at Walmart and work at Walmart, for example. I shop at Walmart. I like Walmart, but it's going to be it's it's going to affect people who have the least um you know ability to absorb even
221:00 - 221:30 small changes in food bills and the like. And so yeah, I think I think you know uh and this this would be a fair distinction between President Biden and President Trump's policies. President Biden said, "We're going to build manufacturing by taxing wealthy people in my district and having uh funding for new steel and new manufacturing." President Trump's saying, "No, don't have the wealthy people in Rose district pay pay for it. Let's have the poorest workingclass
221:30 - 222:00 Americans pay for it." Would you would you say that that's a fair distinction? Look, I'll just stand by what I'm saying. I don't think these steps are being undertaken in a carefully orderly way. And look, I've worked I worked on the transition. There's some very able economic folks I think. Where are they? Well, I guess at least no I think I think understands some of the challenges and is responsive to market. But you would agree that this has been a destructive policy so far. I think elements of this have been erratic and
222:00 - 222:30 they have hurt the United States and hurt our people. What do you think of some of those folks? And I I'm not taking the president out of context. I think his real view when he said, "Okay, we can only have three or four dolls, three or four toys." You know, when I used to have people visit the United States, relatives, they used to go in the grocery store and you know what they love to see? 45 cereal boxes. That's that's American exceptionalism that we've got 45 cereal boxes. I I I do you know any American who only wants three toys or four toys?
222:30 - 223:00 Look, I my dolls love my daughters love dolls and so I'd like them to have as many people. I mean, he put up the Taj Mahal in Atlantic City. I mean, come on. Look, I I think we can all agree that that some of these steps have been hard to follow. They've been a bit erratic, and I I do think they're going to have some concerns um uh for in Let me ask a last question. There was there's a way to have strategic tariffs to protect
223:00 - 223:30 American industry in a way that wasn't as erratic as this. Correct. in a much more rational way of doing them with China. I I I would agree. So, and and I I'm still not exactly clear. If you listen to various voices in the administration, what this has meant for, are we trying to increase more capacity in the United States? Are we looking to be able to export more better deals? I I don't really see an a clear statement
223:30 - 224:00 about what we're looking for. And frankly, I it concerns me that every one of our allies and partners comes to the United States, we meet with them in advance, they're all nervous about what's going on. And so I so I understand a little bit more on the China stuff. I have I have less comfort and patience with what's going on with our closest allies who are investing in the United States and that count on us for being a bolster of peace and stability. I appreciate your service and your perspective. Thank you, Mr. Mr.
224:00 - 224:30 Bill Arachus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very much and I want to thank all of you for your service. We appreciate you. Uh, Admiral Montgomery, on May 7th, 2021, a ransomware attack on the Colonial Pipeline captured headlines around the world. In Florida specifically, I represent the T the 12th Congressional District in the Tampa Bay area. Our port and airport operations were severely impacted, both of which are critical uh
224:30 - 225:00 to the economic health of my state. Since uh China has so heavily prepositioned itself in our critical infrastructure, I shudder at the thought of such attacks across the country beyond the current frequency of China's recent wave of cyber attacks. In your testimony, you mentioned the National Guard's role in cyber uh capacity to defend our infrastructure. Do you believe the National Guard could
225:00 - 225:30 adequately respond to numerous nationwide cyber attacks on the the scale of the Colonial Pipeline attack and uh what can we do now to develop that capability? Thank you. Thank you for the question and uh you're absolutely right. Tampa about nine months later was hit with a water attack as well. Uh that turned out to be an insider I think an insider job. Um look what China's doing is operational preparation to the battlefield. They are putting in this malware or gaining access so they can
225:30 - 226:00 come back at a later time and disrupt or destroy systems. And by the way, if if they did the same thing with like a thousand satchels of explosives and put them in the same port, you know, electrical power, water systems, the American people would be going crazy right now. But because it was cyber, we've kind of backed off. You know, you're right. To get at it, the National Guard is our best, I think, our best asset. I don't think we have enough offensive cyber operators in the active service. We can't use the intelligence
226:00 - 226:30 agencies. We can't use the FBI. The National Guard is the natural is the is the natural place the the National Guard is. And I think the National Guard we'd have to develop a little more capacity in it. It's at about half the capacity it should be for this. It should go for about four or 5,000 on net operators to about 9 or 10,000. So a little bit of investment, but they have unbelievable authorities, not just DoD, but Homeland Security and most importantly state governor's authorities which are significant. So I absolutely believe they're the right people. And the best
226:30 - 227:00 part is they know who they're working with because they come from the community. They'll have the relationships. So to me, you all should be pushing hard for a National Guard solution to becoming more offensive in the defense of our networks. Excellent. I think the sir if you don't mind I think the connection with the governors that the admiral mentions is really important about the guard and we have teams in there but they you know to be next to first responders and know those relationships you know in a timely manner they can respond to those attacks
227:00 - 227:30 because often you find out about them after they've already happened and that's the unfortunate part. Whereas if you're in a defensive protective posture, then you can respond a hell of a lot quicker or you can do things to counter that before it even gets in there and disrupts your IT backbone or your your electrical grid or your water system or what have you. Agreed. Thank you, General. Appreciate it. Uh, Admiral Montgomery, I also wanted to ask you about the cypress sonic missiles and American leverage regarding the sonic
227:30 - 228:00 semiconductor production and export controls. Do you believe if the US were to adopt the stronger controls including controls over Taiwanese uh semiconductor semiconductor producers that we would uh mitigate the strategic imbalance or should the US be more focused on cyic defense? So I think it's a it's going to have to be both. First, I'll tell you what worries me most are the Chinese
228:00 - 228:30 parts in our own missile systems and your committee is doing a great job looking at this and there's some legislation I think you need to push through to to just get China out of our systems. But second, you're right, Taiwan uh we need to monitor what's being transferred to Taiwan and I would say that the chips are actually come from US companies that I'm most worried about in those export controls. I'll be honest though, most weapon systems are based on chips that are from the 15 to 20 nanometer, you know, five, seven year old chip systems. Believe it or not,
228:30 - 229:00 it's your phone that has those the the really whamime chips in them on. So, we really do need to get hypersonic defense. This is crazy. We're allowing an adversary to field a conventionally p a conventional weapon system for which we have no defense. No one believes we're going to nuke them if they send a couple conventional warheads against our systems in Guam and Japan or even Hawaii. Therefore, we need a conventional defense against this conventional weapon system. And the last administration took a busman's holiday
229:00 - 229:30 on this. They passed on having the right system which was ready to go in 2029 to meet your congressional direction. They defunded that system and then funded a system that'll come in 2036. They did it because it would have low less cost over the the fiscal year defense plan. They did it for financial reasons. Our children, my son who's out on a ship out there needs to have actual hypersonic defense today or at least by 2027, 2028, 2029. And we need to review that system
229:30 - 230:00 and have the missile defense agency go back and begin to procure both hypersonic defense systems so we can have the a a viable system in a few years and an exquisite system that they had pushed for 6 or 10 years from now. Can I can I just add one point on this? Yeah. The chip packaging that has to be done in the United States, when those chips are made in the US, the packaging is different from ones that are made overseas. So, to Mark's point, we really have to make sure that we're able to bring those in and do the packaging so
230:00 - 230:30 that we don't find chips that are made from a foreign country inside of one of our systems. Thank you, General. I appreciate I yel back, Mr. Chairman. Miss Caster. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh thank you gentlemen for your service to the country and and helping us to uh on a strategy to deter aggression from the Chinese Communist Party. And I hear you loud and clear. It has to be uh militarily and economically uh over the past few years. It hasn't just been bipartisan in this committee, but we've had a real uh a real strategic
230:30 - 231:00 focus. And I I am a little concerned that we're viewed around the world as as not maintaining that strategic focus right now. I I I saw it uh in Australia watched some of the Malibar exercises uh with and then AUS the Azian everything we've done to to bring the Philippines in. Thank you all for your your work on that. We've done it domestically. There was a strategy to invest in our industrial base. China wants to control
231:00 - 231:30 all of the future clean tech. Uh, and they were doing a pretty good job, but we decided we were going to invest and we saw uh, 380 new clean technology factories, a manufacturing boom across the country, but it we're having a policy debate here in Congress on receding that. And that's a gift to China, giving those jobs uh, back to to China as the world moves to clean energy over time. So now now these tariffs come
231:30 - 232:00 down and even a tariff on on Taiwan and I wonder u what you've seen uh economically and mil militarily go a little deeper uh Secretary Campbell it was it was distressing to see right after these arbitrary tariffs were announced boy China rushed to to meet with South Korea and Japan and that so what is happening uh go a little deeper on some of our most important partners and are they
232:00 - 232:30 hedging uh and what do we need to do to get get the upper hand back? So, thank you for the question and it and it's a hard one. I I agree with the general that our military contacts are balanced in our boat. They they sustain us in difficult times, but ultimately they will not be able to operate unless there is strong support in both countries. And we've seen that time after time. I I would say right now um you're absolutely
232:30 - 233:00 correct that China is determined to try to pick off countries that are wavering or alienated or worried. They're having their best luck probably in Southeast Asia, which is their own backyard and in places in the global south. Most of our allies desperately want to have a close relationship with the United States for a variety of reasons. It's a little bit like, you know, a little older for me. You probably didn't even know this movie. There's a great scene in an
233:00 - 233:30 officer and a gentleman in which Lou Gossid Jr.'s got the hose and Richard Gear, he's trying to get him to quit and he says, "I got nowhere else to go." Many of these countries recognize that their best and frankly only uh strong partner in the maintenance of peace and stability and sort of a steady stable world is that partnership with the United States. They are disoriented right now about what's taking place. But they're trying to do everything possible
233:30 - 234:00 to maintain a good relationship with the United States. Try to, you know, kind of fend off the most dangerous steps economically that would hurt them. try to figure out a way forward. I commend them on that. The truth is we just don't know how hard it's going to be for them in the next couple of months. And militarily, General, do you point us uh to any areas that you recommend that we need to focus on? Have you seen uh a change in behavior among some of our PA partners and allies that we need to be
234:00 - 234:30 aware of and focus on? Well, I I would say that South Asia is a is an area that we need to pay more attention to from I would say from the India pack border all the way to Vietnam. I mean, I think the challenges in there are um extraordinary. I think what China has done along the line of actual control in the last at least the last five years that I've been watching it by putting rail and road and surfaceto-air missile sites and heliloports and then the damning that they do along the Mikong del uh delta to
234:30 - 235:00 choke water to these countries. The smaller ones are are challenged in there. You can see the situation in Myiramar. You can see the situation in Bangladesh and Nepal and Bhutan, Laos, Cambodia. So you know that that soft land underbelly of China gives them access to the Ottoman Sea. It gives them access out into the Indian Ocean. They need those access points as uh as a means to diversify the challenge that they have with the Mala Strait and the South China Sea. And so I mean I think
235:00 - 235:30 the countries there are incredibly important. We need to pay attention to it. I think there's things that have gone on in Southeast Asia, mostly ASEAN, that have gone quite well. But, you know, it's a it's every day, ma'am. You have to be out there every day. This this this persistent partnership is what really brings the the the leadership of the United States to bear. And the security partner of choice has always been the United States. And we can never
235:30 - 236:00 seed that. The challenge in the region is the economic partner of necessity sometimes because it's in the neighborhood is China. And so the countries out there are trying to balance all of this and that's why it's so important that we're present. Thank you. Um thank you. I want to thank the witnesses for being here today for your valuable testimony on this important topic. I also serve on our House Intelligence Committee and are heavily focused on uh this
236:00 - 236:30 issue. Uh the title of today's hearing, deterrence amid rising tensions preventing CCP aggression on Taiwan. When I explain to my constituents back home the issue of Taiwan, I I think back over the last 25 years with China and there's a narrative there that goes like this. Um you know, 25 years ago, 20 years ago, Tibet was the big issue in China. Everybody talked
236:30 - 237:00 about Tibet, human rights, sovereignty, the Daly Lama. Um, we don't talk about Tibet anymore. CCP has won in Tibet. They they've suppressed all human rights. They they've they've used forced labor and education camps. And so, in in many ways, they have won in Tibet. It's not even in our vernacular anymore that we talk about Tibet. Fast forward to Hong Kong and what's happened in Hong Kong. We all see it. We've all observed it. Uh, you know, we talked about, oh, a democratic
237:00 - 237:30 movement in Hong Kong and it was going to be different. It's a surveillance state and there's a reason why everybody has left or or lots of people have left Hong Kong to Singapore and other places because of what the Chinese have done in Hong Kong. But they've essentially won in Hong Kong in terms of what we were supposedly going to do or what our allies were going to do didn't work out. Now in Shing Jang, little different story, but they're using the same tactics that they've used in Tibet and in Hong Kong. And as I think about
237:30 - 238:00 Taiwan, uh they seem more emboldened than ever based on what they've been able to do through non-military efforts in Tibet, in Hong Kong, uh and and in Shing Jang. And so there's that narrative there. And my my question is as we look at Taiwan, um it doesn't seem like there's been uh any type of deterrence that worked in Tibet or Hong Kong or Shing Jang. Um walk me I know Taiwan is a little bit different than those other two in in
238:00 - 238:30 many different aspects, but um the narrative that I just laid out. uh talk to me about the Chinese thinking as they as it relates to what they've done there and what they're going to do in Taiwan. General or uh Admiral, I'll start with you. So, first I do think it's a different scenario. It's a scenario where by the Taiwan Relations Act and by actions we've taken over the last 30 years, we are committed to ensuring that China does not impose a a non-consensual
238:30 - 239:00 solution on Taiwan. And we've made a lot of investments in that. So I do believe that uh there is an opportunity for deterrence here. But you know your implications right deterrence is not just a capability or capacity to do something but a a belief that you're willing to do it. So I think what's really critical for us is a lot of the recommendations all three of us have pushed out here are about either building capacity to do something and prevent a a a Chinese um coercive action
239:00 - 239:30 and then a credible belief that you're going to do it. you know, and you it's been brought up here, our withdrawal from Afghanistan, our our u how we've supported Ukraine, those both those factors kind of make allies nervous about our equipment. They should make Taiwan nervous. So our job, Congress's job is to be out there aggressively pushing legislation that makes the in the proper investments both in weapon systems, munitions, but also diplomatically and economically signal to Taiwan that we're willing to to uh
239:30 - 240:00 fight and die with them. That's a tough signal, but it's one I believe in. I think it's one General Flynn believes in, and we spent our careers pushing. So I do believe we can do this deterrent, sir. General Flynn, I I uh what I would say is um there's been some stops and starts even though the Taiwan Relations Acts, you know, created that, but I'll just tell you from a military perspective, when I looked at and sized up their forces a couple of years ago,
240:00 - 240:30 uh it was apparent to me that there was uh it was two-prong problem. There was a part Taiwan problem, there was a part US problem. And uh but I do think as I mentioned in my earlier testimony that that has changed and I think that that has changed dramatically because of the introduction of being able to train those forces. And so it gives them a degree of confidence that the United States is going to be there and uh and that the importance of them defending
240:30 - 241:00 themselves and protecting their national sovereignty and their territorial integrity with their forces and it is a whole of government effort on their part. I mean, their first responders, their military police command are incredibly important to protecting their people. And so, I just think that um in answer to your question, I think this momentum that we have right now has to be sustained. Otherwise, um it will um it will create doubt in the minds of the Taiwanese. And I don't think that's what
241:00 - 241:30 we need there. And by the way, that will also um uh go to the other countries in the region. If there's doubt there, there'll be doubt elsewhere. And I don't think that we can afford that as a country. We certainly can't afford it as a re in the region. Thank you, Mr. Torres. Uh thank you. Uh you know, America to me is the greatest country on earth and there's no challenge that American ingenuity cannot overcome. But when it comes to the strategic competition with China, America is in a far more fragile position than most Americans realize.
241:30 - 242:00 And China's a far more formidable rival than most realize. And so there's a sense in which we've been lulled by our superpower status into a false sense of security. And I want to ask about a few areas starting with critical minerals. Uh Dr. Campbell, do you agree that critical minerals and rare earths are central to the defense and decarbonization of the United States? Yes. Which country controls almost all of the world's rare earth mining? Uh, China. And and as you understand, I know
242:00 - 242:30 it's not just the Well, I'm going to that you're anticipating my next question. Which country controls almost all of the critical mineral processing and refining? China. Yes. Do you think the United States is in a position to deter a foreign adversary who has a chokeold on the core components of our military defense? Makes it that much more challenging at this moment. Let's speak about the future of war. Do you agree that the future of warfare is autonomous? I believe that will be an important element. Yes. Which country is leading
242:30 - 243:00 when it comes to drones? Uh, China is formidable. The United States also has capabilities as well. Who can manufacture at scale? China. And scale matters in a war. It does. Which country is leading when it comes to robotics? China again has formidable advantages here. The US has spent trillions of dollars on large legacy systems. Can you imagine a world where those large legacy systems are easily shot down by a swarm of autonomous systems? Yes. Let's go to ship building. During
243:00 - 243:30 World War II, the United States emerged as the arsenal of democracy, building a total 270,000 vessels, including 2,700 Liberty ships in just four years. Which country is leading at the moment when it comes to ship building? China dwarfs us both in commercial and military ship building. And the former secretary of the Navy would agree with you. He said that one Chinese shipyard has more capacity than all of our ships combined. China's ship building capacity is over 23 million dead weight tons. The United
243:30 - 244:00 States less than 100,000 dead weight tons. The difference is a multiple of 230. Do you think the United States is in a position to deter a country that has 230 times more ship building capacity than we do? I think over the long term that becomes more challenging. Yes. Energy, the future of energy. Uh solar is emerging as the dominant driver of new energy generation. Who is the leader in solar? China. And China not only has
244:00 - 244:30 an advantage in a single stage of production, it dominates the whole supply chain for solar energy. Is that correct? That's correct. I'm not really sure what my role here is just to say yes. Okay. All right. But that's I I think the point that you're making, but I'm going to summarize and then I'm going to ask each of you to All right. So, but because I think it's important I the the depth of America's vulnerability is poorly understood even here in Congress, I feel. But China controls the critical minerals core to America's defense and decarbonization. It has 230
244:30 - 245:00 times more ship building capacity than we do. It is so far dominating the autonomous future of warfare and it is so far dominating the future of energy. You can give a much longer answer now. Is it fair to say and I will ask this question of each of you. Is it fair to say that we are catastrophically unprepared for a strategic competition with China? So I I think the point that you made in any comparison between the United States and China, China has substantial
245:00 - 245:30 advantages in a number of areas. You didn't talk as much about technology, which I think is the key area that we have to worry about. You also touched a little bit on manufacturing. We're slightly ahead in AI. Well, I I would just simply say if you look at the critical technologies, AI, 5G, synthetic biology, and robotics, and look at where they came from 10 or 15 years ago and where we are today, I I think even if we have a couple of months lead in a few areas, you got to be concerned. And so, I think the general picture that you're
245:30 - 246:00 painting is accurate. What we often hear right now are folks that point to a couple of weaknesses in China's overall approach. Aging economy, indebtedness. The truth is China has substantial capacities that we're going to have to deal with and ultimately they do have significant advantages in a number of areas that are going to be critical. So I'm completely aligned with you on although speaking of indebtedness, we the United States are presently spending
246:00 - 246:30 more on debt service than we are on our national defense. Yeah. I don't know if you have any further thoughts. I'll I'll make a couple I mentioned earlier steel, aluminum, battery, magnets, microchips, rare earth elements. These are things that we are we are uh uh way behind on and the processing and manufacturing has left the United States. So, we have to get it back so we can be able to protect the very things that we have to protect in order to build the things that you're
246:30 - 247:00 alluding to, ships, satellites, airplanes, ground sensors, you name it. Um, one other point not mentioned here today though, but I'd like to I'd like to make a comment is that, you know, so in order to diversify our supply chains, we also have to prevent tech piracy. And we have over 300,000 Chinese students that are doing PhD research and they're in our graduate programs. And if even 10% or 5% of those were stealing because the research
247:00 - 247:30 they're doing is sent being sent back to China puts a huge puts us at a huge disadvantage in trying to regain some of that space. And so I think it's not just the industrial strength of the organic industrial base with raw materials and rare earth elements. It's also preventing the tech piracy that's going on widely across our country and that has to be addressed at the same time that we are talking about industrial strength.
247:30 - 248:00 I would just let me add one quick thing. I I do agree our actually our greatest strength to counter everything you said is our academia is our research. Um, I would limit I would not ban any one country's uh students for being here, but I would put strict procedural controls to make sure we don't lose intellectual property. But we need everyone as we've had to come in, share their ideas, think with us. Our entrepreneurship is our biggest strength alongside that academia. And I think we should fully exploit that. And any foreigner that wants to come in here,
248:00 - 248:30 get their PhD here, and make money here for the United States tax base, I'm all for. We just need to have strict and yet we're defunding academia at the moment. Yeah. Can I just say ultimately our greatest Thank you very much. The gentleman's time is expired. Thank you, Mr. Torres. Very good line of questioning. With that, I now recognize myself for five minutes. Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Your decades of service. I'll begin with a story. Start with a pineapple in Taiwan. 90% of Taiwan's pineapples go to
248:30 - 249:00 mainland China. When mainland China decided they wanted to change prefixure races and local elections, they sent out a massive dictate that they would be embargoing local farmers in Taiwan. I'm from a farm state in Iowa. That makes a real impact. As a result, the Chinese effectively turned multiple prefixures across Taiwan against their own government in Taipei by electing communistleaning local leaders.
249:00 - 249:30 Admiral Montgomery, you're a senior director at the Center for Cyber and Technology. You've spoken about CCP propaganda, false flag operations in the digital domain. This is an opportunity for the CCP to change leadership in Taiwan like the chi Taiwanese pineapple without a shot being fired. Do you believe the CCP is capable of setting off a false flag invasion in Taiwan itself? I do, sir. I do think that I don't know that a they could overthrow the
249:30 - 250:00 government with it, but I do believe that information operations and deception run by the Chinese by the Chinese Communist Party will absolutely weaken Taiwan's societal resilience. When you combine it with the other tools, cyber attacks, economic pressures, energy pressures, cutting off communications with magical anchor drops on cables. When you combine that all together, that's it's that cohesive comprehensive attack that breaks societal resilience. So, I think it'll take more than just the one thing, but everything contributes to a weakened
250:00 - 250:30 Taiwan. That's just in Taiwan. Let's talk about the rest of the world. Does the Chinese have a dedicated campaign plan in the information warfare space to influence other allies, not just in the Indopaccom area, but the entire region or the entire world? Oh, they do. Yes. Um, and they're running it aggressively. If if you read want to read Chinese language products in the United States, 92 to 95% come from the Chinese Communist Party. This is a real problem for us. We need to
250:30 - 251:00 absolutely push back. I do feel like we need some some of our tools back like RadioFree Asia and others to push back in to get the truth out. The truth about American exceptionalism, the truth about what we're pushing forward, the truth about our allies and partners in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. So, you're absolutely right, sir. We are competing with a monolith in in China and uh and we're going to need every tool possible. Can I could I tell you a story? So yeah, this this is happening not just in the United
251:00 - 251:30 States. It's happening in other countries. Land is purchased land is purchased near critical infrastructure. On that land there's a Chinese company where the majority shareholders own a telecommunications company. On that land they put towers from those towers. They disseminate information. They go and purchase a media company and then they buy bot farms that spread that disinformation and mis misinformation throughout all these countries. We know what's going on. We're watching it. We
251:30 - 252:00 don't have enough capacity to go into each of these countries and counter it. But it is so pervasive out there in each one of these countries. It is damaging to the credibility of the United States. General Flynn, Admiral Montgomery, and certainly Secretary Campbell, I would propose this committee look at a subcommittee specifically on Chinese propaganda and the way that it's softening the battle space for what will surely become a kinetic conflict if we don't stop it early. Very briefly, General Flynn, I want to talk to you about uh the need for large quantities
252:00 - 252:30 of lowcost strike vehicles if it does become a kinetic uh conflict in Taiwan. Specifically, is there value in diversifying the types of missile capabilities on hand during an invasion to repel China's attack? Absolutely. I mean, again, the mid-range capability that we have, the Prism systems that are coming on board, I'm I'm aware of another uh missile that is uh aside from the Prism that's lighter weight, longer distance, greater lethality, and again, we have the HIMAR system. I mean, in the
252:30 - 253:00 reorganization of what the army's going through right now, I would have 97 97 high Mars launchers just in the US Army Pacific. Add that to containers that are out there for deception, and you can create a mosaic of a challenge that the Chinese did not calculate into when they built their A2 AD arsenal. Add to that type 12s and type 88s that the Japanese have. Add to that brome, which is what the Philippines have. I mean, you can
253:00 - 253:30 create this ring of fire there that that prevents them from even deciding to load up these rows and start going across this straight. By the way, you know, the the most high-risk, highly complex operation is a multiode assault into a country across a 100 mile straight. I mean, I get the 27 window, but honestly, I mean, I see they're rehearsing and preparing for it,
253:30 - 254:00 but dog gone, that is one hell of a complex operation. You're absolutely right. So, for them to be able to pull that off, that's why we have to slow them down. And General Flynn, I think you open the window here that this cannot be America alone. This has to be an integrated operation. Both what we do on the ground, in our communications, also in our kinetic response here using a diversity of weapon systems. Very briefly, I want to thank the secretary for being here. You know, we've led on the six asurances to Taiwan act. I'm leading the fortifying US markets from Chinese military aggression act. We have
254:00 - 254:30 seen the shortcomings of the foreign military sales just at scope there. Could there be an opportunity to increase um partnership in the defense of Taiwan by expanding our direct commercial sales, our licensing for dual technologies to facilitate a rapid transfer of critical needs to Taiwan uh from both us and our allies. I I believe that is entirely uh what's possible and I think with your leadership from the committee, it helps
254:30 - 255:00 push the executive branch. One of the things that both my colleagues have underscored is that the limitations bureaucratically that have existed for decades that make it difficult to fulfill some of our defense commitments to Taiwan. Slowly but surely, those are being pushed away uh in uh favor of greater efficiencies and the like. I think it is in fact the case that the executive branch responds best when it hears from this committee on these
255:00 - 255:30 issues. And I just again thank you for your guys commitment and service on these issues. I want to thank both of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle very focused not just on national security but on pragmatic ways that we can get ahead of this problem so we don't end up in these kinetic situations that this team has so articulately displayed in a situation where we do not want to be in if we can prevent it on the front end. With that, seeing no other members wishing to speak, I would like to um add any documents that have
255:30 - 256:00 been presented to the record. Without objection, it will be added to the hearing for the record. I want to thank all of our witnesses today for your service, continued service to this country and what you do. Questions for the record are due one week from today. Seeing no objections, the committee is adjourned.