ican presence in Asia, and he said that essentially there was a three-legged stool in Asia, and that the legs of the stool were China, Japan, and Korea, and that the one factor that kept the legs in equilibrium was the United States presence. So we have a critical interest in the region, we have critical allies, and there is no question that the rhetoric in recent days with the elections in Taiwan has been considerable. First, let me just assure you that in terms of my own responsibilities, that we will certainly exercise all of the mechanisms of the Taiwan Relations Act to make sure that we do everything consistent with that Act in terms of assisting and working with Taiwan, in terms of meeting their security needs. Secretary Cohen, who is very much engaged on this issue, is just back from a trip to the region, and I think to all of the countries in that region, they have to be impressed with the democratic processes that they see, whether it was the elections over the last weekend-once again, it shows what free people are capable of doing if they have the right to vote and to choose their leaders. I share your concerns that there is a period of serious tension there right now, and know that I will look forward to working closely with Secretary Cohen, the Joint Chiefs, and our Senate to make sure that all of our security interests are protected in this vital region. Senator INHOFE. Mr. Secretary, I was just asking if you agreed with our assessment of the threat that exists today, that is out there, in terms of the threatened position that we are in as a nation, in terms of our relationship with China. Secretary DE LEON. Well, I think it is a critical situation. I think it is one where I am not yet in a confirmed position, so I am not yet able to engage with our policy people, but I would agree that there is a significant military threat there, and would work with the CINC and with our military leaders. Senator INHOFE. OK. I do not want to use up more of the time, but I appreciate that very much. Mr. de Leon, I have been very sensitive to the rather arbitrary, but still the legal 50-50 requirement that we have in terms of our maintenance, in terms of public and private maintenance in our depots. I would like to reference to you a report that came from the Air Force Material Command that said, “Further, 50-50 states a further impact on available headroom in fiscal year 2000, as well as all outyears," and they talk about here the CLS and the ICS. Then it goes on to say, "That the bridge contracts merely represent a symptom of a much larger problem, and should not be the only justification to support the Air Force waiver of the 50 percent contract workload limitation in fiscal year 2000." The problem is much larger and extends beyond fiscal year 2000. We had a hearing on this in which we discussed that it was a national security waiver, and whether or not that would just continue into this year or whether it would go into next year. Do you have any ideas on what you think is going to happen after the expiration of this national security waiver, in terms of how we can try to comply with the 50-50 legal constraints that we have? Secretary DE LEON. I had a chance to read the paper. It is my hope that that is a one-year waiver only. I would like to assure the Senator that I am committed to maintaining strong and vigorous depots. They are a critical piece of our readiness. I think that their utility has been demonstrated over and over again. I hope that that is a one-time exception. Senator INHOFE. Well, I hope it is, too. I know that there is not a lot of optimism there. My time is up, but just one question on Vieques. I have been very much concerned that we had deployed the Eisenhower Battle Group to the Gulf without the proper training, and, in fact, the Chairman was good enough to let me spend 45 minutes outlining my views on how serious the problem in Vieques is. Do you see any solution to this problem prior to the time that the U.S.S. Washington Battle Group will be deploying to the Gulf? Secretary DE LEON. First, I want to thank you for the effort to make sure that the Eisenhower Battle Group did receive quality training, and working with our allies we were able to secure some opportunities for live-fire training. There are a series of discussions. ongoing concerning the George Washington Battle Group right now. I would be happy to brief you privately, because I think there are some critical issues, but I can assure you that the Department's representatives are at the table with the appropriate other agencies of the Executive Branch to make sure that Senator INHOFE. Well, I would appreciate that. My time has expired, but I would like to have those sessions with you, or someone on your staff. My main concern is that you make a commitment to do everything in your power in the new job that you will be holding to give these people the proper training before these battle groups are deployed, and we determine there is no place else. Secretary DE LEON. I agree with you on the training, and absolutely in terms of my commitment. Senator INHOFE. All right. Chairman WARNER. Subject to the fact that you just told my colleague that you want to brief him, can you just say on the public record, are these talks directed at a possibility of some training for that battle group before it departs? Secretary DE LEON. I believe that they are. Chairman WARNER. They do encompass that. Chairman WARNER. So it is not a foreclosed issue at this time. Secretary DE LEON. I believe so, and I think some of these items are better discussed Chairman WARNER. We understand. Secretary DE LEON.-in a more private context. Chairman WARNER. If I could go now to a broader series of tions. Senator INHOFE. Yes. ques Chairman WARNER. I would like to start all of our hearings with a person who is under consideration for the position that you are going to certainly be confirmed, about your perception of the worldwide threat. The testimony before this committee each year has continuously shown a trend for a more dangerous world. Since we brought up the issue of the Taiwan-we covered that--but give us your perception of the worldwide threat, around the globe. Secretary DE LEON. Certainly. Again, this would be my personal perception, because I have worked hard to not be involved in any decision-making process. I think an assessment would start, obviously, with our relationship with the Russian Republic as well as China. Those are, from the military point of view, two countries that have significant military capabilities that we have to be very engaged with and very focused on. Additionally, in the Middle East, the potential of the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by entities or governments that do not have an affinity for the West or for the United States is there. So I would start in terms of Russia, China, the Mid-East. I would add to it the potential proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, both in terms of what they might mean in terms of international terrorism, but also in terms of our need to make sure that we have adequate civil support, adequate mechanisms on hand, and then the final issue, and just a brief summary that I would raise would be the protection of our information infrastructure, which would include both the safeguarding of the technology, the safeguarding of our unique knowledge of how to use this technology, and then the additional point of how to use cyber-communications in an environment where others may be using these new, and very significant, and very powerful mechanisms to disseminate disinformation. So very briefly, Senator, that would be my personal view of what the world looks like right now. Chairman WARNER. Mr. de Leon, the United States is experiencing another energy crisis. It could parallel the seriousness of the one that we witnessed when I first came to the Senate 20-plus years ago, in the 1979-1980 time frame. Now, just as a footnote, my good friend and colleague here to my left, Senator Levin, and I joined the Secretary on one of his first swings through the Middle East region, and he has been back many, many times into that region. The first part of my question: Is Secretary Cohen and the Department engaged in joint efforts with the Secretary of Energy and others to alleviate this crisis? Second, I observe that our nation is, at the very moment we are having this hearing, flying combat missions over Iraq in pursuit of a containment policy. Iraq is smuggling oil along the coast of Iran out into the world market. Iraq could either increase its production or decrease its production and affect this current crisis. We find that Saudi Arabia, one of our most valued allies in the region, has according to reports worked out some sort of a deal with Iran regarding production of oil. Iran continues to pose a very significant threat, and I will later come to a question about our missile defense program, where Iran is a core part of that problem. So we have our service persons risking their lives for Iraq. We see our ally, Saudi Arabia, and perhaps others in that region, working with Iran. This leaves the American citizens in a very complex situation. I would like to have you address question number one: Is the Department involved in trying to alleviate this energy crisis? Two, how would you relate to the American public the complexity of this issue, where we are actually risking lives today in the enforcement of peace and stability in a region, against Saddam Hussein, at the same time those same allies that we are protecting are working with Iran? Secretary DE LEON. The first part of the question, I know that the Secretary of Defense plans to be visiting the Mid-East in the April time period. I know that he stays very closely connected with his colleague, the Secretary of the Department of Energy, on a variety of issues, principally on issues dealing with our nuclear arsenal and our lab structure. I will convey to him your question. I know that Chairman WARNER. Well, to add to it, I think given his knowledge and background of that that region, that he should be putting his shoulder to the wheel in this crisis. Secretary DE LEON. I think that is a fair Chairman WARNER. I have seen him one-on-one with all the heads of state and government in that region. Secretary DE LEON. I think that is a fair point, and I think that that is a challenge that he would relish in terms of engaging our allies in the region on increasing energy production, which would be so critical here economically. The second part of your question, peace and stability in the region, you raised a series of questions that are significant and important. Let me break them down. First, in terms of the no-fly zones and the enforcement, I think that our air force and our navy aviators have done a critical job in terms of constraining Saddam Hussein Chairman WARNER. No question to that. You should add Great Britain. They have been flying missions, too. Secretary DE LEON.-and the other contribution of our allies. I think the Chairman WARNER. I think it is down to one ally. France is no longer flying, is that not correct? Secretary DE LEON. I believe it is the British that are deployed with us right now. But from that perspective, I think that our pilots and the no-fly zones have seriously constrained what the Iraqi military is capable of doing. It has significantly constrained his activities. In addition to that, our navy, in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere deployed, has been engaged, using their authorities under the U.N. and international law, to intercept, when appropriate, tankers that may be carrying fuel and supplies that are in violation of the embargo. There was an incident just a few weeks ago where, indeed, the U.S. Navy intercepted a tanker that was coming out of the Persian Gulf. The final point, in terms of the American interest in peace and stability, certainly, we have an interest in terms of the delivery and the free flow of petroleum coming out of the region. We have another vital interest, and that is to use the sanctions to curtail the financial wherewithal of countries like Iraq and Iran to not have additional financial resources to enter into the marketplace for potential weapons of mass destruction. Chairman WARNER. Well, I simply say that while our American pilots are taking a risk with their lives, we seem to protect further marauding by Saddam Hussein against Kuwait. Kuwait and others are in this situation, and integral partners in trying to bring about a solution. It seems to me that we ought to remind them of why the United States has such a heavy commitment to the Gulf. Yes, it is to maintain peace and stability, but they are the prime beneficiaries of that peace and stability, and I mean it is one thing to send over tax dollars, and military systems, and everything else. But I am worried about those fellows in the cockpit, any one of whom could be hit today or tomorrow, and be brought down in trying to bring about that peace and stability, and it is under that umbrella that they are now reaping considerable profits from the export of the oil. I must say I am a bit stirred up on this question, and I may return to it. Senator Levin. Senator LEVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join you in seeking answers to that question, as to how our allies that we are protecting are now participating in such a precipitous and huge increase in the price of oil that benefits them financially, while we are taking the risk. I think the Chair has put his finger on a very important question which I know all of us would be interested in the Secretary's answer to when you have a chance to raise that with him, Mr. de Leon. The press this morning reported that the next test of the National Missile Defense System, which was originally scheduled for April, will now take place in June. I have three questions on this. One: Is the report accurate? Two: Who made the decision to delay the test, the program people or the policy people? Third: What was the reason for the delay, if it is going to be delayed? Secretary DE LEON. My understanding is that on Saturday, Lieutenant Ron Kadish, the Director of the Ballistic Missile and Defense Organization, convened all of his program personnel and they went through an assessment as to when the next test could occur, and it was their judgment that that test should be scheduled for the June time period. Senator LEVIN. So that was a programmatic decision. Secretary DE LEON. It was a programmatic decision, based upon extracting the lessons learned from the last test. In addition, some configuration testing that was required on some cooling veins that are associated with the kinetic kill vehicle. Senator LEVIN. The impact then on the timing of the Department's deployment readiness review Secretary DE LEON. Well, I think it puts the deployment readiness review in a similar time period. Certainly, there will be a need for some time to assess the results of the June test, but I think that there is a feeling that the secretary will then be able to look |