▶ 0:23:48Chair Risch: The united states senate foreign relations committee will come to order. This morning, we have an interesting agenda. Before we do, we want to welcome all our guests, the public. We are glad to have you always. We have a zero-tolerance policy for interruptions. But other than that, we are glad to have you. Glad to have you here and everybody's participation.
▶ 0:24:17Chair Risch: I am going to give an opening statement, yield to the ranking member, and then we will hear from our witness. After that, we will open it up to a round of questions. So Mr. undersecretary, thank you so much for being here today to discuss an incredibly important issue, and that is arms-control.
▶ 0:24:36Chair Risch: Timely issue given the president's actions in iran to address a near nuclear capable adversary, which one could argue is in need of arms-control. The action in the middle east highlights what america must do to protect the american people from an imminent threat and an adversary with the danger of nuclear weapons in the wrong hands. As we all know, having nuclear weapons in the wrong hands is very, very dangerous for the entire planet.
▶ 0:25:08Chair Risch: President trump is rightly taking care of the iranian nuclear capabilities, but as you know, iran is not the only country of concern. We are now for the first time in a multipolar nuclear landscape. It is a landscape where the U.S. is facing two nuclear near peer competitors in russia and china in addition to rogue states with nuclear ambitions, which are very concerning -- a very concerning problem.
▶ 0:25:36Chair Risch: As you have noted rightly before, we are in inflection point and a changing landscape requires changing policy. The expiration of the treaty with russia was not just a symbolic milestone. By the way, I supported that and urged the president to terminate. It was the recognition that we have more than one nuclear threat to the american people. Nuclear agreements of days gone by will no longer meet the needs of our nation. If our adversaries are building nuclear stockpiles, we unfortunately must do so as well.
▶ 0:26:07Chair Risch: I know you agree that any future agreement must be verifiable, enforceable, and inclusive of developing nuclear powers. A treaty was only russia will not protect -- with only russia will not protect american interests, but building this kind of agreement will not be easy. Russia is a serial treaty violator, and that is putting it lightly. It has failed to uphold its end in virtually every treaty it has signed.
▶ 0:26:33Chair Risch: China also is doing so and has the fastest growing arsenal of any nuclear arms state. This is a dangerous time, but fortunately we have and administers up to the task. President trump has stated clearly future arms-control must address russian and chinese nuclear arsenals.
▶ 0:26:55Chair Risch: Secretary rubio has laid out three foundations for any new arms control agreement that I think are spot on and worth noting here as most things secretary rubio does. First of arms-control can no longer be a bilateral issue between the U.S. and russia. It must include china to be even remotely effective. Second, we will not accept terms that harm the united states or ignore nations who do not follow through on agreements in pursuit of a future agreement. It is pointless.
▶ 0:27:26Chair Risch: And third, we will always negotiate from a position of strength. We are the united states of america, and we will act like it. We need an incredible modernize nuclear program that deters enemies from trying to intimidate us with their own nuclear weapons but we need to do this while pursuing all avenues fulfill the president's genuine desire for a run with fewer of these weapons.
▶ 0:27:55Chair Risch: Earlier in this administration, president trump directed a landmark legislation to reduce bureaucracy and structural inefficiencies that got in the way of effective foreign policy. The organization you leave now was able to align arms-control security assistance emerging threats, counterterrorism, and counter narcotics policies all under one roof to support america's national interests.
▶ 0:28:19Chair Risch: As the inaugural undersecretary for arms-control of the international security, I hope you will use this opportunity to provide this committee with an update on the reorganization and state of nuclear programs and negotiations as much as can be done in an open setting. Thank you for your service and that of your family. I will now turn it over to ranking member shaheen.
▶ 0:28:40Sen. Shaheen: Welcome, secretary dinanno. Now that I know about your history, I will consider you one honorary granite stater. Delighted to welcome you to the hearing today. Last thursday, almost three weeks into this war against iran, the administration pushed through more than $16 billion in arms sales to the middle east, and they did that by using emergency authority to bypass normal congressional review.
▶ 0:29:06Sen. Shaheen: What we know is our golf partners are burning through interceptors at a staggering rate, using in a day with the united states produces in a year. We met with a number of our golf partners last week and heard that they are concerned about the availability of munitions. This is an emergency with respect to our munitions and weapons, I believe, and I think it is one that is driven by a lack of planning and a clear strategy. The united states is running through munitions as well.
▶ 0:29:39Sen. Shaheen: Here at home in some cases we have only about a quarter of the interceptors we need. I have been in briefings, and it is still not clear what the end goal of the war in iran is. Without a clear end goal, we are making real trade-offs about where resources go. We have seen these trade-offs already showing up in ukraine, where it continues to adapt and is currently advancing against russian forces. But U.S.
▶ 0:30:05Sen. Shaheen: Support has become less predictable and allies are increasingly stepping in to purchase and backfill american-made arms. According to ukrainian officials, over 80% of their strikes are now carried out by drones. The battle field is moving towards autonomous systems and drone swarms. In fact, senator kaine and I were just in a hearing that was classified but is going to become open.
▶ 0:30:31Sen. Shaheen: But it was about how we are developing some of those developmental munitions which are what we have been seeing in ukraine and among our adversaries in iran, from russia, from china. But unfortunately, the support we have in the U.S. is not keeping pace. And it does not stop with ukraine. Broader security environment is becoming more dangerous.
▶ 0:31:02Sen. Shaheen: Russia is expanding and modernizing its nuclear capabilities. As we know, the chairman alluded to the new treaty has been suspended. That ends inspections and provides increasing uncertainty. Russia has also deployed technical nuclear weapons to belarus, moving them closer to nato, and raising risks. We are hearing from a number of our nato partners who are very concerned that within the next five years, russia intends to advance on a nato country.
▶ 0:31:35Sen. Shaheen: It is also testing new underwater nuclear systems that are harder to track and control. At the same time, china is rapidly expanding its nuclear capabilities. It is constructing more than 300 new missile silos. It is growing its arsenal with little transparency and outside any arms-control framework. And at the same time, the arms-control framework that has helped manage these risks is breaking down. Talks on the future arms-control arrangements have stalled.
▶ 0:32:05Sen. Shaheen: There is a broad agreement a multilateral approach that includes russia and china is best, but as we know, that is not viable right now. China has consistently opposed joining such negotiations. In practice, that gives china an effective veto over progress that we can make with russia and on other fronts. Waiting for perfect conditions while things are moving in the wrong direction is not a plan. Mr.
▶ 0:32:30Sen. Shaheen: Dinanno, the bureau of arms-control and international security has gone through a major reorganization. That was supposed to bring clarity and focus. I hope we will hear this morning how you are approaching this and what is guiding decisions and look forward to hearing your perspective. Thank you.
▶ 0:32:48Chair Risch: Thank you, senator shaheen. Mr. dinanno, the floor is yours.
▶ 0:32:54Mr. Dinanno: Chairman risch, ranking member shaheen, and distinguish member's of the committee, thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. I am proud to be the first undersecretary appointed to lead what is known as the new and expanded t family since the state department was reorganized in july of 2025.
▶ 0:33:18Mr. Dinanno: The reorganization consolidated the department's international security functions, expanding the t family from three to five bureaus and assigned three officers to our broad portfolio. I serve as the senior advisor to the president and secretary of state for U.S. policies on nonproliferation, arms-control, and international security.
▶ 0:33:40Mr. Dinanno: Our team works on critical security matters ranging from proliferation of weapons of weapons of mass destruction to countering terrorism, international narcotics trade, to approving arms sales and security assistance to U.S. partners and allies worldwide. When I was before you as a nominee almost a year ago, I committed to seeking verifiable and enforceable arms control agreement that enhanced america's national security.
▶ 0:34:11Mr. Dinanno: I have used each day of my first months as the undersecretary to advance that very goal. Perhaps less publicly known than other state department rules are the best responsibilities that fall under the office of the undersecretary for arms control and international security.
▶ 0:34:32Mr. Dinanno: We oversee nuclear, chemical, biological, and conventional weapons issues, export controls, sanctions enforcement, treaty verification, driving interagency policy processes, coordinate closely with the war department and other federal agencies, and represent the united states in bilateral and multilateral diplomatic settings, including critical trilateral arrangements. T family personnel largely consists of civil service experts.
▶ 0:35:03Mr. Dinanno: Our staff possess a deep knowledge, technical competencies that are relative to a vast range of international security concerns. We leverage our in-house expertise of technologies like seismologists, nuclear physicists, counter drone experts, aviation experts to fulfill an extensive array of t family response abilities.
▶ 0:35:27Mr. Dinanno: We also negotiate, implement, and rigorously verify an array of arms control, international arms control, and disarmament agreements on behalf of the secretary of state and president trump. One such treaty at the top of many minds is new start, which expired last month.
▶ 0:35:48Mr. Dinanno: The treaty was ineffective and only constrained the united states while allowing russia to build and maintain a vast nuclear arsenal. It started as a bilateral treaty that had no impact on the nuclear weapons in china or any other states.
▶ 0:36:09Mr. Dinanno: New start no longer served in the united states, and its expiration opened up a new era for us to pursue president trump's vision for an improved and modernized agreement. Although the work of our team may often be invisible in public, a wide range of response abilities are essential to keeping americans safe at home and abroad. I will show you just a couple quick examples.
▶ 0:36:38Mr. Dinanno: In january, members of our emerging threats bureau traveled to antarctica to inspect foreign research stations and verify the absence of any military activity associated with the antarctic treaty system. Our bureau of law enforcement operates a high-value rewards program that offers financial incentives and information bringing major criminals, corrupt officials, and transnational criminal networks to justice.
▶ 0:37:11Mr. Dinanno: The counterterrorism bureau supports secretary rubio's designations of foreign terrorist organizations, including terrorist actors and cartels like the muslim brotherhood. Since january, when president trump took office, the counterterrorism bureau has designated nearly 30 foreign terrorist organizations, including 15 narco terrorist cartels.
▶ 0:37:39Mr. Dinanno: Another significant t family office is our political military affairs bureau. That recently cut regulations, streamlined approval processes, and the number of restricted government to government transfers by over a third as part of the administration's priority to jumpstart the U.S. industrial base and remove outdated regulations.
▶ 0:38:05Mr. Dinanno: Since our desk similarly, our partnership helped strengthen U.S. security and prosperity by securing significant australian investments to uplift our submarine industrial base in an important arrangement with the united kingdom and australia. We worked d in and day out to make america safer -- we work day in and day out to make america paper, more prosperous, and were secured by countering adversaries and protecting america's technological and military advantages.
▶ 0:38:35Mr. Dinanno: And we will continue to deliver measurable results to the american people. I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:38:42Chair Risch: Thank you so much. We certainly appreciate your expertise here and great background on this.I agree with virtually everything you said except for one exception. You said the new start treaty did not restrain any country on the planet. I would disagree with that. It restrained us. We were the only ones that kept our word under that agreement. As we know, russia was just totally loose under that.
▶ 0:39:12Chair Risch: Let me ask this. Obviously, china is a big question mark here. I don't think anybody would think they are going to negotiate until they get peer status with us. Once they develop and produce enough nuclear material and arsenal, I think at that point they may be interested in talking. What is your view on that?
▶ 0:39:41Chair Risch: Do you think when they get to peer status with s they will want to sit down and talk?
▶ 0:39:46Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question, Mr. chairman. I agree with you the new start treaty only constrained the united states. Regarding the chinese, first of all it is important to acknowledge under the nonproliferation treaty article six to engage in disarmament discussions, and they have refused to do that, so we continue to press them on that.
▶ 0:40:09Mr. Dinanno: Regarding the growth of their stockpile, as you said in your opening statement, we no longer view this as a bilateral problem. Even the new start number, 1500 russian strategic systems combined with what is approaching 1000 warheads, about 2500 is already in the new symmetry with what the united states would be at at 1500.
▶ 0:40:37Mr. Dinanno: So their incentive to engage with us, number one, it is their obligation, and number two, we have to work closely with the war department to understand that we will vigorously compete to modernize our deterrent to try to rollback the chinese stockpile.
▶ 0:40:55Chair Risch: I appreciate that. I guess I look a little further down the road even then that -- than that, and that is I don't lay awake at night worrying about russia and china. Both of them are mature societies far enough that it is rubbed destruction when so many presses the button for the first time.
▶ 0:41:22Chair Risch: What I worry about is the rogue countries that either have an ambition or even nonstate actors that have an ambition to get a nuclear weapon and use it. Of course, once one is used, who knows what that will set off? Let's assume for a minute the best.
▶ 0:41:42Chair Risch: And that is that once china gets to the point where it feels it can sit down and negotiate and reach a reasonable agreement and russia comes to the table and the three of us get to a point where we have an agreement we can live with, what do you think the possibilities are or the likelihood is that the three of us together would then look to the other countries that have nuclear weapons and say, look, the three of us are going to help police the entire planet's
▶ 0:42:15Chair Risch: Arsenal of nuclear weapons? Do you think that is a reasonable possibility to look forward to in the future?
▶ 0:42:20Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question. I think it is certainly a possibility, but I think it is important today to point out that we do participate in the p5, which is with all the nuclear weapon states, france, china, russia, the united states. I think it can be an effective tool. I think it needs to be more effective and take on some of the challenges that would lay out.
▶ 0:42:48Mr. Dinanno: I also think the point that you raise about nuclear potential proliferation risks continue. The nuclear suppliers group for example was formulated in 1974. An australia group, mtcr, they need to be modernized. I think we need to recognize that across all nuclear weapon states.
▶ 0:43:16Mr. Dinanno: I think this is also an issue we will discuss at length that is review conference next month, but these are all issues very much in my mind. And look forward to working through some of these issues with you.
▶ 0:43:32Chair Risch: I appreciate that. And I guess one of the reasons that I think as I think is the just recent experience we had where were broke out between india and pakistan. Both nuclear armed countries. One of those, pakistan, the nuclear weapons are not even controlled by the government. They are controlled by the military. That is an absolute recipe for disaster. Something has to be done about this.
▶ 0:44:01Chair Risch: As I say, we look over the fence , we look at russia, we look at china, but those are not nearly as big a threat to the planet as rogue actors. Your thoughts?
▶ 0:44:13Mr. Dinanno: Regarding india and pakistan, there are a lot of issues. Our approach as we laid out, as the president laid out is broadly multilateral. It is an evolution from the trilateral approach from the prior trump administration. Certainly, we would welcome discussions with both india and pakistan. There are safety and reliability issues.
▶ 0:44:42Mr. Dinanno: There is lots for us to talk about again outside of the nonproliferation framework. So I think it is important we engage both countries to your point, sir.
▶ 0:44:52Chair Risch: I agree with that. The president agrees with that. You noticed when that war broke out, both he and the secretary waited into that really quickly and were instrumental in bringing that to an end forget they recognized the dangers that countries like this have that possess nuclear weapons. Senator shaheen.
▶ 0:45:14Sen. Shaheen: Thank you, Mr. chairman. I certainly agree with you that the threat, the more alarming threat is probably from nonstate actors and from countries that have not been part of a previous controlled regime around nuclear weapons. And I certainly agree with you, Mr.
▶ 0:45:41Sen. Shaheen: Dinanno, that we need a new way to think about it. But we had a hearing here in december where our witnesses had some disagreement, but I think there was general appreciation for the fact that if china is not willing to join discussions and russia is, why would we not go ahead and start engaging with russia?
▶ 0:46:09Sen. Shaheen: Because they have more nuclear weapons right now then china does. What we heard from some sources is china does not intend to engage in nuclear talks unless it is on parity in nuclear weapons with the united states.
▶ 0:46:26Sen. Shaheen: It seems to me there would be some benefits to upgrading the nuclear nonproliferation guidelines to going ahead and engaging with some of those countries that pose a concern for the united states. So how do you answer that?
▶ 0:46:45Mr. Dinanno: So, we have not put any limits on our approach, multilateral approach. It does not shut up any engagement.
▶ 0:47:00Sen. Shaheen: Are we engaging, however, in those? Because there is a difference in saying if somebody approaches us, we are happy to engage in our being proactive in how we engage with other countries.
▶ 0:47:13Mr. Dinanno: Yes, ma'am. As I mentioned earlier, our engagement with the p5 is ongoing. That is always a challenge, but I think it needs to -- like some of our other regimes, it needs additional retention, additional caregiving that the russians, chinese, the u.k., and france are all involved in these discussions.
▶ 0:47:44Mr. Dinanno: So that would be a multilateral venue. Again, we have not shut off any channel that would exist for bilateral engagement. I think it is important that we keep all our options open, and I think the president's policy has clearly done that.
▶ 0:48:03Sen. Shaheen: Thank you. While I appreciate the threat of nuclear weapons is a concern that has much greater ramifications, the reality we are seeing right now whether it is in the war in ukraine, iran, and other parts of the world where conflict is existing is that warfare is changing and the weapons are changing and the bigger threat right now may not
▶ 0:48:34Sen. Shaheen: Be those nuclear weapons but maybe the other weapons that are being used. We really pushed our european allies to step up on their own defense and on ukraine. And they have. Right now, they spend more than we do on supporting ukraine and are spending that weapon on american weapons -- spending that money on american weapons. Are we able to deliver the weapons they are buying from us?
▶ 0:49:01Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question, senator. I think it is an important one. I think it shows why the reorganization of the state department, putting all the bureaus that do international security together makes sense.
▶ 0:49:16Mr. Dinanno: Because I think in relation to our political military bureau at the work we are doing to modernized our defense industrial base, we can release two executive orders, work closely with the war department . As part of the most recent executive order, announced the executive council to stand up between the commerce department, the state department, and the war department. That meeting took place within a month.
▶ 0:49:46Mr. Dinanno: Unheard of bureaucratic speed. I can tell you.
▶ 0:49:50Sen. Shaheen: That does not make me feel better.
▶ 0:49:53Chair Risch: Not a very high bar.
▶ 0:49:55Sen. Shaheen: No.
▶ 0:49:56Mr. Dinanno: The commitment to modernizing our defense industrial base could not be stronger. I heard loud and clear during my confirmation process the state department role here is to make sure our regulatory approach does not constrain our allies and partners, that the demand signal from every part of the government, from this committee, from my leadership was to move faster and to provide more capability.
▶ 0:50:27Mr. Dinanno: I think our recent america first arms transfer strategy is a really good innovation on that for our partners and allies around the world that might not always require our most exquisite platform, might not require an f-35 or patriot system, but there are other systems that there are certainly good enough, that complement existing U.S.
▶ 0:50:54Mr. Dinanno: Posture in the region, and that can send a demand signal to industry to stand up other capabilities. So again, the state department piece of this is to open up the aperture, take on a little more risk, and move faster. That is really dwarfed by the reforms they are making at the war department and undersecretary duffy and his team are making draft pick -- drastic reforms.
▶ 0:51:23Mr. Dinanno: I work closely with them and I'm on a call with the weekly driving change, driving integration, so it is a priority for us, and I think it is not going to happen overnight and it is not going to be easy or painless. I think we need to work together, the administration and congress. There may be some legislative relief we need along the way here, but it is an absolute national security imperative not only for the security of the united states but as well as our partners and allies.
▶ 0:51:52Mr. Dinanno: I think this is what you are seeing play out.
▶ 0:51:53Sen. Shaheen: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:51:57Chair Risch: Senator mccormick.
▶ 0:51:59Sen. Mccormick: Thank you for being here. We are in the middle of this active conflict with iran and iran has a record that is well-established. It is worth discussing now how to monitor and evaluate iran's nuclear drone and missile capabilities following the conclusion of the military campaign.
▶ 0:52:23Sen. Mccormick: The recent launch of an iranian missile on diego garcia now puts capitals within direct range of missiles beginning the iea concluded that iran had developed space launch vehicles they could use to develop icbm by 2035 should tehran decide to do so.
▶ 0:52:47Sen. Mccormick: First question to you is, how are you engaging with our nato allies to update their threat assessments and perceptions regarding iran and the missile threat? One arms control regimes are viable to constrain iran's ability to threaten europe?
▶ 0:52:59Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question, senator. The first question is -- I just got back from europe last week. Extensive meetings with the british and french. I have had multiple engagements with other nato allies, the germans, the danish, the dutch, polish, you name it. We are actively involved. I was telling the staff earlier this is really the bulk of my time in my job to engage foreign partners.
▶ 0:53:30Mr. Dinanno: Certainly nato is a huge part to that. And we need to be extremely clear on our support to nato. I think the president has been, and we need to continue to double down on that. The second part of your question, look, I have given this a lot of thought. I am very troubled when I look across. I mentioned this earlier. Across our nonproliferation regimes, they are all outdated. What was funded in 1974, 1987.
▶ 0:54:00Mr. Dinanno: The australian group which addresses chemical and biological threats, biological threats in 1985. This is my entire adult life. We are trying to shove 2026, 2030 next-generation problem set into an old business model.
▶ 0:54:18Mr. Dinanno: I am currently chairing a group into the state department on how to modernized mtcr, personally overseeing that because that is in the regime where we have to be extremely concerned we are not constraining our allies and partners regarding an adversary. I think those are questions to ask so I look forward to working with you and your team on soliciting ideas. I don't want to predetermine the outcome of that engagement.
▶ 0:54:46Mr. Dinanno: There may very well be elements we need to maintain but it absolutely needs to be modernized.
▶ 0:54:52Sen. Mccormick: I agree with that. Also according to the director of national intelligence, 2026, russia is developing antisatellite nuclear weapons which the intelligence community describes as the greatest single threat to the world's space architecture.
▶ 0:55:12Sen. Mccormick: So undersecretary, how should the united states respond to the threat of outer space weapons challenges by peer and near peer adversaries, and which arms control measures offer the most promise given the expiration of the new start treaty?
▶ 0:55:28Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question, senator. Again, very important question. Specifically to the russian outerspace system, I don't want to get into too much detail here in open forum, but what I can say is that any deployment of that system would be a violation of the treaty. Directly focused on the arms control piece of it. The russian exotic systems are getting crazy, even for the russians.
▶ 0:55:59Mr. Dinanno: So I think this -- the president's approach to the ranking member's earlier question about other bilateral and other multilateral ways to get at the problem, the answer is yes. That is obviously a system that did not pressure aggressively the russians, and I am sure it will come up in our p5 engagement, which is imminent.
▶ 0:56:27Mr. Dinanno: Again, I don't want to talk to much more about the russian capability in open forum, but certainly the exotic systems, the underwater system, the poseidon, their nuclear powered cruise missile, these are all systems that fall outside of the new start, to your point. We need to have a direct conversation with the russians, and I am sure we will.
▶ 0:56:52Sen. Mccormick: Thank you. Mr. chairman, I will yield my remaining 10 seconds.
▶ 0:56:56Chair Risch: I will gladly accept that, senator. Senator kaine.
▶ 0:57:00Sen. Kaine: Thank you, Mr. chair. Thank you for holding this hearing. Just for the audience, the senate uses a lot of acronyms. We will talk about nato and cdc. T family, what is that in the state department, and what does it stand for? T does not mean anything. It has been historically called the t family. The functions within it are very important functions. I am glad the chair has called this hearing so we can explore.
▶ 0:57:32Sen. Kaine: Undersecretary dinanno, in your opening comments you talked a little bit about something that is important to me and many on the committee, the framework announced by president biden. It has been worked on and supported in a bipartisan way by this committee. President trump had a very productive meeting with australia's p.m. Last october about it and other issues. Came out of that meeting saying. Ahead.
▶ 0:58:04Sen. Kaine: The -- saying full steam ahead. The senior adviser in the state department is a primary integrator of the partnership. The senior advisors intended to streamline regulatory barriers to have this framework be all that it can be between the U.S., as failure, and the u.k. -- the U.S., australia, and the u.k. How are you developing the partnership?
▶ 0:58:30Mr. Dinanno: First to your very important first point, I think t was for the first undersecretary's name was tom. If it is not, that is my name, so it is good for me.
▶ 0:58:44Sen. Kaine: That is classified information.
▶ 0:58:46Mr. Dinanno: There is a state permit historian that actually was terrific that I will ask that question. Things for the question. It is important. The coordinator reports directly to me. Number two, I see him every day. He is extremely experienced. This team is small, but extremely knowledgeable on some of the details to bring out the pieces that fall into place here.
▶ 0:59:18Mr. Dinanno: Another counterpoint that I think supported, just yesterday I met with the australian coordinator. And last week I was in the u.k. Meeting with the u.k. Coordinator. The u.k. Coordinator sort of felt, hey, guys, talking a lot about australia, we have the u.k. Piece here too.
▶ 0:59:38Mr. Dinanno: We had an extremely productive discussion about the types of capabilities, giving an understanding, and their footprint in nato offers a little different flavor than save the australia team. So we have made some positive steps in aukus. One is the mtcr.
▶ 1:00:05Mr. Dinanno: We look at you we look at yuav's now as I manned aircraft. However, when you get into the actual agreement, some of the provisos that would be attached, it is like a fishing not. The more you pull it apart, the more you figure out the more problems there are, so that is going to happen here.
▶ 1:00:34Mr. Dinanno: So sort of looking at aukus as a been of a canary in the coal mine on this richler tory reform. We will take them one at a time. I bet you earlier. We are going through a mtcr review and don't want to preempt the outcomes. Happy to talk about it, but I believe we will probably need some legislative relief so looking forward to working with you and the committee on this.
▶ 1:01:03Mr. Dinanno: The war department has moved very smartly on this. We are anxiously awaiting some announcements on pillar two. Another point here is on the excluded technology list, the 800 pound gorilla here. It needs to be a lot smaller.
▶ 1:01:25Sen. Kaine: I like the progress. I just went to australia in february and did many events, many of which were aukus related, to kick the tires to see what the australians are doing in terms of investment to get we had hard questions for them. They had hard questions for us.
▶ 1:01:47Sen. Kaine: To put something on your screen that continues to be important is the info magician of the reforms and you are right to point out that we have to get it right here because we may want to do similar partnerships and other allies. To the extent we figure out how to do the reform, that will also make it easier to decide.
▶ 1:02:04Mr. Dinanno: 100%.
▶ 1:02:06Sen. Kaine: On pillar two, everyone is talking about what is ed markey project, what is a signature project. It can be anything and sometimes that mix it harder to focus on it and excited to say there are some announcements. Getting closer. I yelled back -- I yield back.
▶ 1:02:26Chair Risch: There is nothing to your back. Senator cornyn, you occupy the far end of the day is, but having said that, that is the result of the idiosyncrasies of the arcadian committee system in the senate. I do think there is anybody on this committee that has a longer history of dealing with this subject then you do. Appreciate hearing your thoughts on this.
▶ 1:02:49Sen. Cornyn: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Present company excepted for you and the ranking number. Mr. undersecretary, you have an expansive portfolio. I don't know how you do it but thank you for doing it. Senator shaheen talked about the rapid rate that we are using various munitions and counter drone technology, counter missile technology in the middle east in the conflict with iran.
▶ 1:03:20Sen. Cornyn: I know we all are concerned about our defense industrial base, but it also takes money to buy these munitions and this material. The president is allegedly going to request $400 million in emergency supplemental for the department of war, presumably to replenish a lot of this.
▶ 1:03:46Sen. Cornyn: Can you talk in the open about the necessity of those, whether it is $200 billion or some other figure, whatever the figure is, the necessity of congress funding the effort to replenish these munitions and develop our industrial base where it should be?
▶ 1:04:00Mr. Dinanno: Senator, thanks for the question. First of all, I do the job because I have hundreds of dedicated state departments, civil and foreign officers that work for me. They are a really special group and work really hard. Specific to your question, the the specific supplemental I probably cannot speak to.
▶ 1:04:26Mr. Dinanno: I have not been part of those discussions, but I think brought her on modernizing the defense industrial base and some of the point I was making earlier, the foreign military sale reform has to be a priority.
▶ 1:04:45Mr. Dinanno: Uniquely, it has to be a partnership between the federal government, both the administration and the congress, our allies and partners, as well as industry, so I think again this is a little bit outside of my purview at the state department. The war department has really leaned forward on this and looking forward to some extremely unique arrangements with industry on how to get -- give some certainty to their investments.
▶ 1:05:14Mr. Dinanno: So I would defer most of the questions on those, what does look like, what those private sector and government arrangements look like to bring more capabilities faster. Again, the state department piece is the regulatory piece. I don't want to downplay it because it is important and it can get in the way.
▶ 1:05:34Mr. Dinanno: The demand signal I have gotten from the committee to my leadership is to open up the aperture, make more capabilities available, and again, the war department and administration are doing some extremely creative financing to bring more capabilities to our forces and our partners and allies. I am not sure that answers your question directly on the supplemental, but I do not want to get that wrong.
▶ 1:05:59Sen. Cornyn: Thank you. I just want to make the point that we have to come up with the money to pay for it, congress is one way or the other. The new start treaty. I agree with the comments you and others have made that russia cheats.
▶ 1:06:18Sen. Cornyn: But also, the president's determination to somehow bring china into those negotiations with new arms control treaties in the future, what will it take to get china engaged in your view?
▶ 1:06:34Mr. Dinanno: That is a great question, sir. Thank you. I think the president's broad view of peace, he has been forward leaning on this, he wants to see fewer nuclear weapons in the world, and that is a good place to start. Probably knew start -- new start, not to repeat what we have talked about a little bit, has only covered part of the russian stockpile and none of the chinese stockpile. So I think there are two points to make.
▶ 1:07:06Mr. Dinanno: Arms control and nonproliferation are one side of the coin. The other side of the coin of course is the war department. It is ongoing and will bring new capabilities across the spectrum. I think 150 b21's will get the chinese attention. I think hundreds of lrsl will get their attention.
▶ 1:07:32Mr. Dinanno: Testifying before the housley last week, one went through exactly what the modernization looks like. I don't think anyone wants an arms race. I know the president doesn't. He has been very clear he wants to see fewer nuclear weapons, but the chinese continue this breakout, again, they are approaching parity, and this is not a 2040 problem. It is very much becoming a 2030 problem.
▶ 1:08:02Mr. Dinanno: We will compete vigorously across the spectrum of modernizing our nuclear forces.
▶ 1:08:08Chair Risch: Thank you, senator cornyn.
▶ 1:08:10Sen. Cornyn: Mr. chairman, will you indulge one more question?
▶ 1:08:15Chair Risch: The chairman is most generous.
▶ 1:08:19Sen. Cornyn: Let me ask you about the enriched uranium in iran. Where is it? How big of a concern is into you? And what is your opinion about iran's determination to continue developing the capacity to develop a nuclear weapon?
▶ 1:08:38Chair Risch: Mr. secretary, before you answer that question, is that answerable in the setting we are in?
▶ 1:08:44Mr. Dinanno: I can lay out some thoughts on that.
▶ 1:08:48Chair Risch: He asked for a specific location. I have been in on this.
▶ 1:08:59Sen. Cornyn: I will withdraw that part of the question to make it easier.
▶ 1:09:03Chair Risch: Thank you.
▶ 1:09:04Mr. Dinanno: Look, I think the administration's iran policy was clear. It did not start three weeks ago. President trump issued nspm2 months ago, laid out a policy that iran's nuclear program and their nuclear capable missiles pose an existential threat to the united states and that iran can never be allowed to acquire or develop nuclear weapons. That was the U.S. policy 14 months ago.
▶ 1:09:34Mr. Dinanno: It is the U.S. policy today. Again, to the chairman's point on the uranium stockpiles, that active theater of operation will be at the war department and central command would be sort of the folks to talk to directly about that.
▶ 1:09:55Mr. Dinanno: What we do at the state department inside the t family bureaus, we would support the iea. That engagement resides under me, but any of that would probably be after the cessation of hostilities. But I don't want to get out in front of what is happening in the region there. That is the preview of the war department.
▶ 1:10:21Sen. Cornyn: Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:10:23Chair Risch: Thank you, senator cornyn. >> thank you. I have cheated our earlier discussion on a number of these questions. I wanted to as primarily about the arrangements with saudi arabia. Mentioned in your testimony that five facilities have been struck. In your testimony, you say that you negotiated five agreements.
▶ 1:10:55Chair Risch: I am assuming one of those is the saudi arabia agreement.
▶ 1:10:56Mr. Dinanno: Yes. The saudi arabia agreement has not been signed by the president yet. As you know once the president signs it, if he signs it, that would be due to congress.
▶ 1:11:09Sen. Merkley: Was that one of the five you were referring to in your testimony when talking about five different agreements?
▶ 1:11:15Mr. Dinanno: So the administration has laid out a goal of signing 20 agreements.
▶ 1:11:22Sen. Merkley: I know that and don't want to take a lot of time on this, just asking if saudi arabia is one of the five you referred to in your testimony.
▶ 1:11:29Mr. Dinanno: I believe so.
▶ 1:11:30Sen. Merkley: That has not been signed so that probably enters my next question which is the associated bilateral safeguards agreement has not been completed with saudi arabia as well.
▶ 1:11:39Mr. Dinanno: Yeah, again, once the agreement is signed, I am happy to talk through those details. But until the president actually signs it --
▶ 1:11:49Sen. Merkley: I am referring to your november 24 report to congress. You note saudi arabia's reservations about the additional protocol. There are three things that normally comprise the gold standard, the additional protocol that allows inspection of all nuclear sites, including ones that we are not directly involved in. And also no reprocessing and no enrichment.
▶ 1:12:18Sen. Merkley: Of those three things, do you think that any of those three might be included in the agreement with saudi arabia? No processing, no enrichment, and the inspection of all sites including ones that are not directly our companies, if you will.
▶ 1:12:34Mr. Dinanno: Thanks for the question, senator. Look, again, once the agreement is actually signed, we can go through some of the details. Until it is signed, I don't want to go through the details, but what I can tell you is I think we will have a solid and compliant with the atomic energy act nonproliferation approach that gets signed by the president.
▶ 1:13:01Mr. Dinanno: Whether it needs some of those data points, ap or gold standard, it is pre-decisional for us to talk about that. Once it is signed and delivered, I am happy to come back and answer those questions.
▶ 1:13:14Sen. Merkley: Ok, I will just express my concerns. And that is all the public reports are that none of those three things will be covered by the agreement with saudi arabia. And if they are not covered with saudi arabia, so they are able to reprocess or enrich, we cannot inspect sites, iaea cannot inspect the site and we cannot inspect other nuclear sites, it seems to be the
▶ 1:13:47Sen. Merkley: Perfect set up for nuclear proliferation. Once that standard is set, it is hard for other nations to agree to the standards of saudi arabia agreed to. As you and I have discussed, we have in the islamic world a major shiite superpower in iran, a major sunni superpower in saudi arabia, and anything that saudi arabia gets in terms of not covering enrichment, not covering reprocessing, not covering additional civilian nuclear sites for inspections makes it hard for everyone else to agree to those.
▶ 1:14:16Sen. Merkley: I know you are setting strong standards but I guess cap me concerned.
▶ 1:14:25Mr. Dinanno: If I can just respond quickly, saudi arabia is determined to develop a civilian nuclear program. I think the approach that we have and the nonproliferation requirements inside the section 123 of the atomic energy act which we will meet and I am confident we will have an extremely defensible nonproliferationand it is most t that nonproliferation program is
▶ 1:14:56Mr. Dinanno: Run by an american company and american program, as opposed to a russian or chinese program. Again, I understand exactly what you are referring to. Again, I'm happy to come back if we get the agreement signed and walk through some of those details. I'm supreme the confident that we will have a number of -- nonproliferation footprint. Should it get signed, that will more than meet the minimum standards in the atomic energy act.
▶ 1:15:27Sen. Merkley: Thank you.
▶ 1:15:31Chair Risch: -- >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Secretary dinanno, I want to underscore the concerns raised regarding reports that the administration is talking about going into a nuclear cooperation agreement with saudi arabia about the 1-2-3 standards. That is what we required of the uae and other recent countries. If we are really concerned about nonproliferation it seems we should have the strongest standards.
▶ 1:16:02Chair Risch: The chairman mentioned during his opening comments the uranium enrichment program. You have nonproliferation in your portfolio. You are familiar with tulsi gabbard's testimony before the senate intelligence committee, right? Are you aware that the dni testified recently before the committee?
▶ 1:16:26Mr. Dinanno: Yes. >> in her testimony she said as a result of operation midnight hammer -- the operation that took place last year -- as a result of the operation iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. You can contest that finding that was presented by the dni?
▶ 1:16:46Mr. Dinanno: Sir, I'm not in a position to revisit her testimony or the president's decision.
▶ 1:16:52Sen. Van Hollen: I'm asking you about 1 a comment the dni made. -- I'm asking you about it, the dni may. You have nonproliferation in your portfolio. I would think you are following this closely. Are you?
▶ 1:17:06Mr. Dinanno: I'm happy to talk about the role that the bureau I oversee play in nonproliferation with regards to iran.
▶ 1:17:16Sen. Van Hollen: Do you agree with her statement -- this was public testimony and I'm quoting again -- "there have been no efforts since then to rebuild their enrichment capability." do you disagree with that statement from the dni?
▶ 1:17:31Mr. Dinanno: The intelligence community's job is to inform policymakers. I am not a consumer -- I am a consumer of intelligence, I am not a maker of intelligence, in that sense.
▶ 1:17:47Sen. Van Hollen: She provided the intelligence community's view to the policymaker. President trump a policymaker.
▶ 1:17:53Sen. Van Hollen: I understand that. That goes without saying, but go ahead and say it. Joe kent, who resigned in protest, said that all 18 of america's intelligence agencies agreed that ron had no capacity to develop a nuclear bomb. As you say, you are a consumer of intelligence. Have you seen anything to dispute that statement?
▶ 1:18:19Mr. Dinanno: I don't want to respond to what one individual --
▶ 1:18:23Sen. Van Hollen: I'm asking you about the intelligence communities assessment, which dni gabbard testified about.
▶ 1:18:30Mr. Dinanno: I am responding to your question about the individual you mentioned. I have not seen his comments. I don't follow his comments.
▶ 1:18:39Sen. Van Hollen: Well, if you didn't want to my question about dni gabbard. I ask this because president trump set on march 4 "if we don't hit them within two weeks they would have a nuclear weapon," which is manifestly untrue based on all of the testimony we have seen from the intelligence committee. Let me turn to another issue. You are responsible for ensuring that U.S.
▶ 1:19:07Sen. Van Hollen: Arms transfers are consistent with the trump administration's conventional arms transfer policy right?
▶ 1:19:12Mr. Dinanno: Yes sir.
▶ 1:19:14Sen. Van Hollen: That requires that you consider the risk an arms transfer may pose, right?
▶ 1:19:21Mr. Dinanno: Sen. van hollen: yes sir. You involved in assessing that risk with the administration's decision to invoke emergency powers to bypass congressional review and transfer over 20,000 bombs to the netanyahu government?
▶ 1:19:38Mr. Dinanno: In response to the administration's emergency declaration, if there is ever a circumstance that is an emergency this would be it.
▶ 1:19:54Sen. Van Hollen: Mr. dinanno, I did not ask you. I ask you whether you comply with that policy.
▶ 1:20:02Mr. Dinanno: If you let me finish, I'm happy to answer your question, sir. That being said, I sat before the committee during my confirmation process and committed to working with the committee to follow the law. The law does allow for the emergency exemption. That is why we used it.
▶ 1:20:21Sen. Van Hollen: I'm not asking you about the --
▶ 1:20:24Mr. Dinanno: I think the context is important sir.
▶ 1:20:27Sen. Van Hollen: I submitted a question for the record. I'm asking you whether you were involved in reviewing the transfer of bombs to the netanyahu government with respect to compliance with the policy.
▶ 1:20:39Mr. Dinanno: Any foreign military sale that we do would fall underneath the conventional arms transfer policy.
▶ 1:20:50Sen. Van Hollen: Did you personally review that assessment?
▶ 1:20:56Mr. Dinanno: Again, senator, the emergency declaration --
▶ 1:20:59Sen. Van Hollen: Not the emergency declaration. Did you review the assessment regarding whether or not that transfer of 20,000 bombs complied with the cat policy?
▶ 1:21:09Mr. Dinanno: Everything we do complies with the law.
▶ 1:21:12Sen. Van Hollen: Did you personally or were you involved in that review?
▶ 1:21:17Mr. Dinanno: I was involved with the transfer, and anything that we would do would be consistent with our cat policy, which is compliant with the law.
▶ 1:21:28Sen. Van Hollen: So I'm going to take it as an know that you did not review whether or not that transfer complied with cap policy. Did you personally review that?
▶ 1:21:36Mr. Dinanno: You can take it anywhere you want.
▶ 1:21:39Sen. Van Hollen: Did you?
▶ 1:21:40Mr. Dinanno: I already told you I was involved with the policy. I oversee the bureau.
▶ 1:21:45Sen. Van Hollen: Did you personally review?
▶ 1:21:48Mr. Dinanno: I review hundreds of arm sale -- of arms sales. The emergency declaration is consistent with the law. And most important layer think it is important for the committee that we lay out we are not trying to establish a new norm that will continue on a case-by-case basis to look at emergencies if they exist, just like the biden administration did in 2023. Let me finish my comment.
▶ 1:22:18Mr. Dinanno: I'm trying to address your concern.
▶ 1:22:19Sen. Van Hollen: No.
▶ 1:22:20Mr. Dinanno: Yes sir, I am.
▶ 1:22:23Sen. Van Hollen: We you concerned that israeli defense minister katz said they were going to use the rafa model in gaza?
▶ 1:22:34Mr. Dinanno: I'm not familiar with that comment.
▶ 1:22:37Sen. Van Hollen: Would you take a look at that and let me know if that concerns you?
▶ 1:22:42Mr. Dinanno: I'm happy to. >> they give very much, Mr. chairman. Last week nvidia said it had been licensed for many customers in china for its advanced ai chips, the h 200, and had received purchase orders for many companies.
▶ 1:23:08Mr. Dinanno: On january 13 the department of commerce rule governing the h 200 license process, which the state department plays a role in, contains various end-use requirements. Certify the chips will not be used for military intelligence or weapons of mass destruction. Given beijing's military that seems difficult if not impossible to certify. Currently communist china is so computer constrained that it continues to resort to smuggling U.S.
▶ 1:23:37Mr. Dinanno: Ai chips and stealing from U.S. models to remain competitive. As evidence of this on thursday the justice department charge three people with $2.5 billion worth of servers with nvidia ai chips to china. Under secretary dinanno, is it your understanding that communist china is pursuing a civil military fusion strategy whereby it has eliminated any barriers between the commercial and defense sectors to develop the most technologically advanced military in the world?
▶ 1:24:07Mr. Dinanno: Thank you, senator, for the question. So, the state department role in the bureaus I oversee specifically regards to export control enforcement, we had direction from the president to support these -- this chip sale to china.
▶ 1:24:29Mr. Dinanno: With the caveat and an important caveat that we would only do so by establishing -- I'm trying to remember the president's exact phrasing. Strong national security. That is exactly what the nonproliferation bureau that reports to me does.
▶ 1:24:48Mr. Dinanno: We reviewed -- I cannot talk about specific licenses per se, but have reviewed and continued to review, to apply the highest standards to look at all of the intelligence and the derogatory information we may find and push that into the decision process. Ultimately -- I'm sorry, sir.
▶ 1:25:10Sen. Ricketts: I'm talking about the china military fusion. You have heard that term before?
▶ 1:25:15Mr. Dinanno: Yes sir.
▶ 1:25:16Sen. Ricketts: I did not ask you about a specific license yet. Let's talk about at a high level. How would you be able to certify that a technology that may have dual use -- caa high end ai chip -- would be able to be used for only one purpose versus going into some of the other things that license has to prescribe so we cannot get into weapons of mass destruction or something like that?
▶ 1:25:45Sen. Ricketts: How can you certify that if they have this military civil fusion? >> the review process is extensive. Any derogatory information would go into our decision process, whether or not we would recommend approval or not.
▶ 1:26:13Sen. Ricketts: Ultimately the -- your concern is noted and I think it is important, but looking at each individual entity with an extremely high bar -- the president himself said -- and that is the bar that we implemented. I oversee and implement is that high national security standard. Part of that would be to address the diverse risk.
▶ 1:26:38Sen. Ricketts: The ability to design and -- design and produce an ai chip lies at the heart of our competition with china. China cannot manufacture these without semiconductor manufacturing. As a result, export controls represent one of our most significant points of leverage with beijing. Companies are barred from selling to communist china. The past several years we have prioritized diplomacy with allies, convinced them to match our same level of controls.
▶ 1:27:14Sen. Ricketts: Foreign companies are able to continue filling orders for critical tools to communist china providing support. This misalignment uplifts chinese ship making capabilities, helps chinese communist china [indiscernible] and shift away from firms. Given that ai is a dual use, it contributes to the enhanced capabilities for the pla, posing national security threat. Do you agree that insuring our allies have fully aligned our export controls on sme towers is critical for national security?
▶ 1:27:44Mr. Dinanno: Senator, thanks for the question. We have extremely active diplomacy with our allies. We have programs not only information sharing and engagement, the nonproliferation bureau actively seeks out and trains.
▶ 1:28:06Mr. Dinanno: Attempting to raise the standards of potential weak spots or potential partners that we felt we need to raise their standards. Not only do we actively engage with -- again, I would characterize traditional allies, but it is very important that we raise the standards of -- across the board. Across the countries that might be involved in that supply chain and we have active programming that does that.
▶ 1:28:35Sen. Ricketts: This issue is why I plan to introduce the multilateral alignment of controls act to harmonize export controls on smes to communist china with our allies. The act will ensure that if an adversary cannot manufacture a tool themselves, they will not be able to buy it. So that the united states can lead the world. >> thank you, senator.
▶ 1:29:02Sen. Ricketts: I know you have been active in this area and it is an absolute critical concern. Not only what we sell to them, but also one hour allies such as the netherlands sells to them. That is critical too. Thank you for your work in that regard. With that, senator rosen.
▶ 1:29:23Sen. Rosen: Thank you for today's hearing and thank you, Mr. dinanno, for joining us. I want to go and talk about nevada little bit. The nevada national security site was ground zero for the vast majority of the united states' exclusive nuclear testing from 1951 to 1992, which -- during which there were 100 atmospheric tests and 828 underground tests conducted.
▶ 1:29:57Sen. Rosen: Any nevadans suffering from these exposures are still waiting for justice and compensation. Today the and nss plays a critical role in certifying the liability and effectiveness of our nuclear stockpile, but without -- I'm going to emphasize that, I could say at 100 times -- without the need for explosive testing. You can imagine my surprise when president trump and others such as the assistant secretary suggested the U.S. should resume explosive nuclear testing. So, Mr.
▶ 1:30:26Sen. Rosen: Dinanno, what is the state department's position on explosive nuclear testing and of president trump were to order a nuclear test, I do you expect russia or china to respond? What about other countries' nuclear weapons, and how we manage the inevitable damage this going to cause to your efforts to pursue multilateral arms control and risk reduction measures?
▶ 1:30:54Mr. Dinanno: Thank you, senator. Let me start by saying the president has laid out a view that I elaborated on and assistant secretary all -- yaw elaborated on, where the president instructed the war department and energy department to test on an equal basis with
▶ 1:31:24Mr. Dinanno: Our adversaries. The backdrop of that is important to understand, that both the russians and the chinese are testing at yield.
▶ 1:31:33Sen. Rosen: I can tell you that in our tunnel and the radiographic things we have there in the new kinds of technology we have, we have adequately, without explosive testing, insured that the capabilities of our nuclear stockpile.
▶ 1:31:56Mr. Dinanno: So, thank you, senator. Couple of points to make. We are still assessing -- we have made no decision specifically on how or what any testing program would look like. That is pre-decisional. I'm happy if we could come back and talk to me.
▶ 1:32:16Sen. Rosen: You had better, because the people of nevada and utah and all around you think what happens in nevada with an explosive test days in nevada? Is it sure doesn't.
▶ 1:32:26Mr. Dinanno: I think you are referring to any potential atmospheric testing.
▶ 1:32:33Sen. Rosen: They created with the ground in nevada, and let me tell you, there is groundwater. It doesn't go away.
▶ 1:32:40Mr. Dinanno: Let me answer your concern, if I could. I have not been in any discussions that have -- where open atmospheric testing has been under consideration. The testing -- any testing -- is under consideration. Again, it is currently pre-decisional. But the president has laid out and it is important to understand that the united states --
▶ 1:33:06Sen. Rosen: It is important to understand that he had better come talk to sap is planning to do that. The people of nevada have a stake. The people of utah have a stake in that and I will look -- idaho, right above us, texas. Everything goes around this country. Trust me.
▶ 1:33:24Mr. Dinanno: I understand that and I appreciate your concern.
▶ 1:33:27Sen. Rosen: I will move on to something else.
▶ 1:33:30Mr. Dinanno: I want to address it, that is important. You talk about the wind. There has been no discussion that any atmospheric testing would take place. Again, the chinese and russian programs are underground. They are at yields that I can't talk too much about in this open hearing, but the chinese underground testing program would be in the hundreds of tons
▶ 1:34:00Mr. Dinanno: . No discussions -- again, that I have been a part of -- would in any way talk about winds work downrange. I have heard nothing to that effect.
▶ 1:34:15Sen. Rosen: You understand my concern about the need for visual besides a ground cratering in? We have made millions of billions of dollars of investments on radiographic and other technology using math, using physics, using science to be sure that we ensure the tech -- integrity of our nuclear arsenal. We have been specific to that and I'm glad to take you down there if you have not and to see what they are doing and how they are doing it before you enter into more of these discussions.
▶ 1:34:44Mr. Dinanno: Yes ma'am. I would happily go there. I know what they do there. Again, I think it is important to understand that the russian and chinese systems -- the russians and chinese are testing at yield. That creates intolerable disadvantage for the united states by not testing. Again, I have heard no discussion of any sort of atmospheric testing whatsoever.
▶ 1:35:09Sen. Rosen: I tend to disagree with you, but I yield. Thank you. >> senator cruz.
▶ 1:35:17Sen. Cruz: Thank you, Mr. chairman. I find it troubling that the united kingdom is prepared to transfer the chagas archipelago to marie she is. A deal that is -- marie she us mary cheney us -- the transfer gives china leverage over one of our most strategic military assets, significantly impacting our ability to operate from diego garcia.
▶ 1:35:49Sen. Cruz: It is in violation of the united kingdom's treaty commission -- treaty to the united states. President trump has been pressing back hard against the steel for months. Yet there are serious concerns that elements within the state department continue to support it. Even as iran targets diego garcia with missiles.
▶ 1:36:17Sen. Cruz: Public reporting indicates that support for this agreement originated within the political military affairs bureau and the state doubled down in a february statement, announcing a pm delegation to vicious -- mary she has -- mauritius.
▶ 1:36:38Mr. Dinanno: The president has been clear that, obviously I follow the president's policy lead. Specific to diego garcia, the most important thing we have to have -- and I agree with your assessment on the potential concerns with the chinese as well -- but the preservation of diego garcia as a forward operating base for the military.
▶ 1:37:06Mr. Dinanno: Again, slightly outside of my purview -- is without question the priority of the administration and the state department.
▶ 1:37:12Sen. Cruz: I agree with you that the president has been clear, but I would like to get you express -- explicitly on the record with a yes or no answer. Do you support the deal between the united kingdom and voracious -- mauritius?
▶ 1:37:28Mr. Dinanno: I'm unclear this current state of the negotiation, and -- in mauritius. What I support is that the united states had the ability to use diego garcia. You reference elements inside the state department. I don't know where those elements are. The political bureau answers to me. I answer to secretary rubio and the president.
▶ 1:37:57Mr. Dinanno: We would be completely aligned with the president and the secretary's guidance on that.
▶ 1:38:01Sen. Cruz: Let me help you out, because there appears to be tension. On february 18 president trump issued the following untrue social. I have been telling prime minister keir starmer of the united kingdom that leases are no good when it comes to countries and he is making a big mistake by entering a 100 year lease with whoever it is that is claiming interest to diego garcia in the indian ocean.
▶ 1:38:27Sen. Cruz: Our relationship with united kingdom is strong and powerful and it has been for many years, but prime minister starmer is losing control of this important island by claims that -- from entities never known up before. In our opinion they are fictitious in nature. Just to resolve any ambiguity, the true social ends with "do not give away diego garcia!" is there any ambiguity in what the president said?
▶ 1:38:58Mr. Dinanno: No sir. There is not.
▶ 1:39:00Sen. Cruz: Ok, so then why did the bureau announce a delegation to mauritius and signal it support for the deal? The official statement says, " the U.S. supports the decision of the u.k. To proceed with its agreement in mauritius concerning the up -- the archipelago. "
▶ 1:39:26Mr. Dinanno: I don't think any delegation actually went your most importantly. The president sets the policy and we implement the president's policy.
▶ 1:39:36Sen. Cruz: I would ask you to figure out who the hell wrote that statement that the U.S. supports this deal and why they are putting out statements from the department of state that are directly contrary to the position of the president of the united states, who is charged with responsibility of making that decision.
▶ 1:39:55Mr. Dinanno: I think I would agree that the u.k. Would be the partner of choice there. There is no daylight between me or anybody at the state department. In the president.
▶ 1:40:09Sen. Cruz: I am very glad to hear it, because as we have seen with the recent targeting of diego garcia by iran, this base is critically important for protecting american national security interests. And if the united kingdom is to compromise that base, that would harm our national security and be in direct violation of a binding treaty between the united states and the united kingdom.
▶ 1:40:36Mr. Dinanno: Yes sir.
▶ 1:40:37Chair Risch: Thank you, senator cruz. I suspect that the white house has already figure out who authorized that text that went out. I would be interested in hearing that.
▶ 1:40:48Sen. Cruz: If they haven't I hope this questioning will accelerate that process.
▶ 1:40:52Chair Risch: Thank you so much for appearing here today. I think this was incredibly important, and I appreciate a good airing of these issues. Obviously it is ongoing, and it is going to be something that is around for a long time. We look forward to working with you as we go forward. Thanks much. For the information, members of the committee, the record will remain open until the close of business tomorrow.
▶ 1:41:22Chair Risch: If we get any other questions, I would ask you to respond to them as quickly as possible. Again, with thanks to the committee, we appreciate it. This committee is adjourned.