Pre-confirmation Hearing Questions for VADM Dennis C. Blair

Defense Reforms

Yes, I fully support the changes that the Goldwater-Nichols Act brought about. As you suggest, I’ve seen the "before and after" picture and the improvements have been significant. These reforms have strengthened our Armed Forces and especially the combatant commanders’ ability to conduct operations in support of our strategy of engagement in peace and to direct joint and combined operations in war.  

"Jointness" has become the core of the American way of war. It dominates the way we operate across the full spectrum of conflict - the joint commander is clearly in charge. It dominates the way we train - joint exercises are the capstone of the training hierarchy. It is becoming dominant in our doctrine, which is continually becoming more based on joint concepts and less based on a simple combination of service concepts. It is asserting an ever-stronger role in our acquisition decisions, as the JROC ensures that service systems are built with interoperabilility from the beginning, and that choices among service systems are made based on joint value.  

The most important impact of Goldwater-Nichols has been to place jointness at the heart of the thinking and activity of the Department of Defense. The Act served as the impetus to improve strategic planning and operations, joint doctrine and training, professional military education and acquisition. An essential feature is the clarity of each CINC’s responsibility and authority to execute his assigned mission and prepare his forces. This clear assignment of mission has significantly strengthened the execution of the national military strategy.  

The goals of the Congress in enacting these defense reforms, as reflected in section 3 of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act, can be summarized as strengthening civilian control; improving military advice; placing clear responsibility on the combatant commanders for the accomplishment of their missions; ensuring the authority of the combatant commanders is commensurate with their responsibility; increasing attention to the formulation of strategy and to contingency planning; providing for more efficient use of defense resources; and enhancing the effectiveness of military operations and improving the management and administration of the Department of Defense. 

Yes - strongly.  

There are three areas in which I believe the Department of Defense should further develop the implementation of the goals of Goldwater-Nichols: 

It is not clear whether improvements in these areas will require legislation, or can be accomplished within current authorities. The important thing is to keep improving jointness within the armed forces, based on the goals of Goldwater-Nichols.  

Relationships 

Section 162(b) of title 10, United States Code, provides that the chain of command runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense and from the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commands. Other sections of law and traditional practice, however, establish important relationships outside the chain of command. If confirmed, what will be your relationship with: 

The chain of command flows from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the Commander-In-Chief, US Pacific Command. The Secretary is my immediate supervisor and I will report directly to him and provide the best possible military advice to execute my duties and responsibilities in the Pacific. As is custom and traditional practice, I will communicate with the Secretary through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 

Under current DoD Directives, Under Secretaries of Defense coordinate and exchange information with DoD components, to include combatant commands, in the functional areas under their purview. If confirmed, as a combatant commander, I will respond and reciprocate. I will use this exchange of information as I formally communicate with the CJCS and provide the best military advice to the SECDEF. 

With two exceptions, all Assistant Secretaries are subordinate to one of the Under Secretaries of Defense. This means any relationship US Pacific Command would have with subordinate Assistant Secretaries would be working with and through the applicable Under Secretary of Defense. Since the Assistant Secretaries of Defense for C3I and Legislative Affairs are principal deputies to the SECDEF, the relationship with them would be conducted along the same lines as with the various Under Secretaries.  

The Chairman is the principal military advisor to the National Command Authority (NCA). The law does allow communications of the President or SECDEF with the combatant commanders to be transmitted through the Chairman. President Clinton has directed this policy in the Unified Command Plan to keep the Chairman fully involved so that he can execute his other legal responsibilities. If confirmed, I will continue the same outstanding relationship with General Shelton as I have enjoyed while serving as his Director of the Joint Staff.  

When functioning as the acting Chairman, the Vice Chairman’s relationship with CINCs is exactly that of the Chairman. The 103^rd Congress amended Title 10 to give the Vice Chairman the same rights and obligations of other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As a CINC, I would exchange views with the Vice Chairman on any general defense matter considered by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Vice Chairman also heads or plays a key role on many boards and panels that affect readiness and programs and, therefore, the preparedness of US Pacific Command. I would anticipate exchanging views on matters before these boards and panels as they affect the Pacific Command. If confirmed, I anticipate continuing the close working relationship with General Ralston as CINCPAC that I have enjoyed for the last two years as Director of the Joint Staff. 

The Assistant to the Chairman represents the Chairman in the interagency process, and works particularly closely with the leadership of the Department of State. Combatant CINCs and their staffs also work in an interagency setting. While there is no command relationship between the Assistant to the Chairman and a combatant commander, informal exchanges of view are of mutual benefit. If confirmed, I would expect to continue such exchanges. 

I am very familiar with this relationship. The Director of the Joint Staff is generally the Joint Staff point of contact for soliciting information from all the CINCs when the Chairman is developing a position on any important issue. On a day-to-day basis, the Deputy Commander in Chief works with the Director of the Joint Staff to exchange positions and clarify direction. However, on occasion it is important for the CINC to deal directly with the Director of the Joint Staff to ensure that his position is correctly understood by the Director. 

Title 10, section 165 provides that, subject to the authority, direction, and control of the SECDEF and subject to the authority of combatant commanders, the Secretaries of Military Departments are responsible for the administration and support of the forces they have assigned to combatant commands. Each Service has a component commander subordinate to CINCPAC who administers and supports Service forces, but on occasion it is important for a CINC to exchange views personally and directly with a Service Secretary on issues. 

Service Chiefs now have two significant roles. They are responsible, in accordance with Goldwater-Nichols, to organize, train, equip, and provide trained and ready forces for CINCs to employ across the spectrum of conflict--peace, crisis, and war. Without the full support and cooperation of the Service Chiefs, no CINC can hope to ensure the preparedness of his assigned forces for whatever missions the NCA directs. Next, as members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Service Chiefs have a lawful obligation to provide military advice to the NCA. Individually and collectively, the Joint Chiefs are a source of experience and judgment that every CINC can and should call upon. If confirmed, I intend to conduct a full dialogue with the Chiefs of all Services. 

My relationship with other CINCs will be one of mutual support, continued dialogue on key issues, and frequent face-to-face interaction during periodic CINC Conferences and other meetings, as required. In today’s security environment, an atmosphere of teamwork and cooperation is critical to executing US national policy. In each of my supporting and supported relationships with other CINCs, I will do my utmost to assist them in the execution of their duties and responsibilities. If confirmed, I will take this duty especially seriously, because the area of responsibility of the Pacific Command is the largest of any CINC, and has mutual boundaries with each of the other four combatant commanders. 

Major Challenges and Problems 

In your view, what are the major challenges confronting the Commander-in-Chief United States Pacific Command? 

Assuming you are confirmed, what plans do you have for addressing these challenges?  

There are several components of my experience that have prepared me for this position . First, I have enjoyed a remarkable career at sea, serving in positions of increased responsibility from captain of a ship to command of a Carrier Battle Group. Years of sea duty have contributed to my understanding of the operational warfighting requirements of air, ground, and naval forces. Building on these operational assignments, I have served on staffs within the Navy, the Joint Staff, with the Director of Central Intelligence, and on the staff of the National Security Council. These tours of duty have given me unique insights into the workings of national security policy and strategy formulation at the highest levels of the Department of Defense and the US Government. Additionally, I have spent a significant portion of my career serving in the Pacific, from San Diego to Japan. Finally, my experiences with the many soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines -- America’s sons and daughters – are an important qualification. I have had a great opportunity to serve with an outstanding group of people for these past three decades and have come to understand how important it is that senior military leaders contribute to the professional development of their subordinates, and to care for the safety and welfare of servicemembers and their families. It is a cherished responsibility to develop in our junior commanders the sets of skills they will need to lead our forces into the 21^st Century. I know I can make an appropriate contribution.