Oversight Hearing – The United States Army

House Subcommittee on Defense

2025-05-07

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

The subcommittee convened to receive testimony on the posture of the United States Army from Secretary Daniel Driscoll and General Randy George. The discussion focused on the Army's readiness to meet future challenges, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, amidst evolving threats and rapid technological advancements like drone technology. Modernization and a comprehensive transformation strategy were highlighted as crucial for ensuring the Army's effectiveness.

Army Transformation and Modernization

The Army is undertaking a comprehensive transformation, driven by the need for rapid adaptation rather than waiting for the 2030 timeline <citation data-id="7.13"></citation>. This involves cancelling obsolete programs, developing advanced capabilities, using modular open system architectures, and streamlining headquarters staff to improve efficiency and lethality <citation data-start-id="7.19" data-end-id="7.23"></citation>. Secretary Driscoll emphasized that the greatest risk lies in maintaining the status quo, advocating for continuous and agile changes <citation data-id="50.6" data-id="50.16"></citation>. Congressional members expressed strong support for the transformation's intent but voiced concerns regarding the lack of detailed budget information for FY26 and the need for transparent dialogue with Congress, industry, and military communities <citation data-start-id="2.4" data-end-id="2.14" data-start-id="2.18" data-end-id="2.22"></citation>. The Army aims to reduce bureaucracy in its acquisition process, citing successful rapid prototyping examples to accelerate technology delivery to soldiers <citation data-start-id="64.1" data-end-id="64.16" data-start-id="71.1" data-end-id="71.4"></citation>.

Drone Technology and Counter-Drone Measures

Drones were identified as a "game changer" and a transformative element of modern warfare, significantly altering battlefield dynamics <citation data-id="1.13" data-id="8.8"></citation>. The Army is investing in counter-drone technologies and integrating drone awareness into basic soldier training <citation data-start-id="1.15" data-id="9.1" data-id="9.3"></citation>. Lessons from the Ukraine conflict underscore the critical need for rapid software and hardware updates, contrasting sharply with the Army's current, slower update cycles <citation data-start-id="16.13" data-end-id="16.15"></citation>. A key challenge is the heavy reliance on foreign components for drones, with the Army seeking to encourage domestic manufacturing and agile procurement of capabilities rather than specific programs <citation data-id="10.1" data-start-id="11.12" data-id="12.3"></citation>. The cost-effectiveness of counter-drone measures is also a concern, driving the search for cheaper solutions and directed energy systems <citation data-start-id="21.1" data-end-id="21.5"></citation>.

Budgetary and Acquisition Challenges

Congressional members expressed frustration over the absence of a finalized spend plan for FY25 and delayed budget details for FY26, hindering legislative duties <citation data-start-id="2.4" data-end-id="2.8"></citation>. Concerns were raised about proposed cuts to civilian personnel, potentially impacting contract execution and increasing the burden on military staff <citation data-start-id="2.32" data-end-id="2.36"></citation>. The process of program cancellation drew scrutiny, particularly regarding coordination with joint partners and the assessment of close-out costs <citation data-start-id="13.12" data-end-id="13.26"></citation>. The Army acknowledged past shortcomings in collaborating with industry and committed to improving acquisition processes and fostering a more competitive industrial base through predictable demand signals and partnerships <citation data-start-id="50.10" data-id="116.1" data-id="116.2"></citation>. Agile funding for UAS, counter-UAS, and electronic warfare was requested to keep pace with rapid technological change <citation data-start-id="7.26" data-end-id="7.28"></citation>.

Lessons from the Ukraine Conflict

The conflict in Ukraine has dramatically reshaped strategic thinking, emphasizing several critical lessons for the Army <citation data-id="15.3"></citation>. Key takeaways include the impossibility of concealment on the modern battlefield due to pervasive sensors, the dominance of software-driven technology requiring constant updates, and the increased speed of warfare through swarms of autonomous systems <citation data-start-id="16.3" data-end-id="16.23"></citation>. The effectiveness of long-range fires, even without traditional naval power, was also noted <citation data-start-id="16.42" data-end-id="16.44"></citation>. These insights are directly informing changes in Army training and organizational structure to enhance adaptability and readiness <citation data-start-id="9.7" data-id="16.40"></citation>.

Specific Program Discussions and Southern Border Mission

Discussions included the proposed divestment of air cavalry squadrons and Apache helicopters, justified by the Army due to the high cost of older models and the need to invest in autonomous systems for a balanced manned/unmanned fleet <citation data-start-id="22.8" data-end-id="22.9" data-start-id="23.3" data-end-id="23.6"></citation>. The Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) was identified as a critical innovation for the Indo-Pacific, with efforts to accelerate its development and deployment <citation data-start-id="73.2" data-id="94.1"></citation>. Concerns were raised about the future of the Black Hawk helicopter, with members emphasizing past commitments to its modernization and multi-year contracts, contrasting with Army leadership's cautious stance on future procurement in light of evolving battlefield needs <citation data-start-id="107.1" data-end-id="107.7" data-start-id="110.3" data-end-id="110.4"></citation>. The Army's role on the southern border was discussed, with soldiers providing security but not law enforcement functions, and the mission seen as valuable for training and counter-UAS learning, despite questions about its cost and impact on other priorities <citation data-start-id="39.2" data-end-id="39.6" data-start-id="44.1" data-end-id="44.5" data-start-id="45.1" data-end-id="45.3"></citation>.

Tone of the Meeting

The meeting maintained a respectful yet demanding tone, with congressional members expressing appreciation for the Army's service and transformation initiatives, but also voicing significant concerns regarding transparency and the timely provision of detailed budgetary information <citation data-id="1.5" data-id="1.7" data-id="2.2" data-id="4.20" data-id="49.4" data-id="88.3" data-start-id="2.4" data-end-id="2.14" data-id="2.28" data-id="2.32" data-start-id="13.12" data-end-id="13.26" data-start-id="107.1" data-end-id="107.7" data-start-id="134.14" data-end-id="134.28"></citation>. Army leadership conveyed a proactive and determined stance, underscoring the urgency of rapid transformation to meet evolving global threats and overcome bureaucratic obstacles <citation data-id="7.13" data-id="50.6" data-id="51.2" data-start-id="64.16" data-end-id="64.20" data-start-id="94.5" data-end-id="94.8"></citation>. Both sides acknowledged the necessity of collaboration to effectively modernize the Army <citation data-start-id="2.18" data-end-id="2.19" data-start-id="12.2" data-id="50.14" data-id="118.3"></citation>.

Participants

Transcript

Good morning.  Subcommittee will come to order.  Today, the subcommittee will receive testimony in the posture of the United States Army.  First, I'd like to welcome our two witnesses, Secretary of the Army Daniel Driscoll and General Randy George, Chief of Staff of the United States Army.  Mr. Secretary, congratulations on your appointment.  I look forward to working with you.  General George, thank you for joining us once again.   The U.S.  Army is a force that remains the backbone of our nation's defense and the critical pillar in ensuring global stability.  Today, we will assess the Army's readiness to meet the challenges of the increasingly complex security environment, particularly as we look toward future conflicts, including those that may unfold in the Indo-Pacific theater of operation, where strategic competition continues to intensify.  The Army's role in the future fight is evolving rapidly.   shaped by emerging threats and technological advancements.  Among these, the proliferation of drone technology stands out as a game changer.  Drone warfare offers both unprecedented opportunity and significant vulnerability.   Our adversaries are leveraging drones to challenge traditional battlefield dynamics, requiring robust investment in counter drone technology to protect our soldiers and maintain operational superiority.  Modernization remains a cornerstone of the Army's transformation, and I commend the progress made in recent years through the next generation combat systems, combined soldier lethality, and advanced network capability.  However, progress must be matched by scrutiny.   We must ensure that these efforts align with the demands of tomorrow's battlefield, where agility, resilience, and technological edge will define success.  We must ensure that the investments in our Army reflect the needs of a multi-domain fight and strike the right balance between conventional capability and the specialized forces required for hybrid and asymmetric warfare.
The Army has begun to implement a comprehensive transformation strategy to rapidly deliver capability,   optimize force structure, and eliminate waste and obsolete programs.  I'm interested in hearing how you will implement this strategy to achieve a more efficient and more effective Army.   Today's hearing is an opportunity to address these issues head on, to hear from our witnesses, and to chart a course that ensures the U.S.  Army remains the world's preeminent land force.  I look forward to a robust and insightful discussion.  With that, I recognize the distinguished ranking member, Ms.  McCollum, for her opening remarks.
Thank you for the courtesy, Mr. Chair.  Mr. Secretary, General George, welcome to the committee's discussion about the Army's plans to transform for the future.  As the chairman pointed out, we're excited and interested in hearing your plans.  As I said yesterday in our hearing with the Air Force, fiscal year 2026 budget process is off to a very rough start.   We have just over four months left until the end of FY25, and the department still has not agreed upon a final spend plan with Congress.  I know there's plans floating out there, but they haven't been agreed upon.  The skinny budget for next year has been released, but we don't know what the numbers are based off of yet.   These are rumors that full budget may not even be released until June.  All puts us in a very difficult position getting our job done, and I know both a ranking member, Delora, and Chairman Cole want to get our job done on time.   And that's why yesterday we were unable really to discuss the Air Force and Space Force budget priorities in any detail.  They just don't have the information.  Likewise, it's disappointing that we're going to be unable to discuss the Army's priorities and programming details for FY26 at this time.  And I know you share that concern.   So I hope you'll reach out to the committee, to the chair and I, with details as soon as they are released.  Last week, you both presented the Army's transformative initiative, which will include changes to war fighting capabilities and force structure and program activities.   And we do need to make changes.  And I know you want to move quickly, very quickly.  However, any successful transformation proposed by the services has only going to be made possible with an open dialogue with the United States Congress, the people of this country.  That means you must work with us, with industry and with military communities involved.  Bypassing any of these vital steps will only create questions.   and create delays, something I know you don't wish to have happen.
And I know you want to put to rest any confusion, and I know it's not your desire to provoke anxiety, but not doing this in a forward, transparent manner could land up doing exactly that.   So I look forward to hearing more details on the Army's transformation of initiative and how this differs from implementing the Army's 2030 initiative.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up