Committee Members, President Yoshida has seen fit to elevate Representative Jason Holland to the Cabinet Position of Secretary of Defense. Therefore, this hearing is open for 5 days to question the fitness of said nominee to the office of Secretary of Defense.

::Bangs Gavel::

Mr. Holland,
What are your credentials? Have you had any past experiences in foreign and military affairs? Why do you want to be secretary of defense? What do you feel about being a Democrat in the Yoshida administration?

Mr. Holland,

First of all, allow me to congratulate you on your nomination.
I have two questions for you, both pertaining to our present engagement in Iraq.

First: Do you feel that we can achieve our goals in Iraq at our present level of deployment?
Can our military be maintained at its present size, or do we need to add divisions?

Second: How will a Holland Department of Defense ensure security during the upcoming Iraqi elections?

Thank you.

This post has been edited by JIC X on Oct 15 2004, 12:28 AM

Mr. Chairman,

Members of the committee. First of all let me thank you for allowing me the chance to come before the committee to testify on my behalf on my recent nomination to this prestigious office. I want to thank all the members in the committee who are in attendance.

I must admit that it was, to me, a surprise when President Yoshida asked that I join his cabinet. I had to think about it for several days, and I spoke with many of my friends, family members, my son, and various other people in my life on this decision. However, it boiled down to this: The President, regardless of the party, had asked me to serve my Country. How could anyone who is a patriot of this Country not say yes?

If you confirm me for the post of Secretary of Defense, I intend to implement the following items:

1 � Update the Defense department procurement policies to help save tax payer money. Currently, the DoD has over 20,000 civilian personnel whose sole job is it to oversee military contracts. That�s more people than the US Marines can deploy! While we must always work to insure that American tax payer funds are used as wisely as possible, this is a bureaucratic and structural impediment to our troops. For example, we had the funds to purchase the new light weight body armor for our soldiers in Iraq, yet it was civilian contract over site which delayed their delivery. We must revamp this process and streamline it so that our men and woman in uniform never suffer because someone, somewhere is holding up their supplies.

2 � Work to revamp our military away from the cold war heavy defense structure to a lighter, more mobile and more rapid deployment force. Its estimated that our Armed forces spend over $ 100 billion a year to train, equip, and fight against a threat that is no longer relevant. We must re-engineer our defensive position to be ready for the 21st century challenges, not the 20th century challenges.

3 � Redeploy American armed forces around the world from outdated defense postures to the use of the so-called �lily pad� model be restructuring our defense assignments from Western Europe to the Caucus, the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Not only will this save money due to cheaper rents in these nations, but it will be align our forces to respond to situations as they occur. In addition to this, we will see an increase in good will towards the American government and people, as the inner-mingle and in some cases marry folks from cultures which have not had positive interaction with Americans in the past.

4 � Work to increase the diversity within the military hierarchy to include promote more candidates such as woman, minorities and those with more diverse ethnic backgrounds into roles of more senior military commanders. We must make certain that our military is a reflection of the people of this country, and that folks should not be excluded from the top.

5 � Work with Congress to update the pay and benefits structure of our armed forces to help boost the signing bonus benefits, survivor benefits, pay, and other factors to help increase recruitment, lower the turn over of the military staff, and work to increase the average enlistment time to help spread out training costs over longer periods. Its critical at this time that we keep retention as high as possible, and one of the ways in which we can do this is through increased benefits.

6 � Work with the military and the Congress to create a new Command and Control structure (CINC) for the continent of Africa. I will ask Congress to appropriate funds for the position, and the building of a command structure for any possible military actions on the African continent. I believe that from the past tragedies in Rwanda to Burundi, from Congo to Sierra Leone, and now the recent events in The Sudan, it is imperative that we have a force structure necessary to respond to situations on the African continent as quickly as possible.

Mr. Chairman I believe that these are critical steps which we need to take in order to make our military more efficient, more able to meet the challenges which lay ahead of us, and more representative of the nation as a whole.

I look forward to answering any and all questions that the members may have.

Thank you,

Jason Holland

Mr. Garwood,

Thank you for your questions.

For starters, just so everyone knows, I am the son of a military officer. My father retired in 1974 as a brigadier general in the United States Army. All my life I was raised around the military, being born at Fort Benning in Columbus, Georgia, to his retirement at Fort Stewart, Georgia. My father served in Korea and Vietnam.
I have a first cousin who is currently a Major General in the United States Army. My brother, Lindsey, is a Major and is currently in Iraq.

While I did not serve myself, I have been active on defensive questions, having worked with the military in both Georgia and Congress. I have great admiration for folks in the military, I respect their service, their sacrifice, and their love of country. I personally have set up a fund for the families of Georgians who lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, to help their survivors.

My qualifications come from a deep understanding of the military, its culture, its institutions, and its history. To quote my friend, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, �I may be a hawk, but I am a cheap hawk.� I have looked at ways to help modernize and streamline the military to make it more cost effective to the nation. While we could never put a price on our defense, or their lives, at the same time we must make certain that every dollar we spend it spent efficiently, effectively, and wisely.

As for foreign affairs, that started early in life from my father�s deployments to the United Kingdom, then West Germany, Japan, and Belgium. Before I was 18 I had lived almost half my life overseas on army bases, getting to know the local people and making friends which have lasted to this day. This was manifested in the marriage to my former wife, who was from Argentina.

From there when I founded my own investment company, Holland Investments, my daily interaction dramatically increased with both foreign government officials, as well as foreign businesspersons. From my time as CEO, I met and made friends with several prominent Japanese business person, Chinese government officials, Vietnam government officials, Brazilian business and government persons, as well as Argentineans of all stripes.

I have deep respect for those of other cultures or countries, and I believe that it is through our interaction with those who are not like us that we find a good deal of wisdom and insight.

As for being a Democrat in President Yoshida�s cabinet, I have no problem with it, and neither does the President. I am an American first and foremost, and my party affiliation falls way down on the list. I follow in the foot steps as such folks as Secretary Cohen in President Clinton�s cabinet, and Secretary Mineta in President Bush�s cabinet.

I hope that answers your questions,


Rep Holland D-Ga

Mr. Devlin,

Thank you for your question.

Our currently troops levels in Iraq must be examined and addressed, depending on the goal of the mission.

Our first mission goal was the destruction of the Hussein regime, which our forces achieved smashingly. For this deployment, more heavily armored and first assault units were necessary.

However, as our mission has changed from that of offense to security, I feel we must look into any potential redeployments to the nation as necessary. It would be unwise of us to use our first assault troops to defend soft targets, when they may be needed elsewhere.

Therefore, I would work with the military to look at any necessary reassignment of force strength as needed. I can not give you a hard answer as to �we will need X more troops� as this assessment is still being carried out.

For the second part of question one, that again goes to the goals of our forces, and something I think I touched on in my opening statement.

Our forces are, in a lot of ways, currently designed to fight an enemy which is no longer a threat. We must reassess our defensive structure in order to achieve a military which will fit our future needs.

Do we need such heavily armored divisions? Should we have more mobile, lightweight units which are better trained to fight in terrain which the tactical plans for a war in Europe did not envision? Would more units trained in mountainous combat be more practical than those trained in the more plain like environment which we thought we may fight in the 1980�s?

So to answer you question, we may need to reassign and change our structure before we can better answer that question. Perhaps we will be able to shift personnel around which will mean that we need less units.

However, at this time, I can say that I personally do feel that a large armed forces would be a wise course of action. We should look at ways to increase our force projections to meet current and future obligations for this nation, whatever they may be.

Now, for your second question:

(occ � assuming that they have not happened, since this is suppose to be 2006 or so).

The Yoshida Administration will work with Mr. Allawi of Iraq in order to make certain that the polling places are open, safe, and secure.

While I will not go into our positioning here in open chambers, suffice to say that we will take whatever preventative steps are necessary to insure that the elections are as event free as possible.

We do foresee the insurgents and the terrorist elements in Iraq attempting to hijack and subvert the first ever free election in Iraq, and that is something that this country will not allow to happen, and something this President is determined to see prevented.

I hope this answers your questions,

Rep Holland D-Ga

Thank you Mr. Holland. No further questions. I believe you are the man for the job.

I yield.

Mr. Chairman,

I would first like to congratulate the nominee on his nomination. Second, I would like to thank him for his straight-forward and encompassing answers. I have three questions:

1. How does the President's assault on Iran effect our capabilities in Iraq? Are we prepared for a general war with Iran?

2. What role do you believe the UN Security Council should play in the application of preventative force?

3. Why haven't we been able to either kill or detain Osama bin Laden?

I look forward to the nominees answers.

Thank you.

I yield.

Mr. Ellison,

Thank you for your questions.

In recent days the committee has learned about the strikes on the Republic of Iran. As many of you know, this action was taken in response to the growing threat of a nuclear armed Iran.

While we have tried to be conciliatory towards Iran in the past decade or so, they have yet to disavow their sworn hatred of the United States. The President felt that, given the possibility of an Iran possessing the bomb, the threat it would cause to our allies was to great to allow this to happen.

In light of this attack, I am certain that my most recent personnel orders towards the soldiers in Iraq makes more sense. The military is being stretched thin, and we must do things to shore it up. I strongly advocate to the committee that they consider emergency appropriation to help increase the size of our armed forces through better pay, increased signing bonuses, and allowing the defense department to structurally realign the capacities of our forces

It is our goal that these strikes will not materially effect the day to day operations of the US and Coalition forces in Iraq.

As for if we are prepared for a ground war in Iran, the answer is whole heartedly yes, IF that is the only course of action. However, the President has made it clear that he does not want to get involved in a land war in Iran, as our strikes were only preventative in nature.

The UN and its application is more a political matter than a military matter, and something I feel you should address to the Secretary of State. Of course we want to work with the United Nations to make certain that all international treaties and obligations of all countries are enforced. The UN has a well documented history of helping to prevent crisis and problems well before they happen.

But, with that, we must understand that the UN is a political body, whose goals and agenda represents the will of the body, not of the United States of America. The UN has had several spectacular failures in the past, such as Rwanda, that we must make certain never happen again.

The answer to your UBL question is something which we probably should not discuss in an open hearing forum. However, best intelligence reports that I have shown are that he is either in the lawless region of Pakistan, or inside Iran.

The Pakistani government is working diligently to try and find him if he is there. The Iranian government, however, does not share our desire to find him and bring him to justice.

Its hard to find and capture one man around the world. I remind the committee that it took the FBI over a decade to catch Ted Kaczynski, and Erik Rudolph here in the United States were we know the terrain, the people, and the culture.

Now, imagine the hunt for one person in an area of the world where America is not exactly loved. I think you can agree that this is certainly an impediment to our efforts.

But please be assured that the military is working with agencies around the world to find him and bring him to justice.

I hope that has answered your questions.

Rep Holland D-Ga

Mr. Chairman,

Just one follow-up question if I may.

The nominee claims response to my first question.

However, any person with even a basic understanding of military force and foreign policy understands that the easiest American target for an Iranian counterattack would be our forces in Iraq which are currently fully engaged in a guerilla war. There are 10 divisions either in Iraq or on their way to Iraq. Given these three assumptions how is it reasonable to expect that there won't be a direct Iranian assault on our forces in Iraq?

I would like to thank the nominee again. I look forward to his answer.

I yield.

Mr Ellison,

Per your question, as I stated, it is not our goal for these strikes to effect the day to day operation of American and Coalition forces.

Duties such as patrols, guarding strategic targets, and working to eliminate the insurgents/terrorists will still continue.

Now, as to the question of Iran counter attacking into Iraq at American forces.

I personally don't think this would be wise for the Iranian government, in that while our actions in Iran were to limit their ability to make nuclear weapons, our strikes were not aimed at the destruction of the Iranian regime.

If, however, Iran decided to counter with an invasion into Iraq and actually engaging in open war with the American forces, then all options are on the table. If the goal of the Iranian regime is survival, I am certain that will not consider this option.

Rep Holland D-Ga

Hearing is now closed.