>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more. >> a fast and reliable internet connection is something nobody can live without. we are there for our customers with speed, reliability, and choice. it starts with great internet. >> browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home the court, and accessories. there is something for every fan. every purchase helps support nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime.

>> u.s. military officials testify on securing the red sea following strikes on ships by iran backed houthi rebels . this hearing is about 90 minutes. >> we call this meeting of the subcommittee to order. the senator is on his way back from votes. i doubt he is planning to hear all of my opening remarks >> i will call this smeeting o

the subcommittee to order. senator young is on his way back from votes. i doubt he is planning to hear my opening remarks so i will put them in the record and turn it over to him and then we will hear from witnesses. we are convening the subcommittee to discuss an incredibly important topic. developments in yemen and on the red sea. for the better part of the last decade, gulf nations often assisted by the united states have been at war in yemen against hootie forces -- houthi forces. i would argue it was a catastrophic mistake for the united states and our partners to be part of this conflict. my belief is that the war would simply strengthen the houthi and strengthen the influence. during the last several months we have seen tragic evidence of this reality. armed with sophisticated technology from iran and coordinated with the iranian military they have launched a barrage of attacks with

missiles, underwater drones, aerial drones against ships through the red sea. the red sea is one of the most important geostrategic locations of the world. maritime commerce passes through its waters and now 90% of this traffic has been forced to choose longer and costlier alternatives. the cost increase of global shipping will be significant. consumers will bear the brunt but the impact is not just economic due to these actions of the red sea, both container ships with food supplies for starving people in yemen have not been able to make their deliveries. and sudan were 95% of the population cannot afford more than one meal per day, deliveries of food and medicine are crucially delayed and come at significantly higher costs. i oppose this involvement in the war. i regret that they are now strong enough to attack our interest in the region. now that we are in the crosshairs we must respond.

that is why i have supported the president's leadership to lunch operation prosperity guardian to restore maritime security in the red sea. i've also supported the decision together with our partners in the uk to target houthi infrastructure to prevent imminent attacks. that response has been paired with the targeted sanctions strategy to weaken their ability to finance operations and increased interdiction efforts to intercept weapons. this response has occurred without congressional authorization to my knowledge there is no existing law that would permit the cherry action. the constitution requires congress to authorize these acts. we swore an oath to follow the constitution. if we believe this is a just military action then we should authorize it. we also need to acknowledge there is a real risk of escalation especially since he run is unquestionably eating their actions. thus an authorization is

important to also guard against and unauthorized mission. i want the focus of this hearing to be on the ground reality in the red sea. the scope of the threat to the united states, the merits of the existing response plan and the options going forward. i do not intend this to turn into a forum on congressional authorization. i believe that a tailored and time bound congressional authorization is not just nice to have. it is required to both authorize and limit the current military operation. i will be in discussions with my colleagues in the coming days to introduce such an authorization. if we could have this it would help us understand both the power and limits of american military might in and around the red sea. this broader crisis in yemen and malingering war is not over. it is a crisis that senator young and i have been focused on together for years. a war that has ravaged yemen

for nearly a decade and created the world's worst humanitarian crisis has quieted, but the country is still in dire straits. the united states through the special envoy testified for us today and regional allies have all been working together with leaders and citizens to find a political solution to permanently end the war and resolve the internal conflict. peace will only come through political reconciliation. our airstrikes can protect u.s. assets in the region and in the red sea, but they cannot bring peace to yemen. this is an incredibly important hearing. i look forward to the discussion with witnesses to help us chart the path forward. i will now turn it over to senator young. >> thank you for convening this important hearing on the current foreign-policy challenge. i think our witnesses for appearing today. the actions of these proxies in yemen and surrounding waters

threaten the lives of innocent mariners and sailors as well as significant mobile commerce. they risk destabilizing the fragile pathway toward peace. nine nations border the red sea. none of them are iran. yet the bloodstained fingerprints of this leading state sponsor of terror are all over. whether it be material support or other means of direct support using intelligence and command and control apparatus to enable these actions, these actions are having a cascading, destabilizing effect on food security in africa, global energy prices and the dreams of many people to rebuild their society. it is imperative that the administration respond to these actions while demonstrating it is both a strategy for deterring aggression and an appropriate

legal doctrine for maintaining these. to date, i have not seen such a strategy put forward. i am encouraged that the foreign relations committee will be holding two hearings this week on the destabilizing activities across the region. i must also point out the lack of public committee action on these and other questions since the hamas attacks on israel on october 7. i have no doubt about the sincerity of the witnesses when they will tell us that they are committed to addressing the security challenges and particularly in yemen. i do have doubts, however, that the administration has an actionable plan. an actionable plan to bring an end to this aggression, terrorism, and a curtailment of russian and chinese meddling in this region. our military actions to date carried out by incredibly brave u.s. service members, have yet to stop the houthi.

the questions were presented with what do we do now? what actions by the united states are we willing to countenance? how do we push back on this iranian rhetoric tying these actions to israel's fight against hamas? how do we continue to push for a stable peace process in yemen? i hope we will be able to get at these topics today and i hope we will hear from our witnesses today, what we hear will help us all better understand how the administration plans to ramp up the response to finally take seriously the need to respond adequately to the threats facing the red sea. finally i would like to mention the names of naval special warfare operator first class chris chambers and maybe special warfare operator second- class nathan gage ingram.

i would like to acknowledge and offer my sincerest sympathies to their families. these men came from families of veterans. all of whom understand sacrifice . they are nonetheless in our hearts. these brave men gave their lives to preserving america's security in the red sea and we would be remiss if we did not remember the continued danger our men and women in uniform face even at this very hour on the land and sea and in the air. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. let me add, my words and sentiments of sympathy. thank you for that recognition. the chairman is joining us today and i turn it over to him. >> first i want to welcome them to the committee. i want to thank you, mr. chairman and ranking member young for conducting the hearing. i think it is extremely

important. i just want to add my support for your opening comments on the responsibility of congress in regards to the authorization for use of military force. i agree with you that the administration should be seeking that authority. it is our responsibility to respond. i also want to acknowledge your leadership and senator kaine's leadership i am very interested in learning where the command and control was involved in regards to this campaign? i think as much information as we can get as to the responsibilities for the proxy activities by around would be helpful to us. that point erased earlier, that is how is the campaign in regards to the red sea affecting the prospects for peace within yemen from the warring parties? i think these issues are all very important for us to learn. i thank you for conducting this hearing. >> thank you very much.

let me introduce the witnesses and then i will turn it over to you for five-minute remix. it's my pleasure to introduce the special envoy for yemen. mr. lenderking is familiar to a lot of us here. he served as secretary of state for the arabian affairs and held other positions of the state department in the region. dan shapiro was here with us today, i can well known to the committee. he's the secretary of defense for the middle east. he is known to us as a former u.s. ambassador to israel. previously served a number of important roles in the united states senate. first, mr. lenderking and then ambassador shapiro. >> chairman murphy, ranking member young, distinguished members of the subcommittee thank you for this opportunity to speak with you about the situation in yemen family response to ongoing houthi attacks in the red sea. it is at a crucial moment. reckless attacks are

jeopardizing the very real accomplishments of multilateral diplomacy over the past three years. when president biden appointed me special envoy for yemen in 2021, he made clear that achieving a diplomatic, durable peace in yemen was a top administration priority. that has not changed and there is tangible progress to point to. in 2021, yemen was a hot war with cross-border attacks and tremendous destruction of infrastructure, countless deaths inside the country. now both cross-border attacks and that destruction have ceased. after more than 50 trips to the region, i remain convinced that peace is not only possible but serves u.s. interest. it serves our regional partners and the people themselves. the people of yemen deserve to live in peace. despite the illegal maritime attacks, the april 2022 truce

between the warring parties continues to hold. violence remains at the lowest level since 2015. the humanitarian crisis, while still acute, is less severe than at its peak. until the escalation, the average yemenis were being able to see a way back to stability. should not lose sight of these milestones even as we degrade and destroy houthi military capabilities and destroy their attacks. in december, the special envoy announced that the parties to the conflict had reached an understanding on the road up including a durable cease-fire and inclusive process. we have strived for and supported these goals. the u.n. roadmap remains the best hope to end the conflict. as we have all seen some october, the houthi are

throwing the progress away. ron is equipping and facilitating houthi attacks in the red sea. credible public reports suggest a significant number of iranian and hezbollah operatives are supporting attacks from inside yemen. i cannot imagine the yemen people want these iranians in their country. this must stop. they risk killing mariners from many nations every time they launch an attack which they have now done on more than 45 occasions by attacking oil tankers and other ships carrying hazardous materials, they are accountable for environmental catastrophe in the red sea. by making maritime traffic through the red sea costly and dangerous, they are exacerbating economic and humanitarian conditions in egypt, sudan, ethiopia and elsewhere. these attacks are acts of terrorism. the houthi are not even adhering to their stated goals. they are mostly striking ships

with no connection whatsoever to israel and driving up the difficult cost of delivering humanitarian aid to people around the world including two yemen. since they hijacked the galaxy later on november 19, they have held hostage 25 innocent sailors from five countries. they should release them immediately and unconditionally and not behave in this reckless manner. what they are doing is piracy. hypocrisy becomes even clearer as we look at the continued abuse of the human rights of the people. the detention facilities are filling up with political detainees. they are recruiting child soldiers and indoctrinating them. they are blocking the city, the third-largest city and routinely restrict humanitarian access. don't take it from me, ask the people. in response to the threat, the united states and partners are deploying a multipronged military, economic and diplomatic strategy to raise the cost of additional attacks

and shift the calculus. the u.s. military has acted quickly and decisively to thwart the military threat. in addition, on february 16 the designation as a specially designated global terrorist went into effect. the designation has a powerful means to hold them accountable. parallel to targeted military strikes and the terrorism designation, we are also working every diplomatic channel to speak with one global voice to condemn these attacks, building on strong and unanimous statements from the security council, the united states mobilized a group of 44 states to callout provocations in the strongest possible terms. on january 10 we secured passage of un security council resolution 2722 which demands a halt to these reckless attacks. these efforts are one component of a broader diplomatic strategy. even as we degrade and disrupt

their capabilities, squeeze their terrorist financing and shame them on the world stage, we must also seek diplomatic off ramps. we are working multiple channels to make clear that they must cease attacks immediately. let me be clear. we do not seek this confrontation, but we will respond to the attacks. i remain hopeful as the envoy for yemen that we can preserve a diplomatic path forward but the houthi are harming their own people by putting up the peace process. ultimately peace serves the interest of all yemenis as it does the united states and regional partners. the united states stands ready to support. thank you for your invitation today. i look forward to the discussion and your questions. >> thank you. mr. shapiro. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member young, numbers of the subcommittee. i appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today about the department of defense work to protect civilians and restore

safe and free navigation for all legitimate maritime traffic . i will summarize the threat and guiding principles for addressing this critical issue. since november 19, the houthis have conducted at least 40 attacks on commercial shipping and naval vessels through which 15% of all global trade flows. they have used anti-ship ballistic missiles, anti-ship cruise missiles, surface missiles and they claim these attacks are almost entirely unrelated to israel and israel related shipping. to be clear any such attacks would be legitimate anyway. these attacks are as much a front to maritime commerce as is piracy. they have affected the interest of more than 55 nations and threatens the free flow of congress through the red sea. these attacks have prompted more than one dozen operators to suspend transit to the red sea causing a spike of

insurance rates for vessels in the region and putting the lives of innocent mariners and servicemembers are at risk. the houthi attacks are also causing critical delays in humanitarian items such as food and medicine where they are needed the most. this adversely affects those in need of assistance around the world including sudan, ethiopia and indeed yemen itself. one country suffering significantly, egypt has seen transit peace decline by someone hundred million dollars per month, depriving it of a critical source of foreign currency. most recently the houthis launched a series of antiship ballistic missile attacks against commercial ships in the red sea including one that impacted the mv islander wanting a member of the crew and one on february 18. they severely damaged that vessel putting it at risk of sinking forcing the crew to abandon ship and causing an oil slick in the red sea.

the houthis have also launched weapons toward our warships, including a cruise missile that the u.s. intercepted. they have also fired medium- range ballistic missiles against israel that have threatened to cause damage to egypt, jordan, and saudi arabia as well. it's clear that these represent an international problem affecting all nations committed to navigational freedoms. these attacks which affect the entire region, nations across the globe, they cannot go unchallenged. this demands a broad-based and collective response. our guiding principles are to internationalize this response and ordination with allies and partners >> call for an immediate cease- fire. you say that you care about servicemembers. you said nothing about aaron bushnell.

>> the witness can continue. >> we seek to internationalize the response in coordination with allies and partners and military, diplomatic actions to impose costs on the houthi leadership antegrade their ability to conduct these attacks. the special envoy lenderking has discussed this diplomacy and specially designated global terrorist designation. i will do -- expand on the department of defense efforts. this is called operation prosperity guardian. since secretary austin announced this coalition in december more than 20 countries have joined to increase maritime controls and safeguard commercial shipping. it is led by task force 153 which is charged with providing leadership and commanding control of maritime security activities in the red sea.

operation prosperity guardian is designed to reassure the maritime industry deter illegal activity and purple -- promote safe commerce. meanwhile the department has been engaged in efforts to destroy antegrade the capabilities that the houthis used to conduct these attacks such as anti-ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and facilities known to house such items. on january 11, january 22, february 3 and favorite 24th we executed deliberate, carefully planned multinational strikes against targets alongside the united kingdom and with the support of a growing number of partners that now includes australia, the rain, canada, denmark, the netherlands, and new zealand. in our most recent strike we 18 targets across eight locations including underground weapons storage facilities, missile storage facilities.

attacks on unmanned systems. beyond coalition strikes, u.s. forces has conducted self- defense strikes including missiles and long launchers posing an imminent threat nearly 3 dozen times. in total we have over 230 targets through both deliberate and self- defense strikes likely destroying hundreds of weapons. that is not including the dozens of missiles that u.s. and partner naval vessels have intercepted and shot down over the red sea. in december, u.s. forces disrupted attempts to board and sees a ship sinking three fast boats in the process after they fired on helicopters. they have not attempted another seizure since that incident that they do appear committed to sustaining standoff attacks. complementary to the efforts to degrade and destroy capabilities, i would like to mention the efforts to stem the flow of aid to yemen and

publicly expose support to them. january 11 and january 28 u.s. naval forces interdicted carrying lethal aid in clear violation of international law. senator young, i want to thank you for recognizing the navy seals that perished in this january 11 interdiction. u.s. forces discovered over 200 packages containing components of unmanned, one underwater and service vehicles propulsion guidance of warheads for medium- range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, air defense associated components, network equipment, antitank guided missile launcher assemblies and other components. these are the same weapons that have been employed to threaten and attack u.s. navy vessels but also innocent mariners. in support of these efforts to publicly expose the support, the defense intelligence agency published this unclassified

report providing clear and compelling evidence that they have deployed these attacks. iran does not control them in the way it does groups in syria but it certainly has the choice to withhold support without which they would struggle to effectively track and strike vehicles. we have made it very clear that we hold and run accountable for attacks by partners and proxies. we believe they are aware of the consequences should these result in u.s. casualties. our actions have demonstrated the willingness to directly hold the run of -- iran responsible for the continuing pattern of these attacks against u.s. personnel and facilities and the continuing threat that the united states will continue to take military action. in conclusion, while the

department of defense supports the overall aim of de- escalating tensions and restoring stability, we will not hesitate to defend civilians and protect the free flow of congress and one of the most critical waterways. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. envoy lenderking, you've spent the better part of the last three years speaking to and trying to understand the houthis and their rationale for their engagement in a variety of conflicts. the rationale for these strikes is ridiculous on its face. they say it is connected to israel's response in gaza but they are attacking ships indiscriminate of the flag. it seems to have nothing to do with what is happening in gaza. it is really important that we understand what the reasons are for this engagement and what the goals are because it will help us shape a response and help us try to rebuild deterrence. i appreciate you talking to the committee for a moment about

why you think the houthis have chosen to engage the united states and allies by attacking shipping lanes of the red sea and what you think the goals are of that engagement? >> thank you very much, senator. thank you for your support over the years of this effort we have engaged on to bring this piece deal. we are very grateful for that. i think there are two factors that are driving the houthis . one is gaza presented an opportunity for them that they felt they wanted to take advantage of. as we both clearly said, they were goaded, encouraged, instructed, aided, abetted, assisted, by the iranians to take the fight to the red sea. i think they have had an opportunity to put some of the weapons that they have been able to accumulate over the years on display both through the attacks on civilian infrastructure in israel, at the beginning of the conflict

and now on the red sea, testing all of these items they have been able to either receive in violation of un security council resolutions or to construct in their own country with the parts that are smuggled in. i think they have sought, as you know, to link this to the gaza situation. it's entirely an illegitimate linkage. you rightly point out they are attacking ships in a reckless manner, including those that have -- >> the witness will suspend. the committee will be in order. >> including those -- they even attacked one ship that was loaded with corn for iran. they have engendered a huge amount of international enmity

as a result of that. i think you see that reflected in the number of countries that are speaking out in various ways about the problem. the fact that they continue this and have said publicly that they will not stop until there is a cease-fire in gaza is an indication that we are not yet at the point, unfortunately, where they do intend to dial back. >> ambassador, the administration has largely pointed to article 2 authorities as the justification for the military campaign. i know that you do not serve in the dod general counsel office, but this looks to me like war and every bit as a constitutional sense. we have engaged in multiple rounds of strikes. we have a limited number of boots on the ground. we have taking casualties. we have prisoners. i am having a hard time understanding why this does not require a traditional congressional war

authorization. maybe you can speak for a moment about the administration's legal basis for these ongoing strikes. >> the u.s. forces maintain the ability to defend themselves. ts when they are operating lawfully on the world's oceans and they have the right, the obligation, to defend and protect u.s. shipping that comes under >> u.s. forces maintain the ability to defend themselves when they are operating lawfully in the world's oceans. they have the right and the obligation to defend and protect u.s. shipping that to defend and protect u.s. shipping that comes under attack from piracy. as commander in chief to protect and defend u.s. personnel and certain partners. the strikes are also necessary and proportionate actions in the exercise of the united states inherent, right of self- defense reflecting article 51 of the united states nations

charter. beyond that i certainly defer to colleagues and the general counsel on appropriate that have forwarded. but i'll defer to my colleagues to go further. >> senator young. >> thank you chairman. the chairman has referenced the importance of in this context. i know the chairman of the committee senator cardon also articulateed that and i would just emphasize. historically it's been important that congress takes its prerogatives as it relates seriously in part because this strengthens the hand of our commander in chief and war fighters in reestablishing deterrence. so as this conversation moves forward, the details will

matter but i want to emphasize that and relatedly dive into a number of follow up questions on this war powers concern we have. so mr. shapiro i will begin with you. in this setting can you walk throughs, your understanding. unilateral u.s. action to defend commercial ships of foreign nations, correct me if i'm wrong. >> the united states, thank you senator. the president again has directed these strikes consistent with the article two authority as commander in chief to protect partners in this coalition. and it is fully within the presence authority as commander in chief to make those.

>> is there a precedent you're looking to, give me just one that gives a legal basis for operation prosperity guardians defense of shipping. >> senator, i would have to defer to colleagues to find the historical precedence for that. but that is a inherent part of the president's article to authorities. >> did you not anticipate questions about the legal rational before you came before the subcommittee. >> senator we did indeed and those are the answers that we believe provide the president the authority to conduct these operations. both the defensive operations and indeed. >> okay this is about as rigorous as, i'll say for the record not for you of course because, you've been tasked with being here. but those are about as specific as the administration's rational they gave with the war powers notification. so we're going to need more information on a going forth

basis. reporting in bloomberg legal operations in foreign waters weren't even considered hostilitys. -- hostilities. or brief strikes do not institute hostilities and thus will not factor. >> i'm not familiar with that report. strikes when it involves u.s. ships that the u.s. navy is obligateed and has a right to defend in international waters. there are necessary proportionate responses under fd1 of the united states

nations charter. >> has the united states entered into hostilities with the houthis. >> these are strikes on the houthi targets. that is a term, not sure if that's the correct term for what we're engaged in. we've struck many many targets in yemen where the houthi's have weapons that they have used and are using and sometimes they're in the process of using against us and against our partners. >> what is a, i'll change gears a little bit. what is the long term assessment the united states is going to need if it continues this prolonged exchange of fire with the houthis. >> it's very hard to speculate on how this will evolve. the president has the authority the ones we've articulateed. the administration is committed to consult with congress on

additional actions going forward. and the authorities under which they'll be conducted. >> thank you. what's the administration's anticipateed end point at which it assessing it has restored deterrence. >> we need to see the houthis stop these attacks. we currently have not seen that yet. whether it's an internal one or iranian agenda. whether it's a regional raising of their profile. whatever it is and we have removed and degraded considerable. we're still not done. >> extending on that, not done. can you detail to what level of activity is going to be necessary. the administration is going to need to take to reach that end point. >> it's very hard to speculate. much of it depends on when they

decide they have endureed enough of the strikes that we and degradeed enough of the capability that we are capable of and exercising. we hope to restore stability and deescalate tensions in the region very soon. we don't want to assume this will take a particular amount of time. we want to use all it will tools and the partners and the capabilities we have to make very clear to them and of course to iran their supporters and sponsors that this must end and will continue to take action until it comes to an end. >> chairman. >> senator cane. >> thank you mr. chairman, thank you to the witnesses. houthi behavior is abhorrent. but i have great skepticism on what we're doing right now. i have great skepticism about the legal authority. about the absence of true shared responsibility with nations who's ships are being

attacked by the houthis. why should the u.s. and uk be shoulders the burden of protecting other nations. i have serious skepticism about the effectiveness of this operation. to begin with on legal authority. i think we've all concedeed there's no congressional on these hostilities. we're losing troops, they're losing civilians and others. to claim that this is covered by article to self-defense. that means you can defense u.s. personnel. you can defend u.s. military assets. you probably can defend u.s. commercial ships. but the defense of other nations commercial ships in no way, and it's not even close. that's not self-defense under article two of the

constitution. and a president can't make itself defense by calling another nation a partner. it is in my view laughable to call that self-defense. a issue to defend commercial. broader efforts to defend commercial ships of other nations. while it might be strategically a good idea there's no constitutional authorization allowed the president to do that unilateral. second, taking offensive actions and striking targets within yemen to degrade, yemeni capacity, houthi capacity. while again it might be strategically a smart thing to do. that's not self-defense under article 2. and so i basically view this at the first level as a side of actions that might have a strategic value although we've yet to see a strategy. senator young and senator

murphy and i wrote a letter to the administration and we don't have a response. there may be a strategic wisdom in doing it but i think the activities are well beyond what the lateral powers are. that's number one. two shared responsibility. although there are partners in this operation the military actions are being under taken by the united states and the uk. why should the united states and uk be shouldering the burden of this? there needs to be, if we can get to a point where we can actually authorize u.s. participation, we shouldn't do it without other nations participating. but finally i guess my, most serious skepticism right now is the effectiveness of this. president biden himself has said, that the actions that we are under taking are not likely to deter houthi escalation. i am a little disappointed that you so quickly try to pull cold

water on the idea that this is connected to the war in gaza. these attacks started on november 19th. the houthis have said this is because of the war in gaza. you pointed out instances of ships that weren't going to israel or instances of ships that had food that were going to nations that needed food. i think the interpretation is the houthis seeing some suffer in the region are saying others are going to suffer in the region until we figure out a response. i would venture to suggest that about the only time we've seen something that was a deescalation moment was in the week long pause when the first hostage deal was done.

so trying to reestablish deterrence if it's 100 troops, 300 troops. f it's 100 troops, to discuss, i hope you don't pour cold water saying this is related to gaza. the only period of deescalation we've seen is during the first hostage release. i'm going to continue to press on the legal questions. there's some difference of opinion on the committee whether this, u.s. strategy is going to involve deescalation at all or whether it's actually, more regional conflict. i consider myself in the camp of senators who believe the u.s. involvement in another war

in the middle east, would reflect that we learn virtually nothing over the last 25 years. and we definitely shouldn't slip or slide into a war. this is the kind of thing that can lead us to slip or slide into a war and that's why congress needs to be engaged and have a debate, i yield back. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm for the witnesses benefit i'm not going to be talking about the uemf. i think we discussed that fully and it's an important topic and i concur with the direction of the questions that have been made so far. this is an attack on trade in the red sea. which i conclude affect the nations along the red sea. and that only bahrain is

participating in defending against these attacks. what is the administration's efforts with saudi arabia in terms of becoming more involved in this effort and is there progress in that front? mr.lenderking. >> i think it's a very important question to ask. i know from the states side and secretary blinken. this was a very significant issue that was raised. we need to see our gulf partners in the game much more. i think we all feel that that is the case. there isn't a country in the gulf that approves with what the houthis are doing. >> what is saudi arabia doing. are they getting on board.

is there effort in that regard? >> there certainly is. i mean, sorry. there's a sterling engagement at my level. i won't speak for the defense department but secretary of state as well, if anything expand this coalition. either opg or the strike coalition. and there's very strong recognition that the gulf partners i think to get at senator kaine's question. this is a multifaceted responsibility and should -- >> where's the economic impact. who suffers as a result. i know that shipping rates and for europe and asian have gone up significantly but even for the atlantic and pacific because people have had to go around the gulf. who is suffering? are the chinese tradeers suffering. are the nations along the red

sea suffering. who is suffering because of what the houthis are doing. where is the biggest impact. why isn't china putting pressure on the houthis? weren't they putting pressure in iran. we're out there fighting and putting ourselves in danger. china is most impacted by closing off trade to the red sea and they're sitting on the sidelines pretending they're everybody's friend. why is china not being embarrassed. you mentioned in the testimony that the houthis are suffering international empathy. i don't think they care. china cares however. and putting a spotlight on china's lack of involvement and lack of effort to stop these attacks i think would be highly effective. help me with this idea. who suffers the most in terms

of trade and why is china not participating. >> i couldn't agree with you more, senator. i think the burden needs to be shared because the pain is being felt in multiple realms and regions. you look at a country like egypt where suez canal fees are down 50%. it's impacting the currency. it's impacting the ability of their economy to function. you look at the movement of desperately poor situation, violence prevailing there. that is very disturbing. the ethiopian economy also suffering. yemen itself. the yemeni themselves are being hurt by what the houthis are doing. the decrease going into yemen's own port. >> we're huge risk and huge economic impact for itself in order to support the chinese economy. and to support the economies of people in the red sea who are all sitting back quietly

supporting in many cases supporting iran. who is given the support the houthis are relying upon. i wonder, what are the strategic options here. one is to say we're out. you guys want to close down the red sea that's up to you guys. unless you want to step in and protect it. the idea that will we're there suffering and these people are not defending themselves, and putting pressure on iran is something i just don't understand. mr.chairman i know my time is up so i will stop there. >> thank you senator romney. senator hagerty. >> thank you mr. chairman. special envoy lenderking i would like to spend some time with you. you've been dealt a hand. i would like to talk to you about the designation of the trump administration made as a terrorist organization. and the fact that shortly after the biden administration took office, they delisted the

houthis as a foreign terrorist organization. we've seen what's happened in the time in between. there have been attacks in the uae, attacks on the saudi, we've seen attacks on u.s. personnel and the attacks in the middle east. we've seen a tremendous amount of unrest since that time. i know you know that i'm going to read for my colleagues what the designation of a foreign terrorist organization requires. first it requires it's foreign organization. indeed, houthis are. engages in foreign activity or retains the capability and intent. the terrorism of the organization threatens the security of the university nationals or the security of

the united states. the houthis meet this description. >> as you probably know there was a strong movement within the trump administration to designate the houthis that led to the, the new administration came in and sought to be the priority. i think that's brought proof. >> i heard you discuss the peace project. but i also saw the article of foreign affairs claim the middle east is in the greatest period of peace that we've ever seen and now we see what happens. what do the houthis have to do to be declared a terroristic administration. do they have to kill americans. >> certainly not. both the military, the impact of the designation, the fdgt senator that i described will

cut off financial networks, their ability to fund raise, it will put some hurt. and if we need to adjust to the fto, if these attacks continue. >> they certainly continue at a rapid pace. i would like to see a little more than hurt, i would like to see this addressed, sir. let me go to something else that concerns me. the aid that we send to yemen. i'm deeply concerned that the houthis may as well divert the aid we're sending. the u.s. humanitarian aid we're sending to yemen. $1.1million for norwegian people's aid. norwegian people's aid. this is an organization. the npa that settled a lawsuit with the united states for previously providing training and expert advice to the

iranian military and to palestinian terrorist groups including hamas. and we're sending our tax dollars there. they started receiving them in august and are going to be receiving them through september of this year. we shouldn't send a penny to an organization like this. my question to you, i know this is a tough question to answer. but can you guarantee that our taxpayer dollars that are going to yemen aren't in some way being diverted to the houthis to support this activity we're talking about right now. >> i think that's an incredibly important point. i'm not aware of any taxpayer dollar going to support this type of activity. that should not be happening. that is definitely not within the priority. >> can you guarantee that the money being sent, are not getting to the houthis.

drive up inflation hurting americans at home. i'm concerned we're right back funding both sides of the proposition here by sending this aid there. >> senator, i am, i share the concern. i will certainly take a look at that. >> i would appreciate it. secretary blinken could not answer me either when i asked him about the foreign aid that's going into gaza and being diverted by hamas. please, please address this. >> thank you for your concern, yeah. >> are the you ready to go senator vanholm. because you're up next. >> i am, i am. looking at a recent reu renewal of a statement that makes it clear that when it comes to aid being provided by u.n. organizations and international ngos that there have been, he's gotten no reports of diversion even from our israeli friends and i'll be happy to share that with the

senator. >> if i might, i've had reports directly that that's what's happening. >> they are not reporting it to, that's the statement i have from a couple of days ago. >> it would only require to ask the national advisor. >> if i could, i want to pick up on a couple of questions raised by senator kaine. and deputy assistant shapiro good to see you. let's recognize the houthi action has been in response to the war on gaza. would you not agree with that mr. shapiro. >> thank you senator. i certainly agree that the

houthis have made the claim that that is the original motivation for their text. i think they've made some other claims along the way. i would just simply say that whatever the rational or reason or claim that the houthi is or any other organization would make for conducting these kinds of attacks there's no legitimacy to them. there's no legitimacy to. >> i agree with you. i agree there's no legitimacy. there's no disagreement there. but isn't it a fact that the houthi attacks on shipping went down significantly during the period of humanitarian pause in december. >> i believe there was a decline during that period. it was not a completion secession. there's been several points when there have been spikes and valleys i don't know to what we can attribute that. sometimes i believe the decline is to our strikes while they reload and prepare for their next strike. >> our strikes as you know came

after this humanitarian aid. so their strikes cannot be contributeed to the strikes we took. i think the record is pretty clear. but if i can ask you, we at the same time said we were going to provide, we the united states were going to propose a u.n. security council resolution. i don't know if you've had a chance to look at the provisions put out there by the united states. but one of them, indicates that under current resolution. >> the state department should address that. i would say that, in all of our

recent engagements with israel, that includes conversations between our military, we've made very clear no operation should be considered or under taken without a clear and executeable plan and the follow through to implement it to ensure the safety, safe evacuation of civilians who are taking safe harbor and provision for their humanitarian needs as they move. >> given that would you agree that it would be a mistake for the united states to provide more offensive weapons at this time? to the netanyahu government without receiving assurances with respect to actions that we've requested. >> as you know senator, the president has made clear from the beginning of this conflict on october 7th that he will help ensure israel has what it needs to defend itself following those terrible terrorist attacks and make sure they cannot be repeated.

they must observe the laws of war. laws of conflict and ensure that the maximum to protect civilians and provide the need. issued the security memorandum 20 which will help ensure that we receive a credible and rileed assurances from all our partners who receive defense services, defense articles and certain defense services. >> i very greatly appreciate the president taking that action. thank you and the administration and the president. of course on that. but let me just say i think it would be sending very mixed signals prior to receiving prior assurances that they will not take the actions that we were worried about. we were to extend further significant military systems. i would just like to include in the record, a statement made by

samantha power today from jordan where she is standing in front of lots of world food program shipments that need to get into gaza. saying these should be into gaza. and i would just ask you ambassador shapiro and both of you to take back to the president and administration, 25 senators wrote a letter talking about the actions that the benjamin netanyahu needs to take to allow more assistance into rafah. including the steps we should be taking right now. >> i'll enter that into the record. senator young and i are going to pose a series of second round questions for you. and i want to start with a series of questions you got

from senator kaine and senator bill hagerty. i support the actions that the administration is taking because i believe their the guarantor of international waters. we have an obligation to respond when united states interests are being attacked in commercial waters. i do worry about the efficacy of a campaign of military strikes when we have seen very little evidence that air strikes against the houthis have restored deterrence over the course of a seven year war with the saudis who conducted 23,000 air strikes. i would note that nine of the locations targeted by the united states and the uk in january of this year were previously hit by 419 air strikes in the saudi led air war between 2015 and 2022. so, if 23,000 air strikes by the saudis weren't effective in

moving the needle militarily and disturbing deterrence. how can we be confident that our campaign of air strikes is going to have a different outcome. >> thank you mr. chairman. look, we first of all have to understand who we're dealing with. we're dealing with an organization now especially designated global terrorist organization that simply think the rules don't apply to them. they are backed by the, common denominator which provides weapons, which provides intelligence, which provides targeting information. which provides financial support and training and they too have an agenda. that agenda includes to try to get the united states to depart the middle east. and so, these are the actors we're dealing with. and what our strikes are intended to demonstrate. first of all is that we will continue to degrade and remove

their capability. if they continue to conduct these attacks. we will also try to interdict as much as we can and work with our partners on that. we will of course defend those who are transiting the waters. and that we will be prepared to take additional actions if there are obviously additional threats against us or against our people. we have demonstrated very clearly on tower 22 in jordan. and there was a very strong u.s. response in iraq and syria against irgc affiliateed targets, individuals and facilities. and it has until now led to a quiet period since february 4th . we don't want to take that for granted but it has demonstrateed to iran that we are prepare today respond --

prepared to respond. yes, but after seven years of development with iran, the ability to very quickly rebuild their capacity. there's not a lot of evidence that during a period of these air strikes we have had any effective deterrent. do we actually believe there is a finite amount of infrastructure that has been hit to change the reality inside the red sea through military operations alone. >> we know that they still have capability. you know we sort of have a good sense of the numerator what we have been able to eliminate and what they've used and we don't fully know the denominator. that's information we're looking to develop and obviously we're working to prevent that from expanding through interdictions and working with partners to prevent other smuggling opportunities. i can't tell you that we know that, there's a moment when

they will decide that they've had enough. that is our intention to make sure that they understand that if they continue to target us and our mariners that we will work with our partners to protect them and that they will respond as appropriate to conduct these acts of self- defense. >> let me ask you one last question on this question of authorization. i do agree that it is a very troubling and creative interpretation of article to authority to extend protection to partners. i agree with senator kaine that that is probably not a theory in good standing. but let me ask you, if you believe that, article two authority gives you the ability to attack partners of those that are directing attacks at u.s. partners. i'm asking you of course about

iran. do you have existing article two authority having identified iran as a participant in these houthi attacks to launch strikes against iranian assets or iran itself. >> i would really be overstepping to speculate on authorities that would be sited for strikes that have not taken place. i would say that the president's article two authority was very much relevant in the response strikes in iraq and syria following the attack on tower 22 in jordan in which three u.s. service members were killed. i do think that has an impact. that has an impact in iran's thinking since the targets included rigc affiliated facilities. and well known to support attacks on the united states. i think they should take that

serious and they do take that seriously. >> special envoy lenderking. the houthis have said if they were relisted as a terrorist group that they would expel humanitarian workers and take other actions. just days of this going into effect. can you discuss on this designation on the ground. >> thank you senator. the houthis took a few actions which honestly haven't had a great deal of impact. they do as you note threaten to expel u.s. and uk aid workers in yemen. there are a number of u.s. and uk nationals who do a lot of great work on the humanitarian side in yemen. from what i understand so far the houthis have not made good on those threats. they issued legislation quote unquote. i say that in quotes because

they're not a legitimate government. they're not internationally recognized they're a militant group and recently designated as a terrorist group also. they took action to designate us. and they've said they will continue their attacks on shipping. so they've taken a few steps which i think are mainly for their own public consumption. >> you've spent over the years, you've spent countless days in the region. you may head there again soon, they're discussing before the hearing. can you describe how the narrative has shifted since the brutal attacks on october 7th. in terms of bringing peace to yemen from before the war to now. >> i think significant number of yemeni want to see the yemen conflict ended. i think it's heartening that we mentioned that the truce that

was set in april of 2022 has essentially held inside yemen. despite the fact that there's attacks on the red sea by the houthis, the internal war in yemen is not heated up. we're very concerned that would happen be it another effect of a prolonged situation in the red sea. we want to and by the way senator, i think it's porpbtd also that the road map that i described is something that the parties that is the yemen government and the houthis and saudis still say they want to see achieved. i think that's important. >> that's where i was headed next. >> key priority of course is to keep the red sea attacks under control. stopped. >> and what if there's ongoing escalation. what would be the implications for your broader efforts to try and reconcile. >> no question that a broader

escalation or continuation of the status quo under mines the peace effort which we worked very hard to achieve over the last three years and would ultimately i think degrade our own interest in the region which are solidly behind seeing a peace effort in yemen. we do not want a return of al- qaida. yemen is a country who in the past has threatened and led to the deaths of america. so stable in yemen is our interest and to our partners. we want that effort driven forward. the road map is the best i've presented for peace since that conflict began. >> before i recognize senator cruz, just i be remissed if i didn't ask a question about china. it's in the last year or so, it's like this sort of style itself as a power broker in the middle east. and yet here we are, in the

midst of real security crisis which is for so many an economic and diplomatic crisis in the region. and china is nowhere to be found. so enjoy lenderking, pushing back on china diplomatic and financial end roads in the region. seems like an opportunity to remind people who's really working to effect positive change in the region. >> senator thank you, it picks up on the questions that senator romney also posed about the chinese role. we see a certain degree of free loading that is unacceptable. when we talk about an international problem that needs an international solution. we need the chinese much more aggressively engaged. they are feeling the impact economically of the red sea attacks on their own shipping effort. so that is, and i would just assure you that we have a

dialogue at my level and the most senior levels of this government with the chinese about taking a more responsible role in the red sea. and we will continue that. >> that's a positive. senator cruz. >> thank you mr. chairman, mr. shapiro you worked on iran related issues throughout this administration. you were on the team headed by ralley and you're now at the defense department. meanwhile the biden administration has allowed the iranian regime to build up a ghost fleet of tankers which are third country flaged tankers. that fleet grew from about 70 vessels at the beginning of the administration to almost 400 tankers together. the iranian regime used that ghost fleet to ship over a billion barrels of oil and to make unaccountable tens if not

hundreds of billions of dollars. when joe biden came into power iran was selling roughly 300,000-barrels of oil a day. today due to the biden administration's apeacement of iran, iran is selling 200- barrels of oil a day. those billions of dollars went directly to fund terrorism. they went to the houthi's, they went to hamas, they went to hezbollah. they paid for the houthis terrorists and for the terrorism. they paid for the october 7th atrocity in israel. the biden administration refused to and we're seeing the consequences in the middle east. in your judgment how is the biden's administration appeasement of iran, how is

that worked out for the safety and security of israel and the safety and security of america? >> thank you senator. a number of the questions you raised about sanctions enforcement are the problems of the treasury department. and i will simply on behalf of the defense department will have to defer to my colleagues there. i are tell you the subject of the hearing is how we're responding to the threat of an iranian sponsored and backed in the houthis. >> i had a question how is this working out for the safety and security of israel and the saferty and safety and security of america. you are not answering that question. >> through the assistance we provide to our partners including israel to defend itself. to our own responses when iran

and iranian backed organizations have targeted our personnel and tragically have killed three of our personnel and in their sponsorship of the houthis, military strikes of free shipping in the red sea that we will respond and. >> with all due respect that's baloney. how many have been sanctioned. >> sanction matters belong to the department of. >> is the biden administration concerned about the billions of dollars they continue to float to the iatola today right now today. that money is flowing to the iatola that there's ships that this is selling the oil.

ayatolah and the biden administers response is well we made very clear that there will be consequences. baloney. cut off the money. why will the biden administration not cut off the money from iran? >> senator, i really have to stay in the lane of the department of defense. what we have made very clear. >> did you work with ron malley and his task force. >> i worked for a few months to the department a few months. >> you are ambassador to israel. i find it impossible that you have no views on the hundred billion dollars plus that joe biden has gifted to the ayatolah that has been used to murder americans and murder israelis. aoáeurpl asking you, isn't it time to cut off the money? >> on behalf of the defense department what i can say is when we see iran which we do see on a daily and regular basis, supporting terrorism,

providing weapons, providing intelligence, providing sponsorship and training to terrorist organizations we make very clear to iran that not only. >> you don't make clear. if they continue to have the money you're not making it clear. if you say here's $100 million but we're going to send you a stern letter. that $100 million is being used to fund weapons. it's not just iran, the houthis. the iran administration rightly designated the houthis as a foreign terrorism organization. within months of taking office what did the biden administration do? delisted the houthis. finally last month the biden administration was forced to relist the houthis and to designate them as a specially designated global terrorist group. how did it work out delisting the houthis for three years? did they behave just quietly or do they continue to be the terrorists they've been the

whole time even while the administration is trying to apiece them. >> this is part of special envoy lenderking's expertise. >> were they not terrorists last year. >> they were designated. >> were the houthis terrorists in 2023. >> they were designated as of a couple of weeks ago. >> you're delisting them was indefensible and it's proven catastrophic. >> just as a quick follow up, mr. shapiro to mr. cruz's line

of questioning. forces in the region have interdicted shipping, special envoy lenderking referenced it earlier. interdicted the shipments from iran over to yemen for a number of years running. can you describe briefly and then i'll turn it over to my colleague senator barraso, mr. shapiro. how is the smuggling situation evolved since october 7th and since we forced our forces into the arabian sea? >> thank you senator. the smuggling continues. we know that it continues. i think to get into details to describe exactly what we are seeing, the volume, the routes, the shipments will probably require speaking in a closed session. but because we continue to see those efforts, we have under taken in that sense in

particular has been in the lead on this enhanced efforts to identify and then interdict those shipments when we see them. we do communicate with various partner who is could also bring that capability to interdict. we ambassador lenderking and i have worked together in looking at opportunities to strenghten. i believe the smuggling does continues but because we know it's continuing we are working to strengthen those efforts.

>> thank you. a couple of months ago we were in djibouti. they can't get through the suez canal. going around africa. it's adding time, to the cost significantly the impact of foreign trade. all of these things as a result of the houthis and what they're doing in that area. aiming at ships, sometimes with drone, sometimes with missiles. it's over 11 miles while i was there at the point looking at how close things were. the day i get back, the times does a big expose about the administration falling on the job on trying to stop the sale of oil to china. they reported 59 million- barrels of oil on they described them as shadowy tankers. that left iran and all of these have have ended up in china. and then, the cash from all of

this ended up in iran. and at the lowest prices of oil would be $2.8 billion but likely much more as prices fluctuate. secretary of treasury came to congress she testified this is before that report came out. that all things are fine, we're doing everything we can. the american people don't believe it. the american soldiers that are there risking their lives don't believe it. because that's 140 attacks from houthis funded and by iran on american soldiers. we know where the money is coming from. the money is coming from the sale of oil that we should be blocking or other funds that go from the united states. what, i think the administration has failed completely. i think the president is just being outworked and outplayed and outmaneuvered by the iranians. like the world is seeing a diminished president who's just not up to the job. what are you doing from the standpoint of the state department to prevent this

ongoing effort to sell for iran to be able to continue to sell to china. they're working together and iran is also giving drones to russia. north korea, it just seems we're not where we want to be. what's your response to all of this. >> thank you senator. first of all for visiting djibouti. it's not everybody's first option to go visit. i've been there, we have a very important interdiction mission from djibouti. certainly agree with you the iranians were not supposed to be able to sell that kind of oil to china. i think there's vigorous efforts and that kind of funding you're speaking about is in violation of not only u.s. interest but also numerous

u.n. security council resolutions. >> does seem that it was the new york times expose that brought it to the forth because the biden administration seemed to be unaware of what's happening over there. >> i'm not the iran expert, senator. but i think the administration is aware of it and would certainly look into these reports in more depth. >> if they're aware of it then they tried to mislead congress essentially. because the department of treasury said we're doing everything possible. and then this gets shown to the world from a press coverage. anything you want to add on this? >> okay well. we can go on and on. the other thing that i saw in djibouti, china is building a large base there. you can see it from the air coming in, you can see it from the ground. china is making significant investments in that area. our base in djibouti was an old

french legion base. which is named after a commander at the time. china is making significant investments in that area. it goes right into the red sea. anything you're noticing with that and needs to be concerned with? >> well certainly, senator. i think we are very conscious and aware of chinese expansion in the gulf region which is by and large not in ours interest. i think that's very much a part of the engagement we have and the chinese and also our partners in the region and in east asian as well. >> okay. and mr. shapiro last month, qatar energy.

>> there's much more fuel being spent to move the shipments around. capacity u.s. energy supply would be helped or hurt by president biden's decision to reduce america's, putting a pause on that given that the supplies from qatar are now forced to go around africa. >> i think i'm not an expert. >> i will just tell you the answer. it's hurting. >> may i address your question about china. >> please. one of your colleagues mentioned that what's quite clear is that china is playing no role to help with this multilateral international effort to defend international shipping in international water ways. and it is one of those moments when i think it has become clear to many of our partners in the region. sometimes who when people ask questions are they going to

remain committed to the u.s. or can the u.s. remain committed to the region or will they have alternative security partners. they do not have a security partner who is doing what we're doing to defend security in this region. i think it's been a moment of clarity about u.s. safety in this region. >> what is the united states strategy to make sure europe is not forced to turn to iran based on this new policy. >> i think it's beyond the defense department's area. >> it's indefensible. thank you, thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you so much senator. let me thank both of you for being here today. thank you for all the hard work you've done to try to bring political settlement to the people of yemen.

i know we were close. and and i think one of the reasons why we need to place an imperative and pry kwror till on bringing to close this and prioritize on bringing to close this. i want to welcome your father and stepmother to the hearing today. you should be very proud of the work your son has done to try to bring peace to a region that has been without it for far too long. with that, thank you both for your testimony, senator young and i were just commenting. this has been one of the most substantive and more wide ranging hearings that we

[indistinct conversations]