SABRINA (00:00):
Secretary of National Defense, Teodoro, and other government officials. This was the Secretary's fourth visit to the Philippines, the most visits ever by a U.S Secretary of Defense, which highlights the remarkable strides the U.S and the Philippines have made to expand and modernize the alliance and reinforced our shared vision for free and open Indo-Pacific. To that end, let me spotlight just a few deliverables. Secretary Austin and Secretary Teodoro signed a general security of military information agreement, which is a critical step to enhance information sharing and deepen interoperability. The secretary is also co-led the groundbreaking ceremony for a new bilateral combined coordination center. These bilateral undertakings will improve joint efforts to plan bilateral exercises and operations and humanitarian response efforts in order to address common challenges in the Indo-Pacific region. Additionally, in another example of the steadfast U.S commitment to the Philippines and our partners and allies in the region, secretary Austin authorized a million dollars in aid and U.S troops to assist Philippine forces in providing life-saving aid to the people of the Philippines in response to the super typhoon that made landfall a few days ago.
(01:15)
Next, secretary Austin will travel to Laos to participate in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Defense Minister's Meeting Plus. We'll have a readout of that soon. And finally, the Indiana National Guard, Oklahoma National Guard, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia announced a new partnership this week under the National Guard Bureau's State Partnership Program. The enduring partnership pairs U.S states and foreign nations to enhance mutual relationships and promote defense and security cooperation objectives. The state partnership program has built relationships around the globe for more than 30 years, and now includes 105 partnerships with 115 different nations. And with that, I'd be happy to take your questions. Tara.
Tara (01:59):
Hi Sabrina. So the U.S is expected to send another $275 million in security assistance to Ukraine announcing that later today, and I was just wondering, the president is committed to spending $7.1 billion before his term ends. How do you get there in these small increments? What is the Pentagon's thinking on this?
SABRINA (02:17):
So Tara, I don't have a package to announce today, but as you know, we roll out packages on a pretty regular basis. So when we have something to announce, whether it be a presidential drawdown package or a USAI package, you'll be hearing from us, of course. In terms of the 7.1 billion dollars that we have left and that we are able to use for drawdown authority, you've heard it from here and you've heard it from the White House that we are committed to using that full authority that Congress has allotted to us. The only way we can do that also is to make sure that our shelves are fully back-filled and stocked. So as our shelves continue to get stocked equipment and capabilities that are needed, we draw down from those and send those to Ukraine. The president has committed to ensuring that every dollar that Congress is allocated will be spent.
Tara (03:11):
But there's only, I guess, about eight weeks left or something like that, so if you're still waiting for the stockpiles to be replenished before sending, how do you get there before January 20th?
SABRINA (03:20):
Yep. So we're working on that every single day. This building is working on ensuring that Ukraine has what it needs to be successful on the battlefield in the short and long-term. We roll out packages frequently. I don't have one to announce today, but when we do, you're going to see that cadence continue throughout the year and through the end of the administration. Dan.
Dan (03:45):
Could you talk about the decision to lift the restrictions on the use of longer-range attack on missiles for the Ukrainians, and why was this decision taken when it was after many months of saying that this was not going to happen? And then also, can you just give us an update of how many missiles have been used by the Ukrainians and roughly what they're targeting?
SABRINA (04:06):
So Dan, I don't have anything to announce or to confirm at this time. If we have more to share publicly, we will do so. That being said, just taking a step back to answer broad strokes some of your questions, let's not forget where we are, and that is the fact that Russia chose to escalate this war by introducing DPRK forces into the battlefield and into the fight. And so what we are doing is, as we have been from the very beginning, is ensuring that Ukraine has what it needs. So you're going to see us continue to support Ukraine with different presidential drawdown packages that are going to support its short-term and long-term needs.
Dan (04:49):
Sorry, just on the North Korean troops. Roughly how many are there now on the ground around Kursk and are there indications that North Korea is ready to actually send more troops?
SABRINA (05:00):
So in the Kursk region, what we approximate is approximately or over 11,000 DPRK troops in the Kursk region. In terms of are more going to be sent, it's certainly a possibility, but that's our initial assessment right now along Kursk. Carla.
Carla (05:18):
Hey, thanks. To follow up, Ukraine fired long-range fires into Russia. Did they violate the policy or did the U.S policy change?
SABRINA (05:28):
Yeah, so Carla, what I'm going to tell you is exactly what I told Dan, is I just don't have anything to announce today and I don't have anything to confirm at this time.
Carla (05:37):
Did they violate the policy? Did they tell us about it? I mean, did they or did they not violate the policy or did the policy shift? Officials have told the OA that the policy has changed.
SABRINA (05:46):
Yep. So Carla, appreciate the question, but again, I just don't have anything to announce or to confirm at this time.
Carla (05:51):
And then I guess I want to ask also, since we're still unclear on whether or not the policy has changed, the change on Russia's stance on the nuclear doctrine. Under these changes, they're saying that a large attack by a non-nuclear state that's backed by a nuclear state, which would be the United States, that would be treated as a joint assault on Russia. How concerning is that to the Pentagon and have you changed your posture?
SABRINA (06:24):
So we aren't surprised by Russia's update to its nuclear doctrine. It's something that they've been signaling that they intend to update over the last several weeks. It's the same irresponsible rhetoric that we've seen before and that we've seen frankly for the past two years. So it's something that we're going to continue to monitor, but we don't have any indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon within Ukraine, and we don't see any changes that need to be made to our own nuclear posture as well. Yes.
Speaker 5 (06:56):
Well, thank you Sabrina. According to Associated Press reports, President Biden is authorized and we've been talking about Ukraine using this U.S. supplied long-range missiles for deeper strikes into Russia. My question is, what are the ramifications of President Biden escalating the war against Russia? In light of the Russia's foreign ministry statement in the Associated Press that, as was stated, Putin has reaffirmed Moscow's readiness to use nuclear weapons if he sees a threat to its sovereignty, and a follow up.
SABRINA (07:28):
Well, let me be clear. We're not at war with Russia, and the party here that continues to escalate this war is Russia by bringing in another foreign country into the battlefield, by bringing in over 11,000 DPRK soldiers into the fight, that is an escalatory action. And you've heard the national security advisors say yesterday that this administration told Russia that if they escalated this conflict by deploying DPRK troops, we would help Ukraine respond. Again, parts of the war that has been escalated upon directly stem from Russia's choice and decision to invade its sovereign neighbor.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
Additionally, given the joint U.S. NATO escalation of attacks with Ukraine against Russia and with China and North Korea joining Russia to form an alliance against the West, would not you say that World War III has begun?
SABRINA (08:28):
I would not say that. That is not the characterization that this building assesses. And you've seen us take measures to de-escalate tensions and to… And I'm sorry, I'm just speaking broadly around the world, but when it comes to Ukraine, the commitment of this administration from the very beginning of this war was to help Ukraine take back its sovereign territory. A decision by another country to invade its sovereign neighbor cannot go unchecked, and that's why you've seen not just the United States, but 50 or so countries all around the world come together and support Ukraine through the Ukraine defense contact group. So this is a global effort to support Ukraine, but I certainly would not characterize it as that. Joseph.
Joseph (09:15):
Thanks. Got one on Iraq and then one on Lebanon and Israel. The Iraqi Prime Minister was speaking a short while ago and he said that Israel was preparing for attacks or operations inside of Iraq. Can you say anything about that or have you had any heads up from Israel on this?
SABRINA (09:35):
I don't have anything for you on that. And I apologize, I haven't seen those comments either.
Joseph (09:39):
And then when was the last call between the secretary and his new Israeli counterpart? Have we only had one?
SABRINA (09:45):
The last call was when we read it out. I think that was last week. I'm sorry I'm blanking on the exact date, but when we read out that call was the last time that they spoke.
Joseph (09:54):
What role is the department playing or preparing to play for a bolstered Lebanese army on the border with Israel if and when this current war ends?
SABRINA (10:07):
You mean the Lebanese Armed forces?
Joseph (10:11):
Talks with them because Israeli reports say that CENTCOM is playing a role, the Pentagon is playing a role or will play a role in strengthening this army that's supposed to deploy in greater numbers.
SABRINA (10:23):
Well, I think what you're seeing right now, the first thing that we need to see before we get ahead of that is a ceasefire put in place on that northern border. So you're seeing administration officials continue to engage on that front. The role that CENTCOM plays in training up or equipping Lebanese Armed forces in the future, I don't want to get ahead of that because we still need a ceasefire in place. So we're going to continue to push on that. Those efforts are being led by other places in this administration, but that's certainly our focus, and should a ceasefire be able to get put into place, we'd have more to share beyond. Janie.
Janie (11:01):
Thank you, Sabrina. A couple of questions of South Korea and Russia and North Korea. On the defense cost sharing, can the defense cost sharing already decided by South Korea and the United States be notified? Do you think the next administration would gain or you just leave it there currently situations?
SABRINA (11:33):
So Janie, I can't speak to any changes that the incoming administration would make. I can only speak to ours, and you're pretty familiar with our arrangements with the ROK. I would say on behalf of this administration, we have enjoyed a deepening of a partnership between the Republic of Korea. We share a shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific. You're going to see us continue to work towards those goals and some of the benchmarks that this administration has set out from the very beginning, but I can't speak for an incoming administration.
Janie (12:06):
Secondly, it was reported that Russian government and military delegations visited North Korea and met with Kim Jong-un to discuss military cooperation. What concerns does the U.S have regarding the discussion of additional deployment of North Korean troops?
SABRINA (12:32):
I think I've been pretty clear from this podium, Janie, that we are certainly concerned by DPRK soldiers moving into Russia. The visitations of certain delegations, different countries, that's not surprising, but the movement of troops in and becoming co-belligerent in the war, that is certainly of concern to us, something that we're going to continue to monitor. And you've heard us say very publicly that we're not surprised by this deepening partnership as the DPRK has been willing to supply Russia with ammunition, and now in this case people, to promote and to continue its war of aggression in Ukraine. So we're not surprised, but we're going to continue to monitor that.
Janie (13:20):
When the United States allowing Ukraine to use long-range missiles, does this mean it is allowing strikes against North Korea forces or against Russian forces?
SABRINA (13:37):
So again, I don't have anything to announce or to confirm at this time, but you said very clearly that the introduction of DPRK soldiers into the fight, especially when it comes to Ukraine sovereignty, means they're a fair game in that fight and so they would be considered lawful military targets. I'm going to go to the phones and then happy to come back in the room. Missy, Washington Post.
Missy (14:05):
Hey Sabrina. Just following up on all the questions about the Atacms and the reports from the Ukrainian and Russian officials that there's this new element being added to the war. I know you're not going to address those directly, but I'm wondering if you could give us, just to provide the context for the stories that they're writing about this topic today. How do you guys see this moment in the conflict? What does the Defense Department think? Can you just sort of describe how you see the battlefield equation and Ukraine's prospects for achieving its goals? Thanks.
SABRINA (14:47):
Sure. Thanks, Missy. So if you're looking for a broad battlefield assessment, I think what we would say is Ukraine still continues to push and hold in key areas. Without a doubt, there is still a raging fight in the East in that Donbas area. So they are continuing to fortify their lines there, but certainly the introduction of DPRK troops into that Kursk region has put more pressure on Ukrainian troops further up in the north. So they're continuing to fight, and I think what's important is Kiev still stands. President Zelensky is still engaged and continuing to rally Ukrainians to fight against Russian aggression, and we're certainly proud to support Ukraine in their efforts to take back their sovereign territory. I'll go to one more from the phone and then happy to come in the room. Mike Glenn, Washington Times.
Mike (15:51):
I'm good. You can go on somebody else. Thanks, Sabrina.
SABRINA (15:52):
Do you have one more from the phone? Rio, Asahi Shimbun.
Speaker 9 (15:57):
Thank you, Sabrina. Can you hear me?
SABRINA (16:01):
Yes.
Speaker 9 (16:01):
I've seen media reports suggesting that China rejected a meeting with Secretary Austin during the Asian defense minister's meeting class in Laos. Could you please confirm this report, and also what is your take on China's rejection this time?
SABRINA (16:17):
Yeah, thanks, Rio, for the question. We did reach out to set up a meeting. Unfortunately that was not able to land during the secretary's travel. That being said, I would point you to the fact that the president just met with President Xi. So conversations and meetings with PRC leaders are happening at the very highest levels of government, as well in lower channels with this department and others in this administration. Great. Come back in the room. Tom.
Tom (16:45):
Thanks, Sabrina. President-elect Trump has warned we are closer today to World War III than at any other time. So to sort of piggyback on some of the other questions we've heard today, why can't the Pentagon comment publicly on this monumental decision? There's no bigger story than the use of American weapons to strike inside Russia and saying we don't have anything to announce today, it seems to be dodging the elephant in the room, which is this. Why can't we get something from the podium?
SABRINA (17:22):
Yeah, I understand the frustration, Tom. Look, and I said if we have more to share publicly, we will, but at this time, I just don't have anything more to share. In terms of the comments on an escalation and a larger war, we don't share that. What we do believe is that Russia has escalated this war with bringing in over 11,000 DPRK soldiers into the fight. And a commitment from this administration is to continue to arm Ukraine with what it needs on the battlefield. We don't see that as escalatory. We see that as a commitment that we set out from the very beginning of this administration.
Tom (17:59):
Okay, thanks. And then on Lebanon, Israel's been hitting targets obviously across the country without constraint, including the strike last week in the Northeast that killed 15 first responders. Does the Pentagon still fully support Israel's campaign or is there now movement towards greater pressure on Israel to bring about a ceasefire before the end of this outgoing administration?
SABRINA (18:19):
We have said very publicly we support Israel's rights to their self-defense. We've also said very publicly that more needs to be done to ensure that civilians are moved out of the battle space and to lessen civilian casualties. In terms of a ceasefire, I mean, we have not shied away from the fact that we continue to press for this both publicly and privately, more from other folks in the administration. You have seen different officials continue to travel to the region to get to a ceasefire, and that was before there was an election, that was before we had a new incoming administration. This has been an ongoing effort by this administration to secure a ceasefire in the north. And also we want to see a ceasefire in Gaza. We know more humanitarian aid needs to get into Gaza. That's something that we continue to engage on every single day with our Israeli counterparts. And you're going to continue to see us do that till the very last day.
Tom (19:19):
Would the Pentagon be prepared to use more leverage against Israel to get more aid into Gaza, to get more civilians out of the battle space in Lebanon?
SABRINA (19:27):
Well, we're already seeing changes, Tom. I mean, I think it was a few weeks ago we mentioned that they have opened the Erez crossing, they've opened that Jordanian corridor again. You are seeing more aid get in. Is it enough? No, it's not enough. More needs to get in, but we are seeing a change in behavior and that is because we are continuing to engage. We are using our leverage and that's why we're seeing some of that progress moving forward. Yes, Chris.
Charlie (19:57):
Thanks, Sabrina. Can you confirm whether the USS Abraham Lincoln is still in CENTCOM or if it's departed?
SABRINA (20:04):
The Abe has departed the CENTCOM AOR and is in seventh fleet is my understanding.
Charlie (20:08):
And will there be a carrier replacing it?
SABRINA (20:11):
I don't have anything to announce at this time, but as you've heard us say from this podium before, we maintain significant firepower in the central command area of responsibility to include F-16s, F-15s, and several B-52s as well, so we have a significant posture there. In the back. Yeah.
Speaker 12 (20:36):
Thank you, Sabrina. Regarding the Lebanon. Lebanon's army just announced that three of its soldiers have been killed in an Israeli strike on their position in the village of Sarafand in the south of Lebanon. So first of all, do you have any comments about these [inaudible 00:20:54] and do you support self-defense for the Lebanon army?
SABRINA (21:00):
So I am not aware of the reports that you're citing, but certainly what we've said is we don't want to see Lebanese armed forces get in the crossfire of any operations on that northern border, but I don't have any more details to provide on that. Again, we have supported and have trained and equipped LAF forces before. In terms of what the future holds, again, what we're focused on is ensuring that a ceasefire can be put into place. Yeah, of course. Charlie.
Charlie (21:34):
Thank you. Have you seen or do you have reason to believe that more North Korean troops are headed to Russia? Do we have a better idea of what the ones that are there are doing?
SABRINA (21:44):
So we haven't seen more moving in other than that 11,000, or probably over 11,000 in the Kursk region. I think we could certainly see more move in, but at this time, our assessment is that it's over 11,000 DPRK soldiers embedding with Russian forces.
Charlie (22:05):
Are they engaged in combat?
SABRINA (22:08):
We've seen those reports, reportedly engaged in combat. Do we expect that to be the case? Absolutely. I mean, they're moving there for a reason. We expect them to be engaged in combat. We just can't independently confirm that that has actually started. But absolutely. I mean, they're moving into that Kursk region for a very specific reason, which is clearly to engage Ukrainian forces. So we have seen those reports and we would expect them to engage in combat soon. I just can't confirm that that started.
Charlie (22:37):
Okay. And I know it's a touchy issue, but Atacms or Long Range or whoever we're describing, the Russians claim they intercepted some of those missiles. Is there a comment from DOD on that?
SABRINA (22:47):
I don't have a comment on that. Constantine.
Constantine (22:50):
Thanks Sabrina. Overnight, it seems like two undersea cables were cut in the Baltic. German officials are saying they suspect suicide. Does the Pentagon have an independent assessment on this reporting?
SABRINA (23:03):
So we've seen some of those reporting and it's something that we're looking into, but I just at this time don't have anything more to provide. But it is something that we'll continue to look into.
Constantine (23:11):
Is there a world where the Pentagon sends expertise, military assets to aid in this investigation?
SABRINA (23:20):
Potentially if asked, but at this moment I am not tracking that anyone has. I think there are very capable people in the region that can do their assessment. But of course, if we're asked to assist in any way, I'm sure we would be happy to. Okay, great. Thank you everyone.