Pentagon Press Briefing for 7/02/24

All right. Well, good afternoon everyone. Just a few things here to pass along and then we'll get right to your questions. Secretary Austin hosted Ukrainian Minister of Defense Rustem Umerov at the Pentagon today and reaffirmed the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. During the meeting, Secretary Austin highlighted that the US will soon announce a new security assistance package for Ukraine, valued at approximately $2. 3 billion. The package will be a combination of Presidential Drawdown Authority and Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funding, which will provide a significant number of urgently needed air defense interceptors to protect Ukrainian cities and civilians from Russia's unrelenting aerial attacks/ as well as artillery and anti-tank weapons to support Ukraine's needs on the front lines. In addition, Minister Umerov provided Secretary Austin with an update on dynamics on the ground in Ukraine as Ukraine's forces bravely continue to fight Russian aggression. A full readout of the meeting will be available later today on the DOD website. And additionally, we'll have more details to provide in the near future regarding the security assistance package. (01:11) Looking ahead to next week, Secretary Austin will participate in the upcoming NATO Summit in Washington from July nine through 11. The summit marks the 75th anniversary of NATO and the secretary will join President Biden in celebrating this milestone while advancing key policy priorities. These include ensuring the implementation of new NATO plans for credible deterrence and defense, enhancing long-term support for Ukraine and fostering its future NATO membership. During the summit, Secretary Austin will be engaged on discussions to ramp up transatlantic defense industrial production. Ensure adequate defense investments from allies. And the deepening of practical cooperation between NATO and its Indo-Pacific partners to include Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea. Since its creation 75 years ago, NATO has been the greatest defensive alliance in human history. Next week's summit underscores the US's unwavering commitment to NATO and the alliance's critical role in maintaining global security and stability. (02:14) Finally, the US's Third Fleet is hosting the 29th annual Rim of the Pacific Exercise in and around the Hawaiian Islands, June 27th through August 1st. RIMPAC is the world's premier joint and combined maritime military exercise. This year, 29 nations, 40 surface ships, three submarines, 14 national land forces and over 150 aircraft and more than 25,000 personnel are scheduled to participate. The theme of RIMPAC 2024 is Partners: Integrated and Prepared. This year's iteration features a wide range of integrated capabilities from disaster relief to maritime security operations and from sea control to complex all domain war fighting. All to prepare multinational partners towards operating collaboratively to enhance our collective capabilities towards defending a free and open Indo-Pacific. For further questions, I would refer you to Indo-Pacific Command Public Affairs. And with that, I'll be glad to take your questions. We'll go to Associated Press. Lita.

Thanks, Pat. Two things. One, can you give us an update on the pier and plans to reattach it? And then as a follow up on the secretary's visit today, can you say whether there was any discussion about loosening restrictions on the use of long range weapons? That's obviously one of the things that President Zelenskyy has asked about just as recently as Sunday, urging Western nations to loosen restrictions. Did that come up during his meeting with the minister? Was there, I guess, any forward movement on that? And one little tiny thing, I'm a little confused. He said he was talking about announcing. Didn't his comments already announce it?

Okay. Well, we'll start with the pier first.

Okay.

You asked how the pier is. The pier is great. The pier is still in Ashdod, has not been re-anchored. We're continuing to monitor weather conditions right now. So pending those, we will be able to provide updates in the near future in terms of potential re-anchoring date. But as of right now, again, due to weather conditions, it remains in Ashdod.. As far as the discussion today with the minister, again, we'll have a readout for you Don't have any specifics to provide on that front other than to say our policy as it relates to the use of long range weapons into Russia has not changed. Which, again, our policy is that the long range weapons that we provide to Ukraine are for use inside Ukraine sovereign territory.

Well, except that they did loosen the restrictions a bit a couple weeks ago?

In terms of counter fire across the border. What you were asking was-

Any other restrictions?

... the restrictions or the request to use those types of capabilities to do deep strike inside offensive attacks. The policy hasn't changed in that regard.

Is Crimea considered-

Crimea is part of Ukraine.

Okay. So they can use the long range weapons inside Crimea?

That's part of Ukraine. Correct. And then in terms of the secretary's comments. Again, I'll let them speak for themselves. I mean, given that the minister was here and given that we expect a more fulsome announcement in the near future, it provided an opportunity to highlight not only our continuing support for Ukraine, but also the fact that we will have this package out on the street soon as we continue to try to rush security assistance to them. Jennifer.

General Ryder, does Secretary Austin think that Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO?

I think you've heard Secretary Austin and others say that Ukraine's future is in NATO, and so it's not a US decision whether or not to let Ukraine into NATO, it's a NATO alliance decision, so 32 countries. But certainly the things that we are doing now are to, and you've heard others say this, is build a bridge for Ukraine to come into NATO. And so part of that is working with them in terms of looking at their military and their defense capabilities, not only to ensure that they can sustain those into the future, but also to build interoperability in for the day when they are a member of NATO.

But if the NATO leaders next week at the summit decide to allow Ukraine into NATO, the US would support that?

Well, again, I'm not going to get ahead of what NATO may or may not announce other than to say we've been very clear that we see that Ukraine's future is in NATO.

And can I follow up on the threat to US bases in Europe? Is the threat or potential terror threat linked to the NATO Summit?

So again, there is no single threat, as I understand it, as it relates to EUCOM's efforts to step up vigilance. It's a combination of factors. Again, military commanders around the world have the authority to take appropriate and prudent measures to ensure the safety and security of our forces. But again, as I understand it, this is not necessarily based on a single threat, but out of an abundance of caution. Let me go to Jim and then I'll come here, John.

General, just real quick. You said that they've talked about the dynamics on the ground in Ukraine. Have the dynamics changed? What did the ministers tell the secretary about the situation there?

Again, Jim, we'll get you a fuller readout here. But what we continue to see on the ground is it remains a tough fight. Russia continues to attempt to take ground, but the Ukrainians have done a good job of holding there line. Again for context, in the seven months that we were working to get additional security assistance and supplemental funding for Ukraine, the Russians made an effort to try to push and take Ukrainian territory and really did not accomplish that much in terms of the amount of geography that they were able to take. So what we see now is the Ukrainians, in large part, empowered by the security assistance that's being rushed in to include ammunition are now continuing to hold the line. We'll continue to support them in their efforts to defend themselves.

Talk about counter offensives?

Again, we'll get you a readout, but I'm not going to get into talking about potential future operations or refer you the Ukrainians to talk about their operations. Sir.

Thank you.

Thanks. General. I go back to the pier. The Marshall area was full according to the information that you gave us last week, is almost full. And the WFP said that they already transferred the sensitive aid material that could be ruined under the open air to their depots inside the area somehow. Do you have any latest on the situation there? Because the WFP says that the security condition is not still yet at the level that they want. Have you ever contacted your IDF counterparts about that? The Israeli defense minister was here a week before. So any talks about providing security for this aid to reach the Gazans?

Yeah. So a few things there. So first of all, for specifics, I would refer you to the World Food Program and USAID. Next week's summit underscores the US's unwavering commitment to NATO and the alliance's critical role in maintaining global security and stability. Finally, the US Third Fleet is hosting the 29th annual Rim of the Pacific Exercise in and around the Hawaiian Islands, June 27 through August 1st. RIMPAC is the world's premier joint and combined maritime military exercise. This year, 29 nations, 40 surface ships, three submarines, 14 national land forces and over 150 aircraft and more than 25,000 personnel are scheduled to participate. The theme of RIMPAC 2024 is Partners: Integrated and Prepared. This year's iteration features a wide range of integrated capabilities from disaster relief to maritime security operations and from

From C control to complex all-domain war fighting, all to prepare multinational partners towards operating collaboratively to enhance our collective capabilities towards defending a free and open Indo-Pacific. For further questions, I would refer you to Indo-Pacific Command Public Affairs. And with that, I'll be glad to take your questions. We'll go to Associated Press. Lita.

Thanks, Pat. Two things. One, can you get us an update on the pier and plans to reattach it? And then as a follow-up on the secretary's visit today, can you say whether there was any discussion about loosening restrictions on the use of long-range weapons? That's obviously one of the things that President Zelenskyy has asked about just as recently as Sunday, sort of urging Western Nations to loosen restrictions. Did that come up during his meeting with the minister? Was there any forward movement on that? And one little tiny thing, I'm a little confused. He said he was sort of talking about announcing, didn't his comments sort of already announce it?

Okay, well we'll start with the pier first. You asked how the pier is. The pier is great. The pier is still in Ashdod, has not been re-anchored. We're continuing to monitor weather conditions right now. So pending those, we'll be able to provide updates in the near future in terms of potential re-anchoring date. But as of right now, again, due to weather conditions, it remains in Ashdod. (12:42) As far as the discussion today with the minister, again, we'll have a readout for you. Don't have any specifics to provide on that front other than to say our policy as it relates to the use of long-range weapons into Russia has not changed, which is again, our policy is that the long-range weapons that we provide to Ukraine are for use inside Ukraine's sovereign territory.

Well, except that they did loosen the restrictions a bit a couple weeks ago.

In terms of counter-fire across the border. What you were asking was-

Any other requests.

The restrictions or the request to use those types of capabilities to do deep strike inside offensive attacks. The policy hasn't changed in that regard.

Is Crimea considered?

Crimea is part of Ukraine.

Okay. So they can use the long-range weapons inside Crimea?

That's part of Ukraine. Correct. And then in terms of the secretary's comments. Again, I'll let them speak for themselves. I mean, given that the minister was here and given that we expect a more fulsome announcement in the near future, it provided an opportunity to highlight not only our support for Ukraine, our continuing support for Ukraine, but also the fact that we will have this package out on the street soon as we continue to try to rush security assistance to them. Jennifer.

General Ryder, does Secretary Austin think that Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO?

I think you've heard Secretary Austin and others say that Ukraine's future is in NATO. And so it's not a US decision whether or not to let Ukraine into NATO. It's a NATO alliance decision, so 32 countries. But certainly the things that we are doing now are to, and you've heard others say this, is build a bridge for Ukraine to come into NATO. And so part of that is working with them in terms of looking at their military and their defense capabilities, not only to ensure that they can sustain those into the future, but also to build interoperability in for the day when they are a member of NATO.

But if the NATO leaders next week at the Summit decide to allow Ukraine into NATO, the US would support that?

Well, again, I'm not going to get ahead of what NATO may or may not announce other than to say we've been very clear that we see that Ukraine's future is in NATO.

And can I follow up on the threat to US bases in Europe? Is the threat, potential terror threat, linked to the NATO Summit?

So again, there is no single threat, as I understand it, as it relates to UCOM's efforts to step up vigilance. It's a combination of factors. Again, military commanders around the world have the authority to take appropriate and prudent measures to ensure the safety and security of our forces. But again, as I understand it, this is not necessarily based on a single threat, but out of an abundance of caution. Let me go to Jim and then I'll come here to John.

General, just real quick, you said that they've talked about the dynamics on the ground in Ukraine. Have the dynamics changed? What did the ministers tell the secretary about the situation there?

Again, Jim, we'll get you a fuller readout here, but what we continue to see on the ground is it remains a tough fight. Russia continues to attempt to take ground, but the Ukrainians have done a good job of holding a line. Again for context, in the seven months that we were working to get additional security assistance and supplemental funding for Ukraine, the Russians made an effort to try to push and take Ukrainian territory and really did not accomplish that much in terms of the amount of geography that they were able to take. So what we see now is the Ukrainians, in large part, empowered by security assistance that's being rushed in to include ammunition and now continue to hold the line. We'll continue to support them in their efforts to defend themselves.

Talk about counteroffensives?

Again, we'll get you a readout, but I'm not going to get into talking about potential future operations or refer you to the Ukrainians, talk about their operations. Sir.

Thank you.

Thanks. General. I go back to the pier. The Marshall area was full according to the information that you gave us last week is almost full. And the WFP said that they already transferred the sensitive aid material that could be ruined under the open air to their depots inside the area somehow. Do you have any latest on the situation there? Because the WFP says that the security condition is not still yet at the level that they want. Have you ever contacted your IDF counterparts about that? The Israeli defense minister was here a week before. So any talks about providing security for this aid to reach the Gazans?

Yeah, so a few things there. So first of all, for specifics, I would refer you to the World Food Program and USAID. As I understand it, the World Food Program has begun to take some of that aid out of the Marshalling area to onward warehouses and distribution centers. But for the details on that, I'd have to refer you to them.

Okay. IDF, do you have any talks with them to provide security for the aid?

Well, as you know, we've established a coordination cell that is comprised of the humanitarian organizations, IDF, US forces that are managing the pier. Again, as I understand it, World Food Program is also discussing security with the IDF, but ultimately this is a question for humanitarian organizations to determine of what level of security support do they require and need, recognizing that they are not combatants on the battlefield, in the middle of a combat zone, attempting to deliver humanitarian assistance. So those conversations are of course always ongoing. If your question is whether or not the US is planning to put boots on the ground and provide security, the answer is no. So I'll just leave it there. Anne.

You characterize the amount of aid that's sitting in Cyprus, and then also does either Cyprus or the amount of aid in Cyprus or at the end of the pier, does that factor into the decision about whether or not you return it and reattach it?

So I would refer you to USAID since they ultimately manage the amount of incoming and outgoing aid in terms of how much is in Cyprus. And as always, when you take a step back and you look at the big picture here in terms of what is it that the international community is trying to do, it's trying to get aid into Gaza for the people of Gaza. The maritime corridor is one aspect of that. And so lots of different variables will be considered in terms of how best to get that aid in. Right now, the maritime corridor affords a way to get aid in. So as long as that's useful, that will be something that we continue to look at and I'll just have to leave it there.

So there are plans to reattach the pier as of now?

As I mentioned, right now looking at the weather states, I can't give you a date on when that would occur, but it's something that we're monitoring. So I'll keep you posted on that. Let me go to the phone here and I'll come back into the room. Let me go to J.J. Green, WTOP.

Thanks General Ryder. Talking with some US allies and NATO partners today and in the last week or so, as they prepare for the NATO Summit coming up, they've repeatedly talked about their concern as recently as today, that they think Russia is likely preparing for an attack on a NATO country within the next three to five years. So what, if anything, can the Pentagon say about how it views that potential threat? And I know you're not trying to scope out how you're going to deal with possibilities, but how does the Pentagon view Russia's increasingly aggressive action, possibly plans to deal with this thing if it happens?

Yeah, thanks J.J. Well, this is why Russia is taken into account in our National Defense Strategy. It's very clearly outlined as an acute threat, as evidenced by its actions in places like Ukraine and other malign activity that we've seen Russia being associated with over the last several years. So I would refer you to the National Defense Strategy in terms of the kinds of things that we're doing,

But there's also our relationship with allies and partners around the world to ensure deterrence, the NATO Alliance being one of those things. It's a collective defense focused on ensuring that it's very clear that we're going to support one another's security to deter the type of aggression that we're seeing in places like Ukraine. So leave it there. Let me go to Nancy.

Thank you. General, in light of the Supreme Court ruling, has the Pentagon assessed that now any order given by the President to US service members is lawful?

So, what I would say is always the case with any decision or order. We have legal counsel, lawyers are available throughout the Department of Defense to advise military leaders regarding the legal or prudential impacts of orders, as well as the legal effects and consequences such orders could have. So that's going to enable any leader, regardless of the decision or the order that they're contemplating to make informed legal and ethical decisions. As it pertains to potential orders in the future or scenarios, I'm just not going to get into hypotheticals.

Is the Pentagon doing a review of this? Because the way the ruling is written, it would appear that if all official acts are protected from immunity, it's hard to understand the scenario that could be ruled as any order as illegal or even immoral at this point, is it not? Is there any sort of official review then given the complexities of all this?

Yeah, I mean, I appreciate the question, but again, I'm not going to get into a thought exercise other than to say that we, like always, have the benefit of legal counsel training on ethics standards. And any leader that is contemplating a decision or an order has the benefit of seeking that counsel to make an informed ethical and legal decision. So again, while I appreciate the question, I'm not going to get into hypothetical scenarios.

[inaudible 00:24:00] I'm never interested in thought exercises. So what I'm trying to understand though, is there any kind of formal review? Or is it now being left to the discretion of individual commanders-

Not that I'm aware of. Natasha.

Thanks, General Ryder. Can you give us an update on the F-16 training for the Ukrainians, where that stands at this point, how many have graduated, if any? And whether there's going to be another tranche going in for training? And then on the question of American contractors going into Ukraine, has a decision been made yet on whether that's going to be facilitated or allowed by the Biden administration in terms of DOD contracts for American firms that want to go in and help?

Yeah. On your latter question, Natasha, again, where the press reporting out there, and I'm just not going to comment on internal discussions or proposals that may or may not be under consideration. (24:54) As it relates to the F-16s, I'm tracking that there's currently over a dozen pilots training on the F-16 in both Denmark and the United States for operational security reasons, I'm not going to be able to get into the specific numbers of pilots at those locations and the training timelines. But as you'll recall, the training is tailored to the pilots and it will continue to depend on student experience, their English language skills, their flying experience, whether they go through basic flying training or to advanced F-16 fighter training. (25:33) And so, the airpower coalition, capability coalition that has been put together by the UDCG, continues to look at this holistically and take into account Ukraine's needs. That's the alarm. Sorry, guys. That's all the time I have. Takes into account holistically not only the training aspect, but the logistics sustainment and maintenance aspects of this. So making sure that when the capability is provided to Ukraine, it's something that they're going to be trained and ready to execute in a safe, effective manner. So, a lot of work continues to go into that effort and I'm sure we'll have much more to provide in the near future.

[inaudible 00:26:19] on track to finish and be completed for at least some of the pilots and have some of the capabilities actually moved to Ukraine this year?

So, as I understand, some of the pilots have already graduated and have gone on to follow-on training in Europe. But again, I'll let Ukraine talk to the specifics of where their pilots are and what their status is. But again, right now the initial deliveries of F-16s as you're tracking are set to take place sometime this summer. So again, we'll have more to provide in the future on that. (26:51) Yes, sir.

Thank you. Could you please clarify when this newest military aid package to Ukraine will be announced? Is it going to be coming days, during the NATO Summit?

Soon. That's as specific as I can get for you right now. But again, we'll keep you updated on that and I appreciate the interest. We'll definitely get you more details here in the near future.

[inaudible 00:27:14] also also spoke about more Patriot Interceptors, should we expect also that he has will transfer more Patriot systems to Ukraine in addition to Interceptors?

So, I don't have anything to announce beyond what we highlighted earlier. Again, air defense is a capability that we recognize Ukraine needs, and so we're working with allies and partners throughout the world to identify capabilities and get those to them as quickly as possible. (27:41) Let me take a couple more from the phone here. Jeff Seldin, VOA.

General, thanks very much. Earlier today, CSIS issued a report looking at satellite imagery showing four likely Chinese listening stations in Cuba, including one not far from Guantanamo Bay that had not been previously reported. Does the Pentagon have any reaction to this report, to these facilities? And what's the assessment of China's activity in Cuba in terms of expanding its surveillance capabilities?

Yeah. Thanks, Jeff. Did see the report, not going to necessarily get into commenting or confirming the specifics in there. I will say that, as always, we're confident that we can continue to meet our security commitments both here at home and in the region. As you may have heard us say, or the White House say almost a year ago, they've been tracking that these activities have been going on for decades. The PRC had completed an upgrade of its facilities in Cuba in 2019. We know that the PRC is going to continue to try to enhance its presence in Cuba, and we will continue to keep working to disrupt that. So, we're continuing to monitor this closely, taking steps to counter it. But that's all I've got on that and I will just leave it there, Jeff. (29:03) Let me go to Jeff Schogol, Task & Purpose.

Thank you. According to Media reports, three US service members in Okinawa have been charged with sexual assault since December. Has the Secretary been briefed on this? Has he spoken with his Japanese counterpart on this? And have these alleged incidents affected the alliance at all?

Yeah. Thanks, Jeff. So the Secretary is of course tracking this closely. I will say that the alleged behavior of those members does not reflect the core values of the US military, nor does it represent the conduct of the overwhelming majority of Japan-based personnel that we have forward deployed. And so, we are closely working with the local communities to address their concerns regarding these cases. We are deeply troubled by the severity of the allegations and we regret the anxiety this has caused. (30:01) Japan is one of our closest allies, and so we will continue to do everything we can to keep the lines of communication open on this. The respective units are working diligently with local authorities to investigate the allegations thoroughly, while also ensuring due legal process under applicable laws and agreements. so I'll just leave it there. Thanks, Jeff. Come back to the room here. Yes, Jean.

Thank you, General. Two questions on North Korea and China. First question, North Korea launched on another ballistic missiles into the east coast yesterday, and North Korea claimed that it's successfully tested multiple warheads last week. What is the Pentagon's reactions on this?

Well, I think you saw that Indo-Pacific Command put out a statement on that. Again, we continue to highlight the fact that this kind of destabilizing, disruptive behavior is irresponsible. We continue to call on North Korea to return to diplomatic discussions. But in those particular launches, while there was no assessment that it posed a threat to the US or our allies or partners in the region, is something that we will continue to take seriously.

On China, according to the New York Times, that China is purchasing farm land next to US military bases across the United States. And it adds a strategic base monitoring US military units and using it for intelligence activities. Do you think this is a threat to national security? And what action will the United States take against China?

Well, it is something that we continue to closely monitor, as you're probably aware. This is something also that the US government writ large has looked at to include through CFIUS, so I would refer you to Department of Commerce and Treasury for more questions on that. Thank you.

Thank you, General. I have a question for the Italian television. Looking at the NATO Summit next week, how's the secretary planning to address the issues that we saw coming up with President Biden at the debate with the counterpart of NATO? What is he planning to do? Because the question might be asked if the President is still capable to take the proper decisions when it comes to the military abroad.

Yeah, so I reject the notion of the question.

What can you say? If you guys are planning a plan or something, like a script or something to say?

Yeah, it's a ridiculous question.

Secretary Austin will be there supporting President Biden, the President of the United States at the NATO summit. I'll just leave it at that. Yes sir.

Going back to Nancy's question, so was there no anticipation or any preparatory legal discussions about the ruling that could really complicate troops' ability to defy what they might have previously known as an illegal or immoral order?

Again, look, let's not conflate the Supreme Court deliberation and debate about presidential authorities, and the uniform code of military justice and the access to legal counsel that military leaders have. On any given day on a variety of topics around the world, any commander or any leader can consult legal counsel to get an assessment on whether or not a decision or an order, regardless of what it is, is legal, ethical, moral, and appropriate. And that doesn't change. It doesn't change. As I'm sure you can appreciate in a democracy where laws are written by humans and they're malleable and there's always going to be a variability to that, which is why you have legal counsel so that you can get advice on that. And so when it comes to the Department of Defense and prosecuting our duties to defend the country throughout the world, we're always going to have the benefit of informed legal counsel to make informed ethical and legal decisions. Yes sir. I'll come back to you.

Thank you, General. My question is on China and Taiwan. So on Tuesday, Taiwan said China's coastal guard detained the Taiwanese fishing boat near a Taiwanese island. Do you have a comment on this incident? And also do you think China has increased their coercive activities towards Taiwan in these days?

I don't have a comment on the latter. I'd have to refer you to Taiwan to talk about the status of their fishing vessel. Again, look, broadly speaking, we've been very clear about PRCS aggressive activities in the South China Sea and beyond. And we'll continue to work closely with our allies and partners to address that behavior. Constantine.

Thanks. So on this line of questioning about the Supreme Court decision, I get what you're saying that the Pentagon has lawyers available for commanders to consult. But does the Pentagon feel that that is enough of a bulwark against a commander in chief that the Supreme Court has ruled to be pretty much immune from legal prosecution?

Again guys, I appreciate the line of questioning. I've provided you my response and I'm going to leave it at that.

Well, I'll try one more time.

Okay, go ahead.

I guess what we're trying to understand is, you described it as a debate, but it was a decision by the Supreme Court and that decision was that official acts are immune. And I think what we're trying to understand is if the president any order that he gives, does not face any possibility of prosecution, then how come US service members could be charged for carrying out those acts? So I think what would help us, if there's a way to take the question or maybe consider having somebody from general counsel explain to us how they're thinking about it, because that's what we're trying to reconcile because the way you've explained it, a service member could follow exactly what the president told them to do and maybe face charges. And we're trying to understand why and under what circumstances.

Yeah. And again, I appreciate the questions, but again, what I would tell you is look, without getting into hypotheticals, every situation has to be assessed on its own merit depending on the situation, the context of the situation. And if you are a military leader, you're going to have the benefit of consulting counsel or policy makers in terms of whether an order or decision is legal, ethical or moral. That won't change. And so again, I'm just going to leave it there.

Can I just ask that would you mind just taking our requests and-

I've answered the question.

In the next few days or so, could we talk to someone even on a background level to get a better understanding of how the department is thinking about this from a legal perspective?

If we have any updates to provide, we'll definitely take that into consideration. Sir.

Thank you very much. With the recent grow of Houthi attacks in Red Sea, with most sophisticated weapons. So how much it is big concern for the United States after the Gaza, to keep its Arab allies safe from the possible attacks from the Houthis? Because we know there is a possible deal between United States and Saudi Arabia. That is a defense deal that is linked with the Gaza peace process. So now what is the level of alertness for us in that region specifically?

In terms of regional partners, well, as you know, we maintain very robust relationships with partners throughout the Middle East and Central Asia region to address a variety of security concerns and threats to include the Houthis. And so as we said for a very long time, we're focused on regional security and stability and whether it's through exercising, whether it's through diplomatic relationships, whether it's through economic relationships, working to ensure security and stability and that's not going to change. So that also includes addressing threats like the Houthis.

One on military assistance by the United States towards Pakistan from year 2018, we have seen that the military assistance towards Pakistan you can say there is no military assistance from 2018. Only from this administration we have seen only the civilian assistance. And from 2018 what the US was claiming that Pakistan is not doing enough to counter Al-Qaeda and Taliban. That was a key US demand from Pakistan. But now as US is not there, at that time US was there in the region. And now Pakistan is going after Al-Qaeda link groups, almost the PTG, the Pakistan Taliban group and other groups. At this time with this administration, any consideration for military assistance by Pakistan or other coordination regarding the ongoing Pakistani counterterrorism operations?

Yeah, so I don't have anything to announce. As we talked about last time, the US and Pakistan do share a security cooperation relationship, particularly focused on counter-terrorism. We have a long history of working together in that regard. And so as opportunities present themselves in the future, I'm sure those conversations will continue to be ongoing. But in terms of any new security assistance, I don't have anything to announce. All right, last question. Yes sir.

Thank you, General. Some reports are claiming that Serail will begin an offensive operation on Lebanon in the second half of July. Do you have any signs about this operation maybe will be imminent? And what's your current concern about the possibility of border conflict?

Yeah, I think where we're still focused on is attempting to resolve these tensions through diplomatic means. And so that continues to be where Secretary Austin is focused and the US government is focused. And so whether or not there could be a conflict, I certainly hope not. I'm not going to speculate or get into hypotheticals other than to say again, we appreciate the fact that it's tense right now. We don't want to see a situation where a miscalculation could spiral out of control and cause a wider regional conflict. And so this is why it's important that we continue to focus on diplomatic resolution of the situation along the border. Thanks very much everybody. Appreciate it.