Pentagon Press Briefing on 10/01/24

... Iran to halt any further attacks including from its proxy forces. During the attack, the US military coordinated closely with the Israeli Defense Forces to help defend Israel. US Navy destroyers deployed to the Middle East region, supported the defense of Israel by firing approximately a dozen interceptors against the incoming Iranian missiles. Initial reports indicate that Israel was able to intercept the majority of incoming missiles and that there was minimal damage on the ground, but I'd refer you to Israel for confirmation and any questions on that as they're in a better position to discuss. (00:33) Please note that we're still assessing the attack and the outcome, so numbers may change as we receive updates. Additionally, no US personnel were injured or harmed during the Iranian missile attack. Secretary Austin Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General CQ Brown, Jr. and US Central Command Commander General Erik Kurilla have been in constant contact with President Biden and Vice President Harris throughout the day to consult on the situation and US actions. (01:00) In addition to his phone call earlier this morning with Israeli Minister of Defense Gallant, prior to the Iranian attack, Secretary Austin spoke to the Minister again just a short while ago to get an update. He reaffirmed the United States' ironclad commitment to the defense of Israel and underscored that the US remains well-postured throughout the Middle East region to protect US forces and defend Israel in the face of threats from Iran and Iran-backed terrorist organizations. (01:26) We'll provide a readout of that call as soon as possible. To be crystal clear, as Secretary Austin has said, should Iran, its partners or its proxies use this moment to target American personnel or interests in the region. The United States will take every necessary measure to defend our people, and separately, I do have an update to provide on DOD support to Hurricane Helene response efforts, but I'll provide that at the end. With that, happy to take your questions. We'll start with AP, Tara.

Thanks, General Ryder. What Navy destroyers were involved in helping shoot down and intercept? And given this escalation, what's being communicated between Secretary Austin and Minister Gallant right now in terms of tampering things down and potentially avoiding a wider war?

So the two Navy destroyers involved were the USS Bulkeley and the USS Cole. In terms of the conversations between Secretary Austin and Minister Gallant, won't get into the private discussions other than to say we are consulting closely with them on next steps and the continued defense of Israel.

And then are there any plans underway to conduct a NEO given the increased risk of a wider war?

Right now there has been no order to evacuate. As you've heard us say before, we are a planning organization, so we of course plan for all contingencies. But as of right now, State Department has not called for an evacuation. Jennifer.

Should we assume that the SM3s were used by the Cole and the Bulkeley to shoot down or to intercept the missiles?

I'm not going to get into the specific type of ordinance, Jennifer, other than to say, again, they fired a dozen interceptors.

And Iran said that they gave a heads-up to the US and to Russia. How much warning were you given by Iran?

Yeah. I'm not aware of any pre-warning by Iran about their potential attack. As you know, this is something we've been following very closely for a while based on the threats of retaliation by Iran, and so we've been closely consulting with Israel for a while now to be prepared in the eventuality. And as today demonstrated, we were prepared and we were able to successfully work alongside Israel to defend them from this attack. Let me go to Carla.

Thanks, Pat. You said that the destroyers shot down Iranian missiles. Where did they come from? Were they all from inside Iran or was some also from Yemen being shot by the Houthis?

Carla, to my knowledge, and again, we're still assessing this, these were all launched from Iran, ballistic missiles, and what I said was that they fired the interceptors towards those missiles.

Then were any other US assets involved in this defense?

Of course, we have a lot of capability in the region. A lot of things that are there to be prepared for a wide variety of threats. But in terms of the launching of these interceptors, it was those two destroyers.

So just being clear, no ground-based interceptors were used in this?

Correct.

Were you aware of any duds that didn't fire off that maybe Iran wanted to fire more than the roughly 200?

As I mentioned, we're still assessing the outcome of the attack and so we'll have much more information later, but these are all our initial reports.

And then on the second call with the secretary and Minister Gallant, did he urge Israel not to respond or to moderate any response to Iran or did Gallant share any of Israeli intentions for their potential response here?

Well, again, as I'm sure you can appreciate, I'm just not going to be able to get into the details of their call other than to say, again, we're consulting closely about next steps and the continued defense of Israel.

What does Secretary Austin think about the potential for an Israeli response here? Would he urge them without saying what he said in the call necessarily, but what are his feelings about the potential? Would he urge them restraint or...

Well, look, if you take a step back here, we fully support Israel's right to defend itself. You just saw a very significant ballistic missile attack by Iran against Israel, and so we'll continue to work alongside them to support their defense. We, of course, do not want to see a wider regional conflict. You've heard us say that many times and we'll continue to work towards that end, but we also fully understand the fact that this was a significant attack by Iran, and so we're going to continue to consult closely and we're going to continue to support their defense. Let me go to, Laura.

Thank you. Just a couple of clarifications. You say that the US destroyers had intercepted or shot down the missiles or just that they fired?

I said that they fired approximately a dozen interceptors against the incoming Iranian missiles.

Were there any US aircraft that sent that shot interceptors at Iranian missiles.

What I've read out is what participated in the defense of Israel. Okay.

And then, sorry, just one more. Can you say if there were any drones or cruise missiles that were involved in the Iranian attack?

Again, still assessing it right now. It appears it was ballistic missiles. No drones, but again, we'll continue to assess. Let me go to Joseph and then we'll come here.

Just wanted to turn to the Israeli invasion in Lebanon. For the past couple months, the department and the secretary have called for de-escalation. You guys have voiced your opposition to any ground incursion invasions limited operations. After we found out that the Israeli strike last week killed the Hezbollah Chief Hassan Nasrallah, it seems like the tone changed from the statements last night. The department and secretary said they supported what Israel is doing. So what changed for a change in that tone and that stance from the department?

Yeah, I think the biggest thing, Joseph, is we fully support Israel's right to defend itself against Hezbollah. As we understand it, they will be conducting limited operations to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure that's arrayed along the border there that could be used to threaten Israeli citizens. And so we're continuing to consult with the Israelis to better understand how they intend to go forward. (07:50) Obviously, I'd refer you to them to talk or ask questions about details regarding those operations, but we fully understand as part of their overall efforts to return people home that they do need to address those threats that are along the border there. And so all that to say, we will continue to consult with the Israelis and other partners in the region long-term about how we can ultimately de-escalate those tensions and get to a ceasefire.

Have they asked for any help from you guys doing whatever it is that they want do?

No. Yes, sir.

Were the United States surprised by the scale of the Iranian attack on Israel?

Well, look, like I said before, we've been monitoring this for a while. Iran had been very public about its threats to retaliate, and so it's something that we've been monitoring. Certainly, this was a significant attack probably about twice the size in terms of scope of what we saw earlier. But again, we're still assessing the outcomes of this. And as I highlighted at the top, we certainly condemn this reckless attack, this direct attack against Israel, and we'll continue to support Israel's defense.

Several Israeli media spoke about of respond tonight, the Israeli respond tonight to this attack, including some, not just Iran, some other Middle Eastern countries. Will the United States be assisting the Israelis in the respond?

Well, I'm not going to speculate about hypotheticals. I'd refer you to the Israelis to talk about...

I'm not asking about it. Will the Americans help them with their-

Well, what you're asking me is if they're going to do something, and what I'm saying is I'm not going to speculate about what or if they may do. As I highlighted to several of your colleagues, we're consulting closely with the Israelis in terms of next steps with the emphasis being the defense of Israel. So let me go this side of the room. Oren.

Essentially a followup to that question, is the US willing to strike Iran in response to this? Are you putting that on or off the table?

Well, look, Oren, again, I don't want to get into hypotheticals. I think I was very clear at the top that should US forces be targeted by Iran or its proxies will take necessary steps to defend our people. And I think we've also been very clear that we're going to support the defense of Israel. And so I'm not going to get into theoretical or speculative operations at this stage other than to say we mean what we say and we say what we mean.

And then a followup question. Iran claims to have used a new Fattah missile, which is supposed to be a hypersonic ballistic missile. Can you assess whether they did use new and advanced weaponry in this attack and whether they learned from the April attack?

Again, we're still assessing the attack and the outcomes, and so we may have more to provide later, but I don't have anything on that right now. Dan.

Thanks for your time. Two questions please. On Secretary Austin's statement last night, he referred to being supportive of operations along the border. Is he open to Israel using operations on both sides of the border along the border? Was a little vague there.

Well, I think I'd go back to how I responded to Joseph, right? We understand and support Israel's right to defend itself against Hezbollah as we highlighted in the readout. We understand that part of that is dismantling some of the attack infrastructure that Hezbollah has built along the border. Certainly, again, we don't want to see this broaden into wider regional conflict, but we understand again that what Israel is doing are limited operations to destroy that attack infrastructure and then enable citizens on both sides of the border to return home. (11:51) Ultimately, at the end of the day, we do think that a diplomatic resolution is the only way to achieve lasting stability and security across the Israel-Lebanon border. So we're going to continue to work to that end, but we also again understand Israel's need to defend itself.

And then a followup. The State Department read out a report on a attack on diplomatic facility at Baghdad Airport last night. Have you seen any other attacks on US forces I guess since Friday? This one would seem to be on a diplomatic facility, but be it in the last day particularly at this heightened time of tension or just broadly over the last couple of days?

Yeah, as of right now, I'm not aware of any additional attacks. Thanks. Sir.

The iron dome, how effective is it against ballistic missiles and some of the televised images appear to show some of them landing on infrastructure? Are you aware of that? In general, was this attack more effective than the Iranian attack in April?

Again, understanding that a lot is still very initial. As I highlighted, initial indications are that there was minimal damage on the ground. In terms of the specifics, I would have to refer you to Israel really to talk through that. And again, as more information comes in, we'll certainly know more, but the initial assessment is that Israel was able to successfully defend itself, of course with the support from the US. And so again, we may have more later on that. Helene?

Thanks, Pat. I just want to be clear because it seems like we're at a very dangerous time where any kind of ambiguity from the US could lead to an attack on American troops. I understand when you say that we are going to defend any attack at American troops. I also understand that you said that no American troops were hurt. So therefore, are you saying the US is not planning on a kinetic strike against Iran? Because right now when you say there will be consequences, all of that, you are leaving it vague and people don't understand. And I want to understand, are we going to be joining Israel in hitting back against Iran in a kinetic manner?

Yeah, so with all due respect, you're talking about a hypothetical future, right? And presupposing what Israel may or may not do. So I'm just not going to talk about-

But you said there will be consequences and Jake Sullivan said there will be consequences. So what does that mean?

Right. I think broadly speaking, the US has been clear that there will be security economic consequences should Iran attack, but I just don't have anything to preview specifically as it relates to that. All right? Yes, sir.

Thanks, Pat. Just to clarify, did any US aircraft track any of the missiles either before the launch or during the attack, even if they weren't involved, kinetically in the defense of Israel?

So I won't go into specifics, Chris, other than to say, as you well know, we have a wide variety of ISR capabilities throughout the region to monitor and track potential aerial threats to include aircraft that do that. So I'll just leave it there. Okay, Charlie.

Thank you, General. I know you said repeatedly that Iran doesn't telegraph these attacks yet from early this morning we were told that an attack would be imminent, so we're getting some sort of information from somewhere. Based on whatever that was based on, where does Iran stand now? Is this just the first salvo from your assessment? Are they positioned to go ahead and pull the trigger again at will?

I mean, that's really a question for Iran. As evidenced by this attack, they certainly maintain the capability to conduct additional attacks. As I highlighted at the top, we call on them to halt any further attacks and we'll continue to assess. We'll also continue to be prepared to respond in the defense of Israel should they opt to do another one. We certainly hope that they do not, but we obviously have to be prepared in that eventuality.

I just want to clarify, I think you said earlier this is twice the size and scope from the attack of April 13th?

Yeah. It's about twice as large in terms of the number of ballistic missiles that they launched from the last.

Was their intent to actually do damage this time?

Well, look, you don't launch that many missiles at a target without the intent of hitting something. So absolutely, just like the last time, their intent is to cause destruction. And so fortunately Israel has very significant air defense capabilities and the US of course played a role in helping on that front as well. Thank you. Matt.

Thanks, Pat. You said there have been no new attacks on US forces in the region, but is the department tracking a greater threat now to US forces, and are you taking any extra measures on top of the recent plus-ups you've done for force protection?

Well, Matt, I mean, as you know, we're always taking force protection very seriously. We're all very well aware of the heightened tensions in the region, and US central command has been for a long time now constantly assessing and reassessing the threat to ensure that our forces are protected. Like I mentioned, I'm not aware as I come to the podium, I'm not aware of any additional attacks beyond the one that Dan mentioned, but it's something that we'll obviously be keeping a close eye on to protect our forces.

Secondly, were there any other nations other than the United States and Israel who took part in intercepting missiles or helping to track them or anything like that?

Yeah, I don't have anything to provide on that, and obviously I wouldn't speak for other countries from here. Yes, sir.

I'd like to ask you if you guys talk to the European allies and if you ask for military support in protecting Israel in case of another attack from Israel or the proxies? Or at the moment, it's only in the US helping Israel militarily as well?

Well, I'll allow other countries to speak for themselves. I will say, and we'll put a readout on this afternoon as soon as we're done here. The secretary did have an opportunity to talk to his French counterpart earlier this morning just to talk about the situation in the Middle East. This was before the Iranian attack occurred, and so we'll get that out momentarily. Broadly speaking though, again, in terms of any European coordination or cooperation with Israel, that's really for individual countries to talk to. I won't speak to them. Let me go to the phone real quick before I get in trouble. Task & Purpose, Jeff Schogol.

Thank you. I understand that the destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors. Did they hit any of the missiles? If so, how many?

Yeah, thanks, Jeff. So again, as you highlight, they fired the interceptors. We're still assessing, again, outcomes of that. I just don't have more information to provide at this time. Okay. Let me go to Heather from USNI.

Hi. Thank you so much. So you mentioned that the United States has the ability and intent to respond if any of its service members are attacked. Over on Friday you had two US destroyers and an LCS come under attack from the Houthis, which is an Iranian proxy group. Is there, I guess, any intention to launch any attacks in response to those service members coming under attack?

Well, first of all, Heather, as you are aware, there were no US service members injured in any of those attacks. And as always, we will respond appropriately at a time and place of our choosing, but I'm not going to telegraph or speculate on any punches at this time. All right, and Patrick Tucker, Defense One.

Hey, thanks for doing this. So on the announcement of three additional aircraft squadrons, F-15s, F-16s, A-10s. I presume that they weren't involved in any of the interception activity. Can you talk a little bit about why they're there and what role they might fill now in terms of enhancing security for US forces in the region?

Yeah, absolutely. Well, as we've been highlighting for a while, we have a robust amount of capability in the central command and US European command regions. What those capabilities provide us is versatility in terms of responding to a variety of contingencies. And so basically having the right tools in the toolkit to be able to respond appropriately to any type of attack or contingency situation. And so as you well know, Pat, fighter aircraft can perform a variety of missions to include taking down drones, taking down missiles, particular kinds of missiles, as well as providing ISR, electronic warfare types of capabilities. (21:36) So all of this comes together to provide us with options on how best to respond to any type of attack and to protect our forces. Let me come back to the room here. Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, general. First on Iran after today's attack and the expected response from Israel. Is the assessment at the Pentagon still that the situation in the Middle East still under control and we're not in all-out war yet? And the second question on Lebanon, excuse me, what's your understanding to what Israel is calling limited ground operations or incursion? Is it limited by like in time? In scope? How do you see this?

Sure. So in terms of your first question, as you know, we've been working very hard from the beginning to prevent a wider regional conflict. Certainly the type of aggressive action that we saw by Iran today makes that more challenging, but that continues to remain our focus and remain our goal is to prevent a wider regional conflict, and so we'll continue to stay laser focused on that. In terms of Israel's operations, again, they're in the best position to answer questions, but our standing in consulting with them is that, again, these will be limited operations focused on dismantling facilities that Hezbollah has built along the border to stage attacks into Israel. (23:11) And so part of those discussions, again, have been focused on making sure that there's an understanding as far as potential mission creep as it relates to the broader tensions in the region. But again, we support their right to defend themselves from Hezbollah attacks, and so we'll continue to consult with them on that. As I mentioned, Wafa, ultimately, we do believe that a diplomatic resolution is the only way to achieve lasting stability and security there. Few more. Phil.

A couple small questions. One is, why weren't land-based air defenses used? Did the United States have fewer partners in trying to knock down these Iranian missiles this time than it did in April?

I would compare it to a palette, Phil. You're going to use the capability that you need to respond to a particular situation. So I mean, as evidenced by the fact that our forces were able to so quickly support Israel's defense, we have a wide range of capabilities arrayed to be able to respond to whatever those threats may be in the most appropriate way possible. So it's less about the platform and it's more about the capability. And so again, we still maintain a robust capability to be able to respond to any potential future threats as well.

I just want to follow up on what Helene was asking, which was important in the sense, I think you said a red line that if Iran or its forces were to attack US troops, there would be a US response against Iran. At least that's what it sounded like you were saying. Is that correct?

What I said is it should be very clear that if Iran or its proxies use this as an opportunity to attack US forces, we will respond appropriately, yep. Okay. Last question, Nat.

Thanks, Pat. I just wanted to clarify a few things that you said. In terms of Iran's capabilities going forward, is it clear from the US side that the imminent risk is over of another attack from Iran?

Well, look, it's something we're going to keep an eye on. We certainly hope that there's not another attack, but I obviously Iran maintains a capability and it's just demonstrated that they're willing to use it to directly attack Israel. And so we're going to continue to consult closely with Israel on next steps. And importantly on the defense of Israel.

And on the Israel's limited incursion, have they provided any sort of a timeline on how long they would stay there?

I'd refer you to Israel to talk about that. I don't think it'd be appropriate for me to talk about that. Hey, folks, while there's been an understandable focus today on the Middle East, before we conclude, I would like to provide a quick update on a topic closer to home as DOD continues to work with federal, state, and local officials to support Hurricane Helene response efforts. As of this morning, the department has more than 6,500 service members actively engaged in relief efforts across six states. Florida has nearly 3,500 guardsmen activated, and Georgia has around 1,400 guardsmen on duty. South Carolina has activated nearly 500 guardsmen along with two helicopters for their recovery efforts. (26:39) Tennessee has around 130 guardsmen and seven helicopters activated, and Virginia has activated nearly 60 guardsmen along with one helicopter and numerous high water vehicles. Additionally, since the storm passed, North Carolina has emerged as an area of particular focus after the historical levels of flooding that occurred in the western part of that state. (26:59) A multi-state, multi-agency effort is currently underway with more than 80 guardsmen and 13 helicopters from Connecticut, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Ohio, New York, Southern Carolina, or excuse me, South Carolina and Florida, joining more than 800 North Carolina Guardsmen in providing support to devastated North Carolina communities. US Northern Command is also providing active duty support efforts to FEMA and the US Army Corps of Engineers is providing emergency power planning and response teams to Georgia, as well as dam, levee, and bridge inspection to Tennessee and Kentucky and temporary power to North Carolina. (27:35) For further questions about National Guard missions, I would encourage you to contact the specific states in questions and for active duty support efforts to FEMA, US Northern Command is standing by. For service-specific evacuation efforts, it's best to contact the services directly. As the DOD continues to aid response efforts, Secretary Austin and department leaders will continue to be engaged and stay in close contact with federal, state, and local officials to ensure resources are available and to maximize a coordinated response. And in the days ahead, the department will continue to keep our fellow Americans who've been impacted by this storm's devastation and our thoughts. Thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it.