Pentagon Press Briefing on 9/12/24

Destroyers, fighter aircraft and carrier strike group presence, of note following a period of dual-carrier coverage by the Theodore Roosevelt CSG and the Abraham Lincoln CSG in the St. Comm region, the Theodore Roosevelt has departed and begun its transit into the Indo-Pacific command area of operations. As we have been since the beginning of the crisis in the Middle East following Hamas's vicious October 7th attacks, we remain intensely focused on working with regional partners to de-escalate tensions and deterring a wider regional conflict. The United States also remains very focused on securing a ceasefire as part of a hostage deal to bring all of the hostages home and to end the war in Gaza. (00:42) Closer to home, as you may have seen reported, what is now called Tropical Storm Francine made landfall in Louisiana yesterday as a category two hurricane, bringing storm surges, flash and urban flooding, hurricane force winds, tornado watches. The governor of Louisiana declared a state emergency earlier this week and brought nearly 3000 Louisiana National Guardsmen onto state active duty. These guardsmen, along with 134 high wheeled vehicles, 65 watercraft and 32 Army guard helicopters were positioned around the state to support response and recovery operations. As of this morning, five parishes are still under mandatory evacuation and more than 390,000 homes are without power. For more information about the response and recovery, I would encourage you to reach out to the Louisiana National Guard. (01:33) And finally, Secretary Austin will travel to Maxwell Air Force Base Alabama tomorrow and will accompany First Lady Dr. Jill Biden to highlight the new universal pre-kindergarten program being implemented at Department of Defense Education Activity Schools. Secretary Austin will also provide remarks at Maxwell to announce the multiple new initiatives in support of his taking care of people effort, emphasizing the department's commitment to the overall well-being and quality of life of our service members and their families. We'll have much more to provide tomorrow, but you can anticipate these new initiatives will be focused on actions that improve the quality of life for our service members, enhance their economic security, support the careers of military spouses, and make moves to new assignments easier. And with that, I'd be glad to take your questions. Start with Tara.

Thanks, General Ryder. On Ukraine, we've seen in the last day or so Secretary Blinken say that the door may be opening a little bit to the US considering giving Ukraine more long-range strike options or loosening restrictions. But we heard pretty clearly from Secretary Austin last week that he's not in favor of this. Is that thinking changing? Is the building now considering giving Ukraine more long-range strike options?

Yeah, I've certainly seen the press reports on that. I would tell you there has been no change to our policy, I don't have anything to announce. And certainly if there are any changes, we'll let you know. But as of today, that policy has not changed.

What is the primary driver behind Secretary Austin being reluctant to further loosen the restrictions or to provide more long-range options?

Yeah. Well, I mean, first of all, again, this is our policy, right? And we've of course worked with the Ukrainians to ensure that they have the ability to conduct counter-fire defensive strikes to defend their troops that are being attacked from across the border in Russia. We are very, very much focused, and we've talked about this before, on ensuring that Ukraine has what it needs to be able to preserve its sovereignty and take back occupied territory. And that's going to continue to be our focus. The bottom line is we want to see Ukraine win in this conflict. And when they feel that it's time, Ukraine feels that it's time to go to the negotiating table, we want them to do so with as strong a hand as possible. (03:56) And I would point you to Secretary Austin's comments at Ramstein last week where he highlighted there is no one capability, there is no silver bullet that is going to enable Ukraine to succeed. It's about taking all of the capabilities that they have and employing them in a way that gets them closer to success and having that stronger hand at the negotiating table. So again, as this battlefield has evolved, our support to Ukraine has evolved. But again, as of right now though, the policy has not changed. I'll just leave it there.

Okay. One other topic, on Syria, there are reports that Israel conducted a raid against and obtained some IRGC documents and whatnot in Syria. Can you confirm this?

Yeah. Again, seeing those press reports, but I'd refer you to the Israelis for any questions about their operations. Thanks. Jennifer?

Pat, I have some questions about the M1 Abrams tanks. Have they been used on the battlefield in Ukraine? And if so, how many?

Thanks, Jennifer. I'd refer you to them to talk about where and if they've employed those capabilities. I mean, as you know, we've obviously provided them, help train them and provide some remote tele-maintenance capability. But as far as where and if they've employed them, I'd refer you to them.

And do the Ukrainians have permission to use them across the border in Kursk?

Well, as I highlighted, I mean, what we've agreed to with the Ukrainians is that they can use US security assistance to conduct counter-fire, defend themselves from potential Russian attacks or actual Russian attacks from across the border. But when it comes to the capabilities that they're employing, I'd refer you to them.

And overall, are they making a difference? There was a lot of debate at the time when they were being approved, are the M1 Abrams tanks making a difference?

Well, again, I'd take a step back and say, first of all, that's a question that the Ukrainians would have to answer. I would tell you again though that it's not about one singular capability. It's about how you take all of the capabilities, whether it be air, defense, armor, artillery and training, and combine all those together to create capabilities that support your strategic and operational objectives. And so certainly we've seen the Ukrainians fight very courageously, very creatively, and there's no reason to think that things are going to change in that regard anytime soon.

Separately, on the Hill yesterday there was a heated hearing on US chips, supercomputer chips that have ended up making their way into Russian weapons. Senator Blumenthal hosted the hearing and four technology companies, including Intel and Texas Instruments were brought before the hearing. First of all, is the Department of Defense concerned about American technology ending up in Russian weapons still two and a half years into the war? And what can you do to stop it and why haven't you been able to stop it?

Well, broadly speaking, Jennifer, as you know, there has been an inter-agency effort to place sanctions on Russia to prevent those kinds of activities from occurring. So I'd refer you to my colleagues at Commerce to talk more about those particular efforts. But that's something that the Department of Defense will continue to work closely with our inter-agency partners to prevent, because, again, certainly we don't want to see American technologies being used in places like Ukraine against Ukrainian citizens. Thank you. Konstantin?

Thanks, Pat. The USS Roosevelt, you mentioned she's chopped into the Indo-Pacific, is it safe to say that she is on her way home? Are you able to say whether she's returning to home?

As a matter of policy, Konstantin, we're not going to talk about future deployment timelines. It's going to the Indo-Pacific AOR and I'll just leave it there.

And just one quick follow-up, are there any plans or conversations to have a two-carrier presence in Sengkang to replace the TR?

I don't have anything to announce right now. Again, the amazing thing about the US military is our ability to surge and provide forces wherever we need to. But as I highlighted at the top, we have a significant amount of capability in the US central command and US European command areas of responsibility. Let me go to the side of the room. Yes, sir.

Thank you very much, General. Recently the United States and Greek Cypriots have signed their bilateral defense agreement, and Turkish Foreign and Defense Ministries have "strongly condemned" the signing of this agreement. The US has historically taken in neutral and impartial position on the island. Would you now say that the US has done away with the impartiality?

I appreciate the question. I'd have to refer you to State Department to discuss the diplomatic discussions on that.

But the Department of Defense has signed this agreement, and the assistant secretary was there this week. So what does it say from a military perspective, from the DoD perspective, that this was signed, and how does it change the US military presence in that region? This is basically US based right now.

I'll tell you what, let me take your question and we'll come back to you on that. Thanks. Ellie?

How much money is left from the supplemental for presidential drawdown and does that money expire at the end of the month?

Yeah, thanks, Ellie. So broadly speaking, it's important to remember that when we talk about presidential drawdown authority, it's exactly that. It's the authority to spend monies within the DoD budget and the supplemental. And so at the end of the fiscal year, those authorities would expire. And so right now we're continuing to work with Congress to see about getting those authorities extended

... extended to enable us to continue to draw down packages. And so in the meantime, you're going to continue to see drawdown packages, but we'll have much more to provide on that in the near future.

Is it $6 billion?

Let me take that question. Janne?

Thank you, General. Two questions. North Korea and Russia, presentation following North Korea's continued the garbage balloon provocations, it launched multiple short-range ballistic missiles into the East Coast early yesterday, the day after the US presidential debate. Do you think there is a possibility that North Korea will use additional provocations to interfere with the United States' presidential election?

Look, we obviously saw the DPRK's launching of those missiles. I would refer you to INDOPACOM's statement on that. We certainly condemn that kind of destabilizing action and I'll just leave it there.

Russia, Russian Ministry of Defense said it could use nuclear weapons if Ukraine attacked the Russian mainland with the US long-range missiles. What is your reaction on this?

Yeah, well, this kind of nuclear saber-rattling isn't new. It's very irresponsible, it's dangerous. You've heard Secretary Austin highlight the fact that this is not the kind of language that a nuclear-armed country with a large military should be saying. All that to say we have not seen anything at this point that would indicate that we need to adjust our strategic force posture. So we'll continue to monitor that, but at this point, there's been no change to our posture. Let me go to the phone here, Missy Ryan, Washington Post.

Hey, Pat. Thank you. I'm just going to ask you a question you've been asked previously in the past week about Iraq and the statements by the Iraqi government about the apparent agreement to withdraw US forces over next two years. Are they accurate? And I know you've said that you can't confirm that just now. Number one, is that still the case? And number two, can you talk about what has been agreed to in principle? Is it accurate to say that the US and Iraq have agreed in principle to withdraw all US forces, it is just a question of when and how? That's my understanding. Just want to make sure that that's correct.

Yeah, thanks, Missy. So yes, to answer your question, I don't have anything new to announce. As we've highlighted, we have been discussing with our Iraqi partners what the transition... From the global coalition in Iraq, what that transition would look like to an enduring bilateral security partnership between the US and Iraq would look like. Again, we'll keep you fully informed when we have something to announce, but as of right now, I do not have any updates to provide. Thank you. Let me go to J.J. Green, WTOP.

General, thank you. Ukraine's president, Zelensky said a little earlier today that they believe Russia's begun a counteroffensive in the Kursk region. And I'm interested in knowing what the Pentagon think this means for this conflict when you consider what we've learned from the building and from US intelligence about Russia gathering weapons as well, including ballistic missiles from Iran in recent days, and how this impacts the future and the US plans to support Russia?

Yeah, thanks J.J. So what we have seen is Russian units beginning to try to conduct some type of counteroffensive in the Kursk region. At this stage, I would say that it's marginal, but something obviously that we're keeping an eye on. And then, I'm sorry, the second part of your question?

Yes, how the building might view this activity, what you just mentioned, what you've seen in the context of getting these weapons, which we were told this week, the US has proof of, from Iran the ballistic missiles, and there are other plans to try to essentially attack Ukraine's energy infrastructure as winter comes?

Sure. So first of all, with the caveat that I'm not going to discuss intelligence from the podium here, nor am I going to provide a daily update on Russian employment of various capabilities, as of right now, we have not seen them employ those Iranian missiles yet, although one can expect that they would in the relatively near future. But again, if you take a step back here in terms of what we are focused on, it's on enabling Russia to defend its sovereignty and deter future Russian aggression. So both urgent needs and long-term needs. (15:49) And as we go into the winter, making sure that they have the capabilities from an air defense standpoint to protect critical infrastructure like energy infrastructure, which we know the Russians are targeting, but also at the same time, that they have the capability they need on the front lines like armor and artillery, ammunition, to be able to check any type of Russian operations, for example, near Pokrovsk and elsewhere in the battlefield, including the Kursk region. So it'll ultimately be up to the Ukrainians as they design their campaign plans on how they're going to employ those forces. But certainly our focus is on ensuring that they win and that they have the upper hand when and if they decide they want to go to the negotiating table. Let me go to Howard Altman.

Hey, thanks, Pat. I want to drill down a little further on Tara's question about the Israeli raid on Syria. Did the Israelis inform the US either before or after that raid is being conducted and given that they are a CENTCOM member and also receive a great deal of US aid, should they inform the US either before or after that this raid took place?

Thanks, Howard. Again, I mean I've seen that press reporting, but for any questions as it relates to any Israeli operations, I'm really just going to have to refer you to them. I just don't have anything to provide on that. Let me come back to the room. Yes, sir.

Mario Contendo for the Italian television. Thank you, General, for taking the question. I have a question regarding the strike of the Israeli on the school in Gaza a few hours ago. There was some reports... We read in Europe, some report about France and Germany and the Great Britain deciding to provide less weapons, for instance, from now on to Israel because of this, because of this fact that keep happening. What is the position of the US in light, from the military's perspective, in light of what just happened, if you have anything to say?

Sure. So a few things. So first of all, I don't have any information to provide on the particular strikes that you're referencing, other than to say that from the very beginning of Israel's operations, we've been very clear about the importance of taking civilian safety into account, both from a planning and operations standpoint and both publicly and privately. And I would point you to Secretary Austin's public comments and to the readouts that we've issued. This is a topic of frequent discussion between him and his Israeli counterpart. The bottom line is we believe that Israel has both a strategic and a moral imperative in terms of protecting civilians. (18:44) I will also highlight though that there is culpability on the side of Hamas in terms of their tactics, techniques, and procedures of embedding their operations within civilian infrastructure to include schools, hospitals, mosques. We just recently saw when they executed six hostages in their tunnel network underneath Gaza the extensive amount of infrastructure, money, resources that they've spent on building this massive tunnel network, which is approximately the size of New York City. (19:19) And instead of using those funds and using those resources to help the Palestinian people, they've instead created a tunnel network to conduct combat ops from. This is the challenge that Israel is up against. We do not want to see any civilians killed in this conflict, whether they be Palestinian or Israeli, and we'll continue to work towards that. This is why a ceasefire deal is absolutely essential now and getting all of the hostages released immediately is so important and we'll continue to work towards that. Thank you. Tony.

A couple of questions. Does the fact that the United States now has a one carrier presence in the Middle East, in the AO Middle East, the normal presence, by the

Is that an indication that you feel that the temperature between Iran and Israel has dropped and the threat from Iran to Israel is less than it was a month ago?

Well, what I would say, Tony, just like I highlighted at the top, we are going to take any potential threats very seriously. Again, Iran has indicated that they want to retaliate against Israel, and so we're going to continue to take that threat very seriously and we're going to continue to maintain a robust presence in the central command and European command AORs. That's not going to change. We're going to, again, maintain, as we always have, the ability to surge forces or capabilities anywhere in the world we need them, when we need them.

What's the rationale for moving the carrier group then back to the Indo-Pacific is there [inaudible 00:20:51].

Again, broadly speaking, when you look at fleet management, you've got to take into account things like the readiness of our various ships' aircraft, and so that's always going to be something that's worked into the calculus. You're going to always see things coming and going out of the theater based on those kinds of considerations, but also, as we demonstrated, we have the ability to provide dual coverage, should we need to do that.

Can I ask you a question on the continuing resolution that the secretary warned about the other day?

Sure.

You've lived under this umbrella for a number of years. What stake does the individual sailor, soldier, airman, and space cadet person have in the fight? Will they not be paid over a continued resolution period? Or is it a question of them not getting raises? What is their individual stake, if you can clear that out?

Yeah. First of all, in the event of a continuing resolution, military members will get paid. That is a legal requirement from the Congress that they will get paid, but I think it's important to highlight, because there are no funds available, and because the baseline budget would not change, that would force offsets, force us to offset the costs of these well-deserved pay raises, and it would cut into other programs and accounts at potentially damaging levels. Again, we would encourage the Congress to pass a budget, but the bottom line is military members and our civilians will get paid.

Other accounts would be offset to pay for their continued salaries like [inaudible 00:22:33].

That's correct. That's correct.

Okay, thanks.

Thanks. Chris.

Thanks, [inaudible 00:22:40]. You've highlighted the threat of these short-range ballistic missiles provided by Iran. Does the Pentagon believe that US systems provided to protect against ballistic missiles would be effective against these Iranian ...

Well, Chris, I would tell you that it's not just US systems, the international community has rushed air defense capabilities and training to the Ukrainian armed forces. This is really an international effort to support Ukraine and their integrated air defense capabilities. That's something that we're going to continue to look at to enable them to defend against those kinds of missiles and the other threats that Russia has employed. Don't forget, this isn't Iran's entree into this conflict. They've been providing one-way attack drones, as you know, for a while now. They are absolutely complicit in the continued death and destruction of innocent civilians inside of Ukraine. We'll continue to do everything we can to enable the Ukrainians to be able to defend themselves both on the ground and in the air. Thank you. (23:51) Yes, [inaudible 00:23:52].

Thank you. Have a question on this new NATO command at the [inaudible 00:23:56] bottom that was supposed to coordinate security assistance for Ukraine. Has it begun its operation? Do you have any details or updates on that?

So that's really a question for NATO. You're talking about NSATU, which is the NATO element. My understanding is that, yes, they have begun, but again, I'd refer you to NATO for any details.

One more on the area defenses for Ukraine, the Patriot battery that was announced by the president in July, has it arrived in Ukraine? Is there additional training? What's the status of that delivery?

Yeah. As I'm sure you can appreciate, for operation security reasons, I'm not going to talk about the movement of Patriots other than to say that A, we'll let the Ukrainians talk to their level of comfort about what capabilities have arrived in country and we'll defer to them on that. But B, we are going to, as we have from the very beginning, continue to work with the international community to rush those capabilities there as fast as we can. Thank you. (24:54) Time for a few more. Rio?

Thanks so much. The question is about Okinawa. Yesterday the go governor of Okinawa Tamaki met with officials at the Pentagon and the State Department, and the governor expressed his concerns about recent alleged sexual assault by US service members in Okinawa and a lack of transparency in these cases. Could you please provide a comment on this meeting and on how the US and Japan can improve transparency in incident in Okinawa?

Yeah, no, I really appreciate the question. As we've said before, the alleged behavior of these service members in no way reflects the core values of the US Military, nor does it represent the conduct of the overwhelming majority of US personnel who are based in Japan that we have deployed. We do share the concerns of the local community regarding these cases. We are deeply troubled by the severity of the allegations, and we absolutely regret the anxiety this has caused. I do know that the respective units are working very closely with local authorities to investigate the allegations thoroughly, while at the same time ensuring the due legal process under applicable laws and agreements. I would refer you to US Forces Japan for any further questions on that. Thank you.

Thank you, General. My first question is about Pakistan's role in the Indo-Pacific strategy of the US. As I'm sure you know that China has invested big billions of dollars there in the seaport, and their weapon is mostly now Chinese as well. Is there any other role of Pakistan from military point of view you see beside the terrorism operations that you guys conduct?

Well, I mean, that's really a question for Pakistan to address. Certainly, as you know, we value Pakistan as a partner and we'll continue to look at ways that we can work together towards regional security and stability. But I don't have any specific announcements to make. Thanks.

One more, General. In Pakistan, the Pakistani military has just used a new name for the Taliban in Pakistan, something like Fitna al-Khawari and that reminded me of Shakespeare's quote, which said that what's in a name that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Just to America, their change of name makes a different, I mean the terrorist organization. What else?

Yeah. I mean that's really, again, a question for the Pakistani government to address. I'm not going to get into what's really a domestic decision on terminology. Okay. Last question. Yes, sir.

[inaudible 00:27:47], General. Can you provide us some details about the Pentagon delegation that talks with Chinese?

The details, I'm sorry, in the ...

Delegation from the Pentagon is going to held a meeting with the Chinese partners in China. That's what Pentagon's website says.

Are you talking about the Xiangshan Forum?

Yes. Yes.

Okay. Yes, we did send a representative, we responded to an invitation from the PRC, and so yes, we did. We've done that in the past as well.

Is there any indications that the tension is going to be ... Before that, in some certain points, many, many people were talking about a possible war or something, or a cyber war between the United States and China or Taiwan. Do you think that is not a high possibility anymore?

Well, look, Secretary Austin's been pretty clear, we do not believe that conflict is inevitable or imminent. Our focus is on maintaining open lines of communication to prevent potential miscalculation or from competition from veering into to conflict. I think that these types of venues are very important to enable that communication to continue. As we talked about earlier in the week, you had the Indo-Pacific commander talking to his theater counterpart. And so we'll continue to look at those kinds of opportunities to keep those lines of communication. At the end of the day, what we're focused on is working with partners throughout the region and throughout the world to ensure security and stability, peace and prosperity for everyone. We'll just leave it there. (29:51) All right. Thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it.

(silence)