Pat (00:01):
First, as you may have seen, Secretary Austin was at the United States Military Academy at West Point yesterday, where he delivered a speech to the corps of cadets. Reflecting on his own time as a West Point cadet, his public service career, and his experience on the battlefield, the secretary shared thoughts and advice stemming from his 45 years serving as a soldier and as the secretary of defense for the cadets as they prepare to become future leaders in the United States Army. Transcript of the speech, as well as a video are posted on the DOD website, at defense.gov.
(00:33)
Shifting gears, earlier today, Secretary Austin hosted the Armenian Minister of Defense at the Pentagon for a bilateral meeting, the first such meeting in two decades. The leaders reaffirmed the strategic partnership between our two countries and also reaffirmed our shared objective of an enduring piece in the South Caucasus. The two leaders also discussed ongoing and future security cooperation, efficient and professionalization, institutional capacity building, and training. Full readout will be available on defense.gov later today.
(01:03)
Looking ahead, Secretary Austin will depart tomorrow for Simi Valley, California, to attend the 2024 Reagan National Defense Forum. This marks the secretary's fourth year attending the forum, and on Saturday, December 7, he'll deliver the keynote address, which will be live-streamed.
(01:19)
Additionally, alongside Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, Secretary Austin will also be the recipient of the Ronald Reagan Peace Through Strength Award, from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute.
(01:32)
Following the Reagan National Defense Forum, secretary Austin will travel to Tokyo, Japan for a multi-day visit. This trip marks his 13th visit to the Indo-Pacific as secretary of defense, and comes as the department continues its historic efforts to bolster our partnerships and alliances, and advance a shared vision of peace, security, and prosperity in the region. We'll have much more to share on the secretary's engagements in Japan soon.
(01:57)
Separately, on Tuesday, I highlighted US self-defense strikes in the vicinity of MSS Euphrates in Syria, when US forces faced in imminent danger due to several threats to include rockets and mortars fired in the direction of US forces in the area. US Central Command has advised that three US service members are being evaluated for possible TBI. As you know, those numbers can fluctuate, and I'm not aware of any other injuries at this time. Again, will not hesitate to take appropriate action to protect our forces if they are threatened.
(02:29)
And finally, throughout his tenure, Secretary Austin has prioritized the development and rapid fielding of capabilities to counter the urgent and growing threat posed by unmanned systems. This week, the secretary signed a classified strategy for countering unmanned systems, to unify the Department's approach to countering these systems that looks across domains, characteristics and timeframes. Unmanned systems, more commonly known as drones, have the potential to pose both an urgent and enduring to US personnel, facilities and assets overseas, and increasingly in the US homeland. As you know, the threats presented by these systems are changing how wars are fought. With this singular strategy for countering unmanned systems in conjunction with other major DOD initiatives, like the Joint Counter-Small UAS office, and Replicator II, the DOD is orienting around a common understanding of the challenge and a comprehensive approach to addressing it. And with that, I'm happy to take your questions. We'll start with AP Lita.
Lita (03:31):
Thank you, Pat. A quick question on transition. Has there been… Can you just update us, has there been any steps or any movement at all for any transition meetings or anything here in the Pentagon?
Pat (03:43):
Lita, what I would tell you is, no contact at this stage. I do understand that the transition team has signed the DOJ MOU, but we're awaiting word from the Federal Transition Coordinator and the Trump transition team regarding the next steps.
Lita (04:04):
Okay.
Pat (04:04):
Of course, we here at the DOD are prepared to support a calm, orderly transition, and ensure that the landing team has all the necessary information, consistent with governing documents and agreements to ensure that they're prepared to perform their function duties, and duties on day one.
Lita (04:23):
And then just a quick second question. You talked about this new classified strategy, and you had talked before about that there were some incursions, particularly down in Virginia over in military facilities, and there's been others. Is there anything in the strategy that's more tactical, that allows commanders to do anything, or is this just a broad statement of policy?
Pat (04:48):
Of course it's got all kinds of good information, but it's classified, so I can't talk about it, no. So really, Lita, again, recognizing that the strategy is classified, we will have an unclassified fact sheet that we'll be providing soon. Really, just looking at how we'll approach this. One is ensuring that the department is prepared to conduct counter-unmanned system operations, counter-UAS operations. Two is looking at how we respond to incidents that do occur, by pulling together subject matter experts and resources. And then third is tracking equipment and counter-UAS equipment, UAS one aspect of drones. So really, again, broad brush, it's looking at this in a comprehensive and cohesive way. Again, I'm not going to go into the specific tactics, techniques, procedures at this point, but it enables the department to approach this in a way, again, that's comprehensive, cohesive, and holistic. Thanks. Carla.
Carla (06:00):
Thanks. Going back to Syria, you mentioned the three service members being evaluated for TBIs. Who was responsible for that attack? Who did the US military target on Tuesday?
Pat (06:12):
Yeah, again, as I highlighted on Tuesday, that's something that we're still assessing. It's, again, important to highlight that that region has been the… So, first of all, we know that Iranian-backed militia groups operate in that area. We also know that military Syrian regime forces operate in that area. But this location has been used in the past by groups like Iranian-backed militias to target US forces at Mss Euphrates. But again, in terms of who is operating those vehicles or who was firing those rockets and mortars, that is something that, as I understand it, CENTCOM is still assessing.
Carla (06:53):
True, but you did mention a T-64 tank last time.
Pat (06:57):
Correct.
Carla (06:57):
Isn't that normally something that's used by the Syrians or the Russians, not Iranian militia groups?
Pat (07:02):
Entirely possible, Carla. Again, as I just highlighted, we do know that there are Syrian regime forces in that area, but in terms of at that moment and who is doing what, that's something that, again, as I understand it, CENTCOM is still looking at.
Carla (07:13):
Okay, and then one last one on Ukraine. Is the Pentagon still committed to using up all of the funds that Congress approved to send to Ukraine? I think we're at 6 billion PDA left, and 2 billion roughly in USAI.
Pat (07:30):
Right, 2.21 billion in USAI, and 6.8 billion in PDA. And again, to be clear, the direction that we've received from the White House is to make every effort to continue to rush security assistance to Ukraine and employ the authorities that we have. And we're doing exactly that. The thing that hasn't changed is the sense of urgency within the department in terms of supporting Ukraine, understanding
Pat (08:00):
… Any that the fight that they're in. And we've been doing that for upwards of three years, almost three years now. And we will continue to do that and continue to ensure that we're speaking with them and our allies and partners to enable Ukraine to defend its freedom and its sovereignty. Konstantin.
Konstantin (08:17):
Thanks Pat. Moving to South Korea, could you give us an update on the status of U.S. forces in South Korea? And specifically, can you speak to whether troops there are still under any restrictions?
Pat (08:31):
So first of all, to my knowledge, Konstantin, no change in force posture. And we're obviously doing due diligence in terms of accountability and things like that. But I'm not aware of any significant impact operationally, physically, safety-wise on any U.S. forces in South Korea. Of course, we are in contact with our ROK counterparts, the Ministry of Defense. But yeah, bottom line is, I'm not aware of any impact in that regard.
Konstantin (09:06):
And just to be clear, troops are free to go off base as they choose?
Pat (09:11):
To my knowledge, that's the case. Of course, certainly I'd recommend you reach out to USFK, but I'm not aware of any changes in that regard. Thank you very much. Brandi.
Carla (09:20):
Thank you. Pat. On the new Counter Unmanned Strategy, how long was that in the making and was it prompted by the sort of recent increasing reports of incursions over U.S. military bases, both abroad and in the states?
Pat (09:35):
Thanks, Brandi. I don't have a specific timeframe to give you other than to say that I'm confident that this has been work that's been going on for some time. I mean, you've been following this very closely, the impact that drones have had on the battlefield. This is not necessarily a new thing, but what we're seeing is the way that drones are being applied, the impact of how they're being used, is something that, again, we can't just deal with ad hoc. We need to do this in a comprehensive, cohesive manner. And so that's really what this strategy does, is it essentially enables the department to look across the entire department and our inter-agency partners, how we can best work together to address this. So to answer your question, no, this is not a response to recent events. This is work that's been going on for some time and obviously very important work.
Carla (10:40):
Do you have any new information about progress that's been made between the U.S. and U.K. militaries getting to the bottom of those previous incursions, and have there been any more?
Pat (10:51):
Yeah, I don't have any updates to pass along from the podium here. Brandi. I'd recommend you call U.S Air Forces in Europe or the U.K. Ministry of Defense. Thanks. Fadi.
Fadi (11:00):
Thank you. General. So concerning those three U.S. soldiers who are being evaluated for the potential TBI, where were they when that impact happened? What raised the concern of potential?
Pat (11:11):
Yeah, again, this is all in the vicinity of MSS Euphrates in that region down there.
Fadi (11:17):
Inside the wire or outside the wire?
Pat (11:19):
That's as detailed as I'm going to get.
Fadi (11:21):
On Tuesday, I asked you whether the U.S. provided support for SDF forces attack on the seven villages where the SAA is located. They have positions there. And you referred me to the SDF. I'm asking you as a spokesperson for the Pentagon, did your forces provide any support for the SDF in that operation?
Pat (11:39):
Look, our forces are in Syria to conduct a counter-ISIS operation, right? The enduring defeat of ISIS. They have partnered with the SDF on those missions. Certainly they communicate with the SDF on a frequent basis as partners do, but our forces in that region were threatened. We took action to mitigate that threat and we'll do so again. And so again, they're communicating with one another. We're aware of what the SDF is doing. I'm not going to talk about SDF operations. I'll let them talk about their operations. But let me just be crystal clear. Our forces are in Syria to conduct the enduring defeat of ISIS mission. We're doing that in partnership with the SDF, and I'm just going to leave it there.
Fadi (12:22):
With all due respect, General, I'm not asking about SDF operations. I'm asking about your operations. Did the U.S. forces provide support for an SDF offensive on SAA positions in those seven villages [inaudible 00:12:34]?
Pat (12:34):
If you're asking, were U.S. forces participating in combined arms maneuver with the SDF, the answer is no. All right.
Fadi (12:42):
That's not my question. Did you provide-
Pat (12:44):
I've answered the question.
Fadi (12:44):
So-
Pat (12:45):
Our forces are in Syria-
Fadi (12:46):
I'm not getting yes or no from you. I mean for transparency-
Pat (12:49):
No.
Fadi (12:50):
No, that's no. Right?
Pat (12:52):
John, what do you got?
Fadi (12:52):
Thank you.
John (12:53):
Thank you General. About Syria. After Aleppo, it looks like the opposition forces are moving southward toward other important cities and city in Syria like Homs and Hama. And is your position is changing because the thing is evaluating to something or evolving to something bigger, it seems. Do you have any communication at this phase with the opposition forces or through your Turkish allies, on the developments in Syria?
Pat (13:27):
I mean, we're certainly monitoring the situation closely. Again, the U.S. has no role in what's happening right now in terms of Northwestern Syria and the HTS and their operations and the Syrian regime. I mean, again, as you know, the Syrian Civil War has been going on for a while. This is a new development in that war. But again, we're monitoring closely, very aware of the destabilizing effect. As we've said earlier, we call on all parties to de-escalate to ensure the of minorities groups in the region. We don't want to see more death and destruction in that regard. But again, no involvement by the U.S. Thanks. Matt.
Matt (14:09):
Thanks Matt. On Syria, an SDF spokesperson has said that ISIS is claiming to have control over significant portions of the Homs and Deir ez-Zor regions. Does that match your assessment? Is ISIS gaining ground and can you give us any update on the success that American Counter terror forces are having or not having in the area?
Pat (14:31):
To my knowledge, I'm not aware of ISIS taking significant territory. We do know that ISIS does maintain a capability for obvious reasons, which is why we're there. We do see them continuing to plan and conduct attacks, which again, is why we're there working with the SDF, which is also supporting counter-ISIS operations. So it's a threat we obviously have to take seriously, because what we don't want to see is a resurgence back to what we saw a decade ago. So I'll just leave it there. Thanks. Charlie.
Charlie (15:10):
Thank you. General, have you, well, have your colleagues have any more de-conflicts and conversations with the Russians in Syria?
Pat (15:18):
I don't have anything to read out on that front. Yep.
Charlie (15:21):
Okay. But then a few days ago you said that an A-10 had been used in close combat, or at least close protection. That came out a few days later. Do we have any more information about an A-10 being used in the ground operations that are being conducted by the SDF?
Pat (15:39):
So I know I answered this question on Tuesday, which is why I'm looking confused. So an A-10 conducted a self-defense strike near MSS Euphrates when some individuals were establishing a rocket rail, the A-10s went in, took it out. Period. Dot. Self-defense, not in support of any kind of operations
Pat (16:00):
… operations by any other groups that are going on. This is defending our forces.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Right.
Pat (16:04):
That simple.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
But I was asking since then.
Pat (16:06):
No, I'm not aware of anything. Thanks. Janie.
Carla (16:11):
Thank you, General. Two questions on South Korea and the issues related to South Korea and the United States. First question, how do you assess the fact that South Korea's martial law declaration was inevitably lifted without armed conflict under the president's authorities to protect the liberal democracy and prevent national security threats?
Pat (16:45):
That's really a question that you need to ask the ROK government about. I'm not going to comment on their domestic.
Carla (16:50):
Your opinion.
Pat (16:51):
No, I'm not going to get into discussing Allied Nations domestic politics or management.
Carla (16:57):
Okay. Second question. The United States South Korea Nuclear Consultative Group, NCG, meeting, the last meeting of the Biden administration, was scheduled to be held in Washington DC this week, but was canceled. Can you tell us why it was canceled or will you resume on a different day?
Pat (17:30):
I don't have any updates to provide in terms of rescheduling. Again, just given the events in ROK was deemed a prudent measure and we'll keep you updated in terms of a new date when that's rescheduled. Thank you. Warren.
Warren (17:45):
Two questions in the Middle East, one Syria, one Lebanon. What steps has the US military taken in Syria in light of the security situation and to prepare for what looks like the possible collapse of the Assad regime?
Pat (17:56):
So I'm not going to speculate about the future of the Assad regime, or and again, our forces are in Syria to support the enduring defeat of ISIS. We're obviously going to take appropriate measures to ensure that those forces are protected and as it relates to the ongoing Syrian civil war and what you see in terms of the various groups fighting one another. I mean, that's something that we're going to continue to monitor. As we've highlighted, we would call on all parties to de-escalate. But from a US military standpoint, our focus continues to be on the defeat ISIS mission.
Warren (18:38):
And then can you update us on the effort of general Jasper Jeffers as part of the ceasefire monitoring mechanism? Has that advanced to a point where it's fully functioning or what can you say to that?
Pat (18:51):
I don't have any more detailed updates to provide from what I gave out on Tuesday. General Jeffers is in Beirut working out of the embassy. But again, we'll keep you updated as we have new information to provide. Let me go back to Wafa. Yep.
Wafa (19:06):
Thank you, General. In light of the quick advances the opposition in Syria is making, if you can explain a little bit how the Pentagon will address the new circumstances on the ground in Syria. Is the Pentagon ready to engage with elements of this opposition and also, are these circumstances will have impact on the US forces posture in Syria?
Pat (19:38):
So let me make sure, just to clarify, are you asking will the US reach out to HTS?
Wafa (19:45):
Elements of this opposition, which is-
Pat (19:47):
No. I mean, it is a terrorist group, so no, no plans to do that. And again, as I mentioned, the US has nothing to do with that offensive. And as far as it relates to US personnel in Syria, I'll say it again. The whole reason our forces are there and have been there is to support the enduring defeat of ISIS mission. We'll continue to work with partners like the SDF toward that end. That is our mission.
Wafa (20:18):
Do you have any concerns that this situation in Syria can spill out into Iraq?
Pat (20:24):
Well, I mean that's what you saw 10 years ago, right? As essentially the security vacuum that was created by the repressive measures of the Assad regime instigated the rise of ISIS, which did spill over into Iraq, which is why US forces have been working very closely with an international coalition for a decade now to prevent the resurgence of ISIS, so that can be contained. Again, as it relates to what's going on in Northwestern Syria. We're obviously all watching. We want to see a de-escalation. We understand the potential ramifications regionally, but right now, from a US military standpoint, our focus continues to be on preventing an ISIS resurgence.
Wafa (21:09):
One more to come. There are some reports about Russia withdrawing naval assets from Syria. Do you have anything on this?
Pat (21:19):
I don't. I'd have to refer to the Russian MOD. Let me go to the phone real quick. Jeff Schogol, Task and Purpose.
Jeff Schogol (21:25):
Hi. I know this has been covered, but Al-Monitor is reporting that when the US troops on Tuesday were attacked, they were supporting a militia, possibly part of the SDF that was fighting the Assad regime, and I was just wondering if there's any information about this. I know you may say, "Jeff, you need to talk to the Assad regime," but I think they're looking at the flight tickets and hotels at the moment.
Pat (21:50):
Yeah, thanks Jeff. I mean, very similar question to what your colleague, Fadi, just asked, and so I'll try again. So we have US forces that are operating at MSS Euphrates. They're obviously in partnership with the SDF when it comes to the enduring defeat of ISIS mission. We do communicate with the SDF. We are aware, in many cases, of their operations to ensure that our forces know who's doing what. In this particular case, I'm not going to talk about SDF operations. I'm not an SDF spokesperson, and so I'm just not going to do that. US forces are in that region. Are they communicating with the SDF? Of course. Were US forces threatened when the elements that I highlighted earlier started threatening our forces? We took appropriate action to mitigate that threat, protect our forces. Again, our mission in Syria has not changed. It's the enduring defeat of ISIS. And again, I'll leave it there. Let me go to Jeff, Defense News. And Jeff's not there. All right. Howard from The War Zone.
Howard (23:10):
Hey, thanks, General. On a completely different vein I wanted to ask you about NGAD. Can you tell me why the program was punted over to the Trump administration? And also are there any other big programs on the chopping block, like maybe Sentinel or Replicator?
Pat (23:28):
I'm sorry, which program were you saying was punted to the Trump administration
Jeff Schogol (23:33):
Program or Replicator?
Pat (23:36):
Well, Howard, I'm not going to talk or speculate about the future. I mean, as you know, the Department of Defense, our mission is to defend the country. And that doesn't necessarily mean that we're putting time limits on the things that we do. And so unmanned systems, drones are going to be something, again, that we will
Pat (24:00):
Need to take a holistic, comprehensive approach to addressing, again for all the reasons that you know as you see playing out in places like Ukraine, and other areas of the world. So the Department of Defense is administration agnostic in that regard and that our focus is on defending the country. Again, I won't speculate on what future administrations may do, but I can be very confident in saying that we'll do everything we need to do to defend this country. Thank you. Take a couple more here. You go to Noah, and then we'll go to Jared.
Howard (24:36):
Just to start out with a couple of cleanup questions, you said soon, on a fact sheet releasing about the new strategy. When is soon?
Pat (24:44):
Hopefully, today.
Howard (24:46):
And on the conversations with the counterparts in the ROK, can you tell us what level those are, and when they've occurred? I'm assuming not at the Secretary's level.
Pat (24:55):
Yeah. I don't have anything to read out, or announce in terms of the secretary speaking to the ROK Minister of Defense. Certainly, we'll keep you updated in that regard. We have been in contact with the ROK Ministry of Defense at multiple levels to include from here in DoD, but I don't have any dates to pass along in that regard.
Howard (25:18):
And just a quick last one, there was a call reported, and acknowledged later between the Chairman and General Gerasimov of Russia, that happened last week, and the call was not immediately read out afterward, given that there was secrecy concerns between the two of them. I was wondering if we can have a commitment from you sitting at the top of the briefing room here to read out in the future such calls, given that the details that are provided are not exactly comprehensive in all of them.
Pat (25:43):
Yeah, look, as far as joint staff goes, I'd refer you to joint staff. Certainly, I know just like we do, they endeavor to do all they can to be as transparent as possible about these kinds of things. And so certainly, we'll continue to work toward that end, Noah.
(26:01)
Jared, and then we'll get to your question as long as it's related to current news of the day. Yes, sir.
John (26:07):
Thanks sir. I think we've covered this pretty well, but I just wanted to make sure we cover every base here. You mentioned that what transpired in Deir ez-Zur, there was no U.S. combined arms maneuver with the SDF, but that the U.S. is often aware of their operations. Were U.S. forces centered around in the vicinity of the MSS Euphrates, were they in communication with an advising SDF elements, either conducting their operation or overseeing it? I'm asking about the role of U.S. forces.
Pat (26:33):
Jared, I appreciate the questions, but I'm just not going to have any more to provide beyond what I've already provided.
John (26:38):
Okay. And can you confirm whether U.S. forces did or did not kinetically engage in that area before coming under fire?
Pat (26:46):
Our forces engaged in self-defense. Okay?
John (26:51):
Thanks.
Pat (26:52):
I'll say it again. They engaged in self-defense because our forces were threatened. And our forces are in Syria to support the enduring defeat of ISIS.
(27:04)
All right. Last question
Fadi (27:06):
Two, please.
Pat (27:08):
As long as it's news of the day, sir.
Fadi (27:10):
Yes sir, it is on the news of the day. Mr. Anthony Schinella's, senior intelligence officer, before he committed suicide in Arlington, he had published… His articles were published with me about the Russian bounties to the Taliban for killing U. S. soldiers. In this scenario that we are facing right now, well that is about to start, do you see such things happening again? Third party playing their roles and affecting the U.S. interests?
Pat (27:43):
I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but if you're saying, are we concerned about third parties threatening the United States? Again, look-
Fadi (27:53):
Especially the Russians and the Iranians.
Pat (27:55):
Well, look, if you look at the National Defense Strategy, it makes very clear what we highlight as threats against United States national security interest. To include Russia as an acute threat, and to include malign activity by countries like Iran through their proxy groups. And so this Department of Defense works with our allies and partners around the world on a daily basis to protect U.S. national interests as well as protecting our citizens and our service members who are serving around the world. So regardless of what those threats are, it's something we take very seriously, and we'll continue to do so. But as it relates to any specific things like that, I don't have anything to provide.
Fadi (28:42):
Just one last one, General. Has the Pakistan military at all shared with you about the recent search that I feel, especially from the Afghans, that the U.S. military and the State Department has resided in Pakistan, that they're working towards this separatist movement in this one state of Pakistan, which is just right next to Afghanistan?
Pat (29:04):
You talking about Balochistan?
Fadi (29:06):
No, with the Afghanistan side, the Pashtun area, which I, for the last four years have the paper in. Have they at all shared concerns? These concerns from a journalist point of view, it comes all the way to Washington D.C., to some of the journalists working in the Pashto radio. They seem to be all pushing the Afghans sitting over there, and a couple of people here, for this complete separatist movement of the Pashtun region, and the Pashtun… And that's where you have all the TTP guys. So are you at all looking at the scenario keenly or not?
Pat (29:39):
Look, again, I don't have anything to provide from the podium in terms of Pakistani military strategy. As we've discussed before, the U.S. of course values Pakistan as a partner when it comes to areas like counterterrorism. And so we'll continue to have those conversations. But I'd refer you to the Pakistani military to discuss their operations and their counterterrorism efforts. All right, Goyal, last question, man. Bring us home.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Thank you so much sir. My question is, as far as the Chinese hacking. How this building has been affected in any way, because in the past also Chinese have been stealing, or thieves, and U.S. secret in many ways, including, businesses, industries, and also defense.
Pat (30:22):
Yeah, I appreciate the question. As a matter of policy, we're not going to discuss potential threats, hacks, et cetera. I can assure you this is something we take very seriously every single day. As you highlighted it is a significant threat globally. And so again, we'll continue to do due diligence and ensure that our networks, and our personnel are able to operate safely, effectively around the world.
(30:49)
Thanks very much everybody. Appreciate it. And remember, we're in Syria for the defeat ISIS mission. All right.
Speaker 3 (30:54):
I think he might have said that [inaudible 00:30:55].
Speaker 4 (30:55):
All right guys, I think stick around for the [inaudible 00:31:06].
(30:55)
So-