Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby briefs the media at the Pentagon, September 20, 2021.

Transcript

Mhm afternoon, everybody. Just a couple of things at the top here. Uh today I think you saw the secretary issued a statement recognizing the 10 year anniversary of the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell repeal eliminated a significant barrier to equal treatment in an effort to pursue a more equitable, diverse, inclusive, an accessible Department of Defense. I might also add a more effective military, as the secretary said by insisting on standards of merit and allowing all those who are qualified to serve in uniform. We avail ourselves of more talent, better leaders and innovative solutions to the security challenges that we face around the world. Repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell improved the diversity equity and inclusion across our force and it makes us more representative not only of the nation we defend but wiser and stronger and without question, better able to defend this nation. Uh On a personal note, excited to welcome our newest member of the public affairs team here at OsD Melanie fonder K joins us as the deputy assistant to the Secretary for strategic engagements. Your first date was today. She comes to the team after founding and leading the strategic communications firm M. F. K. Strategies. She previously served as director of communications to Dr. Jill Biden where she developed that then second ladies Communications strategy which included joining forces, encouraging all Americans to support service members, veterans, military families and caregivers among many other initiatives. Melanie will have a robust schedule of office calls here. She settled in and we’ll circulate her contact information as soon as she’s up online. As as far as I know, she doesn’t even have a email account yet, but we’ll get that fixed soon. That will take questions. Hey john, a couple of quick questions on, do you have anything on air strike in Northwest Syria today? I have seen a short statement by Central Command. I think they put that out that and I can just read for you what I’ve got. I don’t have more detail than this though. A strike near Idlib Syria on a senior Al Qaeda leader. Uh Their initial indications are that they struck the individual that they were targeting and that they don’t have any indications at this time of civilian casualties. But they continue to look into that. Of course, I don’t have more detail in that. Okay. The other question I have for you with whether you could discuss any further the question of accountability for the Kabul strike, that General Mackenzie described on Friday and he mentioned very briefly that there would that there was an accountability aspect to the investigation. Is Secretary Austin involved from like. And you allow the Secretary has asked the Secretary of the Air Force to task a senior uh flag or general officer at the rank of three star or above to conduct a review of the Central Command investigation. The same investigation that General Mackenzie read out to you guys on Friday. Uh part of that review will be uh to examine uh the investigation itself, the thoroughness of the investigation to uh study the degree to which any policies, procedures or targeting mechanisms may need to be altered going forward. If any and of course to then take a look at uh what levels of accountability might be appropriate and if so at what at what level uh so that will be part of this review. Um and uh the secretary has asked for the Secretary of the Air Force to To nominate somebody for that and then to have that review done within 45 days of the tasking of the individual reviewer. Does that on the question of accountability, does that three star are above officer of the authority to initiate action or only to recommend? It would be, it would be to review the investigation and make recommendations based on that review, not necessarily to take action. This would be a senior Air Force officer. So um if there’s accountability to be held, um you know, the the decisions about who and and what would be done, it would be a separate consideration. Okay, Jen John I’m still trying to understand how the us military followed a car for eight hours and took a fired a hellfire missile when a car was pulling into a driveway, not even pulling out of the driveway on route to the airport. Why was the decision taken as we’ve now learned there was another surveillance drones showing that there were kids or individuals on the ground, but I’m still confused with that car pulling into the driveway. Why was that the moment that you would strike? Well Jen, I think you can understand now that we’re going to review this investigation. I really am not in a position today to relitigate the Tok-tok of of what happened. Uh and in what order General Mackenzie, I thought did a very fair contextual job on Friday walking you through almost minute by minute, uh what they were seeing and the decisions that they made in the moment. And so I think I’m just gonna leave it the way General Mackenzie left on Friday and then let the reviewer of this investigation come to their own conclusions. Can you explain to us how these drone strikes when they take place in a place like Afghanistan? At what level is the target? Er was the targeting team at the airport? Was it sitting in at centcom in Tampa? Was it at fort Bragg? Was it out in las Vegas? Where at what level was the decision being made? The decision was made in Kabul by the strike sell commander in Kabul. And lastly, is there any plan to evacuate the remaining members of the family? They are doing interviews saying that nobody’s reached out to them for payments and they want to be moved to the U. S. Because they feel their lives are in danger now that they’ve been outed as having had family members who worked for the U. S. Have certainly seen those comments? I don’t have anything to confirm or speak to today in terms of the physical movement of the family members. But we know that Central Command is working through how best to reach out to them for the uh for the issue of payments but also uh to determine the validity of this interest in uh moving out. And I don’t want to get ahead of. I certainly want to speak for the family and I don’t want to get ahead of worse income is in that process. But the defense secretary would support removing that family if they want to come. I believe the Secretary of Defense would absolutely support if the family wanted to leave Afghanistan and come to the United States. I believe he would support that, assuming that you know, all the proper legal hoops were work through. I mean I don’t want to get ahead of a process or a decision that hasn’t been made yet, but I think he would absolutely consider that. Yeah jenny, thank you. Uh on the South Korea issues as you already know that South Korea successfully test fired Slbm uh summary naci first homicide uh as an ally, the United States. How do you view South Korea’s uh successful test fire of Serbia? I would simply say that uh we continue to work closely with our allies in the Republic of Korea. On making sure that we have complimentary military capabilities and that we keep those capabilities ready and prepared and uh capable, in a way commensurate with the continued threats that we see on the peninsula. Do you think that this will help the North Korean provocation? I would like to think that the alliance itself uh and the strength and the unity of the alliance itself would be uh an appropriate deterrent capability. That’s certainly one reason why we work at this alliance so hard and why it matters so much to us and and and to the region. But you’ve heard the Secretary talk about something called Integrated deterrence. He mentioned that the other day in context of uh of the meeting with the Australians at the State Department. Uh Integrated deterrence is not just something that he’s looking at from a United States perspective, it certainly does cut across the Joint force and it does cross many domains of warfighting from space and cyber maritime and air and of course ground. But in the Secretary’s mind, integrated deterrence is really about Netting in and integrating the capabilities of our allies and partners, particularly in that part of the world. And of course, uh there’s no stronger ally than the Republic of Korea. Thank you very much. You’re welcome Theresa. Yes, I have two questions. First one. Um did Secretary Austin give the Secretary of the Air force a deadline for choosing the person that’s going to do the review of the investigation. Okay. But I don’t think this is going to be a task that’s going to take an exorbitant amount of time? Once they’re selected, it will be 40 once the individual has been named by the Secretary of the Air Force Secretary has asked that the review be completed in 45 days. And then my second question is what is the military doing to try to amend relationships with allies in the Middle East following the drone strike? I’m not sure what you’re getting at in terms of mending relationships. So we have very strong relationships in the region as it is. And I would point to the Secretary of Travel just a week before last uh to visit uh some of our gulf allies, Bahrain, Kuwait Qatar. Uh that was very much uh part and parcel of thanking those strong allies and partners in the region for the support that they that they continue to give us with respect to this, these evacuees. Yeah, Travis, Thanks john, I wanted to ask you about Afghanistan as well and I know that the Secretary has talked a little bit about this. He had mentioned a possible resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but I’m wondering if He is concerned that we could have a similar situation to what we saw in Iraq and Syria in 2011, with the Islamic state. Could we see something similar to that in Afghanistan. And how are we better prepared to deal with that kind of threat today than we were saying eight years ago. The Secretary has, has said that given the rapid collapse of the Ghana government, um and the rapid ascendancy now to power of the Taliban, that he believes it would be prudent to reassess his previous assessment of a medium risk. In terms of the return of al Qaida or Al Qaeda affiliates in Afghanistan to a level commensurate with, you know, uh an ability to threaten the homeland the way they did in 2000 and one. That doesn’t mean that um that we don’t already recognized and we have recognized that they do exist in Afghanistan and then they do continue to pose a threat, but a threat rising to the level of a possible attack on the homeland. So he believes uh that given recent events, we need to reassess what our view is in terms of how into what degree they could re emerge at that level. And then your second question And we’ve talked about this quite a bit. I mean, we are not the same country that we were on 9.11. In terms of our ability to defend ourselves from these kinds of attacks. The intelligence communities are much more network now and coordinated and we have far more capability in space and in cyber uh and in uh Certainly in the aviation realm than we did in 2001, uh to try to keep eyes on um and to and to be able to gather and analyze intelligence. Um uh we also have just better kinetic capabilities than we have. We didn’t have in 2001 anywhere near the unmanned aerial capability that we have now. So we have advanced a lot. It doesn’t make you perfect. It doesn’t mean that you don’t still have to work hard uh to make sure that you get it right, but we have definitely advanced RCT capabilities around the world. I guess. I was asking about the lessons learned by the growth of the Islamic state in Iraq and Syria in the in between period. Um us troops largely left around 2011. And there was that period. Yeah, the Islamic State group metastasized and they took over huge swaths of territory including Mosul. So, I’m wondering if there any lessons learned in that fight that we can apply to Afghanistan? So we don’t end up with a similar situation? Well, we’re certainly gonna stay vigilant, uh watching the threat in Afghanistan. There’s no question about that. Um and as I said, the Secretary believes it’s prudent to reassess what we think we know about al Qaeda and ISIS in Afghanistan and where they might go. I would tell you that as we speak today, when you talked about the metastases action of a threat. We have seen it metastasized outside of Afghanistan to other places you mentioned, Iraq and Syria, but also Yemen Somalia. The levant there are that we do not hold there to be an existential threat of terrorism from Afghanistan right now. But again, we’re gonna stay vigilant. We’re gonna watch it and we’re certainly gonna be willing to reassess what we, what we know today. We do have and we do have the capability uh to keep eyes on. If I could just one quick follow up Any future military action inside Afghanistan would be done under the authority of the existing 2001. Am I correct? That’s the authority that you would be, you know, uh the 2000 and one a.m. F. Exists. We would like to see a new am F written to address the kinds of threats that we face. Now. I’m not going to talk about specific authorities for any specific military action that might or might not occur there or anywhere else. But again, the Secretary of supportive of of the administration’s approach to seek a new and more accurate, more clearly defined A. M. F. Dave. Is this reassessment of the threat from Afghanistan? Is this a formal reassessment or just people rethink? He has not tasked a formal assessment. He believes it’s warranted. So does that mean there’s going to be one. Yes. Tom thanks George afternoon, you’ve often set up there that you want to be as transparent as possible. Bearing that mantra in mind yesterday at lackland Air Force Base. The reporter on the public roadway was taking photographs of the entrance sign to lackland. The reporter was covering the larger Haitian deported issue base security came out, escorted the reporter onto base, took the reporters driver’s license and called the local sheriff would not release the reporter until she turned over her photographs and tape recording. I’m wondering if you know about this incident. If not how you feel about it? I don’t know about it. I’m gonna have my staff look into it as soon as the briefing is over. I think that’s the best I can do right now. And you find out what, what actually happened. Thank you. And I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. Let me go back to the phones here are actually haven’t gotten to the phones at all yet, Sylvie, no, john, I would like to go back to bob’s question about the strike in Syria, you don’t have any more details. Where, where was it exactly and who was the Al Qaeda operative that was targeted? Sophie right now, I can just tell you it was near Idlib in Syria and as Central Command said in their brief statement, it was a senior Al Qaeda leader. I don’t have more detail than that right now. Okay, thank you. You’re welcome Phil Hey john, uh, too quick follow ups one. Um, and then I guess I’ll fall back for that one. Um, when you said it was a three star or who’s going to be potentially reviewing uh, this whole review. Um, what does that say about accountability? Does that say that the accountability here, if there were to be any would be for people at three star or below, but not higher. Um what does that say to you? And then and then I guess the the other follow up I had was um on on the the strike itself. I realized that you don’t want to relitigate uh details of the strike, but I mean, aren’t aren’t certain elements of of what happened uh still within, you know, the public’s right to know. I mean, I realized that, you know, that the review of the review has to conclude, but it could be, we have no timeline on that. Well, Phil as I said, the only thing Holding up the review, it’s not even holding it up is just a selection of reviewing officer. And then once that officer has been chosen, the Secretary expects the review to be done in 45 days. I don’t think that’s an exorbitant amount of time to to treat with seriousness and with some sense of gravity this particular investigation. As for the tick tock of the events. I thought General Mackenzie did an excellent job Friday walking you through the thought process. Uh and as much of the targeting process as he could, he is far, he and his staff are far more able to do that than I am from the podium. And so if there’s an additional set of details That you think you need, I would encourage you to reach out to central command. As for your other question about the accountability and the whether a three star sends some sort of negative message, I would remind you of two things. One the tasking memory to the Air Force says it just needs to be an officer at 09 or above. So that’s either a three or four star and we don’t know who the air force is going to choose. And it also says in the memo and I failed to mention this earlier that if the uh invest in the reviewing officer believes that there should be a level of accountability at someone at a higher rank than he or she. Um the reviewing officer needs to make note of that to the Secretary of the Air force and the Secretary of Defense. Uh So that that’s made so that that’s made clear. Yes, Christina. Uh Well I have a big picture, kind of a big picture policy question about freedom of navigation in the Asia pacific and the impact of focus on that short term and then over the longer term how bot is may be thinking about that as an impact as it might impact things like a budding democratic ambitions in Taiwan as as they look to move closer to the global community of democracies mm. So what’s the question, how’s the D. O. D. Thinking about that house. So I asked, I said it was a big policy question. Yeah. I mean there’s an awful lot there, first of all there’s no change to our one china policy. Uh So we’ll just lay that flat right now. Um um we continue uh to maintain a strong belief and international norms uh that exist in that region and around the world. Um and uh and uh and obedience to those norms and orders to include uh the right of navigation in international waters and international airspace. Um freedom of the seas doesn’t just apply to whales and icebergs. It applies to navies and ships of all nations. And we’re going to continue to exercise that that right lawfully and appropriately as we can. And do you think that caucus will assist in that over the longer term? I think it’s important to remember that august is not some sort of new alliance. It is a new defense security partnership that has been put in place. And the first element of it, the first initiative of it is to help Australia acquire nuclear powered submarines which as the secretary said last week, we believe will be an additive component to something akin to integrated deterrence in the end of pacific region. It will, you know, you know, improve the Australian Navy’s reach and their war fighting capability, their defensive capability. Um and uh and that’s all to be welcomed and that particular part of the world given the dynamic, intense security environment that exists about the Ramstein and when they’re going to resume, it’s my understanding that there have been about 9000 mmr vaccines that have been Uh administered. And so the reason for stopping those flights, you still have about 10,000 people at Ramstein. When are they going to start up again? And why is the c. d. c. Um still halting them? I guess I don’t have an update. They are still halted. And your question is much better put to C. D. C. About when they can be resumed. We are just like we do here at home with respect to Covid we comply with CDC guidelines and I would refer you to C. D. C. For more detail on that. Okay I got a couple more and then I’ll let you all go Jared. Hi Mr. Company. My question has been asked. Okay Kim. Do sir. Hey there. Thanks. Um two questions. Can you give us an update on the afghan casualties who were taken to launch tool or other U. S. Medical facilities from the Abbey Gate bombing And also um what guidance are you giving us military personnel who are trying to shepherd along their afghan interpreter or other threatened afghan cases? Mainly in the P. Two category because I’ve heard from people who are worried that they hear state talking about American citizens and legal permanent residents and it feels like The P. two category has just dropped off the map and they want to know if um the administration is still trying to get threatened afghans out. I can’t help you on your first question Kim but I will take it and we’ll see. I can’t promise. I don’t know how much were going to be allowed to speak to a the wounded of another nation. But I will we will certainly look into this and and see if we have something for you. I just wasn’t prepared today to have any detail on that. On your second question again, questions about visas uh and how they’re being processed is better put to my State Department colleagues. What I can tell you is that we have uh been already talking to veterans groups uh quite frequently about their concerns over specific individuals and or specific families. Uh Many of us here in the building also have uh you know friends uh and co workers and teammates that that we know of. And so we uh you might have seen General Miley uh tried to help put together a process by which these veterans groups whether their formal or informal e um developed a process by which they could communicate directly with the department about individuals and family members that that they want to make sure our on our radar screen. And so we’re going to continue to try to improve that process and improve that communication Uh so that we can we can continue to help as many people as possible. Another flight left yesterday where I think more than 20 American citizens on it. So as we said earlier though, the military component of this effort um has ended. It doesn’t mean that that D. O. D. Or the inter agency or the administration is going to turn a blind eye to the effort to continue to try to get American citizens out of Afghanistan and continue to help those afghan allies who helped us so much over the last 20 years or john two questions. Is there a detail you can offer about D. O. D. And transplant assistance to DHS and CBP at the border at Del Rio. And a different subject entirely. A clarification question. Service members who were discharged dishonorably discharged under for sexual orientation or gender identity. Have they always had access to Fulvia benefits or is there a change in policy or process that now makes it easier for them to get full access and referring to via on that one? I don’t I’m not an expert on their uh on their processes. But I did. You saw I hope you saw on the secretary statement that he encourages those uh individuals who were discharged under other than honorable circumstances because of this because of the don’t ask don’t tell policy uh to reach out to their boards of corrections for their individual services and to try to get their services amended appropriately. But as for the V. A. Benefits. I’m just not an expert on that on your other question. I can confirm that the department has received a request for transportation support from the Department of Homeland Security and the U. S. Customs and Border Protection Service. Under this request, the department would provide contracted air transportation for customs and border patrol on a reimbursable basis to temporarily supplement CBP efforts to move non US citizen migrants from Del Rio, Texas to other Domestic CBP processing facilities. And this support will conclude on or before October 20 of this year and it can be provided with minimal risk to current diode emissions. I would just again highlights contracted air uh We’re not talking about military aircraft right now uh and on a reimbursable basis and then uh uh to be provided at minimal risk to uh to current D. O. D. Missions. I don’t have more detail than that. The request really has just come in. So we’re doing the same thing we would do with any R. F. A. Request for assistance. We’re examining it, reviewing it, determining the best way forward. Yes. Really. Uh Cristina’s question, I’m wondering how important Australia is from the deal this perspective to maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan strait. Are you going through this car concrete operation planning for contingency in the Taiwan strait with Australia in the future. I’m not I wouldn’t get so specifically to talk about uh Taiwan here. Again, nothing has changed about our one china policy. Um What I would tell you though is that Australia is a key ally, been an ally for 70 years, uh and a country that that is all by itself vital to indo pacific prosperity and security uh and and obviously a good friend and a partner. So we were delighted to be able to enter this new defense relationship with them and with the United Kingdom and we look forward to, as the secretary said last week, looking at ways we can broaden that with additional capabilities with additional uh rotational uh deployment opportunities and and with additional potential access to Australia and to Australia’s training ranges as well. So there’s a lot here to grow and Secretary looks forward to doing that. Okay. Thanks everybody.