Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby briefs the news media at the Pentagon, January 21, 2022

Transcript

That’s an enthusiastic response. It must be Friday. Okay. Just one thing at the top uh, uh, pleased to be able to uh, to speak uh, to uh, significant NATO exercise that’s about to kick off on Monday. Strike force NATO. We’ll kick off an exercise called Neptune Strike 22 and Neptune Strike 22 it’s going to run through the fourth of February and it’s designed to demonstrate NATO’s ability to integrate the high end maritime strike capabilities of an aircraft carrier strike group to support the deterrence and defense of the alliance. Uss Harry S Truman Carrier Strike group will be placed under NATO operational control and serve as the centerpiece for this long planned activity that fosters NATO allies ability to cooperate and integrate effectively. This of course, demonstrate once again that the alliance is a united, capable and strong transatlantic alliance. The strike group along with several other NATO allies will participate in coordinated maritime maneuvers, anti submarine warfare training and long range strike training, Neptune strike 22 follows strike force NATO’s participation in the work ups that the USS Harry S. Truman’s strike group went through all the way through the end of last year and I might add that the planning for this exercise actually goes back to 2020. This has been a long planned exercise. All of the, all of the training events will highlight the continual and steady progression of alliance cohesion in a high end and dynamic environment and with that we’ll go to questions looks like lita you’re on the line. Yeah, yeah, Thanks, john um, that exercise um, in the Adriatic, is that correct? Mm hmm. It’s done. Was it in the it will be the, I mean it’s the carrier will be operating in the Mediterranean. Um, uh, and I don’t have her exact location right now. She was operating in the Adriatic but she’ll be operating as part of this exercise in the med Exactly where in the med I don’t have that. I’d have to direct you to strike force NATO for more details. Did that get you lita can you address what conversations the secretary has had over the past two weeks or two with allies particularly um, any of those in eastern europe about efforts to um perhaps shore up us aid to them or support for them. Has he gotten calls from any of those allies looking for um any new U. S. Support. Thank you. As you know earlier, he did speak with his Ukrainian counterpart and we read that out. That’s the only conversation uh, that I that I have to speak to this week. He has not spoken specifically to NATO counterparts about capabilities they may need or maybe asking for. Um, so no no conversations in that regard to speak to. I would just say that and I’ve said this before, we continue to look at a range of options of of of capabilities that we might need to make sure all ready in case our allies are looking for that kind of reassurance and as I’ve said before, some of those capabilities can come right from inside the European command area of responsibility or even from from the states. Our job is to tee up options. Our job is to make sure that we’re ready in case our allies uh, need us. Uh, and so the secretary continues to, to look at at all those options before him, but I don’t have any specific conversations and certainly no specific asks by any of the allies to talk to you today, Sylvie. You know, john you said that this exercise was planned for a long time. Did the the tension in around the Ukraine change anything in the a scope or the location? Oh, exercise. I would point you to strike force NATO or to NATO for more specifics about the exercise. It’s, it’s, it’s their exercise. Um, it has been Planned, as I said since 2020 now, um if the scenario has changed over time, I I don’t have that level of detail, but I would tell you that it’s not, it wasn’t planned back in 2020. Anticipating, uh, you know, a Russian move on Ukraine. Um, and it’s not designed, the exercise itself is not designed against the kinds of scenarios that that might happen with respect to Ukraine. It really is a NATO maritime exercise to test, as I said in my opening to test really a wide range of, of, of maritime capabilities that we want to make sure we continue to improve. You can ask another question, speaking about exercises, I’m sure you saw the images of um, the Russian forces deployed around Ukraine. Is it in your, is it your assessment or the pentagon pentagon assessment that this deployment is? Uh, mm hmm, mm hmm. Good girl. It is logical for pure pure exercise. Is it something that for you corresponds to an exercise? Yeah. You mean, is uh, is the force label that he has commensurate with what you would think as an exercise? I mean, the so probably a better question to put to the Russian Ministry of Defense to speak to their exercises. So we um, um, I’ll let the Russians talk about, uh, mm hmm, what these exercises are supposed to achieve and whether they feel like they’ve got the right capabilities in place to do that. I’m here to talk about what we’re exercising and in this particular one Neptune strike. And I we can certainly talk about, um, the significant capabilities that we’re bringing to that exercise and the alliance is bringing to that exercise. But to your larger point, I would just say we continue to see a very sizable force presence by the Russians in the western part of their country surrounding the border with Ukraine uh, and it continues to be concerning. You heard Secretary Blinken talked to this earlier today. Uh, and uh, we believe that there’s still a path to diplomacy here and and we would like to see the situation de escalated. And as I’ve said before, one significant keyway for it to get deescalated is for the Russians to pull some of those forces back out away from the border with Ukraine. And that they have, they have shown no inclination to do that. In fact, quite the contrary, I think, you know, they continue to add to the force presence there. Now, what they’re gonna do, what they’re exercising and what they plan to exercise with. That’s really for them to speak to following these exercises that the Russian forces are involved in. No, I’m not, I’m not, I’m not gonna speak to what the Russians are claiming our exercises. Um uh what we’re saying is they have a significant force posture there and that it hasn’t decreased. In fact it has continued to increase. And we remain concerned about that, the US government assessment that these are not exercises. Well, I think we may be talking to different things. Um, Well, no, you’re talking about, um, I think you’re talking about a Russian statement that at least a portion of troops that they had their particularly, I think they were saying maybe in Belarus are there for exercises. Um, So I don’t, I think what the Russians are saying is at least a portion of these troops are for exercises. Again, I don’t want to speak for them. You got to talk to them. We’re seeing a sizable force presence there, that isn’t decreasing. Um, and it continues to be concerning. And um we have not we have never classified all that force presence as indicative of an exercise. I mean they’re spread out over a wide expansive area all the way from the south, near Crimea, all the way around to the uh to the north over the across from the northeast border of Ukraine. Uh And we’re not seeing them all coordinating in some sort of large scale exercise. We’re not seeing that at all. I think what Sylvia was also asking is the type of forces that they have an equipment in Belarus, is it indicative of an exercise or an invasion? The short answer is when you have forces a rate is that is that better? Yeah. When you have forces arrayed like that they could exercise uh and conduct exercises. Um and those exercises could in fact be to improve their capabilities for an invasion or incursion. So we’re not splitting hairs here over whether you know, they’re exercising or they’re not. And again, I’d let them speak to what they’re doing in terms of exercises that they claim they’re conducting. We see a sizable force presence that continues to increase. There’s no sign of de escalation here. And so we remain concerned about that question. How many or what U. S. Military equipment is on route to Ukraine right now, if any, I think we’ll have more to say about that uh later on we continue to provide as you know, security assistance to Ukraine. Um uh and I believe our State Department colleagues will have a little bit more to say about that later. I don’t have anything to announce or speak to today or at least not right now Nancy. Just a couple of points I’d like to clarify when you talk about how you’re looking at the Russian force posture. Everything you say applies to their naval posture as well and the exercises that they’ve announced um largely when we talk about the force posture, I’m talking about ground forces. I’m talking about the ground troops and the capabilities they have in the western part of the country uh around that Northeast and eastern And quite frankly southeastern border with Ukraine. That’s what I’m talking about. The reason they’ve announced a major exercise involving 140 ships, 60 aircraft. Is that the US assessment that that is postured for an exercise or is it also concerned that that could be used? It’s the same. I think the answer is kind of the same as what I gave jen, I mean, you know, again I’d let them speak to what they were speaking to our exercises. I would encourage the Russians to speak with specificity about their exercises but but uh that they have significant naval force uh in the region is again not being not lost on us. Um And um certainly uh again not knowing what Mr. Putin plans to do. Um you know, he has, he has a sizable amount of military capability, not just on the ground, but at sea. Just a couple of clarifications on the announcement you made, Who precisely will the Truman go under the commando? It’ll be Vice Admiral Eugene Black, who is the strike force NATO commander, but he’s dual hatted as the sixth fleet commander. He’ll he’ll command that exercise. Um The other thing, can you tell us which NATO partners involved or how many? Yeah, I would refer you to NATO to get a more clearly lay down of exactly how many other allies, but there will be several other allies participating in this exercise. And I would remind you not new to you Nancy, but as we did conduct large scale exercises, some people participate in some sections of it and not others based on their own operational demands and schedules as well as the capabilities that they’re trying to improve. So for more detail, I’d refer to NATO to, you know, this exercise is happening near whether or as you note, a sizable naval presence from Russia, Why was there not consideration to delay this exercise? Given that the tensions are there and there’s the possibility for a misunderstanding what these exercises are, could contribute to the tensions already in the region. Sure, look, I think we constantly look at exercises and training um and and ask ourselves, even even after one’s been been been worked on for months, not years. Uh you know, do we really need to do it now? Should we should be speeded up? Should we shorten it? That happens all the time. Um And there was due consideration about given tensions right now um about our exercise posture. Um and after all that consideration and discussion with our NATO allies, the decision was made to move ahead. Thank you. I think you may see in this report and north Korean, I think on the north Korea. North Korea and Kim Jong Un said that suspended nuclear and I. C. B. M. Intercontinental ballistic besides past lunch could be resumed. And also he wanted that he could crossed red right. What is the U. S. Department of Defense position on accelerating those careers tactical capabilities? Well obviously we don’t want to see the north Korean military program continue to be able to pose a threat to our South Korean allies or to the region. So we continue to call on uh Kim Jong Un to sit down and and and discuss the way forward. We have said many times we’re willing to conduct diplomatic engagement with him with no preconditions. So um our view hasn’t changed. We want to see the complete verifiable denuclearization of the peninsula. We believe that diplomacy is the best tact to take to get their track to take to get there and uh and we’re willing to sit down no preconditions, 20 clock diplomatic situation is not work, it’s next? I don’t think getting into hypotheticals and speculating right now about what ifs is very helpful. We’ve made our position clear for the Department of Defense. Happy to continue to say it. Our job is to make sure that that we are ready to meet the security commitments commensurate with our treaty alliance with South Korea. And we’re doing that. Lastly, china vetoed the North Korea’s recent missile around at the U. N. Security Council meeting yesterday. Do you think the U. S. Needs an independent additional sanctions against the North Korea? That’s not a question for the Defense Department jenny, That’s really something better put to my State Department colleagues. These ballistic missile launches are violations of Security Council resolutions. Uh We continue to call on Pyongyang to to cease that activity um and for everybody involved in the international community to actually live up to the sanctions that have already been put in place and not every country is doing that. Uh and china has influence over Pyongyang, we know that uh and and uh and we certainly hope that they’ll use that influence um to the betterment, not only of them in the region, but to the whole world. You’re welcome me have a question about vaccine implementation and discharges in On August 23, the Secretary put out the memo saying that the COVID vaccine would become mandatory for service members. Um a few weeks from between a few weeks and over a month’s like more like 67 weeks later, the services started requiring, started adding them to the battery of vaccines that you get at basic training, which means that for over a month there were people coming into the military not getting vaccinated against covid and now they’re being discharged either mid training or finishing training without reporting to their first unit. So all of those tens of thousands of dollars to recruit them and train them. We’re basically lit on fire. Is that the that implementation rollout and that delay between the announcement and requiring vaccines for trainees? Is that an oversight as part of the implementation policy? Is that is that the cost of doing business while you are trying to implement new policy like this? What’s the, you know, how did how did this happen? It’s not that it happened. Uh You make it sound like it was some sort of happenstance. The secretary as you go back. You look at that memo, he made it very clear that he wanted a period of time to allow the services to plan for implementation. I mean, this was a major rudder shift. Uh you all remember when we were talking about it being voluntary and and to to make it mandatory that that requires process changes. It requires some policy changes and it certainly required the services to get to make sure they had enough stockpiles and they had implementing guidelines for their subordinate commanders in place. And so the secretary felt it was only appropriate and prudent to give them, uh, some time. And that’s why he frankly sent that memo say it’s coming. So you need to get ready for it. And that’s not uncommon. We do that all the time when there’s a major policy shift at the building, You’ve got to give them time to get ready. And so we did that. Um, and, and to your first point about, well, okay, you brought guys in when it was in this sort of intervening period before it was, the mandate was actually in place, but after it’s been announced. And is that a waste? And I would say no, not at all. I mean, we brought these individuals in in good faith. Um, and, um, and I want them to succeed in the military and the best way for them to continue to be able to do that, at least in terms of their physical health with respect to the pandemic is to get vaccinated. Um, and it’s a back to what we said before a lawful order. It’s not uncommon for us to um, to make vaccines mandatory after somebody has come in when something new develops. And so it’s part of being a service member. When you’re, when you’re in order to get a vaccine, you gotta get that vaccine. So, no, we would not consider this. Uh, as you said, uh, some sort of fire or something. I mean, it’s, Yeah, it’s, it’s just the normal process Megan. So we’re talking about two different memos, you’re mentioning the August nine memo, that was a heads up to the service is saying, Hey, I want to, I want to make this mandatory. Everybody get ready on August 23 is when he said, Okay, we’re doing mandatory. But even before that, you know, you had said from the podium here in July, we’re thinking maybe FDA approval, we will make it mandatory. And also for any of the services, it was always voluntary while this was, you know, under an EU way. But the expectation if you are a leader in the military was that this would eventually become mandatory. They could have started working on these policies a year ago. Um, and they could have at least four for four trainees for recruits on day one on august 23rd, august 24th said, Okay, today, we’re gonna, we’re gonna make everybody who’s getting ready to ship to boot camp, acknowledge the way you acknowledge when you, when you ship that you’re going to get vaccinated, acknowledge that COVID-19 is gonna be part of this requirement. They could have done that on August 23, they didn’t for the Marine Corps, it was, they waited until October 14. And so that was, you know, nearly two months of people coming to the Marine Corps saying, I don’t want to get the covid vaccine. And now they’re being kicked out because they still won’t get it. I don’t know that people joined the Marine Corps and said, oh by the way, before I sign this, I’m I’m not getting the vaccine. I’m not sure how often that happened. Um, I would just tell you that again that this was a major rudder shift here. If I could use the naval terminology here and um, and the secretary felt it was important to give this the service’s time to prepare for that and to be able to implement that. And again, Megan. I do, I do take your point and I don’t mean to sound like I don’t or being obstinate, but it is a lawful order. And um, and uh, once you get it. No, but, but but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t still valid once it’s given. Um, and again, we would not consider it a waste of time to bring these young men and women into the service and get them trained up with the expectation that after they take the oath of office and raise that right hand that they’re going to obey lawful orders. And I would remind The vast vast majority are in fact, I mean, we’re up over 91% of the active duty force now that’s fully vaccinated. I mean that’s not insignificant. Pierre We’ve seen in the last 24 hours attacked by ISIS in northeast Syria and in Iraq and in general comment on it. How concerned are you that there is a resurgence of ISIS in the area? Well, I would just say we’re constantly focused on the ISIS threat? That is why we still have advisers in Iraq. That’s why we also have still have a small presence inside Syria. The ISIS threat is not gone. And uh and we recognize that. So just without speaking to specific incidents, I would just tell you we remain focused on that. Okay. I haven’t gotten to anybody on the phone. So give me a second here. Rio. Thank you john for taking my question. Uh despite the deteriorating situation, deteriorating security situation in europe along the grain border, does the secretary still believes in the pacific is the sole top priority and continue to focus on china. Thank you. Yeah, there’s been no change about our strategic focus on the pacing challenge of china or the um very strategic nature of the indo pacific and our goal for a free, open and secure in the pacific. There’s nothing changed about that. But obviously we’re closely monitoring what’s going on in europe. Um as you’ve heard the president speak to that we’re taking that very very seriously and as I said earlier, he’s making sure that we have options ready for the president and for our NATO allies. Should should they need them? Qassem? Yes. Hi john, I have two questions. Some European allies are sending warships to Black sea? Is there a plan to send some U. S. Naval capabilities to the Black sea for now specific ship movements to speak to? I think you know we’re pretty careful about announcing ahead of time the specific movements into specific bodies of water. Um If and when we have something to speak to with respect to black psyops will do that. I will only add that that that we we have every expectation of continuing to operate, sail and fly in international airspace and international waters. And the Black Sea is international waters Ellen us. And of course Western powers have provided some defensive weapons to Ukraine such as javelins and stingers. But many argue that Putin would not use traditional soviet tactics generally based on heavy armored brigades and land forces. Instead he would go with it’s advanced standoff weapons such as ballistic and cruise missiles to cripple the Ukrainian military’s capabilities even before the incursion starts in that case wouldn’t wouldn’t such a move negate or trash those defensive weapons provided to Ukraine or is there any option on table to deter Russians from using those advanced weapons against Ukraine? Speak with any great specificity as to how Mr. Putin plans to conduct another incursion. If in fact that’s what he’s gonna do. I think that is a terrific question for our Russian colleagues to have to answer. Um What I can tell you is that we remain committed to helping Ukraine defend itself through a range of security assistance. Articles that as that assistance continues to flow from the United States as you rightly pointed out, it also continues to flow from some of our allies and partners they can speak to what they’re providing. Um But but we’re we remain committed to again helping Ukrainian armed forces defend themselves. Ellen from synopsis. Hello, sir. Thank you for doing this. Um I know that we keep asking you over time and I’m wondering if the answer has changed on this, but it’s the pentagon. Um What is the pentagon doing about the quick decision on the seals and the religious exemptions from vaccines, Ellen, I don’t have an update for you on that. We continue to talk about this with the Justice Department. We don’t have any position to speak to today, Jeff. Thank you sir. Uh Thank you. Following up on Nancy’s question, the Russians are sorting more than 100 warships. Does the pentagon have a any indications that perhaps a submarine maybe trying to defect? No, we do not Jeff heather from us and I. Mhm. Thank you so much for taking my question. Um I was wondering if you could expand on what the U. S. Will be bringing to the NATO exercise the the USs Harry S. Truman carrier strike group. So it’s not just the carrier but it’s uh it’s her associated support ships and the air wing that’s onboard the Truman. But the real core for this is a naval exercise. So the real core of our participation is is with the Harry S. Truman and her strike group, Jeff Selon john thanks very much for doing this. A couple of questions First, can you describe what type of support the U. S. And the coalition are giving to Sdf forces in Hasakah? We’re fighting with ISIS sleeper cells is now in its second day as they try to break people out of prison. And also the Y. P. G. Is claiming on social media that it tried to send reinforcements to the sdf. But that truck is drones intercepted those reinforcements and targeted them. If you have anything on that, do you have anything on the second part of your question, Jeff? That’s the first I’ve heard that particular report. Uh So I I don’t I can’t comment on that on the whatever support the coalition has been given to the sdf as they have dealt with this or and continue to deal with this with this Prison break. I can tell you that that we have uh provided uh some air strikes to support them as they deal with this particular prison break. Uh Let’s see Dong Sun Park from view a thank you Mr. curvy. So former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said January 2011, North Korea will use on I. C. B. M. Within five years and he said it would have the ability to strike Alaska or the West coast of the United States. So 10, 10 years have passed since the former secretary gauge project. So the D. O. D. Believe North Korea can primitively strike the U. S. Mainland with an I. C. B. M. Capable of carrying nuclear weapons that they continue to advance uh their nuclear ambitions as well as their ballistic missile capabilities. Um They test so they can learn so they can improve um uh and we have without getting into specific intelligence assessments we have every expectation that did you continue to improve their capabilities both in terms of potential range and and uh and precision? And obviously we’re taking that threat very very seriously. I think that’s about as far as I’m gonna go here at the podium, Kelly Meyer. Mhm. Hi John thank you for taking my question. Uh Russia is putting 100,000 troops at the border with Ukraine. We’re sending a written response to Russia. What kind of message is this sending and why aren’t we taking further action? Well Kelly, I would tell you that we uh first of all I’m not going to get ahead of decisions that haven’t been made yet. Um The message that we’ve been sending very clearly to Russia and again I point you back to what Secretary Blinken said just this morning is that there will be severe consequences if Russia decides to incur uh invade or conduct another incursion into Ukraine. And uh largely those the consequences will be felt economically um for our part here at D. O. D. And I’ve said this many many times uh we’re gonna make sure that we have options ready to reassure our allies um particularly on NATO’s eastern flank, if there’s another incursion and if they need that reassurance if they need capabilities to be bolstered, uh we’re going to do that. Um and we’re gonna make sure that we’re that we’re ready to do that. So I think uh this is a whole of government approach. Um it’s not just about the Department of Defense. And quite frankly, as you’ve been seeing uh from other NATO allies who have also not only spoken to their concerns about what Russia is doing, but actually moved on um delivery of security since its assistance to the Ukrainian armed forces, it’s it’s not just it’s a it’s an international community effort. Yeah, Russia and Ukraine is concerned, is bot in touch with any of the Russia’s friends for easing the tension in the region. Any Russia’s friends that’s a pretty short list. Um We we are we are working very very closely with our allies and partners to make sure that that we’re ready and able to to reassure uh to show our commitment to the alliance to Article five. Uh And that’s what we’re focused on here at D. O. D. I don’t have any diplomatic conversations to read out other than the ones that I’ve I’ve already read out, for instance, the secretary’s call recently with his counterpart in Ukraine. Um But one of the things your question raises is the is the uh this is the very real outcome of further isolation of Russia on the international stage. Uh If in fact they commit another incursion into Ukrainian territory, they’re just going to set themselves up for even more isolation from the rest of the international community. This is not a country that has a whole lot of friends, This is not a country that has allies and partners to lean on the way we do the way the West does. Um And uh and one would hope that they would understand that consequence as well as well as the other economic potential consequences that they could face. Okay, as far as South Asia region is concerned, they are in Afghanistan. There is a humanitarian crisis going on and the U. S. Military and us left a lasting mark on the people of Afghanistan that they helped them before they left. Now china is trying to get there. Is there any drd help there as well as humanitarian crisis going on? Because Taliban are not traveling different countries for getting help, the United States. And I think you’ve heard the State Department speak to this quite eloquently, we remain committed to trying to alleviate humanitarian crisis inside Afghanistan. That’s why we’re working closely with non governmental organizations and international organizations uh to try to make sure that that the aid that the Afghans so desperately need gets to them. Um And we believe here at D. O. D. That’s we believe that that’s the right process that that’s the right way to approach this is through the international community and non and non governmental agencies to make sure that that that aid and assistance gets to people in need and that the Taliban facilitate that delivery of those very necessary articles going forward with the people of Afghanistan here in this area in the US are hoping and also they are depending on the U. S. Help for their people back home in Afghanistan. Any message for them? You have please. I mean first of all we have resettled now tens of thousands of afghans here in the country and we have several 1000 more but that were that are working their way through the final process to become American citizens and to move on. But we have D. O. D. Have helped provide a safe and secure environment for that process to continue. And we’re still doing that and we’re proud of that service. Uh We know we have uh here at D. O. D. Continue to have a moral obligation to all of those who helped us over the last 20 years. And that’s why we also continue to work hand in glove with the State Department task force to identify and help relocate uh people in Afghanistan who still want to leave and who still qualify for relocation. We continue to work as part of that task force and will do so until uh you know until it’s not needed anymore. We’re absolutely committed to that. Okay. Thanks everybody. Do you have any more? You can tell us first of all. Um just to clarify was it solely airstrikes or were there any U. S. Ground forces involved even in targeting assistance or hoping on the ground or strictly airstrikes? My understanding is that it’s predominantly airstrikes. I don’t have any more detail on how many and what targets and all that. I’d refer you to centcom for that, yep. Thanks everybody.