Wednesday, March 31, 2021

Pentagon Press Secretary Conducts Briefing for Reporters

 March 31, 2021

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby; Stephanie Miller, Director of Accession Policy

PRESS SECRETARY JOHN F. KIRBY: Good afternoon. OK. I think as many of you know, today is International Transgender Day of Visibility, and we proudly recognize transgender and gender-non-conforming people and their continued struggle for a life of equality, security and dignity. There is no place for violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics. The department, along with our partners in the United States, will lead by example in the cause of advancing the human rights of LGBTIQ -- LGBTQI people around the world.

Now, I think you all remember back in January, the president issued two executive orders impacting departmental policy with respect to transgender individuals. Executive Order 13988, which is entitled "Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation", and Executive Order 14004, entitled Enabling All Qualified Americans to Serve Their Country in Uniform".

In response to those executive orders, the department immediately issued interim guidance to hold in abeyance any adverse personnel actions initiated under previous departmental policy, and directed the identification and review of records of any member involuntarily separated, discharged, or denied reenlistment based on gender identity. This effort -- this review effort is ongoing.

The department also identified and initiated revision to two DOD instructions that affected the military service of transgender individuals. DOD Instruction 6130.03, Volume One is entitled "Medical Standards for Military Service: Appointment, Enlistment or Induction," and DOD Instruction 1300.28, which is entitled "In-Service Transition for Transgender Service members".

Now today, the department is announcing the publication of revised editions of these two instructions. The revised policies in these instructions restore the department's original 2016 policies regarding transgender service. Specifically, they prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or an individual's identification as transgender. They provide a means by which to assess -- access into the military in one's self-identified gender, provided all appropriate standards are met. They provide a path for those in service for medical treatment, gender transition, and recognition in one's self-identified gender and they seek to protect the privacy of all service members and to treat them with dignity and respect at all times.

Now, these policies will be effective in 30 days, affording the military services the necessary time to update service-level policies and provide guidance to commanders, service members, medical professionals, and other communities of practice, as appropriate. During this period, the department's interim guidance, issued on January 29th of this year, remains in effect.

The secretary of defense strongly believes that the all-volunteer force thrives when it is composed of diverse Americans who can meet the high standards for military service, and an inclusive force that strengthen -- strengthens our national security posture. As emphasized from his original statement on this matter, and I quote him here, "The United States Armed Forces are in the business of defending our fellow citizens from our enemies, foreign and domestic. I believe we accomplish that mission more effectively when we represent all our fellow citizens."

He goes on: "I also believe we should avail ourselves of the best possible talent in our population, regardless of gender identity. We would be rendering ourselves less fit to the task if we excluded from our ranks people who meet our standards and who have the skills and devotion to serve -- to serve us in uniform. This is the right thing to do. It is also the smart thing to do."

Now, today, I'm going to ask an expert to come up and handle your questions about this specific issue, and then when that's done, I'll come back up and we'll -- we'll do other news of the day.

So now, I would like to introduce the director of Accession Policy, Ms. Stephanie Miller, up to the podium. She'll be available to answer any questions, and then as I said, we'll move on. I will moderate the questions for her, if that's OK with you. Stephanie.

Our first question will come from Lita Baldor, Associated Press.
 
Q: Hi, John. Thanks. Stephanie, just -- just a couple of questions on numbers. The last numbers, I think, that the Pentagon released were that there were as many as 14,700 active duty and reserves who identified as transgender. Do you have any updated numbers on the number of troops that identify as transgender, the number of troops who identified with gender dysphoria? And then are there any numbers at all on those who have -- who were either not allowed to reenlist or faced some sort of administrative action over the last two -- two years, so -- that you can at least even give us some broad guidelines, or broad estimates of some of those? Thank you.

MS. MILLER: No, I -- thank you. I appreciate the question and -- and I'll see what I can do to -- to answer all of them.

So as you may be familiar, the department policy actually prohibits the discrimination on the basis of transgender status or gender identity, and in that way, we try to -- to protect the privacy of individuals. But a subset of the transgender population are those that have been medically diagnosed with a -- a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and may be seeking or have completed medical care. And so we are able to provide some data as it relates to those who have had that diagnosis and that are seeking that medical care, and the updated numbers we have are about 2,200 inside the -- the military services.

As it pertains to the department's continuing review of -- of records of individuals who may have been adversely impacted under the previous policy – that work is ongoing, and so we're not prepared to offer any data on that at this time. If an individual has not been contacted, but feels as though that they were adversely impacted, we certainly encourage them to reach out to the service concerned or directly to the department such that we may have an -- a conversation directly with that individual.

Q: Could I just get a follow-up? I just want to clarify something. When you say 2,200, you said inside all the military services. Does that include Guard and Reserve, or is that just active duty, do you know?

MS. MILLER: I -- we will -- I will verify that for you. I believe it -- it is comprehensive to all, but we will double check.

MR. KIRBY: OK. Tom?

Q: Yes, any sense of the medical costs that will be involved here, going into the future, ballpark?

MS. MILLER: So you know, the -- the medical data that we have really indicates that, you know, it -- it's -- it's very small, you know, a handful of a million dollars per year, which is really, you know, covered within the -- the defense health budget of several billion. So we're not anticipating, with these changes and policies, that there's going to be a significant impact in terms of medical costs.

MR. KIRBY: OK, back to the phone. Lara Seligman, did you have one?

Q: Hey, I don't have one for this section. I'll have one later though. Thanks.

MR. KIRBY: OK. Abraham, you have one?

Q: Yes, please. Can you talk about the studies that were done and unit cohesion, has that ever come up? If so, can you give examples either anecdotally in -- where it's been a problem or not been a problem?

MS. MILLER: So today in this announcement, we're really focused on the release of the two new instructions and we're excited to implement that policy moving forward. There is ongoing litigation as it pertains to -- to past policy. And so, we're not prepared at this time to discuss either previous studies or the previous policy.

Q: So any comment at all on -- on the impact on unit cohesion?

MS. MILLER: Not at this time.

MR. KIRBY: OK, we'll try again here. Caitlin Kenney, Stars and Stripes?

Q: Hi, thank you. My question is what are the requirements in these policies for a service member to ask for and receive gender affirming surgery and does the Pentagon have an estimate of how many people would likely require surgery versus being treated with hormones or another treatment? Thanks.

MS. MILLER: So really, we will provide medically necessary care to each individual member as really prescribed in their medical treatment plan. So that's -- that's individual for each case and it's certainly determined with their medical provider. And so, it really runs the gamut in terms of individuals who may only seek cross-sex hormone therapy versus those may pursue a surgical intervention.

And so we don't have data necessarily available to share today on the differences of -- of how many people pursue the full spectrum of the plan. But I think it's important to emphasize that all medically necessary care, to include gender transition surgery, will available under these new policies.

MR. KIRBY: OK, Nancy?

Q: I'm sorry. Can I ask a clarifying question on the 2,200 number? Maybe I didn't understand it correctly. Does that number include the number of service members who identify as transgender? Does that include numbers of people who are -- believe that -- are seeking surgery? I'm trying to understand what the breakdown on that number is specifically.

MS. MILLER: Right. That number represents those service members who've been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria or any other related diagnostic codes. So the 2,200 is the number that we're presently tracking in our Military Health System Management and Reporting Tool. And we use that for direct and purchased care. So that's what that number represents.

Q: Before the policy changed, there were some service members who identified as transgender who were allowed to, sort of, be grandfathered in after that change. Do you know what that number is?

MS. MILLER: I don't have that number at this time. But certainly those in that previous grandfathered or exempt population will be fully covered under these existing policies.

MR. KIRBY: Let’s go back to the phones here. Dan Sagalyn, do you have one?

Q: I have question on the next section for you...

(CROSSTALK)

MR. KIRBY: All right, OK.

Q: Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: All right, Jeff Schogol?

Q: Thank you. I apologize that I haven't seen the instructions. Are there any scenarios in which otherwise qualified transgender individuals cannot enlist or be commissioned in the military?

MS. MILLER: So the -- the -- the policies that we're publishing today, one is specific to medical accession standards. And so transgender applicants will certainly need to meet all other medical standards, to include those standards that may be associated specifically with cross-sex hormone therapy, a previous diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or any form of surgical intervention.

So there are specific standards associated with those -- those -- those medical conditions or medical/surgical interventions. But certainly individuals would have to meet all other qualifying standards in that instruction.

Q: And if I could follow-up, if the Department determines that transgender individuals were unfairly separated under the old policy, is it possible they could receive back pay?

MS. MILLER: Each situation would have to be looked at individually, which is why we emphasize that if an individual feels as though they were adversely impacted under the previous policies, we encourage them to contact the Department so that we can look at their case individually and provide any manner of redress that would be appropriate.

MR. KIRBY: Terace, did you have a question for Ms. Miller?

OK. Dan Sagalyn, PBS?

Q: My apologies. I was having issues with my own mute button. Can you hear me?

MR. KIRBY: I can -- I got you now. Do you have a question for Ms. Miller?

Q: Yes, I actually have a question for the next section.

MR. KIRBY: OK...

(CROSSTALK)

Q: Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: Dan Sagalyn?

Q: No, I've got a question for the next section.

MR. KIRBY: Steve Losey?

Q: Hi, yes. Do you anticipate any issues regarding the deployment of -- of people who are transgender or at any stage in the process?

MS. MILLER: The -- the policies certainly provide a wide range of options available both to the member, and to the unit, and the medical provider for -- for managing situations where the individual may need some determination of individual circumstances.

So you know, certainly there can be a discussion under the policy and under a transgender care plan of an adjustment of the date of which a certain part of the transition process is to occur such that the individual can potentially complete any sort of operational movement with the -- the unit. There's the opportunity to advise the service member of the availability of options for extended leave status or participation in other voluntary absence programs as needed. There could be an arrangement for a transfer to another organization, command, location, or duty status as needed.

And really, when all of that is not appropriate then there -- there could be a discussion about other courses of action. But we -- we truly believe that under the auspices of the policy that there is flexibility in most cases to work with the individual concerned and the unit.

MR. KIRBY: You got another one, Abraham?

Q: Yeah, I think I do. So the policy change allows for service members to serve in their self-identified gender. So practically, how will that be implemented and how long will it take to implement that? And also, would you talk a little bit about your office, your position? How long has that been about? How many people are in that office? Thanks.

MS. MILLER: Sure. So the current policy is very closely aligned to original 2016 policy and the -- the policy that was in place for the exempt population or the grandfathered population that we spoke about previously. So the Department has been operating for a number of years in support of transgender service members and -- and affecting that medical transition as needed. And so, when you have the opportunity to review the policies, which I encourage you to do, it really defines how that process works.

And it starts with working with the medical provider and receiving that diagnosis of gender dysphoria. And then the medical provider or a team then designs a medial transition treatment plan. And that usually includes, you know, the -- the primary care provider, an endocrinologist, surgical specialists, and even case managers.

We have wonderful teams that are led by regional chairs across the Defense Department and major MTFs that really specialize in this and are prepared to work with service members to help them have a successful transition.

And so once they design that plan then they work with the unit concerned and the commander making sure that they are looking at the timing of different interventions, and as I mentioned before whether or not there needs to be an adjustment to any of that to help support the service member and support the unit and then the command supports the individual as they affect that transition.

Q: So your office has been around for a number of years?

MS. MILLER: Our -- my office has been around for, yes, a number of years and while I am directly responsible for all aspects of military accessions policy, so essentially any way that you can come into the military, officer or enlisted. Because our office has a lot of expertise in terms of the medical standards, our office was asked to -- to really lead the drafting effort on this policy.

Q: All right, thank you.

MR. KIRBY: Alex, do you have one for Ms. Miller?

Q: Hey, John, it's Luis Martinez, can you hear me?

MR. KIRBY: Yes, I got you, Luis, do you have a question?

Q: Yes, I do, I'm sorry I joined late and I'm not on your list but just a question. We had seen think tanks provide numbers of 10,000 to 15,000 members of the military who self-identify -- self-identified as being transgender. Can you provide us what that number is and when those numbers came about? Thank you.

MS. MILLER: The data the department is tracking from some previous studies is it really ranges anywhere, you know, between 1,000 to 8,000, a pretty wide range. And so that really covers the gambit of individuals who may self-identify as transgender but not necessarily who choose to seek a medical transition or those who -- who choose to seek a full medical transition. So, it's a pretty wide range.

Q: So can I ask, what is this 14,000 number that I've seen somewhere else?

MS. MILLER: The department had previously released information as to, again, the number of individuals in our medical health system that had received a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and as we were talking about a little bit earlier that the more recent numbers we have on that is about 2,200.

Q: Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: OK, Tom, from Talk Media. Sometimes it takes them a minute to unmute themselves. OK, Paul, AFP.

Q: John, my question’s for you.

MR. KIRBY: OK.

Q: Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: Yes, Paul from AFP.

Q: Hey, my questions also for the later session, sorry.

MR. KIRBY: All right, great. I think we've exhausted your -- your questions for today so thanks very much.

MS. MILLER: Of course, happy to help.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you so much. 

 OK, a couple of other items just that I want to mention. The current year 2020 quarterly fourth quarter suicide report has been published on our site. The number of suicide deaths in the current report are preliminary and subject to change as previously unknown cases are reported and some known cases are further investigated.

In the report, you'll see that in the quarter, and again, these numbers may likely vary as -- as time goes on there were 99 deaths by suicide in the active component, 57 in the reserve component. But at this time it's too early to determine whether suicide rates are going to show an increase or a decrease for calendar year 2020. Anyway, it's up on our site and you're welcome to look at it.

Bottom line is, of course, that the health, safety, and well-being of our military community is paramount to the readiness of our force. Every death by suicide is a tragedy and every one results in a grieving family for which we share that -- that grief. 

Also, today I wanted to let you know that the secretary spoke with his Indonesian counterpart, the Indonesian Minister of Defense Prabowo Subianto on the phone to reaffirm importance of the bilateral defense relationship. The Minister congratulated Secretary Austin on his appointment as Secretary of Defense. And Secretary Austin expressed his condolences on the recent terrorist attacks in Makassar and Jakarta. Secretary Austin and Minister Prabowo discussed the regional security environment including the challenging situation in the South China Sea as well as bilateral defense cooperation.

And with that I'll take some questions.

Lita, did you have one for me?

Q: Sorry, no I got one already. I'll let someone else ask. Go ahead.

MR. KIRBY: Meghann?

Q: General VanHerck was here a couple weeks ago, he said DHS had given them a new request for an extension of troops on the border. Has that moved along at all?

MR. KIRBY: I don't have any updates for you on that. Yes, Tom?

Q: John, the extremism stand down is wrapping I guess in the next few days. Has the secretary received any preliminary information from these stand down across the services? Will there be some sort of a report when this is all wrapped up? And talk about the next steps if there are any.

MR. KIRBY: All fair question, Tom. He's received some anecdotal feedback from the services as he's been obviously meeting with service chiefs and acting service secretaries on a routine basis about lots of issues.

We expect that he will have a more formalized chance to get feedback from the service chiefs next week, where they can report back more of what they've learned and how they've felt the stand downs went from their perspectives. And that hasn't happened yet.

But, I don't anticipate a written report that will come out of this. Again, it's going to be a conversation with the service chiefs about what they saw, what they learned and whatever inputs they want to provide to him for his thinking. And I won't get ahead of that thinking. That discussion will certainly inform the way forward.

As I've said before, the secretary wants to make this a continuous focus for the department. That it's something that's -- it's a -- he considers it a leadership issue, something that we should be thinking about and acting on every single day. And sort of in an iterative way and not necessarily in some sort of a time bound function.

So, we'll -- I suspect, as I said yesterday, we'll have more to talk about in terms of specific pursuits, but it probably will be about a week or so before we're in a position to do that.

Q: And we’ve talked before about how you cannot be an active member of an extremist group, but you can still be a member. Is that still the case and is that something he's going to look at maybe changing?

MR. KIRBY: Well the policy as it exists now, the one that he has inherited, says that you can be a member, but it's active participation, not active membership, but active participation in extremist activities. Or in activities driven by a group that is prohibited by the UCMJ and that's everything from espousing this ideology in a public forum to fundraising to -- and certainly to any criminal behavior.

As for whether he's going to revisit the policy of membership alone, as I think I've said on many occasions, he wants to keep an open mind about everything going forward. He wants to hear from the service chiefs and he'll -- I think he'll keep an open mind going forward about what options he might pursue. And again, I don't want to get ahead of decisions that he hasn't decided to make.

Yes. OK. Tom?

Q: Thank you. Thanks John for doing this. You guys have talked about the critical aspects of supply chain and how that relates to national security and threats to the supply chain. As part of the review the Pentagon's doing, is the issue of military working dogs and the supply chain to them going to be considered?

I ask this because the U.S. Navy graduate school put out a report this week saying how 90 percent of our military working dogs come from overseas breeders. I mean, it's a serious question. I know you're probably laughing, I can't see you. But, I'm curious, will this be part of the supply chain survey?

MR. KIRBY: I'm not laughing at all, Tom. I mean, we all recognize the critical national security role, safety and security role that working dogs play. And I think there's very few agencies in the government who understand that better than the Department of Defense.

I don't have a specific announcement to make today about the degree to which the secretary's going to consider this. We certainly have seen that reporting and I suspect that we'll want to get more information before making any kind of policy decision about this.

But make no mistake, I mean, we absolutely fully understand the capabilities and never mind how much people obviously feel affection for dogs. But the actual security capabilities that these animals bring to the mission and we certainly will continue to take it seriously going forward.

Q: Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: Yes. Paul Handley, AFP?

Q: Hi John. Can you tell us what was the reason for General Milley's call to Russia and Ukraine today? And can you give some details on why the U.S. troops in Europe have gone on a heightened -- not alert, but warning status?

MR. KIRBY: Well, so I would refer you to the chairman's office to speak to his -- to his conversations today. But I would say that we're concerned about recent escalations of Russian aggression in eastern Ukraine, including violations of the July 2020 cease fire that led to the deaths of 40 Ukrainian soldiers on the 26th of March and the wounding of two others.

Russia's destabilizing actions undermine the de-escalation intentions that had been achieved through an OSCE-brokered agreement back in July of last year. Additionally, we are aware of Ukrainian military reports concerning Russian troop movements on Ukraine's borders.

We're discussing our concerns about this increase in tensions and cease fire violations and regional tensions with NATO allies. I suspect that the outreach by the chairman today, at least as read out by the chairman's staff with his Russian and Ukrainian counterparts certainly covered this issue and those concerns. But again, I refer you to his office for more specifics.

I'd also note that the National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan spoke Monday with his Ukrainian counterpart, the Head of Presidential Office Andriy Yermak. Mr. Sullivan affirmed the United State's unwavering support for Ukraine's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and Euro-Atlantic aspirations in the face of continued Russia aggression.

Q: Can I follow that up just quickly? There's videos online which are not verified, but they seem to show a large amount of Russian hardware moving into Crimea. Can you confirm anything about that?

MR. KIRBY: I cannot. No.

Q: All right, John, is the secretary worried that Russia could be preparing to further its incursion into Ukraine?

MR. KIRBY: We obviously don't want to see any more violations of Ukrainian territory. I'm not going to speak to intelligence matters.

Q: And just -- this is not the only military maneuvers this week. You had three Russian ballistic missile submarines going up through the ice in the North Pole. You had Russian bombers flying around Europe, NATO had to scramble dozens of fighter jets. How concerned is the Secretary and this building that this is a menacing presence?

MR. KIRBY: I think we've been very clear about the threats that we see from Russia across domains. You mentioned some maritime issues, you mentioned some air domain issues, there’s certainly cyber threats, and we're taking them very, very seriously.

Pierre?

Q: Thank you.

Q: The USS Carrier Eisenhower joined the fight and jets really made some raids on ISIS. Why was it so necessary for the carrier to come so close and to join the fight? Is it because the locals are not being able to carry the fight or that it's an uptick that they needed help? What do you have on this?

MR. KIRBY: I will not - going to talk about specific operations, Pierre, in terms of what missions they're flying and what prompted them. One of the great things about Naval forces is that they're flexible, they're agile, they're mobile. And you don't have to ask permission to use them in any locality.

And you're seeing that bear out right now with Eisenhower being able to support missions in both the European command area of responsibility as well as the Central command area of responsibility. And that's one of the great values of maritime power, specifically aircraft carriers.

Q: Do we need to tell the Russians and the Syrian regime that we are flying over their airspace?

MR. KIRBY: I'm not going to speak to operational flight paths here from the podium. We will continue to fly and sail and operate where international law permits us to do so.

Terace?

Q: No question for me. Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: OK. Dan Sagalyn?

Q: John, when Lynn Rosenthal spoke in this room a week and a half ago she talked about how she was probably going to pick two more people to be in her commission. And I'm wondering if there's any news on that? Where do things stand on that?

MR. KIRBY: I don't have an update. I will ask Lynn and see if we have something to get back to you on that. But I'll take that question. In the room, anything? Abraham.

Q: Yes, with those Russian movements on the eastern flank of NATO, has that - has that affected the Defender exercise preparations that are going on to move lots of hardware and soldiers to an area in the Balkans?

MR. KIRBY: I'm not aware of any effect but I would point you to European Command to speak to that with more specificity. 

Lucas, did you have one?

Q: Larry Kudlow earlier today on Fox said he's expecting a 10 percent cut in the defense budget. Can you confirm that – is it under consideration?

MR. KIRBY: I can't confirm anything specific with it related to the budget. When the Office of Management and Budget releases more information then we can speak to that. But I'm not going to get ahead of that process.

Q: Have you heard any rumors about $80 billion being shaved off?

MR. KIRBY: Nice try. No. I'm simply not going to speculate about the budget. We're just not at that point in the process right now. And when we get to that point, we'll certainly talk with more specificity with you.

Alex. OK. Lara, you had something?

Q: Yes I did, thanks, John. I just wanted to follow-up on the situation in Eastern Europe. Do you have any information to provide about what type of Russian equipment you are seeing built up? Have they had any interaction with U.S. personnel, whether kinetic or electronic interference? And how are our personnel responding?

MR. KIRBY: I have nothing to report with respect to any interactions with U.S. personnel. I mean, these are Ukrainian military reports concerning Russian troop movements on Ukraine's borders. So I know of no interaction with American forces whatsoever. I'm not going to speak to intelligence matters in terms of specifically what is being reported with respect to those troop movements.

Again these are Ukrainian military reports that there have been Russian movements there on that border. And again I don't think I'd be - it wouldn't be prudent for me to go into any more detail than that.

Q: Do you have information that this is more than just a training exercise on the part of the Russians?

MR. KIRBY: I think that's one of the reason why, as I said, we've reached out to Russia to try to gain a little bit more clarity on what exactly is going on. And I just - I'm not prepared right now to speak to the specifics of those conversations as they have just started.

Nancy?

Q: Is Secretary Austin going to speak to his Russian counterpart?

MR. KIRBY: I have no calls - I have no calls for the Secretary to announce or speak to today.

Nancy?

Q: If I can just follow up on that are we to take - because in the statement you read earlier said that we have concerns and we're sharing them with our NATO allies. Are we to take from that then those concerns will be expressed primarily through the State Department? Or because we've heard of calls now from General Milley but you said no anticipated calls with General -- Secretary Austin -

MR. KIRBY: I don't have any calls by the Secretary to speak to today. I think you did see that Chairman Milley made calls to his - both Russian and Ukrainian counterparts and I think it's safe to assume that this was certainly a topic of those discussions. Again, I'd point you to his staff for more detail on that.

Q: And then a colleague of mine asked earlier why the European Command raised the watch level. I was wondering if you could address that, please?

MR. KIRBY: So I can't speak to specifics in terms of the reports about them raising it to a certain level. But just process-wise, so that everybody understands, a watch condition otherwise known as WATCHCON basically expresses a combatant commander’s concern about a potential threat and the ability to provide future warnings. So by setting a WATCHCON basically the commander is better able to identify and track the threat and alert decision makers to emerging concerns.

So it's a way of improving and increasing a leader's visibility, noting that there is something worth watching. And the word watch is the operative word in there. That's what a WATCHCON is. I can't confirm or speak specifically to what General Wolters did or didn't do with respect to his WATCHCON levels.

OK. Oh, I'm sorry, I had one more, Jack from Foreign Policy.

Q: Hey, John, before you go. A quick follow-up on - you said Secretary Austin spoke with his Indonesian counterpart today. I want to make sure I heard you correctly, is that the first time they have spoken?

MR. KIRBY: It is.

Q: OK, thank you.

MR. KIRBY: You're welcome. Jack, did you have one?

Q: Yes, actually just on Myanmar real fast, John. Is there any role or does the Secretary see any role for the U.S. military to stop what looks like a potential civil war there?

MR. KIRBY: I know of no role for the U.S. military with respect to what's going on in Burma. You did see, however, the chiefs of defense from several different nations, including ours, General Milley, make a very firm declarative statement about what the international community's expectations are for a professional military. We certainly want to see an end to this violence against the people of Burma and a return to democracy. And the military right now, we're calling on the military to effect exactly that -- those two things.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

Missile Mission

 

The USS Gabrielle Giffords launches a Naval Strike Missile as part of shipboard operational testing and evaluation in the Pacific Ocean, March 18, 2021.

Sea Ops

 

Marines and sailors conduct launch and recovery training with combat rubber raiding craft from a patrol boat near Naval Base Guam, March 11, 2021.

Marine Fire

 

Marine Corps Cpl. James Russell fires a rifle during a small arms weapons range at Combined Arms Training Center Camp Fuji, Japan, March 11, 2021.

Flight Prep

 

Air Force Maj. Cari Piha reads over the flight plan and preflight checklist before a training mission around the Hawaiian Islands, March 25, 2021. Piha was part of an all-female flight in honor of Women’s History Month.

Leap of Faith

 

Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Jeremy Thibodeaux jumps from a Marine Corps UH-1Y Venom helicopter during mine countermeasures training in the Philippine Sea, Feb. 26, 2021.

Response Ready

 

A service member conducts a live fire simulation during a major accident response exercise at Rosecrans Air National Guard Base, St. Joseph, Mo., March 5, 2021.

Power Plank

 

Army Spc. Brianna Stallings performs a plank during a diagnostic Army Combat Fitness Test at Sagami General Depot, Japan, March 30, 2021.

Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative Women’s History Month 2021 Statement

 March 31, 2021

In recognition of Women’s History Month, the Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division reflects on and honors the accomplishments that women have made, and continue to make, to our Nation’s Armed Forces.  Starting with the Revolutionary War, women have served our country’s military as soldiers, intelligence officers, nurses, engineers, and pilots, among many other positions. Today, more than 224,000 women serve in the active-duty military; women veterans comprise nearly 10% of the total veteran population. Female servicemembers have faced unique challenges throughout history, fighting for all of our freedoms, while simultaneously seeking their own equal rights and opportunities.

Female members of the Armed Forces have continued to make significant achievements in defense of our country as their representation amongst the leadership ranks grows. In July 2020, the Air Force became the first U.S. military branch to select a woman, Chief Master Sgt. JoAnne Bass, to serve as its highest-ranking noncommissioned officer. Midshipman Sydney Barber recently became the first African-American woman to achieve the top role of brigade commander at the U.S. Naval Academy, where she will lead 4,500 midshipmen. And last spring, Second  Lieutenant Anmol Narang, a nuclear engineer, became the first observant Sikh to graduate from the U.S. Military Academy. We look forward to the contributions of future female military leaders as this year we celebrate the 40th anniversary of our first female service academy graduates and, thanks to the landmark decision in United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) (a suit brought by the Department of Justice challenging an admission policy that discriminated on the basis of sex), the 20th anniversary of the first class of female graduates from a public military college.

The Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative (SVI), a part of the Civil Rights Division, advocates for the fair treatment of former and current military members by building a comprehensive legal support and protection network focused on serving servicemembers, veterans, and their families. The Civil Rights Division enforces certain laws that protect the rights of servicemembers, including those affecting their employment, housing, financial, voting, and disability rights. The Initiative builds upon this critical enforcement work, as well as the work of other Department components that serve the military community, by sharing information, identifying servicemember and veteran needs, and coordinating the distribution of resources. The Department of Justice, including the Civil Rights Division and SVI, is proud of the many contributions that women have made to our country’s military.  We remain committed to ensuring that those who wish to serve are not prevented from doing so on the basis of their sex sexual orientation, or gender identity.  If you have any questions about SVI’s work or have a concern specific to the rights of servicemembers, please visit our website at https://www.servicemembers.gov.

Syringe Prep

 

Army Maj. Jodi Brown, chief of public health at the California Medical Detachment, prepares syringes for the paramedics administering the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine on Fort Hunter Liggett, Calif., March 23, 2021.

Preparing the Workspace

 

Air Force Staff Sgt. Vittoria Gonzalez and Air Force Staff Sgt. Ayanna Blanco, aerospace medical technicians assigned to the 161st Medical Squadron, prepare a workspace to be used for the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine at Cesar Chavez Cultural Center in San Luis, Ariz., March 30, 2021. Airmen assigned to the 944th Medical Squadron are helping to provide vaccinations across Arizona.

Food Distribution

 

Warrant officer candidates from the Virginia National Guard’s Warrant Officer Candidate School volunteer at the Chesterfield Food Bank in Chesterfield, Va., March 19, 2021. The candidates helped sort, load and distribute food as part of their community project.

Vaccination Paperwork

 

Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Amanda Reyna fills out COVID-19 vaccination paperwork before administering a vaccine brief to sailors at Naval Support Activity Bahrain, March 30, 2021. The vaccination effort has resulted in about 12,871 doses of the two-shot Moderna and single-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccines being administered to military and civilian personnel throughout the 5th Fleet area of operations.

DOD Announces Policy Updates for Transgender Military Service

 March 31, 2021


Today, the Department of Defense published the policy updates for transgender military service. The policy updates restore the Department’s original 2016 policies regarding transgender service.

The revised policies prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or an individual’s identification as transgender, provide a means by which to access into the military in one’s self-identified gender provided all appropriate standards are met, provide a path for those in service for medical treatment, gender transition, and recognition in one’s self-identified gender, and seeks to protect the privacy of all Service members and to treat all Service members with dignity and respect.

The policies will be effective on April 30, 2021, affording the Military Services the necessary time to update service-level policies and provide guidance to Commanders, Service members, medical professionals, and other communities of practice as appropriate. During this period, the Department’s interim guidance of January 29, 2021 remains in effect.

The DoD Instruction 6130.03: Medical Standards for Appointment, Enlistment, or Induction into the Military Services can be found here.

The DoD Instruction 1300.28: In-Service Transition for Transgender Service Members can be found here.

DOD Recognizes International Transgender Day of Visibility

 March 31, 2021


Today, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III signed a memorandum recognizing transgender and gender non-conforming persons and their continued struggle for a life of equality, security, and dignity during International Transgender Day of Visibility.

It is the policy of the Department of Defense (DOD) to pursue an end to violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics, and DOD will lead by example in the cause of advancing the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons around the world. As such, Secretary Austin signed a memorandum on March 12, 2021 directing the Department to promote and protect the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons around the world, including in our engagements with partner nations and multilateral organizations, and within our foreign assistance programming.

In the memorandum, Secretary Austin announced the Department has updated its policies governing the open service of transgender individuals in the military.

The International Transgender Day of Visibility memo can be found here.

The Promoting and Protecting the Human Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex Persons Around the World memo can be found here.

Partnership Expands Opportunities for New and Small Businesses to Work With the Department of Defense, Expand National Security Innovation Base

 March 31, 2021


The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP), the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on small business matters, and the National Security Innovation Network (NSIN), an innovation unit within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, signed a memorandum of agreement on March 5 to collaborate on expanding the national security innovation base.

The new partnership links two DOD organizations with a common mission to establish an annual, joint program plan to leverage OSBP and NSIN resources to achieve shared objectives:

  • Collaborate to develop events and programs to engage small businesses in the National Technology and Industrial Base.
  • Prototype operational concepts related to emerging technologies and accelerate the transition of technologies and services into acquisition programs and operational use.
  • Support partnership between DOD and academic institutions, commercial firms, accelerators, incubators, and nonprofit organizations whose missions relate to national security innovation.
  • Enhance the capabilities of the DOD in market research, source selection, partnerships with private capital, and access to commercial technologies.

“The effects of the past year have demonstrated the importance of small businesses in maintaining a strong supply chain and knowledge base within the national security and technology industrial base. The partnership between NSIN and OSBP is an important step towards building a resilient industrial base and engaging innovative small companies.

“In line with President Biden's Build Back Better (BBB) Recovery Plan, the initiatives developed in conjunction with NSIN will provide new pathways to American manufacturers and small businesses to offer critical emerging technologies to the Department,” said Farooq Mitha, OSBP Director.

The OSBP and NSIN partnership enables more DOD collaboration and support between small businesses, academic institutions, commercial firms, accelerators, incubators, and nonprofit entities whose missions include national security innovation. 

Morgan Plummer, NSIN Manager Director explained, “NSIN and OSBP share a deep belief that the ideas, technologies and talent that are needed to build a robust defense industrial and innovation base exist in small businesses and startups across the country, and must be deliberately engaged in partnership with the Department.

“This partnership will combine OSBP’s expertise in leveraging small businesses to close capability gaps for our armed forces with NSIN’s nationwide network of non-traditional problem solvers in the academic and startup communities to create a holistic way to increase the number of small businesses contributing to the work of the Department of Defense.”

Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP)

OSBP is the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on small business matters and maximizes opportunities for small business to contribute to national security by providing combat power for our troops and economic poser for our nation. OSBP is also responsible for the health and resiliency of the small business industrial base, leverages small businesses to eliminate gaps and vulnerabilities in the national technology and industrial base and words to expand the number of small businesses in the national technology and industrial base.

National Security Innovation Network (NSIN)

The NSIN mission is to “build networks of innovators that generate new solutions to national security problems.” NSIN is headquartered in Arlington, VA, and has regional offices in 11 commercial innovation hubs throughout the United States. Through its headquarters, regional hubs, and embedded university partnerships, NSIN builds a national network of innovators and delivers programming that solves real-world, DOD problems through collaborative partnerships with non-traditional problem-solvers within the academic and early-stage venture communities.

Filling Doses

 

Air Force medical staff, members of the Michigan Department of Health, and Meijer pharmacists fill doses of COVID-19 vaccines during the grand opening of the state-run, federally-supported Ford Field Community Vaccination Center in Detroit, March 23, 2021. The site will vaccinate up to 6,000 community members per day.

Black Hawk Hoist

 

Army Staff Sgt. Jose Bulow is hoisted into a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter during predeployment training at Fort Hood, Texas, March 26, 2021.

Pentagon Press Secretary Holds an Off-Camera Press Briefing

 March 30, 2021

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby

PRESS SECRETARY JOHN F. KIRBY:  Okay, three, two, one. 

I don't have a topper, so Bob, we'll go to you.

Q:  Hi, John.

MR. KIRBY:  Hello, sir.

Q:  A question about the recent blockage of the Suez Canal.  I realize that's ended now but -- and I don't know if this is -- you've reviewed this previously but is -- has -- did it cause any operational issues for the U.S. Navy, including the movement of a carrier from the Med to the CENTCOM area?

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, Bob, we talked about this a little bit yesterday.  I'm -- I'm not going to speak to specific operational impacts.  The only thing that I would add is that -- what I said yesterday, is that we always have – as a part of routine planning, we always have alternate methods and means of meeting mission requirements and -- and we're comfortable that -- that the forces assigned in both European Command and -- and Central Command have been able to meet their mission requirements.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Okay.  In here?  Lara?

QUESTION:  Yeah, I know you guys just had your extremism training, so I'm wondering if you could tell us anything about that?

MR. KIRBY:  We -- we did.  The -- the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, we -- we just completed our extremism stand down.  I -- you know, only speaking for our world and the -- what -- and -- and not -- and not the department writ large, we -- I just finished -- we just wrapped up literally a half an hour ago.

We -- we had some terrific guest speakers, somebody from the FBI and somebody from our intelligence directorate here at -- at -- at the Pentagon who did terrific presentations about the scope of the issue and the reality of the threat, outside and inside the workforce, and that led to some, I think, very good questions by the people in my workforce, asking more detailed questions about what -- what these experts had to say.

Then we broke up into four small groups and -- different parts of my organization, where they were able to have more intimate discussions with their immediate leadership about their experiences and their thoughts.  I was able to migrate to all four small groups and I was impressed by the candor of the session, the forthcoming nature with which people spoke about the -- their -- their views on this issue and -- and some of the experiences that -- that -- that they had with extremists over the course of -- of their years of service.

So I was quite pleased with the level of engagement, very grateful for the experts that were giving -- so freely gave up their time to -- to come speak to us about their area of expertise, and it was -- I think it was -- it was a great learning experience.

Q:  But was it part of the stand down that DOD is doing?

MR. KIRBY:  Yes.

Q:  Okay.

MR. KIRBY:  Yes.  Okay, let's see.  We'll go to Jeff Schogol.  What do you got?

Q:  Hey, thanks for doing this.  There's only 32 days left until May 1st, and I just wanted to see, is that enough time to get all of the troops and equipment out of Afghanistan if the -- if the President decides to withdraw?

MR. KIRBY:  Well, the -- the key point -- key part to your question, Jeff, is the "if."  The President hasn't made a decision, so we're obviously not going to get ahead of him on that.  He -- I would point you to what the Secretary -- oh, sorry, what the President said himself, that -- you know, that -- that it would be tough but I would also point you to what the Secretary said when we were in Kabul a week or so ago, that -- that if there's a decision to leave, that he's confident that General Miller and General -- General McKenzie will be able to do that in a safe, effective and -- and orderly way.

Q:  Well, at this point, would that require destroying equipment rather than trying to take it out of country?

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, Jeff, I just -- I'm not -- you know, we don't have a decision right now, and so I'm -- I'm not going to engage hypotheticals or speculate about what a withdrawal is going to look like. 

In the room, Mike -- Meghann?  See?  I went right to you this time.

Q:  Listen, I've not heard about it so it's okay.  So I wanted to ask if in your stand down, anything -- any kind of pushback came up, questions about what's considered extremism, what kind of groups and ideologies are considered extremism?

And I ask because I'm wondering if after this, after the review, after the feedback that's collected, if there's going to be a push to put out an instruction, some sort of guideline that has more clear delineation of we know you can -- but at this time, at least, it seems like you can belong but you can't be an active member, there are questions about, like, is being MAGA considered, you know, an -- a -- a -- a extremism, like, is Black Lives Matter an extremist movement?  And so I think there's going to be a lot of -- you know, there's a lot of desire for a more clear delineation, so I'm wondering where you guys are with collecting what -- how you're going to put that definition together and what it may look like when you've completed it.

MR. KIRBY:  Well, -- so I -- as I said, we're going to be informed by the stand down across the force.  That will help inform the direction the Secretary wants to go.  I don't want to get ahead of him on this but I do think you'll see, as -- after this stand down, I think you will see the Secretary make some decisions about how he wants to approach this going forward.

It is, as he has said -- and I suspect no matter what he decides to do, you'll see this reinforced for him -- it's going to be a daily task.  It's not going to be -- and we never thought the stand down would be one and done -- he wants this to be considered a -- an ongoing, enduring leadership issue, and I think you'll see that reflected in whatever decisions he makes -- and again, I won't get ahead of that.

I didn't sense any pushback from the folks in our stand down about the definition of what is or isn't and maybe that was because one of our briefer, our FBI briefer, had -- provided some very good structure about what they consider to be extremism and broken down into various categories.  I found that very interesting.

So, that might be why, I can't speak for every employee, but I didn't sense any anxiety or angst over the definition of it.  And again, we'll get on the other side of this stand down.  The secretary will get feedback from the services and then I think you'll see more clarity from the department on how we're going to proceed. 

OK, Missy, Washington Post.

Q:  Hi John.  I just have a follow-up on the extremism question and then a question about the -- a nomination question.  So on the -- on the extremism thing there was a recent hearing on this and I -- and there was skepticism expressed by some Republicans about how much focus there should be on the issue of domestic extremism in the military, especially because as the department has acknowledged you guys don't have great stats on how widespread the issue is.  And I just wanted to ask if you could address that notion or that concern.

And then it -- has the secretary done anymore outreach regarding the Colin Kahl nomination?  Since we heard about his conversations a while ago before the committee vote.

MR. KIRBY:  I'm not sure I understood your first question. 

Q:  The first question is, some Republicans in Congress, with the hearing last week and they were saying why is the Defense Department -- why are we talking about this issue?  Why are we making this sound like it's a big problem when the department itself doesn't have data to confirm that it is a widespread problem, so we should look at other issues.  That's the criticism of --

MR. KIRBY:  Oh, I gotcha.  OK, I'm tracking you.  On the -- on the second question I'm not aware of any additional outreach by the secretary with respect to Colin Kahl.  We were pleased to see him voted out of committee and we're certainly hopeful and look forward to his ultimate confirmation and to getting him here in the building.  He's an imminently qualified individual with significant and deep policy experience and the secretary looks forwards to working with him. 

On you first question, it is precisely because we don't have a complete granular body of knowledge about the full extent of the problem that we wanted to conduct this stand down and why the secretary wants to take the issue so seriously.  I don't know that you have to have a specific set of data in front of you to know enough that you've got a problem.  

And as the secretary said himself, the scope of the problem is probably less than the headlines would suggest and certainly more than we're going to find ourselves comfortable with.  It's somewhere in between and we owe it to the country, the tax payers that fund us and support us to get a better sense of this.

We've also said and -- actually not we -- the secretary has said, every time he talks about this, that the vast majority and I think he's used the phrase 99.9 percent in his mind are serving this country, whether they're military or civilian, contractor or in uniform, they're serving this country with honor and character and dignity and they uphold the values that we espouse.  They certainly uphold their oath to the Constitution. 

Nobody has suggested that this problem is widespread across the force.  We -- while we don't have perfect data we know that it isn't.  That said, even small numbers can have an outsized impact and that's what concerns us. 

So, we're taking this seriously, but we also do it with a view towards understanding that the vast, vast majority of men and women in this department are serving with honor and character.

Barb?

Q:  One on extremism, a follow-up and a different subject.  You had the briefing in this room, right?  Right here in the briefing room?

MR. KIRBY:  I had -- yes.  For some.  Maybe not everybody could do it.  We had to have some on --

Q:  (Inaudible) occur here.  And since this is not a classified space I want to make the request, could the Press Corps get the same briefing from the two people you had that you speak so highly of that have a top level view of the problem?  Can we request --

MR. KIRBY:  I can ask them if they'd be willing to talk to you.  The briefings they gave were not classified, obviously. 

Q:  I'll be the one to say on behalf of the whole Press Corps, can we get --

MR. KIRBY:  I will ask them if they'd be will to speak to you about what -- about their expertise.  I have no problem asking that question.  But, I can't make them do it.

Q:  No, but what they briefed you on.  No, it's just -- I don't want to hear about their expertise.  I'm assuming that --

MR. KIRBY:  No, I understand the question.  I'll ask.

Q:  Did they -- did they offer a list of extremist organizations?  Is it just specific organizations?

MR. KIRBY:  They had some examples.  But did they offer an exhaustive list?  No.

Q:  All right.  So, I'd like to request we get the same briefing.  The other question --

MR. KIRBY:  Barbara, just -- I will ask the question, but to remind, one of the briefers was from the FBI and I can't speak for that organization.  And the other one, although it's a Pentagon office, I would have to secure their agreement to do this.

Q:  Right.  I'm just asking.

MR. KIRBY:  Right. 

Q:  (Inaudible).

MR. KIRBY:  I will ask the question.

Q:  Right.  I endorse what I just said.  My -- but my actual question is this.  I wanted to just make sure I asked about Myanmar.  We've seen the international letter from maybe 9, 10 Chiefs of Defense staff condemning military action there.  The situation's pretty dire.  I understand the departure -- order departure or voluntary departure of America is a State Department issue, I fully understand that.  What I'm curious about is in this department are you -- what level of concern or what concerns are there about the security situation that you might have to be ready for if there is any sort of departure of Americans?

MR. KIRBY:  Well so you're right, that's an if.  And that's a decision that the State Department makes.  I certainly won't get ahead of --

Q:  And you plan for everything.

MR. KIRBY:  I think, look, in general I would point you to the letter that these Chiefs of Defense, including our own, General Mark Milley, wrote that I think speaks to the concern that we all have here about the security situation in Burma. 

I won't speculate about potential future operations one way or the other and I certainly won't speak to State Department equities with respect to the presence of their personnel or other American citizens on the ground.  That's really a -- that's a decision for them and only they can make.  And so, I think you realize that we -- in terms of this department I mean I'm not aware of any specific planning efforts one way or the other.

Q:  And can I just also ask, quick update - the SOCOM diversity chief, is he - they tell us he's been reassigned but since the Secretary's being kept up to date on that situation, any update on the status of that?

MR. KIRBY:  No, I don't have any update.

Q:  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Yep.  OK, Caitlin Kenney, Stars and Stripes?

Q:  Hello.  My question is when is DOD going to release its current vaccination numbers and rates for each installation?  I know some of us have been waiting to see that data.  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, we're working real hard, as I've said before, to get you guys some more granular data on that.  I - I don't have a specific date certain that I can guarantee its release but we're - we're getting there, we're working real hard on it, and I - I think we'll be able to, you know, post more - be able to post more data in - in coming days, but I - I just don't have a - I couldn't give you a date certain on the calendar.

Q:  A quick follow up, can you, I guess, explain kind of how that data is collected and then, like, what is kind of behind the scenes on, why it's kind of taking a little bit longer, just so that we have an understanding?  Thanks.

MR. KIRBY:  I - I - I can't tell you how it's collected.  I'd - I'd really have to point you to the experts on the COVID task force in terms of specifically, you know, the - the - the pencil work that goes into getting it.  What we're trying to do is get you more granularity from a - a service level.  So I would suspect that that - the - the data we're talking about is coming from the - the services.

And as for, you know - you know, what - what's taking this a while is we want to make sure we get it right.  We just want to make sure that if we're going to roll out more data for you, that it's data you can rely on, in a format that's easy to understand and to comprehend and that's useful, and, you know, we're still working on that. 

Mike?

Q:  Representative Charlie Crist has introduced legislation to make the commandant for the Coast Guard a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Is that being discussed or planned at all here?  And more importantly, is the table big enough, since you keep adding people to it, like, every couple of years?

MR. KIRBY:  I don't know the size of the table in the - in the tank.  I'm - and I won't - I won't speculate about proposed legislation.  I've seen the press reports of it but we're not going to get ahead of proposed legislation. 

Abraham?

Q:  Yeah, thanks.  I've got two questions - like, update questions and then a - something specific about the extremism stand down.  Anything new to report on the HHS request for site visits?  Anything new to report on the requests when General VanHerck was here and he mentioned that there was a request out from DHS to DOD to - to extend the border support?  So is there anything updating either of those two outstanding requests?

MR. KIRBY:  As far as I know, there was an additional site visit to Camp Roberts, which is a National Guard base in central California, for the potential use of the federal part of the land of that - of that site.  I don't know how that site visit went or whether or not our HHS colleagues are inclined to want to use it, so I won't get ahead of that.

We - I can tell you that we don't have - as of right now, we don't have a request for assistance for additional sites from HHS.  I - I - I think we are prepared at Bliss to receive - they are prepared to receive, at Fort Bliss, some number of children, as perhaps early as today.  I would again refer you to HHS for specifics about that but that's my understanding, that - that HHS is - that - and - and - and Fort Bliss is prepared but again, this is an HHS mission - mission, so I'd ask you to talk to them for more details.

On your second question - was that about the border mission?

Q:  Right.

MR. KIRBY:  Well - well ...

Q:  When General VanHerck was here, he mentioned that there was an outstanding request from DHS to - to extend that mission, which expires at the end of the fiscal year.

MR. KIRBY:  I - I don't have any updates on that.

Q:  OK, and then I ...

MR. KIRBY:  I - I can actually - we can take that question, though.  I think that's a fair question.

Q:  And then on the extremism stand down, just so I understand sort of how this works - across the whole force, the request went out to just sort of have a discussion, right, but no data was collected and passed to DOD, to Secretary Austin?

And then Secretary Austin's going to be briefed from the service secretaries and then the - no data has been collected.  And then will there be data collected or what's the next step?

MR. KIRBY:  Abraham, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the stand down was inclined - was intended to do - is not - it - it - it was not, and as I stood here at the podium and briefed - it - it - it was not a data collection exercise, it was meant to do two things - to reinforce our values, and specifically the importance of the oath that everyone takes here to the Constitution and what that oath requires of you.  There are active verbs in that oath that matter - and it was - it was - it was a - it was a chance to revisit what we've all promised to do and what we've all promised to serve.

And then number two, to listen, to get a sense from the men and women of the work force about how they view this issue, if they have any lived experiences that they would be willing to share, and to - to solicit their ideas and thoughts.  That is exactly how we conducted our stand down today, it was exactly that.

In addition to our two speakers, we did have a small session dedicated just to the oath and - and - and a chance to revisit those words, as the Secretary encouraged everybody to do in that video that he produced.  So it was not a data collection exercise.

And as I said and have said many times, we - we don't have perfect understanding of the scope of it but I - I think we want to get a better sense of it.  And the stand down was just the first step in doing that, and we've said that before too - it's just a first step.  Not meant to be a panacea, not meant to solve all of the problems, just to reorient everybody to the importance of service to this country in the Defense Department and a chance to listen to them.

Q:  So does the secretary have next steps in mind?

MR. KIRBY:  As I said to Meghann, I'm not going to get ahead of the secretary.  The - he - he will get briefed by the services on their view of the stand down and feedback that they - that - that they received and that they're willing to pass on to him, and then I think, as I've said, he's going to make this a concerted leadership issue every day that he's the Secretary. 

How that manifests itself, what decisions he might make as a result of what we're learning, I'm not - I'm - I'm not going to get ahead of, but I do think you'll hear more from him in - in coming days and weeks.

Q:  Great, thanks.

MR. KIRBY:  Yep.  Let's see - Jeff Seldin, VOA?

Q:  Thanks very much for doing this.  The SDF is now about three days into a - what seems to be a pretty massive operation to try to suppress and root out ISIS in the al-Hol displaced persons camp.  Wondering if - if you could share anything about what the U.S. and what U.S. forces are doing to support that operation, and also how worrisome is it?  The SDF says that they've already captured 53 suspected ISIS operatives, five cell leaders.  How - how worrisome is it that ISIS was able to establish that type of presence in al-Hawl, in an area controlled by the SDF - SDF, with the help of the coalition?

MR. KIRBY:  Well you're right, the Syrian Democratic forces did initiate an operation over the weekend to degrade and disrupt ISIS activities inside the Al-Hawl IDP Camp.  That operation is ongoing. As of Sunday, there were nine individuals, including one ISIS leader detained by the SDF.

As it is an ongoing operation that the SDF is conducting, I am not going to speak to the specific details of it, except to say that, again, the purpose of the operation is to remove ISIS elements from Al-Hawl in order to bolster the safety and security of the camp as has been recently advocated. 

I would remind that in this year alone, 2021, more than 40 residents of the Al-Hawl Camp have been murdered, so maintaining security in and around Al-Hawl remains essential to facilitating humanitarian access and safeguarding innocent civilians that are there.  So, I think that's about as far as I'm going to be able to go on that.

OK, here in the room.  Lara, again?

Q:  Yes, I wanted to ask about Afghanistan.  I just wanted to get you on the record again.  Are the Taliban meeting their commitments to the deal?

MR. KIRBY:  We are still reviewing the Doha Agreement, which includes reviewing compliance.

Q:  Because in January you said that they were not meeting.

MR. KIRBY:  We are still reviewing the Doha Agreement and that includes examining compliance. 

Q:  So you’re not willing to say what you said in January?

MR. KIRBY:  I'll just ping back to what I just said. 

Q:  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Yes.  Looks like I got more here on the page than I have in the room. 

Tony?

Q:  Hi John.  I had a couple of Secretary Austin questions.  Does he have any plans in the works to have a full conversation with his PLA counterpart, the Minister of National Defense?  And I have a follow-up. 

MR. KIRBY:  I don't have any discussions to announce and speak to at this time.

Q:  Can you take it for the record in terms of whether he's planning or trying to schedule a trip -- to schedule a call?

MR. KIRBY:  I don't have anything to speak to at this time, Tony.

Q:  OK.  On the FY'22 budget, how would you describe his role in the preparation of it?  Is he fairly hands-on, hands-off until he gets a full briefing?  Or how would you describe it?  His role.

MR. KIRBY:  He's been -- he's been kept briefed and apprised of budget preparations that the Deputy Secretary has been leading.

Q:  OK.  Is there any particular program or area he's focused on?

MR. KIRBY:  I'm not going to get ahead of specifics on the various programs in the budget, Tony.  We'll have much to say that when it's the appropriate time.

Q:  Fair enough.  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  OK.  Nothing in here.  OK, Kristina Wong, Breitbart.

Q:  Hey, thanks for doing this.  Great to join you by Zoom.  On COVID, some soldiers and family members have reached out, saying that they're concerned that there's been (inaudible) can't visit the DFAC or gyms on their installation without showing their vaccine card. 

So, I guess they're upset because they say the vaccines are not mandatory and they feel that they're getting forced or pressured to get it.  Otherwise they can't visit the gym or the DFAC or whatever. 

So, my question would be, what do you tell those folks who don't to get the vaccine but feel that they're being sort of unfairly pressured to, otherwise they can't use base services?  And is this a DOD policy or is this sort of installation specific? 

MR. KIRBY:  Kristina, this is the first I've heard of this.  And so, I can assure there's no DOD wide policy governing that.  I would point you to the individual installation commanders to speak to their -- their policies.  This is the first I've heard of that.

But more broadly, what I would say to the men and women of the workforce, what the secretary has said is, that he wants them to be as informed as possible about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines, and to speak with their physicians about what's the right decision for them and for their health, and for the health of their families and, quite frankly, for the health of their teammates.

Q:  Yes, thanks.  I think -- I think some of them are -- are also expressing some concerns about not being able to deploy without getting the vaccine, which I think you've discussed before is -- is a policy, right?

MR. KIRBY:  I -- I'd have to look at the specifics on that. 

Q:  Probably need to.  OK.

MR. KIRBY:  No, I -- I would need --  I'd need to look at that.  I -- I -- I -- I'm -- you know, let me get back to you on that one.

Q:  OK, thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Thank you. 

Aaron Mehta?

Q:  Hey, thanks, John.  So today is the three-month anniversary of the last time any nominees for top politically-appointed, Senate-confirmed jobs were announced.  Those obviously, Deputy Hicks and Colin Kahl.  So a few things on this:  first, are you expecting nominees to be announced in the next couple of weeks?  Two, has the secretary reviewed potential nominees and given his feedback to the White House?  And just more broadly, is there any concern that the slow pace of getting these nominees announced is going to cause people to drop out of consideration for jobs?

MR. KIRBY:  So there's a lot there, Aaron.  I -- I would say that the department continues to work with administration officials to identify for nomination talented individuals for these vacant jobs.  We very much understand the importance of filling these national security jobs with professionals fully qualified, able and willing to do the task.  There -- we -- we -- we understand the importance to national security of these -- of these jobs.

That said, I would tell you that of the approximately 350 appointee jobs here at the -- the department, we have to date filled about 97.  I just checked this morning -- 97 of the 350 or so.  Obviously, that there -- there is more work to be done, and we -- and we recognize that.  But we are focused first and foremost on identifying and nominating the -- the best, the most talented and most qualified people for these jobs, and not necessarily fixated on a predetermined timeline of how to do that.

And the last thing I'd say, Aaron, is that -- and you know this.  I mean, the -- the -- the nomination process does -- does not belong to us.  It belongs to the president of the United States, and -- and we respect that.  Our job is to -- is to help the -- the administration identify these individuals and recommend for nomination, but the nomination process is -- is done out of the White House.

I think I've got one more, and that's Dan De Luce.

Q:  Hey, thanks.  Just a couple of questions.  Do you have anything more on what the U.S. military is doing to help the government of Mozambique after that attack?  Obviously, there's some small-scale training that's been going on there, but I'm wondering if the U.S. is in discussions with the government there, or -- or offering any -- any assistance or support.

MR. KIRBY:  I'm not aware of any specific offer or request for support.  As I said yesterday, we remain committed to working together with the government of Mozambique to counter terrorism and violent extremism.  The training that you suggested is -- is a routine counterterrorism training, and is not related to the -- the events in Cabo Delgado.

Q:  And then separately, the -- China -- Chinese, the military's flown 20 aircraft into the air defense zone on Friday around Taiwan.  They flew eight more aircraft, I think, on Monday.  What's the department's view of -- of this activity there?

MR. KIRBY:  The -- the -- sorry.  The overflying of what?

Q:  China has been flying military aircraft into the air identification -- air defense identification zone around Taiwan, and 20, it was -- on Friday, it was 20 aircraft, and yesterday it was, I think, about eight, you know, fighter jets and other military aircraft, and I'm just wondering what the department's view of this pattern of activity...

MR. KIRBY:  This is not activity that we haven't seen before, Dan, and -- and I think we need to, you know, be mindful of that.  Again, nothing is changed about our commitment to aiding Taiwan in its self-defense.  I think that's about as far as I'd go on that today.

OK, thanks, everybody.