Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby
MR. KIRBY: All right. OK, I don't have -- wow, that's
a weird echo, isn't it? I don't have any opening statement today so
we'll just go right to it. Bob?
Q: Good morning, John. I have a question for you on the attack last
week in Syria. In the absence of any new information, are you are
willing to or able to offer on battle damage assessment, can you say
whether the attack has had any early effect on the militias in terms of
their mobility or their ability -- the -- whether it's lessened the
threat from them? Have they responded in some way and has Iran reacted
in any way in terms of their support inside Iraq?
MR. KIRBY: We haven't seen any demonstrable -- demonstrable -- yeah, I
think that's right, I think that's the right way -- demonstrable? Yeah
-- yeah, it's -- it didn't sound right when I said it. I don't think
we've seen any demonstrable effect yet, Bob, and I certainly wouldn't
talk about intelligence issues.
The last thing I would add is just that as I said last week, a -- one
of the -- one of the things we were certainly hoping to achieve as a
result of that strike was to deter future attacks by militia groups on
our people, our facilities and our Iraqi partners, and we certainly hope
that it has that effect.
There hasn't been -- since the -- the strike last week, there hasn't
been any attacks by militia groups on our people and we -- we hope that
that remains the case. OK, in the room, yeah?
Q: (Inaudible) on this. So when you said one fighter was killed and
two were injured, is this the final count or are you still working on
that assessment?
MR. KIRBY: That is a -- that is a -- the assessment right now. I
think it's fair to say that we'll continue to look at -- at the
situation there over coming days but I -- I -- it hasn't changed and I
have no expectations that there'll be specific changes going forward but
we're going to keep looking at this, OK?
Caitlyn?
Q: Hello. My question is just kind of an update on the National Guard
members in the Capitol. Can you say how many remain in DC and has there
been any request to extend -- to extend them past mid-March? Thanks.
MR. KIRBY: So right now, Caitlyn, there's a little bit more than
5,200 -- and we can get you the exact number if you need that -- but
it's a little bit more than 5,200 in the Capitol region right now and we
are not in receipt of -- of a request or a requirement to extend them
beyond the 12th of March. So currently, that is still the plan. Barb?
Q: A couple of things. First, can I ask you again on domestic
terrorism, the hearing tomorrow with -- with Mr. Salesses -- and
apologies if I'm mispronouncing ...
MR. KIRBY: Salesses.
Q: Salesses, his name. What is the message that -- he will be
testifying on behalf of the department. What is the message the
department has for Capitol Hill right now, for Congress tomorrow, that
he would be delivering on how you dealt with January 6th and the
improvements you might want to see, both how -- how -- what will he
essentially be telling Congress?
MR. KIRBY: I don't want to get -- telegraph or get ahead of -- of
congressional testimony, Barb. That's just usually not a good habit for
us to get into and I certainly don't want to speak for Mr. Salesses, who
is preparing his -- for his testimony today. So I think I'm just going
to let it -- we'll let the testimony happen.
As you know, it's -- it's under investigation, the events that day,
and we also don't want to prejudice that work that's going on to
investigate it.
Q: So if you are still having the National Guard there until
mid-March, what is the reason that DOD has been -- and the Department of
the Army, obviously, has been given for the need to keep the Guard
there? Why are you still there?
MR. KIRBY: We are still there because we're at the -- it's at the --
we're at the -- let me start over again. Our National Guard troops are
on Capitol Hill at the request of city authorities, as well as federal
and local law enforcement requests to supplement security on Capitol
Hill. And you know, that request had originally been assessed to be a
requirement up until the middle of this month. And again, that's the
operating understanding that we're still going on.
We are in constant communication with the local law enforcement,
Secret Service, Capitol Police, as well as city officials about the
presence on -- on Capitol Hill. Again, I don't have any additional
requests or requirements to -- to talk to today, but as the Secretary
has said, he wouldn't want them there one day longer than is needed, and
it's the -- without getting into specific threats and intelligence, the
-- the belief of the department is that this is still a valid mission
for these troops to be doing right now.
Q: To make sure I'm understanding you, even if you can't be specific,
you are saying in the view of the Defense Department and the Secretary,
there is still threat-based intelligence that requires your presence?
MR. KIRBY: In the view of the Secretary of Defense, it is still a
valid requirement to have National Guardsmen in the number that we have
today on Capitol Hill.
Q: All right.
MR. KIRBY: Yeah.
Kristina?
Q: Hey. Good to see you again.
MR. KIRBY: You, too.
Q: There's a report coming out of a local station in Michigan saying
that the Michigan National Guard troops in D.C. are being fed
undercooked food with metal shavings. I don't know if you've gotten to
see that yet. Has the -- it looks like no. So there's a report going
around about -- about this.
MR. KIRBY: Well, get it -- get it to me and my folks, and we'll take a
look at that. I -- I -- that's the first I heard of it. Obviously, we
want to make sure that all our service men and women, and certainly,
these National Guardsmen that are standing out there in the cold
guarding the Capitol, that they -- that they get all the support and
quality-of-life support and care that they deserve. So that's the first
I've heard it. I'm -- I'm happy to -- to take that back and -- and we'll
-- we'll take a look at it.
Q: And then secondly, if I could take a stab at this, looking at the
training materials that were put out on extremism by the Sec Def last
week, the four examples have to do with white supremacy, which is kind
of a no-brainer that it's absolutely not -- not OK. So what is sort of
new about this sort of extremism push? You know, what is -- what's new
about -- I mean, there's already policies and -- and UCMJ provisions on,
you know, white supremacists not being OK in the military. So what --
what exactly is new about -- about this?
MR. KIRBY: Well, and we've talked about this a lot, Kristina, in the
last few weeks, so I mean, I -- I would first point you back to previous
statements that the Secretary has made himself, as well as I have from
the podium. So I -- I don't want to belabor it too much, since we've
gone through it before. But clearly, the events of January 6th and the
-- the presence of some veterans in that crowd has -- has certainly got
everybody's attention here.
But even before that, in the previous administration, there were
valid concerns about extremism in the military to the degree that the
previous acting Secretary of Defense asked the personnel and readiness
people to do a report on -- on extremism, and -- and they did that in
the fall. And that report, again, four or five months ago, validated
that extremism is a growing concern inside the ranks.
Now, how big is it? We don't know. As the Secretary said, the numbers
are probably larger than we would like. Well, certainly, they're going
to be larger than we like, but larger than we probably expect them to
be, and perhaps less than the headlines might suggest, but we just don't
know. And given the events of January 6th, the Secretary wants to
continue to put a focus on this. And so that's -- that's what's -- it's
not that it's not a -- it -- it's not that it isn't a new concern. I
mean, he -- he cites and often talks about an event back in Fort Bragg
in the mid-1990s when he was a -- a commander there with white
supremacists and neo-Nazis in the ranks -- skinheads, to be specific,
who committed violent acts out in town. It's not like we haven't been
aware that this is an issue, but I think there's renewed concerns giving
-- given what has happened in the last few months, that -- that it's a
problem we still don't have a firm grip on and firm handle on, and he
wants to -- and he wants to do that. OK?
So -- and I think, you know, many of you have asked. That -- that
report has -- that -- that the report that was ordered by the previous
administration in the fall, it has found its way into the public domain
and I -- and so I -- we're -- we expect to be able to make that report
available to all of you, hopefully as early as today, but we're -- we're
working through the machinations of doing that.
Q: I guess I'm just trying to tease out the difference between these
white supremacist groups versus these anti-government violent
extremists, and how much of the focus is on, you know, which -- which
group. And if there's more information...
MR. KIRBY: We haven't -- we haven't parsed it out like that,
Kristina. I mean, if you looked at the things that the Secretary said,
it's about an extremist ideology, and that can take many forms. So it's
not just about white supremacy, but about extremist ideologies,
including of a criminal nature, you know, gangs and that kind of thing.
So we're not -- we're not trying to be too proscriptive in what we're --
in what we're defining here. But -- but identifying it is -- is a
challenge, and -- and we're trying to get our arms around that.
Idrees?
Q: Hey, John. If I could just go back to the Capitol and the National
Guard. Yesterday, a -- a bit of the barbed wire surrounding the Capitol
was removed. We're getting some people saw it as a sign that the threat
was reduced. Is there any planning at DOD for the troops to -- to leave
the Capitol, given that there are only, I think, what, 10 days left. So
I -- is there any planning, or is there just no planning right now, and
we're going to wait until the 12th to find out?
MR. KIRBY: Idrees, I mean, like I said, we're roughly 5,200 today,
and I mean, so you -- we've seen a continual, gradual but continual
decrease in the numbers. As I said, right now, the -- the mission is
funded and -- and slated to -- to end on 12th of March. We're in
constant communication with, again, Capitol Police, Secret Service, and
local law enforcement, as well as city officials about the requirement.
And you know, it -- I don't want to get ahead of -- of any of that.
We're still planning on the mission continuing until the 12th of March.
That is not an insurmountable number of -- of men and women in -- in
terms of departure. It -- you know, it -- it's -- it's not like you have
to -- it's not -- it's not such a big number that -- that they couldn't
all leave en masse or in -- in large groups, you know, on the -- on the
12th.
So I don't -- again, I don't -- it -- I don't want to get ahead of --
of -- and I certainly wouldn't speak for the National Guard but I don't
want to get ahead of -- of specific planning but -- but we're
comfortable that we have the number that we need on Capitol Hill right
now, we're comfortable in the conversations we're having with local law
enforcement and city officials, as well as Capitol Police, and, you
know, if and when the situation changes, we'll -- we'll certainly keep
you apprised. Yeah, Meghann?
Q: Has the Secretary put out any more guidance or had any more
meetings about the deliverables that he wants to see from the extremism
stand down?
MR. KIRBY: No, not that I'm aware of. No additional guidance, no. Yeah, Abraham?
Q: Thank you. Again, back to National Guard. Is March 4th a problem
for you guys? Is that something you've been -- the Guard is preparing
for, the -- the March 4th QAnon conspiracy date? And are there
preparations, are there troop movements? I've noticed sort of some
gathering of more Guard members closer together on ...
MR. KIRBY: I won't speak to specific threats. I haven't done that yet
and I'm not going to start today and obviously the -- these Guardsmen
are well trained, well equipped and the -- their -- their commanders
will, as you might expect, take all of the precautions they need to make
sure that these Guardsmen can do the job that they've been assigned to
do. I'll leave it at that. Jim?
Q: Yeah, just a -- I -- just change the subject a little bit. Colin
Kahl is getting his confirmation hearing on Thursday. Do you have an
idea when the nominees for the other sort of jobs will -- will be
announced? You know, I'm talking about the undersecretaries, Secretary
of the Army, Navy, Air Force.
MR. KIRBY: No, I -- I don't have any personnel announcements and of
course, as you know, Jim, those sorts of announcements come from the
White House and I wouldn't -- I wouldn't get ahead of White House
decision making.
Q: Well I tried.
MR. KIRBY: Yep, it's a fair question.
(Laughter.)
OK, one more? Two more.
Q: On Afghanistan, Ambassador Khalilzad is -- in Afghanistan
(inaudible). Does he carry any, like, decision about the troop level in
Afghanistan, also maybe decision about the strategy -- the review --
strategy review?
(CROSSTALK)
MR. KIRBY: I certainly won't speak -- I certainly won't speak for Ambassador Khalilzad and -- and …
Q: How about troop levels, do you have any ...
MR. KIRBY: Nothing's changed from our perspective, there's still an
interagency review going on to -- to look at the Doha agreement, to look
at compliance with it and no decisions have been made about troop force
posture in Afghanistan. Barb?
Q: Can you just go back over what you were saying -- any more detail
on what it is you were talking about that you hoped to make available as
soon as today?
MR. KIRBY: This is the extremism report, many of you have asked for
this. This is a report that was done by the previous administration …
Q: (Inaudible) Miller …
MR. KIRBY: Correct -- correct and we're working through the
machinations of trying to make that public for you, to make it available
for you.
Q: When you release this report, will it be -- I don't know how to
ask what I want to ask. Will it be, you know -- will this administration
have edited anything out of it or put anything additional into it or
will it be as the Miller team concluded it, finished it?
(CROSSTALK)
MR. KIRBY: ... we will not edit, we will not censor. I mean, the idea
is to put it up so you can see it. There's some -- there's just some
things we need to do on a staffing perspective to make sure that -- that
-- that people are aware that it's going up but ...
Q: ... (Inaudible) because this is one of the few reports that bridges both administrations.
MR. KIRBY: Right, right.
Q: So it wasn't really finished or was it? I don't know the answer.
MR. KIRBY: It was complete.
Q: Before Miller left?
STAFF: This wasn't Miller's report, this was –
Q: It was a March due-out report.
STAFF: This is the one that was in October, so under Secretary Esper, was sent by P&R to the -- to Congress.
(CROSSTALK)
MR. KIRBY: ... one from the fall. I'm sorry if I confused that, I
didn't mean to. It's the one from the fall but I -- regardless of who
signed it or didn't, I think the -- the point you're asking is, you
know, will we -- will we -- we edit it in any way before we make it
public, and the answer is no, we won't.
Q: I was asking about a different one then.
MR. KIRBY: OK, well you -- OK, then I was confused cause I thought you were asking about the one Chris was talking about.
(Laughter.)
This is the one -- OK, well now you got me, Barb. This is the one from the fall.
Q: Got it, no worries.
MR. KIRBY: OK, and it will go up in its entirety but I think you'll
see that it validates the concerns that Secretary Austin has expressed
about extremism in the ranks. It -- it very much supports our view that
-- that this is a real problem, and the scope of it is not fully known
but -- but that doesn't -- that doesn't mean it's an insignificant
issue.
OK, thanks, everybody.
Q: Thank you.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you.
Posts
