 Hello. Good afternoon, everyone. I do have quite a few items at the top, so you'll just bear with me, and then I'd be happy to jump in and start taking your questions. So earlier this week, as you may have seen, Secretary Austin gave opening remarks yesterday at the Ukraine Defense Industrial-Based Conference held here in Washington, D.C. The conference connected relevant U.S. and Ukrainian industry and government representatives to discuss initiatives to enhance Ukraine's defense industrial base and build on momentum generated by a successful event Ukraine hosted in Kyiv in September 2023, all of which signals strong U.S. support for enhanced industry partnership. As part of the conference, Dr. Bill Laplante, Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment, convened the eighth meeting of the National Armament Directors under the auspices of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group today. The meeting is being held here at the Pentagon. The first time the forum has convened here in the United States. This meeting brings together more than 40 nations, NATO, and the European Union to engage on industrial-based and sustainment challenges in support of Ukraine, both for their immediate requirements while also supporting Ukraine's long-term defense and national security needs. Later in that, in the day, Secretary Austin hosted Ukrainian Minister of Defense Umarov for a bilateral meeting. Secretary Austin highlighted the department's ongoing activities to meet Ukraine's urgent requirements, including the announcement of the 50-second tranche of security assistance from DOD inventories for Ukraine. The package included additional air defense capabilities, artillery ammunition, anti-tank weapons, and other equipment to help Ukraine counter Russia's ongoing war of aggression. This package utilized assistance previously authorized for Ukraine during prior fiscal years under the Presidential Drawdown Authority, but it is critical, as you all know, that Congress passed the President's National Security Supplemental Request to ensure we can continue to support Ukraine. Security assistance for Ukraine is a smart investment in our national security because it helps prevent a larger war in Europe while strengthening our defense industrial base and creating skilled jobs back home here for the American people. And without additional funding, the department may soon reach a point where it can't sustain the current level of support to Ukraine. Also yesterday, the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, in coordination with the department's V-22 Joint Program Office, announced an operational stand down for all Osprey variants in the wake of the November 29, CV-22 mishap off the coast of Japan. This action is being taken out of abundance of caution while the AFSOC investigation is conducted. As each service conducts operational safety reviews within their fleets, each will re-evaluate their respective grounding bulletins and then determine timelines for resuming flight operations in close coordination with the Joint Program Office. We'd also like to thank the government of Japan for all their assistance in the search and recovery efforts throughout this incident, and we will continue to work with them on sharing information and safety procedures during the investigation. Of course, our thoughts remain with the families of those airmen who are lost. Air Force Special Operations Command is investigating the CV-22 mishap and I'd refer you to them for any additional questions. Switching gears to Congress, earlier this week the Senate confirmed over 420 of our highly qualified general and flag officers. These holds have dragged on for months, degraded our military readiness, and forced far too many of our military families to put their lives on hold and endure even greater sacrifices. And while this was welcome use, we still have dozens of officers that still have had holds placed on them, some of whom are our four stars. We urge the Senate to confirm the remainder of our qualified military leaders as soon as possible so that we can have our team in place to meet this critical moment for our national security. And shifting gears again, next week Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks will visit locations in Silicon Valley, California. She will visit the Defense Innovation Unit where she will meet with DIU personnel who are accelerating the US military's adoption of commercial technology to strengthen national security and she will also receive an update on DIU projects through a series of capabilities demonstrations. She will also meet with a wide range of industry leaders to discuss the department's replicator initiative, discuss innovation across the department, and see demonstrations of AI-powered autonomous technologies. And just one more item. Earlier today, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin called his Royal Highness Prince Khalid bin Salaman, Saudi Minister of Defense to discuss Houthi threats to freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. We will have a readout coming shortly if you don't already have it in your inbox. With that, I'd be happy to open up to some questions. Tara, do you want to start us off? First on the Osprey, the Osprey makes up a sizable portion of the Marine Corps fleet, Air Fleet. How is Marine Corps an Air Force and Navy going to mitigate the loss of access to this aircraft while this investigation is going on? Well, because it's something that they are instituting in terms of the stand down, I'd really refer you to them to speak to how they are managing this stand down and how it's impacting or not their own operations. So I'd refer you to them to speak to that. That is a Secretary concerned about a loss of this many aircraft at once with so many things going on. The Secretary fully supports the services and they're out of the abundance of caution to stand these fleet, these aircraft down. This is something that we've done before. Whenever there is mishap that a service feels needs either more investigation or just out of an abundance of caution, there have been stand downs of fleets before of other platforms. And so the Secretary, of course, supports the services decision to do that. And again, I'd refer you to the services regarding their details on the positive operations. And then last, the Pentagon for more than a year has been trying to stand up a flight safety office where all of this data is supposed to go to be able to look across services, see trends. What's the status of that office and is it looking to this incident? I don't have a status update on the office but as I mentioned in the beginning we do have the joint program office for this platform that is coordinating with the services and other customers who use the Osprey. So that is something that is a connecting office that is coordinating across the services and to our allies and partners, but I don't have an update for you on that particular office at this time. It's supposed to be at a Deputy Secretary at a defense level to really elevate flight safety and when concerns are raised by maintainers or units elevate them to a point where you get a very high level of visibility, but it's been more than a year since the office was supposed to be up and running. Yeah. So again, I would say that Secretary takes safety and security as one of his top priorities. We are the services are out of an abundance of caution again putting a pause on this platform. I don't have an update for you on that particular office, but it's not to say that safety and security of our service members is not a concern. That's exactly why you're seeing the Navy the Marine Corps and the Air Force do what they're doing. But I would refer you to them to speak to more details on that. Yeah. Thanks. Laura. Yeah. Can you please give us an update on the attacks in the Rockins area? How many have we had? How many injuries have there been altogether and have there been any more incidents in the Red Sea since yesterday? So in terms of any other additional instances or attacks since yesterday, I'm not tracking anything that occurred in the Red Sea or at any of our bases. I believe as of today, there have been approximately 78 attacks on our bases, but I don't have anything that's happened within the last 24 hours. Does the department assess that there's been a slowdown in the attacks in the last couple of days a week or so? Well, I mean, and I feel like I was asked this question a few weeks ago when there was an uptick in attacks and yet we do have like a day or two that will go without any attack. So it's really hard to say. I would direct you to the forces, these hostile militant groups that continue to attack our coalition forces and our troops in Iraq and Syria on why they are doing what they're doing and when they decide to do it, but in the last 24 hours we haven't seen any attacks on our forces. Should that change, of course, we would let you know, but that's the difference that I have as of right now when I'm standing up here. Oh, I'm sorry. As of December, I would say December 4th, it's still about 66 of our folks who have received non-serious, non-life-threatening injuries all who have returned to work. I know you'll probably ask about TBI's but I just don't have an update for you on that at this time. Thank you. Do the United States invite the four Russians for world crimes? Is this just because they studied the world in Ukraine? Yeah, that's something that I saw the Department of Justice announce yesterday. I'd direct you to them for more information. Have you had any name over those people? I don't. Was Putin included in this? Again, I would direct you to the Department of Justice who launched, or who announced that yesterday. I don't have more information on those names. One more? Sure. The United States Space Force Command announced that possibility of destroying North Korea's military satellite. And when do you think that time will be coming? I'm sorry, I've not seen that report but I don't have anything for you on that. I'm going to go to the phones here. Idris, Reuters. There have been a number of reports in the past couple of hours about the killing of the Reuters journalist Assam Abdullah and injuring of other journalists in Lebanon in October. And one of the stories from Reuters says definitively that an Israeli tank was responsible for firing two shells that killed Assam. Does the DOD have an independent assessment of what happened that day? Secondly, have you talked to the Israelis about the killing? And thirdly, do you believe Israel killed journalists as a matter of policy? Thanks, Idris. So in terms of an independent assessment, I just don't have that for you at this time. I've seen the reports out there but that's not something that we've been able to assess independently here in the building. Again, I think you've seen with all of our readouts that the Secretary has had with Minister Galant with other senior leader engagements from across this administration. We continue to urge Israel to conduct its operations in a targeted manner as it is seeking out and addressing a brutal terrorist organization within Gaza. We continue to urge Israel to uphold the laws of armed conflict and humanitarian law and the protection of innocent civilians which includes members of the press and so that's something that has come up that we've talked about publicly. It has come up privately as well and I'll just leave it at that. Konstantin, Military Times. Thanks, Sabrina. I wanted to, going back to the Osprey, in August you said that the Department has confidence in the Osprey as a platform. Given everything that has come out this past week, is that still true? Is that still an accurate statement? Thanks, Konstantin, for the question and I think as you heard me say to Tara earlier again, we've seen this done before with other platforms out of an abundance of caution. The Air Force, the Marine Corps and the Navy are standing down their Osprey fleet. I would direct you to the services to speak to of when they're going to be back up in the air. But as you can understand, there will always be an inherent risk in military aviation and to mitigate that risk we will continue to maintain the high level of operational standardization for all of our pilots and for all of the crew. As you probably know, the Osprey is one of the premier assault aviation systems that we have. It is versatile, it's speed and it's vertical lift capabilities are not met by any other platform existing in fixed or rotary wing platforms so it's an incredibly useful platform for all of our services to use. Again out of an abundance of caution there has been a stand down and I would direct you to the services for when those will be back up in the air. Alright, I will take one more from the phone and then I'll come back in the room. Chris Gordon. Thanks Sabrina. Senator Warren expressed concern during Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday about too many service members are receiving lasting injuries or losing their lives due to accidents. Does the Pentagon share that view and what can be done to make training safer broadly? Does the Department need to review training accidents in whatever form, aviation or other? Well thanks Chris for the question. Well as you can see, I mean the Air Force is doing an investigation right now into the mishap that happened off the coast of Japan and we're looking at safety security of our personnel whether it be in our Air Force our Army, our Navy, our Marine Corps we take that very seriously. That's something that the Secretary I know is a priority for him and so we are evaluating any time that there is a mishap and there is an investigation taking the lessons learned from that and applying it and making sure that safety protocols and procedures are followed and enhanced as needed. I'm going to come back in the room. Tom. Thanks Grina. Two questions. One on the Osprey. Does the servicers have the ability to do a stand-up independently or does they have to be serviced wide? They can do it independently. Thanks. And the second question unrelated to Osprey. The President of Guiana yesterday said that he's requesting possible U.S. military support because of oil and oil fields. This is not getting ahead of a decision but this is the clarification. Would such a request stay at Southcom or would it have to come to the Pentagon? How does that work? Well of course any decision whether it's requesting military support would originate at the COCOM and then of course flow up through OSD. Thank you. Great. Fadi. Thank you Sabrina. I want to go back to Idris's question. So this is the you said you saw the report I guess you were talking about the Human Rights Watch targeting Reuters photographer my late friend Issam Abdullah and six other journalists included Jazeera and AFP. This incident happened in Lebanon but it didn't happen in Gaza where Hamas exists. According to the reports it was deliberate and it amounts to a war crime. In addition to these discussion does the Secretary support accountability when it comes to the killing of Issam Abdullah and the targeting of these journalists? Well first Fadi I'm sorry I had no idea that you knew this journalist and of course our thoughts on behalf of the Department are with you and of course the family. Look we are in constant communication your daily communication with the Israeli sorry with the Secretary's Israeli counterparts and also here from senior levels engaging with the Israeli government. You've seen all types from the Vice President's office her National Security Advisor was just engaging with his Israeli counterparts to discuss what is happening within Gaza and around Israel. We do not want to see this conflict spread out into a wider regional conflict. As you know we've sent and surged assets into the region to bolster our deterrence and send a message that we do not want to see this conflict widen and that also means any conflict or clashes along the northern border. I've said it before and I'll say it again the targeting of innocent civilians is something that we take very seriously and so we are in all of our conversations with the Israeli government urging that they always take into account innocent civilians as they are conducting their operations against a terrorist organization that is Hamas. Thank you. On a separate issue Israeli forces announced yesterday that they have received so far almost 10,000 tons of equipment and ammunition and almost 200 airshipment. Are you able to say whether all of that came from the U.S. or how the proportion of U.S. aid as part of what was announced? I can't say for certain what part is U.S. support. We've been very clear that we're going to continue to support Israel with security assistance through FMS and FMF and as long as they need that support to conduct their operations against Hamas but in terms of the announcement that the Israeli government made I can't tell you what specifically in that package that was delivered was U.S. military assistance. All I can tell you is that we are continuing to support Israel and I'll just leave it at that. For the future, this is not a question. Will you be able to compile the amount of assistance that's been provided, whether in a dollar term or I don't know, weight or whatever? That's something that I know you've asked about that's something that we're working through. The difference and what makes it difficult is that the way we provide security assistance, let's say to Ukraine is through coming off of our stock shelves and it's through the presidential drawdown authority which is different from the funding mechanism such as FMS and FMF. We are working on it. It's not that I've forgotten, I certainly haven't. As you know we've said that we're providing broad strokes. Israel with ammunition, precision guided munitions and then air defense of course as well. Nancy. I just want to start by reiterating by these points the war is two months today and I think this information we've been asking for for a few weeks and given that at least part of it is paid for by tax dollars I just want to reiterate how much we'd like to see that information as soon as possible. I had a question about the Biden administration's announcement earlier this week, kind of issuing a dire warning that if Congress is not passed funding for Ukraine by the end of the year it could affect resourcing for that war. Some Republicans are saying that the situation is not as urgent as the administration has presented it because there's at least a billion in funds and given the pace of funding or weapons that have been provided so far that that money can stretch out for a bit of time I wanted to know if you could give me a Pentagon assessment in terms of when funds could run out and how urgently this funding needs to be provided for Ukraine. Is there a point where the Pentagon feels without that funding in the next weeks it threatens the war itself? Sure, so I think the assertion was that Ukraine doesn't need this funding and that they could manage with what we have left. Is that what you were summarizing? The U.S. has enough funding, there's still not remaining funding that it could last for it could be stretched out for a few more months that it's not as urgent as the president presented yesterday. Yeah. He said it needed to be before the holidays. Right, I would Sorry, Dominic. I would strongly push back against that assertion. The biggest problem that we are running up against is we don't have enough money to backfill our own stocks, which means we don't have enough to continue to supply Ukraine with what it needs because it is our weapons, our capabilities, our systems being pulled off our shelves and being shipped over to Ukraine. And so if we can't backfill, that's going to also impact our own readiness, which means that's going to impact what we can provide Ukraine. And so I would really push back against that assertion. And till very recently, we've enjoyed bipartisan support from Congress and that security assistance has been critical in providing Ukraine what it needs on the battlefield. And I would just remind you that everyone thought that Putin would take Kiev in three days. And the Ukrainians have done an incredible job of not only defending Kiev, but then there were other battles that they were continue to push the Russians back, continue to push them into the east and into the south. They are making very good use of our capabilities. And not just ours, allies and partners as well, providing them with the weapons systems that they need. And so you've heard the President say, you've heard the Secretary say it, we're in it with Ukraine for the long haul. It's not just about making sure Ukraine has what it needs to defend itself on the battlefield. It's about making sure that Russia also gets the message that it cannot expand into other countries into other sovereign countries because that's exactly what Vladimir Putin wants. And you've seen some support from both sides of the aisle in Congress. I think there's a small majority that oppose sending more funding for Ukraine. We're working through that. We believe that the urgent supplemental request that we submitted to Congress is the right thing for Congress to pass. And we're hopeful that it gets done. One last topic. Can we get some sense of the number of stories that the Ike and Ford strike groups have conducted? Just I think we haven't had any real visibility in sort of how busy they've been as they have been in the Mediterranean. I'd love if possible some data on that. Yeah, we can take that. Yeah, no problem. Yes, over here. Thank you. Comparing to the last couple of weeks, there are very few attacks on international force and your force in Iraq. So do you believe it is because of your response to the previous attacks? And if I may add this, do you believe the Iraqi government can protect your forces that are in Iraq at the invitation of the government of Iraq? Well, just as you said, we're in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government. They've been one of our partners in the region and within Iraq in protecting our forces. And of course, the mission, the reason why we are in Iraq is to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS. So that the Iraqi military has been a partner in that effort. Look, in terms of the attacks on our forces, I think it's important to remember that it's good that we have not seen attacks on our forces in the last 24 hours. We would like to see that continue. I can't speak to whether that will be the case. I can't predict the future. But I would remind you that when we have decided to respond, it has been deliberate. It has been effective. Our strikes have been able to destroy weapons facilities, command and control node, storage facilities that these IRGC backed groups use. So I think it's important that while we did see a spate of attacks against our forces, they were largely not successful with minor damage to infrastructure. And so, of course, we'll always respond back at a time and place of our choosing, but I'll just leave it at that. Yes. Thank you. I have two questions on Osprey. Is this the first time for U.S. military to stop flying all Osprey variants at the same time? My second question, can you give us a sense of a rough time frame of how long the stand-down will last? Is it likely to be a matter of weeks and months rather than days? I'd refer you to the services to speak to how long the stand-down will last in terms of if this has been the first stand-down. This is not. We've done this with other platforms. We've done it with the Osprey before, but I'd let the services speak to that. Yeah, and then I'll come in the back. Thank you. Sure. Why did it take a week to, you know, reach the decision of stand-down? Well, again, we started conducting the investigation as soon as the November 29th mishap happened. As the investigation was being conducted, the Air Force felt the need to issue that stand-down, but for more information I would direct you to the Air Force to speak to that. Osprey, what is the potential material failure that was indicated in the preliminary investigation? Could you give us a kind of more specific or clarification? I unfortunately don't have more information. I would direct you to the Air Force to speak to that. Again, this is an ongoing investigation, so I certainly want to get ahead of that at this time. Yeah. Thank you, Sabrina. As you mentioned of the opening when you came, that there's a call between Secretary Austin and his Saudi counterpart, and they were talking about the Houthis. So today, the NSC coordinator, John Kirby, he said, we are not in an armed conflict with the Houthis. So does the DOD share with Mr. Kirby this view? You are not in a war with the Houthis, and how so you can prevent this conflict from widening and escalating? Yeah, absolutely. We share that view. We're not in an armed conflict with the Houthis. We have seen drones and missile shot from Houthi-controlled areas within Yemen, not necessarily targeting our ships, but of course targeting most likely commercial vessels that are transiting through the Red Sea. And so part of why we are in the region is to bolster our deterrence, but to also ensure the free passageway of commercial ships that are transiting through one of the most vital waterways in the world. And so, yeah, no, I completely agree with what Mr. Kirby said earlier today. We don't seek conflict. We don't want to see this widen out to a regional war or into the larger region. And that's why you've seen the secretary make the decisions he did to send two carrier strike groups, one in the eastern Med and then one, of course, in the St. Com area of responsibility to deter, to send the message of deterrence, to send a message to Iran and its proxies who would want to inflict whether it's damage or harm to Iraq and Syria or disrupt commercial commerce in the Red Sea and in the region. So that was a very deliberate decision by the secretary. Yeah. Yeah, thank you. So just a circle back on Ukraine. The Ukrainians admitted that their counter offensive has failed. Do you agree with that assessment and do you believe the war is a stalemate? And then how do you think the Ukrainians can break out of that? Does, like, more money in weapons help or do you think they need a new strategy? I think your summary is a bit short. I don't think that they would say it's failed. We have seen them make progress in the counter offensive. It might not be the gains that they want to be making every single day, but there is incremental progress. I think that's important to remember. I'd let the Ukrainians speak to their own operations and how they can change what they need to do for the next phase of the war, which is entering into winter. We have provided them the training, the equipment, the support that they need to be successful. And we feel very confident that they will be successful. And part of that is also invigorating their defense industrial base, which is why you saw the secretary speak at commerce just yesterday about the need for industry to partner with Ukraine so they can have a robust defense industrial base as this war continues. But I would let the Ukrainians really speak to their own operations and characterize what they see as success on the battlefield. Do you agree the war is a stalemate right now? I would let the Ukrainians speak to their own operations. Again, we feel confident that they have what they need to be successful on the battlefield. Great. I saw a question over here and then we'll wrap it up. I have two questions in the Middle East. The first is the U.S. region, 13 individuals and entities that are funding the Houthis in Yemen. Do you believe that will slow down the amount of attacks that we're seeing in the Red Sea in that region over the coming weeks, or is that something that will be more long-term in slowing them down? And then secondly, what is the Pentagon's assessment of Israel's campaign to eliminate Hamas and Gaza? So in terms of the, I think you're referring to sanctions that were issued by the Department of Treasury, I would direct you to them to take more to the sanctions that were placed on those 13 individuals. Look, when you're hitting a financial network that has obvious effects, I can't predict that that slows down or stops any attacks. We can only continue to send the message that we do not want to see this war or a war widened into a regional conflict. And we will continue to respond should our leaders of our ships feel the need to in self-defense. And I'm sorry, your second question. Is the current assessment of Israel's campaign to eliminate Hamas and Gaza? Oh, sorry. Look, I'd let Israel speak to that. We continue to engage with the Israelis on their targeting of a terrorist organization in Gaza. We are talking to them, the Secretary is talking to Minister Galant on an almost long-term basis. We are still getting updates but also voicing support and concern where he needs to. Did I see one more question? No. Yes, one in the back and then we'll wrap it up. Thank you. So director Ray from the FBI said a few days ago in a hearing on the Judiciary Committee in the Senate that the United States, was seeing terrorist alerts that are unprecedented and he even compared them or accepted the comparison to what the United States was seeing before 9-11. Do you coincide with that? Are you also worried or are you concerned about an unprecedented level of terrorist threats not only inside the United States but also do United States have any interests abroad? I would let the Department of Justice really speak to that and the Department of Homeland Security speak to the level of terrorist threats within the United States. That's not something this building can really speak to. Of course, we always monitor threats around the world, partners and allies and threats to our interests abroad. That's something that we're going to continue to do but I don't have anything to announce in terms of anything that we've observed that would change our behavior. Thank you very much.