 Good afternoon everyone, just a few things at the top and then we'll get right to your questions. Earlier today, Secretary Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Brown, hosted the 18th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group virtually, which comprises 50-plus countries who came together or come together rather monthly to coordinate security assistance for Ukraine. The contact group continues to make a collective impact on the international military support to Ukraine as they continue to defend themselves from Russia's unprovoked war of aggression. In total, this coalition has committed more than $80 billion in security assistance to Ukraine, and important work continues via the capability coalitions focused on Ukraine's air force, artillery, maritime operations, ground-based air defense, demining, and information technology. In his opening comments for today's contact group, Secretary Austin reaffirmed U.S. support for a free, secure and sovereign Ukraine, and that we will continue to work hard alongside international allies and partners to ensure that Ukraine receives the capabilities it needs to protect its citizens and defend its sovereignty for the winter and beyond. Separately, as you heard us announce last night in a joint statement, the U.S. and U.K. with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands conducted strikes yesterday against eight Houthi targets in Yemen in response to the Iranian regime-backed Houthis continued attacks against international and commercial shipping as well as naval vessels transiting the Red Sea. These strikes were precise, proportionate, and intended to further disrupt and degrade the capabilities the Houthis have been using to threaten global trade and the lives of innocent mariners. Targets included a Houthi underground storage site and locations associated with the Houthis missile and air surveillance capabilities. Of note, shortly after taking these strikes, an additional Houthi target was struck by the U.S. in self-defense, destroying an anti-ship cruise missile that was prepared to launch and which presented an imminent threat to vessels operating in the region. Again, our aim remains to de-escalate tensions and restore stability in the Red Sea. But as our joint statement yesterday emphasized, we will not hesitate to defend the lives and the free flow of commerce in one of the world's most critical waterways and the face of continued threats. With that, I'm happy to take your questions. We'll go to Associated Press Lita. Two things, Pat. One, can you give us an update on Secretary Austin's condition and any estimated, expected time that he will return to the building? Do you want to do that first? Sure. In terms of return to the building, I don't have anything to announce today. Of course, we'll continue to keep you updated. The Secretary continues to recuperate from home. He's recovering well. As I highlighted last week, part of his care at home continues to be physical therapy. But again, we'll keep you updated on his return date to the Pentagon. And secondly, on the strikes last night, first, just clarification on what you just said, the additional unilateral strike, how long after that initial barrage did that happen? And then can you provide a more detailed BDA at this point? Last night, they weren't able to say much about what they thought the impact of the strikes were. Sure. In terms of the self-defense strike, a rough number, probably within 15 to 30 minutes of the main operation there. In terms of post-strike assessments, CENTCOM is continuing to assess the outcomes of the strikes. So I don't have anything specific on that other than to say that we believe that we achieved good effects. I can tell you that since January 11th, we've assessed that we've destroyed or degraded over 25 missile launch and deployment facilities, more than 20 missiles. Plus, we've struck unmanned aerial vehicle, coastal radar, and air surveillance capabilities, as well as weapon storage areas with good effects. We'll continue to assess and provide you updates as we're able to. Tom. First of all, back, can you give us an estimate of how much who these have been decorated by the numbers you just gave out, percentage-wise ballpark? Again, Tom, I can't go into the specifics in terms of the totality of their capabilities and provide percentages. Other than, again, it's fairly significant when you look at the missile launch and deployment facilities, missiles. You're talking over 50 when you add those numbers together in addition to the other capabilities. So clearly a degradation of capability. We have been very focused on targeting the kinds of things that they've been employing or using to conduct attacks against international shipping and mariners, and that will continue to be our focus. And so the last Houthi attack that I'm tracking was on 18th of January, so five days ago. As you know, since that time, we have taken several self-defense strikes when there was an imminent threat or an anticipated launch. But again, we'll continue to stay focused on that. Can you give us an update on Al-Assad damage assessment? And also, there were two service members wounded. What's their status? And then I guess you're going to be monitoring others for TBI, potentially numbers. And finally, was this the first time ballistic missiles were fired at the U.S. personnel in Iraq? Yeah, thanks, Tom. So a couple of things there. So in terms of Al-Assad and the attack that we saw over the weekend, to my knowledge, no significant damage to the facilities. I am tracking reports today of another attack at Al-Assad, which were, you know, heard those reports, we're looking into it. And so we'll have more to provide on that as it becomes available. In terms of the personnel that were injured in the attack over the weekend, at the time, we were tracking two U.S. service personnel that suffered TBI. Since then, we have identified two additional service members for total four. To my knowledge, all have returned to duty at this point. But again, as you've seen in these kinds of things in the past, those numbers can fluctuate, so we'll continue to pay attention to that. Thanks. The last ballistic missile attacks were in November, November 21st of last year, also at Al-Assad. Jennifer. Pat, what kind of drones are the Houthis using? Are they the same Iranian drones that are being used and shipped to Ukraine? Jennifer, I don't have this specific variant, but based on my understanding, these are one-way attack drones of Iranian origin. Okay. And can you explain just generally the challenges that Ukraine will face if it doesn't get more military aid soon? Sure. You know, obviously the continued lack of funding has forced us to pause drawing down additional items from our inventories, given the implications for our own military readiness. And this, of course, prevents us from meeting Ukraine's most urgent battlefield needs to include things like artillery rounds, anti-tank weapons, air defense interceptors. Also, without additional funding, it prevents us from being able to provide systems and equipment to meet both their medium and longer-term requirements and help them sustain systems that we've previously provided to them. And so, again, we will continue to work closely with Congress and urge supplemental funding as soon as possible. Will they lose if they don't get more weapons? Well, I don't want to predict the outcomes in the battlefield. Obviously, Ukraine has a vote when it comes to fighting on the battlefield. But clearly, you know, the threat is real. And I think the fact that Russia continues to demonstrate an intent to fight against Ukraine and to occupy Ukraine and to eliminate Ukraine as a country highlights the fact that this is a serious security threat that is not going to go away. So the sooner that we're able to continue to provide the levels of support that we have, the better not only for Ukraine but for the international community. Is this the first time the U.S. has not been able to pledge anything to the contact group? Was anything pledged today? Any long-range weapons? Any more Abrams tanks? Yeah, I'm not tracking any specific material support. But of course, we do continue to provide support, for example, training and, of course, leadership via the capability coalitions that I highlighted in the topper. But the point is, in order for us to provide the capabilities that Ukraine needs on the battlefield today, but also in the longer term, we would really appreciate the support of Congress. Thank you, Karla. Thank you. The U.S. Secretary General just now is talking about the conflict in the Middle East. He's mentioning the Houthis. He's mentioning the U.S. and the UK strikes. He's mentioning what's going on with striking in Iraq both Israelis and the United States. And he's urging all parties to step back from the brink and to consider the horrendous human cost of regional conflict. What's the Pentagon's response to that? Well, Karla, we've been working for a very long time on regional security and stability, not only in the Middle East but around the world. And so we'll continue to work very closely with allies and partners globally to address tensions in the Middle East, you know, since Hamas' attack against Israel. Of course, we've been very focused on deterrence and on preventing a wider regional conflict, and we'll stay focused on that. And what about his words on the brink? Is the U.S. on the brink of war right now in the Middle East? We are not at war in the Middle East. Clearly, there are significant tensions in the Middle East. And again, we're working closely with allies and partners to de-escalate and reduce those tensions where we can, recognizing the fact that, you know, others have a vote as well. Natasha. Thank you, General Ryder. Two quick things. So on the strikes last night, were there any casualties that resulted from the U.S. and U.S. strikes, including whether that's no lessons or civilian property? On the civilian side, I'm not tracking any civilian casualties. Of course, we're continuing to assess. Natasha, I just don't have any numbers to provide in terms of potential, who the, you know, militant casualties. But again, that's something we'll continue to assess. Is that because the U.S. is just continuing to kind of take out their missiles and missile launchers as and when they see them kind of loading up and preparing to launch an attack? Or is it because the Houthis simply don't have that capability anymore? Or it's more difficult for them to launch these missiles? What is kind of the thinking behind why they haven't been launching as many? Yeah. I mean, that's really a question for the Houthis to answer. Clearly, our goal here is to disrupt and degrade their ability to conduct those kinds of strikes and to put that kind of pressure, especially when there's an imminent threat, I think, does have an effect. They do maintain some capability. So it's not out of the question that there could be additional strikes. But again, our goal here is to ensure that the Red Sea is safe and secure for international shipping and mariners. That is our only goal. And so again, we'll continue to work with our allies and partners toward that end. Thank you. Let me go this side of the room, Phil. Do you have any sense of a plan or if Secretary Austin will brief this press corps? Phil, I'll very aware of the request and I'll keep you updated on that. I do not have a date for you to provide right now. Okay. And on the attacks in Iraq, I mean, is there have been any communication between this department and the Iraqi government about the need to find the people who are responsible for launching ballistic missiles? Well, Phil, I mean, we've had regular and ongoing discussions with our Iraqi partners on the topic of U.S. forces in Iraq and their safety and security. And so those conversations, of course, will continue. Have you been notified of any Iraqi government plans to end the U.S. mission in Iraq? At this time, I'm not aware of any official notifications to the department. Tom. Thanks, General. Is it your expectation that this dynamic in the Red Sea is going to continue until there's a sustained ceasefire in Gaza? In other words, are you expecting, is the off ramp going to be like a settlement in Gaza? How long do you think it's going to go? Yeah, well, obviously, I don't want to stand up here and predict the future. You've heard me talk about what our goal is, which is to ensure that international shipping and mariners can transit this vital waterway safely and securely. And so we'll continue to work toward that end, both through Operation Prosperity Guardian, which is a defensive coalition to help safeguard shipping, but also with the international community to conduct strikes against Houthi military targets that are being employed in these attacks when we need to. And so, you know, that will remain our focus. We're not, we're not looking to go beyond that. And of course, the Houthis have a vote in this as well, and they could make the choice to stop imposing costs on themselves and their capabilities and stop these attacks immediately. There's a distinction between Operation Prosperity Guardian and what we saw yesterday. Correct. And the name of that operation? There is no departmental named operation for the strikes last night. And I know you don't want to get into, like, the extent to which the Houthis have been degraded, but can you give a sense of how long it might take them to replenish their stocks once this is all over? I can't give you that for a few reasons. One of, you know, I'm just not going to get into intelligence in terms of, you know, their resupply and refresh rates. You know, obviously, that's something that will keep a close eye on. But these strikes from a physical standpoint are having an impact on their ability to conduct attacks, as well as, you know, diplomatic and international standpoint, you know, economic standpoint. So again, our focus here is not to escalate or get into a conflict with the Houthis. Our goal is to prevent these continued attacks against the international community and international shipping, transiting the Red Sea. Dan, did you have a question? Yeah, I guess this particular Ukraine contact group has sort of a muted appearance from DC. We don't have the chairman. We don't have the defense secretary for obvious reasons publicly discussing the urgency here. And as we look at it, we have no PDAs going. We have no sense that that's any anytime soon. Can you speak to that? I guess the symbolism here that, you know, there isn't the same level of urgency or there isn't the same level of attention as there have. Yeah, you know, at the risk of coming across as flippant, which is not my intent here, that's kind of a glass half empty look at it. I would turn it around and say the fact that despite, you know, the fact that we don't have supplemental funding, despite the fact that, you know, Russia continues to push against Ukraine and conduct these, you know, massive bombardments of Ukrainian cities, you continue to see every single month, the international community come together in one form or another in order to focus on this priority, which is enabling them to have the capabilities they need to defend themselves and protect and take back sovereign territory. And it's not just the United States. It's the international community, you know, highlighted the total amount that has been provided so far, $80 billion. And so that is going to continue. And when the secretary, when he has talked to his counterparts, both in the past and just recently, and on the topic of Ukraine, it's always the same thing. What do we need to continue to do to ensure that they can protect their sovereignty and protect their people? And so I think it's actually a very positive thing that we were able to do this in this format and keep that conversation going. More importantly, continue to ensure that the commitments that have been made can be implemented in a methodical form and fashion. Thank you. Let me go to Laura. First of all, why can you not tell us whether or how many combatants have been killed in these? Because I don't have an answer to that question. You don't have an answer? I don't have an answer. The DOD does not know. Again, we'll continue to assess. I don't have any information to pass to you. Okay, sorry. Just a second question. I want to ask you for a little more context on the interceptions that were done by the Navy SEALs last week against the Iranian weapons shipments. Are these types of missions usually done by Navy SEALs, or are they typically done by, I think I'd heard of the Coast Guard doing this kind of mission previously? That's correct. So we've been doing these types of operations for a long time, right? Working with international partners when it comes to patrolling international waterways and search and seizure of illicit arms, among other things. And so going back to my time at Central Command 2013 to 2016, and so in terms of the kinds of capabilities that are applied, it just depends. It depends on the mission. It depends on the capabilities that are available. So there's going to be, you know, a wide array of capabilities that can be applied to that mission under the auspices of US Navy Central or the Combined Maritime Force. Thanks, Tom. Don't come to me. Thanks, Pat. I'm going to follow up on Jennifer's question a little bit. When Congress finally improves a supplemental that will include money for Ukraine, how quickly will the Pentagon be able to start sending supplies to Ukraine, please? You know, I can't give you a specific time hack, Tom, other than, you know, as I just highlighted to Dan, I mean, this is a priority for the department. And so we also understand the urgency. This is not an academic situation. There are lives on the line, and so we'll work as quickly as we can to get capability to them. And there are supplies ready to go if money is available. I think we've demonstrated that if we're made aware of capabilities, we have a variety of means at our disposal to either take those capabilities out of our own stocks to be replenished or to contract out or to work with partners to get those capabilities there. Jenny? Thank you, Jennifer. Two questions. The U.S. Senate under the services committees said that Kim Jong-un's threat to launch hypersonic missiles and use nuclear weapons must be taken seriously. What scenario is the United States preparing for North Korean Kim Jong-un's threats of nuclear war? Let me just make sure I understand. What steps are we taking to prepare for the use of nuclear? How do you have it? Yeah, so again, Jenny, I'm not going to get into hypothetical situations. Clearly, we've been very public on our commitment to working with allies and partners in the region to deter and help stabilize the security of the region. Any type of destabilizing acts are unwarranted, uncalled for, and we'll continue to call on North Korea to return to the diplomatic table. Let me go to the phone and then I'll come to Fadi. Tony? Bloomberg? Pat, I just got in the mood of myself. Can you hear me? Hello? Can you hear me? There we go. Okay, we'll come back to you, Tony. Fadi? Effectiveness of these strikes against HOTI positions. And to perspective, I think you mentioned 25 launching and deployment facilities for missiles and more than 20 missiles in addition to radars and UAVs. Do, does the Pentagon know how much they have in their arsenals in terms of missiles and UAVs? So, you know, again, without getting into intelligence, I mean, you know, clearly this is something that we will continue to study and we have, you know, an understanding of the capabilities. But again, for operation security reasons, I'm not going to go into what we assess as the totality of HOTI capability other than to say that these strikes that we're taking are very deliberate, proportional as it relates to the kinds of capabilities they're employing against international shipping. And you said the focus is not to get into a conflict with the HOTIs. According to officials in the Pentagon statements, I believe the U.S. have used more than 180 ammunition, striking more than 36 positions, a number of targets using aircraft carrier, submarine, ships, aircraft. How does a conflict look to the Pentagon? Well, first of all, I wouldn't define it as a conflict. Again, I would define it as action that's being taken to disrupt and degrade HOTI capability to conduct attacks against the international community. And again, if we go back in time here, you know, beginning in mid-November, the HOTIs began these attacks. And despite multiple mornings from the international community, and despite the fact that there was a statement from 14 countries plus the United States saying there would be consequences, they made the choice to continue to do these. And so, you know, rhetorically speaking, should there be no cost for that? There is a cost for that. And it's right now it's in the form of not only, you know, economic and diplomatic measures, but also in this case, physical means to reduce, disrupt, degrade their capability to conduct these attacks. If they stop conducting these attacks, then there'll be no further need to take these kinds of actions. But again, you know, our hope is that we can restore security and stability to the Red Sea and we'll continue to work toward that end. Let me try Tony again from Bloomberg. Pat, Thursday, the Air Force announced that its ICBM program, the Sentinel, was estimated to run 36% over its current $96 billion cost estimate. That's a lot of money. How concerned is the Pentagon that this key program may be going off the rails, and that you may have to spend money to upgrade the current Minuteman III program? Yeah, thanks for the question, Tony. I mean, you're correct. As I understand it, last week the Air Force and DOD did notify Congress that the Sentinel program had exceeded initial cost projections, which did result in a non-McCurdy breach. As a result of that, DOD will conduct a robust review to determine what caused the cost growth and the way ahead for the program, as our senior leaders have said publicly before. Sentinel is one of the department's largest most complex programs. And we've also said that nothing that the department does is more important than maintaining a strong nuclear deterrent and reducing the risk of nuclear conflict. So I'm not going to be able to get out in front of that review, Tony. I can say that work is underway, that work under the current contract, rather, is underway and will continue until the review is complete. And we will, of course, engage closely with Congress and be as open as possible as this moves forward. But beyond that, I'm afraid I'm just not going to have any more specifics to offer today. Is it accurate to say that for the first time since the U.S. hosted the contact group, it did not donate or offer any weapons to Ukraine? And that's the first time that that's happened? I will have to come back to you. I don't want to just make it up from the podium. I believe that's the case. But let me take that question, Jennifer, and come back to you. Thank you. Courtney. Can you address why the prepared remarks that Secretary Austin had for the contact group this morning included his acknowledgement at the top that he was at home and made a very vague comment about his health? Yeah, thanks, Courtney. So what was posted was an as-prepared-for-delivery version of his remarks. It's, of course, the Secretary's prerogative, what to say or amend as he delivers his remarks. It's as simple as that. Why do you think, I mean, we would ask him this ourselves, obviously, but why do you think he decided not to address the fact that he was at home or say anything about his health and his first public appearance since being released from the hospital? Yeah, I mean, I appreciate the question. Again, it's his prerogative on any remarks that he gives to amend those in delivery. I will say I'm glad that everyone was able to watch his remarks about the impact of the Ukraine defense contact group and the important work that it's doing to save lives from Russia's illegal and unprovoked aggression. On Natasha's question, I wasn't clear if and on the overall idea of potential people being killed in the strikes against the Houthis. So do you have any indication at all that any Iranians have been killed in any of these strikes? I know that you can't give numbers or anything like that, but do you have, I mean, some of these occurred now back on January 11th? That's been some time. Do you have any indication any Iranians have been killed? I do not have any indication of that. Again, you know, as I understand it, as these strikes were being planned, there there's a very deliberate effort as is always the case for us to to conduct these in a way that is going to minimize the potential for civilian harm, of course. And in terms of what we're striking, not being in pop overly populated areas, but when it comes to the total number of Houthis, you know, operators, so to speak, again, I just don't have a number to pass on. That's the plan strikes. What about the dynamic strikes? Do you have that same level of fidelity that there may not be people around those when they I mean, especially if there's the argument is that they seem to be preparing, I think they've all been missiles, right, missiles that are on the rails, maybe being prepared to be launched. Do you have the same level of confidence that people may Houthis or whoever may not have been killed in the dynamic strikes? So again, without getting into intelligence, you know, we're always going to take a look at those things to your point. I mean, there can always be times where, you know, there's unexpected situations. But in this particular case, as I understand it, these are facilities that are on mountain sides and fields at airfields. They're not in crowded industrial or populated areas, as I understand it. Again, we'll continue to assess. But I just have not seen or been briefed on anything to indicate any anything like that. We'll go to Jared and then come here. On these efforts to interdict weapons smuggling to the Houthis from Iran, obviously, this has been going on for a long time, these operations. But has there been any change in the pace or the scope or the focus of these operations in recent months, to say, to complement a prosperity guardian in the U.S. and U.K.-led strikes? Or has the main effort, so to speak, focused more on neutralizing the weaponry that has already made it ashore? Yeah. So it's important to differentiate between those ongoing efforts that I talked about that have been happening for a while and prosperity guardian and these most recent strikes. So the two are not connected. Has there been any change in the pace or the scope of those interdiction operations? I don't have a number to provide other than, again, part of that just depends on, and again, this is a bit of a hypothetical, but it just depends on, for example, are there suspect vessels that need to be searched or stopped? It's sort of like any day you're driving down the highway, if you see something suspicious and you pull someone over to check. So I just leave it at that. Thanks. Yes, sir. On Syria, according to a report by a monitor, the Pentagon has floated a plan that encourages Syrian democratic forces to partner with Syrian government in the campaign against ISIS. Do you confirm there's any plan? I'm sorry, which forces? Syrian democratic forces that encourage them to partner with the Syrian government. I don't have anything on that. I haven't seen those reports. Do you have any for you to the SDF? I mean, of course, our focus in Syria right now is on the defeat ISIS mission. That's the only reason that we're there. So that's the main focus. So you have a long-term strategy in Syria? Along to our focus, the only reason we're in Syria is again, the enduring defeat of ISIS when it comes to the broader regional question of Syria. Again, I don't have anything new to pass along on that. Let me take a couple more here. Howard Altman, Warzone. Thanks, Pat. I got a couple of questions and a couple answers. One, given that the Houthis have threatened US bases in the region, can you say whether there's been any degradation of their surface-to-surface missile supply and what that degradation is? And then, separately, on the defense contact groups, drone coalition, can you say which countries are involved and then what are the deliverables in the timeline for those deliverables in that coalition? Thanks, Howard. In terms of degradation capabilities, I'm not going to have anything to provide to you beyond what I provided earlier. Clearly, again, some of those missile capabilities that they've been employing against ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden region. When it comes to force protection, of course, we're going to take necessary steps to protect our forces throughout the region, but I'm not going to get into specifics in terms of tactics, techniques, and procedures. And then, on your final question, I don't have any specific countries to read out today, Howard. Of course, as we go into the future and as countries announce their participation or are comfortable announcing their participation, we'll defer to them, but we'll certainly have much more in the days ahead on that and we'll keep you updated. All right, can do one more. Makayla. Hi, thank you for doing this. Apologies, my question's been asked. It's a little fuzzy on the phones, but can you kind of explain how long, or can you confirm that the Houthis right now are actively getting replenishment from Iran right now? And then, as a follow-up, do you think we're going to see more of these kind of whack-a-mole strikes? Is that really what SYNCOM strategy is going to be from here on, or are we actually preventing these attacks in the longer term? Thank you. Thanks. So, again, we know, obviously, that Iran has a relationship with the Houthis in terms of, again, their resupply, refresh rate. I don't have anything to pass along other than, that's something that we'll continue to monitor. I think the key point here is that the Houthis starting in mid-November began attacks against international shipping and mariners, and despite multiple warnings, have decided to continue to do that. And we've been very clear that our single focus is on ensuring that the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden are safe and secure, and that these attacks against the international community stop. And so our strategy is to continue to work closely with international allies and partners to disrupt and degrade their ability to conduct these attacks, and we'll continue to stay focused on that. But, again, no intent or desire to escalate. We just want the ability for the international community to be able to sail through these international waterways unhindered and safely. Thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it.