ウィスパリング同時通訳研究会コミュのPentagon Holds Press Briefing As Poland Gets Germany's Permission Send Tanks To Ukraine

Pat Ryder (00:01):
Good afternoon everyone. Just a few things and then I’ll get right to your questions. First, I am aware of the press reporting stating that the US is considering providing Abrams tanks to Ukraine. I have no announcements to make at this time and when and if we do, we’ll be sure to let you know. As always, we continue to remain in close contact with the Ukrainians and our international allies and partners on Ukraine’s most pressing security assistance requirements to include their near, medium and long-term needs.
(00:32)
Separately, the US and Israel began the Juniper Oak exercise yesterday, which is a bilateral live fire exercise in Israel and the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. It’s the largest and most significant exercise we have engaged in together and is intended to demonstrate that the US commitment to Israel’s security is iron clad and enduring. Throughout the week long engagement, more than 140 aircraft, 12 naval vessels, high mobility artillery rocket systems, and multiple launch rocket systems will be used during this combined joint all domain exercise, increasing our ability to inter operate on land, in the air, at sea, in space, and in cyberspace, which ultimately enhances our ability to respond to contingencies and underscores the US commitment to the Middle East region.
(01:18)
In other exercise news, exercise Obangame Express 2023, the largest multinational maritime exercise in Western and Central Africa also began yesterday in Lagos, Nigeria, with 29 participating nations. Conducted by US Naval Forces Africa and sponsored by US Africa Command, OE 23 is the exercises 12th iteration and designed to improve regional cooperation, information sharing practices, and tactical interdiction expertise to support a more secure, safe and economically prosperous maritime environment. The exercise will run through February 3
(01:57)
Also, yesterday, secretary Austin and secretary of the Air Force Kendall spoke at a ceremony at Howard University, during which the Air Force announced that it has selected Howard as the first historically black college or university to lead a department of defense sponsored university affiliated research center. The center will focus on tactical autonomy for military systems, and Howard will receive $12 million per year for five years to fund research. DoD currently has 14 university affiliated research centers, with Howard now being the 15th. Such centers are responsible for providing dedicated facilities and sharing space with department officials and industrial participants to conduct basic applied and technology demonstration research.
(02:40)
Finally, the Senate confirmed Mr. Brendan Owens yesterday as Assistant Secretary of Defense for energy installations and environment. In this role Assistant Secretary Owens is the principal advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense for acquisition and sustainment for all matters pertaining to environment and energy resilience, construction, housing and local defense community cooperation. He also provides budgetary policy and management oversight of the Department of Defense’s real property portfolio, which encompasses millions of acres and over 500,000 buildings and structures at more than 500 installations. And with that, I will take your questions. We’ll start with AP. Tara?

Tara (03:20):
Hi Pat. Thanks for doing this. Now multiple news organizations have been able to match the journals reporting that the administration will be approving Abrams for Ukraine. And it seems like this has been in the works for a while. What was the Pentagon’s thinking behind the last week’s worth of saying that Abrams won’t work, they’re not the right tool for the battle, they’re too costly to maintain. Is this not going to be a useful tool for Ukraine?

Pat Ryder (03:50):
Again, I have nothing to announce today in terms of the M1’s. I think, as we’ve said all along, we continue to have a very robust dialogue with Ukraine and our international allies and partners, to focus on what their immediate battlefield needs are now in the near term. But we also have discussions about what they may need in the medium to long term and we’ll continue to have those discussions. And again, as I said at the top, when and if we have something to announce, we will.

Tara (04:17):
And as a follow up to that, where could this training take place if it does take place? Would this be something that happens in Germany? Is this something that happens in Poland? Presumably like with the Bradley’s and the other systems, some extensive training would be needed.

Pat Ryder (04:33):
Sure. Again, I don’t have any announcements, so I don’t want to speculate or talk about hypotheticals, but when and if we have more information that we’re able to provide, we certainly will. Thank you. Adris?

Adris (04:43):
Taking aside whether Ukraine will or will not get the Abrams, you and others have spoken publicly about the logistics issues, right? Again take aside whether they’re getting them or not. How do you overcome giving tanks to a country when they don’t have the logistics to train, when they don’t have the fuel with it?

Pat Ryder (05:03):
Yeah. Again, without trying to preview an announcement again, which I’m not sure if I was clear, but I don’t have an announcement to make today. The M1 is a complex weapon system that is challenging to maintain, as we’ve talked about. That was true yesterday. It’s true today. It’ll be true in the future. Again, without getting into hypotheticals, any time that we’ve provided Ukraine with any type of system, we’ve provided the training and sustainment capabilities with that. So again, when and if we have something to announce about any new weapon system, we’ll be sure to do that.

Adris (05:43):And once again, putting aside Ukraine, is it beneficial to give a country weapons that it cannot maintain?

Pat Ryder (05:49):
Again, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals or speculate at this point in time. The Ukraine contact group this last week has been focused on what is it that Ukraine needs right now to have immediate effect on the battlefield given the situation there. But again, we’ve also been very clear, more broadly speaking from a strategic and an operational standpoint, that we continue to have discussions with the Ukrainians and our allies and partners about what are the medium and long-term defense requirements for Ukraine. And we’ll continue to have those conversations. Janie?

Janie (06:23):
Thank you, Senator. I have two questions. One in North Korea, one in Taiwan. First question, North Korea is preparing for the largest scale military parade, as you know that. At the same time, what kind of readiness does the United States have in preparations for contingence in which North Korea conduct missile and seventh nuclear test?

Pat Ryder (06:52):
Well, you’ve heard us say before that we do remain concerned that North Korea is prepared to conduct a seventh nuclear test. It would certainly be a destabilizing action in the region. And so it’s something that we continue to keep a close eye on, and we will work closely with our partners and our allies in the region to be prepared in that eventuality.

Janie (07:16):
Yes. And another one. If China invade Taiwan, US process in Korea will move to Taiwan and the United States will intervene. Does the US expect South Korea to be involved in this military actions at that time?

Pat Ryder (07:38):
Yeah, thanks for the question. I’m not going to get into hypotheticals regarding a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan. As you know, we maintain a variety of capabilities throughout the Indo-Pacific region. A variety of forces, not the least of which are approximately 30,000 US forces stationed in South Korea, which are there to work alongside our okay allies to protect and defend South Korea. So we’ll continue to work closely with South Korea and Japan and other allies and partners in the region, to preserve a free and open-end Pacific. Thank you. Laura?

Laura (08:15):
Sure. Dr. Kahl last week spent a good amount of time talking about how now is not the right time to send Abrams, and that Abrams is not the right tool for the battlefield in the immediate future. So is that still DoD’S position?

Pat Ryder (08:32):
So as we talked about, and as Dr. Kahl has talked about, our focus has been on providing Ukraine with capabilities that it can deploy right now in the battlefield. I think we’re all following along very closely. The current situation there is Ukraine tries to recruit, refit and prepare for continued offensive operations along the lines. So that is not changed as evidenced by the recent PDA announcements that we’ve made and as evidenced by the capabilities that you saw coming out of the contact group announced by many of our partners.
(09:04)
And so again, as we look at our security assistance relationship with Ukraine, we’re going to continue to talk not only about their near term needs, but also about their medium and long-term needs. And that has always been the case and will continue to be the case.

Laura (09:19):Do we have Abrams tanks in an exportable version that would be readily available right now?

Pat Ryder (09:26):I don’t have anything to provide on that. Thank you. Thank you.

Speaker 1 (09:29):
Thank you, General. So Der Spiegel is reporting that Germany will allow Poland and other nations to re-export Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine. Has the German leadership communicated its decision with the department and did the department play any role in convincing Germany to make this shift? And on the technical, not technical, as part of your discussion with Ukraine, do you have an understanding how many tanks the Ukrainians think they need, for this maybe offensive coming up after the winter season?

Pat Ryder (10:08):
Yeah. I won’t speak for the Ukrainians. They’ve certainly voiced to the Department of Defense and other international leaders, in terms of the security assistance requirements that they have in order to support their armed forces. As I mentioned, we continue to have those conversations. In terms of Germany, Secretary Austin did have very productive conversations with his German counterpart, when he was in Germany. We issued a readout of that, which I would refer you to. But in terms of decision-making on the side of Germany as to whether or not they will provide tanks or allow third party countries to provide those tanks, I’d refer you to them.

Speaker 1 (10:46):Yeah. I understand at this point. But my question is, has the German leadership, defense leadership, communicated any decision to the department on the Leopard?

Pat Ryder (10:57):
Again, I’d refer you to the Germans. I don’t have anything to provide today. Again, we’ve had productive conversations. We value Germany very much as an ally. You heard Secretary Austin talk about this in his press conference. Germany has committed a large amount of resources to Ukraine to assist in their fight, and we continue to value the relationship that we have with Germany, and we’ll continue to communicate with them very regularly as one of our staunchest and strongest allies. Joseph?

Joseph (11:26):
Just to go back on the joint exercise with the Israeli military. I understand there’s a dynamic force employment there. So, what message is this sending to allies in the region, that the US is going to get in? It has troops to be able to get in and get out, show that it’s still committed not only to Israel, but its other allies in the region. Also, is there any message that’s being sent to Iran in these exercises?

Pat Ryder (11:54):
Yeah. So, to answer your last question upfront, no. This is not meant to be oriented around any single adversary or threat. As you know, the United States maintains many relationships in the Middle East region with many countries, Israel is one of our closest partners in the region. As I mentioned, this gives us the opportunity to work together to increase interoperability, to be able to respond to a variety of contingencies and threats, so that should we need to operate together, we can do so seamlessly.

Joseph (12:29):In terms of messages to other allies in the region?

Pat Ryder (12:32):
Well, again, I mean, just broadly speaking, it demonstrates the fact that the United States is a reliable partner, that we’re going to continue to work together to ensure the security and the stability of the region. As you know, we also conduct bilateral exercises with many other countries in the region. So, this one in particular, is obviously the largest of its kind, and we look forward to working with Israel as we further increase our security relationship and our interoperability. Sir?

Speaker 2 (13:00):
Sir. If I could just follow up on that. On Juniper Oak, the exercise is to include mid-air refueling, and I believe a live fire drill encompassing, quote, the full target engagement cycle, including the suppression of enemy air defenses, strategic air interdiction, and electronic attacks, according to a senior defense official. Is this indicative of a shift to a deterrent posture by the US, with regards to Iran’s nuclear program?

Pat Ryder (13:23):
Again, this exercise is focused on interoperability and strengthening our security relationship, in terms of working together. As evidenced by, most recently, the counter ISIS campaign, the ability to pull Air Forces together seamlessly and operate in a way that is going to be effective, is vital. So, this is one aspect of that, although the exercise is obviously more than just about air power. So, again, it’s not intended to be focused on any one single adversary or threat. It’s all about working together. Thank you. Let me go to Orin.

Orin (14:00):
I was wondering if I could follow up and get an update on the combined arms training, because that was, I think, planned for about a month for each group of 500. Is the first group nearing the completion of that training? Is there planning for a second tranche of Ukrainian troops just to begin that?

Pat Ryder (14:14):
Yeah. So, the training has begun. It started mid January, as we talked about. So, again, estimate that the training will last about six weeks. Once that training is complete, obviously those forces will go back into Ukraine. We do maintain the capability to continue that program, so it’s not a one-and-done type of program. So, that’ll be Ukraine’s decision, in terms of providing additional forces to go through that cycle. We certainly expect them to do that, but at the end of the day, that’s their decision, given the situation on the ground. Okay. Let me go to the phone here real quick. Howard Altman.

Howard Altman (14:52):
Thanks, Pat. I’ve got two questions. One returning to the tanks and one on the Ukraine Air Force. On the tanks, this is not a hypothetical question. As you discussed providing Abrams to Ukraine, how much did the issue of the optics of seeing these things blown up in the battlefield, play into any of the decision-making that the Pentagon has gone through? That’s my question on the tanks. Question on the Air Force. Air Force spokesman for Ukraine said this morning that the type of aircraft that the US will provide to Ukraine has been determined. Can you talk about that? Has that been determined? If so, what kind?

Pat Ryder (15:31):
Yeah. Thanks, Howard. So, on your first question, again, I know it’s not a hypothetical, but I don’t have anything to announce in terms of M1s. The capabilities that we have provided to Ukraine, and the capabilities that we will provide to Ukraine in the future, are not about optics. They’re about combat capability, and enabling them to have the best chance possible to be successful on the battlefield. Whether it’s defending territory or taking back sovereign territory. Then in terms of the press reporting on the US providing aircraft. Again, I don’t have anything to announce on that front. I’m not aware of any Ukrainian pilots currently training in the United States, to my knowledge. Despite what those foreign press reports were saying. Nor again, do I have anything to announce when it comes to aircraft. As we’ve said all along, we’re going to continue to have a robust discussion with the Ukrainians on what their defense needs. That includes the near term, the medium term, and the long term. Thank you. All right. Let me go to Patrick Tucker, Defense One.

Patrick Tucker (16:41):Howard, do you want to finish real quick?

Howard Altman (16:43):Yeah. Just one. Thanks, Pat. Just quick, can you say whether the Ukrainian Air Force spokesman was wrong about that?

Pat Ryder (16:49):I’d refer you the Ukrainian spokesperson. I’m not going to speak on his behalf. Thank you. Patrick.

Patrick Tucker (16:55):
Thanks, Pat. So, the question of maintenance has come up a lot in discussions about what the United States will send or won’t send. Maintenance obviously goes better when you have contracted maintainers from actual manufacturers. Right now in Ukraine, the Ministry of Defense is using Starlink for satellite communications, and SpaceX has actual contractors on the ground, we know that. They’re using data visualization tools for Palantir. We know that Palantir has contractors on the ground to my knowledge. A lot of the great big defense contractors that are providing kinetic or tactical things don’t have contractors on the ground. So, understanding that every company makes their own decision on this, does DOD have a policy to encourage or discourage companies from sending just contracted employees for the purposes of maintaining equipment? Second part, is that something that you’re talking to defense contractors about? Especially as the number of things you’re sending grows more diverse.

Pat Ryder (17:55):
Yeah. Thanks, Pat. I’m not aware of any DOD policy per se in terms of private companies and making decisions on whether or not to send contractors into Ukraine. I’d refer you to the State Department because certainly anytime US citizens are going to travel into a foreign country, particularly one that’s an active combat zone, I have no doubt that they would reach out to state to get any type of guidance. As you know, our focus has been on providing the remote consultations, in terms of maintenance considerations. With the Ukrainians doing the actual maintenance themselves.

Patrick Tucker (18:35):
Do you think it would help to have some of these companies, if they could figure out how to do it, send maintenance contractors in to help some of these issues? Might that aid the discussions about what to send or how to even maintain this stuff?

Pat Ryder (18:47):I’m sorry, Pat. You broke up there at the beginning. Can you re-ask that?

Patrick Tucker (18:51):
Yeah. Do you think it would help if some of these contractors, these defense companies, could figure out a way to send maintenance personnel or other technical experts into the country? Do you think it would help the overall effort?

Pat Ryder (19:03):
Well, that’s really a decision for individual companies to make, in terms of the systems that Ukraine has purchased and how they maintain them. Again, from a Department of Defense standpoint, our focus is on assisting with providing the equipment, and then again, providing remote telesupport, or support outside of the country where it makes sense. Let me go ahead and go to Liz, and then we’ll go to Travis.