Pentagon Briefing as U.S. Considers Response to Killing of 3 Soldiers in Jordan Transcript

Were killed and dozens of personnel were injured from a one-way attack unmanned aerial system that impacted a U.S. military facility located in northeastern Jordan near the Syrian border. The names of those soldiers who lost their lives were Sergeant William Rivers, Specialist Kennedy Sanders, and Specialist Breonna Moffitt, all of whom were assigned to the 718th Engineer Company, a U.S. Army Reserve unit based out of Fort Moore, Georgia. These three fallen heroes were deployed to Jordan in support of Operation Inherent Resolve and the International Coalition working to ensure the lasting defeat of ISIS. These brave Americans and their families are in our prayers, and the entire Department of Defense mourns their loss. We also pray for the speedy recovery of those who are injured. Eight personnel who received injuries required medical evacuation from Jordan to the Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center. Three of those patients are scheduled for imminent transport to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center for follow-on care.

(01:03)
The other five have been assessed for mild TBIs and are expected to return to duty. We are still assessing what happened and how a one-way attack drone was able to impact the facility. U.S. Central Command continues to investigate this attack. And for operation security and force protection reasons, we’re not going to discuss further specifics or measures we’re taking to prevent such actions or future attacks. But we do know that Iran-backed militias are responsible for continued attacks on U.S. forces in the region, and as the president and the secretary have stated, we will not tolerate continued attacks on American forces, and we’ll take all necessary actions to defend U.S. military men and women forward deployed, and we will do so at a time and place of our choosing. Now over the weekend, the secretary received regular updates on the attack against U.S. forces and participated in a briefing with the president and his national security team.

(01:56)
Today’s Secretary Austin returned to work at the Pentagon. This morning, he hosted the NATO Secretary General for a bilateral meeting where they discussed the war in Ukraine, the next NATO Summit, and ways to further strengthen transatlantic security. He also met with President Biden at the White House, and later today will host again the NATO Secretary General alongside Secretary Blinken, and the National Security Advisor. Additionally, the secretary is tentatively scheduled to visit Walter Reed National Military Medical Center this evening for a follow-up appointment. As his doctor said in their statement on Friday, Secretary Austin continues to recover well and is expected to make a full recovery following his treatment for prostate cancer. And with that, I’d be happy to take your questions. Thank you. Lita, yes.

Thanks, Sabrina. A couple of things. Number one, since Secretary Austin has now returned to the building, can you tell us whether or not we will be able to see him in the briefing room this week?

I don’t have… Oh, sorry. Go ahead.

Do you want to get that first one?

Sure. I don’t have an update just yet, but it’s something that we’re certainly working towards and we’ll keep you updated.

Okay. And then, secondly, can you give us an update on the number of wounded, and any breakdown between the Air Force and Army on that, and also any update on the perpetrators of the attack? There’s been a lot of chatter about K-H. Can you tell us whether that is the leading suspicion right now?

Sure. So on the number of injuries right now, we assess that there are more than 40 that have been injured. We do expect that number to continue to fluctuate as our service members, as you know, with TBI, report symptoms later on, so that number could continue to grow. In terms of attribution for the attack, we know this is an IRGC-backed militia. It has the footprints of Kata’ib Hezbollah, but not making a final assessment on that. Our teams here are continuing to do the analysis, but we know that Iran is behind it, and certainly, as we’ve said before here in this briefing room, Iran continues to arm and equip these groups to launch these attacks, and we will certainly hold them responsible.

Just clarification, you said, you know Iran is behind it, you know that Iran or Iranian leaders were actually behind this attack, as in planned, coordinated, or directed it?

We know that Iran certainly plays a role with these groups. They arm, and equip, and fund these groups. I don’t have more to share in terms of an intelligence assessment on if leaders in Iran were directing this attack, but what I can tell you is that we know these groups are supported by Iran, and therefore, they do have their fingerprints on this. But I can’t tell you more on terms of who directed the attack. Jen?

Sabrina, did this drone take off from an IRGC base in Syria?

I don’t have more on the point of origin just yet of where this attack originated from.

And was it human error that failed to recognize that this was an Iranian drone coming to the base?

It’s something that Central Command is looking into to find out exactly what happened. As I mentioned at the top, they’re doing the assessment on this. They’re working through what they need to do to make sure our service members, whether it being in Jordan, Iraq, and Syria, are further protected, but I just don’t have more to share at this time.

Lastly, what kind of drone struck the base? Is this the same kind of Iranian drone being used by the Russians in Ukraine?

That’s something that we’re looking at right now. We’re assessing the drone, but I don’t have more to share just yet. Idrees?

Just to follow up, you said Iran was behind the attack. What does that mean? Have you seen evidence of financing or directing? Anything specific to this attack, not just generally, but specifically?

So maybe I need to clarify further from what Lita had mentioned. We know that Iran funds these groups, like Kata’ib Hezbollah. We know that these IRGC-backed militias are the ones responsible for attacks on our troops in Iraq and Syria. Beyond that, we’re doing an intelligence assessment. We don’t have… I can’t give you today that-

This attack linking it to Iran.

We just know that Iran funds these groups like Kata’ib Hezbollah and other groups that have attacked our forces. But I don’t have more to share on-

Just a general matter you’re saying, right?

As a general matter, yes.

And the second thing is you’ve talked about how the conflict is contained. The Gaza-Israel conflict is contained. Now that U.S. troops have been attacked in another country, are you willing to say that the conflict is no longer contained and it’s spreading?

I wouldn’t say that the conflict is spreading in that we’ve seen over 100 attacks on U.S. forces. Unfortunately, over 100 attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria, and, of course, now in Jordan. We don’t want to see a widening of this conflict. We don’t see this conflict widening, as it still remains contained to Gaza. But this attack was certainly escalatory in that it killed three service members, three of our U.S. service members. And as the president has said, we don’t see conflict. We don’t want to see a widening of a regional war, but we will respond at a time and place of our choosing.

It’s not spreading when troops literally have died in another country.

Yeah. Well, again, but they’ve also been launching these attacks since October 17th, and again, we can’t discount the fact that these attacks are incredibly dangerous, put our service members at risk, but they have not, up until yesterday, inflicted lethal harm. They have been predominantly minor injuries and minor damage to infrastructure. Yeah, Missy?

I just want to ask if you could address the broader trajectory for American forces in Iraq and Syria, and will these attacks affect the ongoing discussions between the United States and the government of Iraq about the future of the American presence there, or there have been some reports that the United States is reviewing plans for the future two presidents in Syria? Can you talk about how this will or will not impact that those deliberations?

I think what you’re referring to is the higher military commission that we discussed last week. So we’re focused on working with our Iraqi partners regarding how to respond to the attack that claimed three U.S. service members. We remain committed to the HMC process and will continue to focus on it at the appropriate time. I don’t have anything to preview on troops levels or changes in Iraq and Syria, but we are committed to the HMC process, and that is ongoing.

But could you just say, would I be right to say that this lethal attack on American forces and the potential for a response, which President Biden has kind of foreshadowed explicitly, would you say that it will not have an impact on US plans for the true presence in Iraq Syria, or is it too soon to say that?

Well, I think it’s too soon to say that, and also I would say that you have to remember that the HMC was already happening and was something that was announced back in August of 2023. The attacks on October 7th did delay some of those conversations from happening and the discussions from starting with HMC, but we’re still committed to that process. We’re still committed to working with the Iraqi government, and we are going to continue to do so, but I don’t have anything more to preview on what that means for our force levels. Yeah, Meaghan?

Can the Pentagon confirm any of the reports that the reason the drone wasn’t shot down is because the troops on the ground thought that it was a returning American drone?

Yeah, I’ve seen those reports. Again, that’s something that Central Command is assessing right now, but I don’t have more to share at this time.

So to follow up on that, you say that this is escalatory because troops have now died in these attacks, but it’s not a spread, even though it happened in a different country. Is there any indication that this attack, either the equipment or the way it happened, any of that, was a different kind of attack than what we’ve been seeing in Iraq and Syria, or was it simply an escalation and people died because they weren’t able to shoot it down? They didn’t detect it the way that they are in Iraq and Syria.

To my knowledge, there was nothing different or new about this attack that we’ve seen in other facilities that house our service members. Unfortunately, this attack was successful, but we can’t discount the fact that other attacks, whether it be Iraq or Syria, were not intended to kill our service members. It is a true tragedy that three of our service members died. And of course, Central Command is looking into what can be done when it comes to our air defenses and looking into this incident to determine how best we can move or how best we can further strengthen our air defense systems.

Was this base less well-protected than other bases in Iraq and Syria?

Not to my knowledge. Jeff?

Thank you. Can you talk a little bit more about what this unit was doing in Jordan? And also, you have said that Iran has backed these groups which have launched these attacks. Is this attack that has killed three service members in act of war by Iran?

Well, look, I think I said this earlier. We don’t seek a war with Iran. We don’t seek to widen this conflict. We have said, and we will continue to call out, the fact that Iran does fund and equip these groups and provide them the capabilities that they use to attack our service members, whether it be Iraq, Syria, or Jordan. So we’re not going to hesitate in calling that out, but we certainly don’t seek a war, and frankly, we don’t see Iran wanting to seek a war with the United States. We are there in Iraq and in Syria. And I think your original question was what were these service members doing there? They’re there in support of the Defeat ISIS mission. That is their purpose there. They’re a part of a named operation that this department has and is committed to in both Iraq and Syria. And so yeah, I’ll just leave it at that.

If I could follow up. How is this not a regional war now between the United States and Iranian proxies in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and now Jordan?

We’re not discounting that tensions are high in the region by any means. Since October 17th, we’ve seen repeated attacks on U.S. forces. So we’re not discounting the fact that tensions are high, that these Iranian-backed groups are targeting our military members with the intention of trying to kill them. But we don’t seek a war. We don’t want to see this widen out into a broader war. And that’s again, attacks on our service members happening in Iraq and Syria to bring it back and to look at what’s also happening in the Red Sea. We don’t seek a wider war there either, but we are going to respond when it comes to commercial ships, or our ships, or our partners’ vessels being targeted and therefore, jeopardizing international trade and putting at risk innocent mariners. So again, we don’t seek war, but we will take action and respond to attacks on our forces. Yeah, Janne?

Thank you, Sabrina. Two questions, one in North Korea, one in Russia, and North Korea launched another submarine, launched the cruise missile into the East Coast yesterday. Do you assess that North Korea’s continued negative actions will lead to vital military action?

Yeah, thanks, Janie. So we’re monitoring these activities, and we won’t comment on intelligence, but we’ve been very clear on the threat posed by the DPRK and their military programs, and our commitment to the Republic of Korea and Japan continues to be ironclad.

The one on Russia. The Russian defense ministry spokesman criticized the United States, saying that the U.S. is dragging South Korea into the Ukraine conflict. Then he warned that if South Korea supported Ukraine, he would stop relations with South Korea.

Yeah, I think, quite to the contrary, you see countries all around the world supporting Ukraine’s cause in the fight for their democracy and the fight for their sovereign territory. We’re coming up on the two-year anniversary of Russia invading Ukraine. Russia is seeking help from partners like Iran, like North Korea to continue to fund itself or support itself in its war against Ukraine. And you’re seeing like-minded nations like the United States and other countries stand in alliance in support of a democracy and in support of a sovereign country who was invaded by its neighbor, unjustly invaded by its neighbor. And we’re very proud of the coalition that we’ve built in support of Ukraine. Ellie?

What’s the total number of attacks now since October and the total number of injuries?

Yeah, just a sec here. So from October 17th to January 29th, we are tracking approximately 165 attacks. That’s 66 in Iraq, 98 in Syria, and, of course, the one yesterday in Jordan. Oh, and I’m sorry. And on injuries, I am tracking approximately 80 U.S. personnel have received non-serious injuries since the attacks began.

Have there been any attacks today and where?

I believe there was an attack earlier today. I don’t have the exact location. We can get you that. I don’t want to speculate, but we can get you that information after. Yes, right over here.

Thanks. You said just above 160 attacks. Just this month, there’s been a little over 50, so there had been around 114 or 15 from October 17 to the end of last year, and you guys have responded, the department, the U.S. has responded to a few of these attacks, but in order to deter, and that came out in statements from the secretary and from other U.S. officials, these attacks have continued. Now, they’ve escalated not just into the Red Sea, now into Jordan, a third country. The deterrence does not seem to have worked yet. Is the department considering altering or reviewing its policy in order to deter these Iran-backed militias from injuring and/or killing more U.S. troops?

Yeah. That’s ultimately a decision that the president is going to make. And as I read out earlier, he’s convened his national security team frequently within these past few days. I’m not going to get ahead of any decisions that the president and the secretary make on this together, but certainly, as our statement said yesterday, we are committed to responding, and we will do so at a time and place of our choosing.

Just a second to go to Israel and Gaza. Reports in recent days suggested that the Biden administration, including officials from the Pentagon, have become more and more frustrated with the civilian death toll, and there are considerations of reviewing what types of weapons, weapon sales to review those to Israel. I know FMF and a separate part of the State Department, but is the Pentagon, does the Pentagon share that assessment? Does the Pentagon share that frustration of too many civilian casualties in Gaza?

I think we’ve been pretty clear that we don’t want to see any innocent lives lost in this war, and we’ve been very clear both publicly and privately with our Israeli counterparts that innocent lives need to be protected, humanitarian corridors need to be opened, humanitarian aid needs to continue to flow through. Of course, we’re concerned by the death toll in Gaza. We don’t want to see continued Palestinians get caught in the crossfire, and we’ve continued to urge Israel to protect those innocent civilians, and we’ll continue to do so. Will?

Just clarification on the number of injured. The A.D. includes those from the most recent attack or not?

It does not. I’m sorry.

Okay. And then has Tower 22, that facility, been targeted previously, either during the Israel Hamas war or prior to that in recent years?

I can’t speak to before October 7th, but since October 17th, when these attacks have happened, no. Tower 22, to my knowledge, has not been the target. But as you know, the Al-Tanf Garrison is right on that border. So attacks have come pretty close to Tower 22, but nothing that has landed on the Jordanian side. Impacts have always been on the Syrian side, except for the attack that happened yesterday. Great. Natasha?

Thanks, Sabrina. So previous drone and rocket attacks that have struck or landed near military facilities in Iraq and Syria they have not caused anywhere near as much damage, nowhere near as many casualties. Is there an assessment of why this particular drone caused so much? I mean, over 40 people injured, three killed. What was different about this drone, or what was different about the facility that it didn’t have the kind of protection that other bases do?

I think what was different about this attack is where it landed. It did impact where living quarters are, and I believe it was pretty early morning, so people were actually in their beds when the drone impacted. But I mean, we’ve seen these types of attacks before, that’s something that Central Command is looking into on how they can better refine not only our air defenses, but prevent future attacks like this from happening again. Can I just… I’m going to go over here and then come back. Yeah.

I have a couple of questions. As [inaudible 00:19:49], does this review in the interim, are there tactics, techniques, or procedures being changed to prevent this from happening again in the region?

Yeah, I wouldn’t forecast that from the podium here. I wouldn’t want to get ahead of anything.

And how about backdoor channel discussions with Iran? Anything through the Swiss government at this point, or?

I don’t have anything to preview here. Yeah. Felicia?

Do you also have a number for the attacks in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden? The most recent.

Let me see here if I do. I don’t know that I have. We can take that question and get back to you. I just don’t have the running total here. As you know, there were, as recently as Friday, there was another attack at a commercial vessel that was transiting. So happy to get you those numbers.

Okay, and one more. Just on the secretary’s meeting with Stoltenberg. Did they talk about contingencies in the event that the Ukraine aid doesn’t go through, or can you talk about the strategy there?

I believe we’ll have a larger readout, but of course, something that is top of mind for the secretary and for many folks across the administration is securing that supplemental funding from Congress. We have not been able to supply Ukraine with a PDA since December, since late December. Ukraine is quite literally in the fight for its life as it continues to hold territory, and continues to fight for its sovereign territory, and push the Russians back in the East and the South. So we’re going to continue to urge Congress to pass the supplemental budget and to give us the funding that we need to start those PDA packages. But of course, it’s top of mind for everyone.

But are there things you can do without it?

No, not right now. Yes.

Yeah, thank you. You mentioned that the Kata’ib Hezbollah has some footprint of that attack, and you know Kata’ib Hezbollah is a part of the popular mobilization groups and it’s part of the Iraqi defense system. So how do you get engaged with the Iraqi government specifically on that attack?

On the attack that happened on our service members? I don’t have anything to read out.

Yeah. When you talk about you’re not looking in a war with the Iran, does that mean that the Iran is not in a table when you’re thinking and assessing to responding to that attack?

I’m sorry. I don’t necessarily understand the question.

Are you taking Iranian IRGC as an option to responding when it comes to responding to this attack that happened yesterday?

We’re going to respond as the president said, and the secretary has said at a time when we feel that we need to respond. I’m not going to get ahead of the president or any decisions. We don’t seek a wider conflict with Iran. We don’t want a war with Iran. Again, these are Iran proxy groups launching these attacks on our service members, but we certainly don’t seek a wider conflict, but we also own the clock here, and we will respond at a time and place of our choosing. Yeah. Oh, I’m going to… Sorry, Will. I’m going to go over to you.

Thank you. If Iranian proxies carried out the attack, and do you hold Iran accountable for the attack, and what response would be as a retaliation against this attack?

So as you can appreciate, I’m not going to forecast what our response looks like, but of course, we hold Iran responsible as they are supporting these groups; these groups that continue to inflict casualties on our forces, whether it be in Jordan, Iraq, or Syria. We absolutely hold Iran responsible because we know that they fund, and train, and support, and equip these militias that operate in Iraq and Syria. Fadi?

Yeah, thank you. So it is the position of the department that Iran is responsible for the attack that killed three U.S. soldiers in northeast Jordan?

Iran bears responsibility because it funds these groups that operate in Iraq and Syria that launch attacks on our service members.

I understand that, but this attack led to the death of three service members. Is Iran responsible for the death of these three service members that you just read their names and their families have been notified of their death?

Again, Iran certainly bears a responsibility as they fund these groups that continue to use capabilities that they get from Iran and, of course, killed three of our service members.

Can I take just a step back?

Sure.

And just looking at last week, maybe from Saturday of last week, up until Saturday-

Saturday of last week, okay.

Or Sunday, maybe, this nine days. The US launched strikes in Syria, in Iraq against Houthi positions inside Yemen with the aim of reestablishing deterrence and degrade their capabilities of whether attacking US forces or shipping in the Red Sea. Nonetheless, throughout those days, what we saw is unprecedented escalation. Ain Al-Asad was targeted with ballistic missiles. Euphrates site was targeted with a drone. More U.S. soldiers were injured. The Houthis went after a British ship, after a U.S. ship. It seems to me, does the Pentagon think its approach to deterrence is firing back? Is it successful? Would you say it’s successful, especially when three soldiers were killed?

Well, I mean, we are assessing what happened yesterday, and we are trying to figure out how a one-way attack drone was able to evade air defenses and was able to kill three of our service members and injured dozens more. To your question on deterrence, I can continue to say we don’t seek war. We don’t seek further conflict. We don’t want to see this widen out into a regional conflict, but we will continue to do whatever we need to when it comes to protecting U.S. forces, and our coalition partners, and innocent mariners transiting the Red Sea. We believe that we have been effective in degrading their capabilities and disrupting their ability to launch certain attacks. But the reality is yesterday, unfortunately, they were successful and they killed three of our service members, and that is an absolute tragedy. I’m going to go to the phones, and then I’ll come back in the room. Lara Seligman, Politico.

Thanks, Sabrina. I have a couple of questions. Can you say whether there’s been any decisions made to send any additional air defenses or other forces to the region to beef up some of the counter-UAS capability here?

Yeah, thanks, Lara. I’m just not going to get ahead of any decisions that are going to be made and certainly wouldn’t preview the repositioning of any air defenses.

Do we have sufficient counter drone capability in the region to account for all the different bases that have come under attack recently?

Yeah. Thanks, Lara. I mean, again, we have seen repeated attacks on our U.S. service members in both Iraq and Syria, and a majority of the time our air defenses have been incredibly successful, and you’ve only seen minor damage to infrastructure and, of course, some injuries, which we all take very seriously. But for the most part, our air defenses have been robust and have been successful. I’m going to take one more from the phone here, Heather USNI.

Thanks so much. The Houthi leadership announced that they fired a naval missile at Lewisby Polar in the Gulf of Aden. I was wondering if there’s any confirmation from the Department of Defense on whether that happened, and if there’s any damage, or if the Polar shot it down.

Thanks, Heather. I don’t have anything for you at this time. We’re happy to get back to you on that one. I’ll take a few more from in the room, and then I’m sorry. We do have something coming up soon. Yes?

There’s been some back and forth about whether the U.S. has troops in Yemen. Can you confirm that?

We do not have US troops in Yemen. Yeah?

In the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, the U.S. has carried out preemptive strikes targeting Houthi missiles before they can be launched at international shipping. Is the U.S. going to consider launching preemptive strikes when it sees potential attacks on its bases in Iraq, Syria, and now Jordan? And if not, why not?

Well, you’ve seen Central Command take action, dynamic strikes, within the region when we’ve been able to identify a potential setup of an attack or identified a point of origin. So we have seen some of those dynamic strikes in the region, and I am sorry, I don’t have the exact dates when those happened, but they were late last year. I’m not going to get ahead of any decisions that the secretary and the president are making on what future action looks like. Only to say that we, of course, will respond when we do. Yeah. I’ll take a few more, and then we got to wrap. Yeah?

You mentioned the drone impacted the living quarters. Do you have any details on what kind of structure that was? Was this kind of a hardened structure? Was this a CHU? A hanger? I was trying to get a better sense of why it caused so much damage.

Yeah, it was a contained housing unit. That’s right. Jeff?

Just one or?

I believe it was just one that was struck, but again, we’re still doing our initial assessments, so if there’s more to read out, we certainly will. Yes, Jeff, you got the last one.

I apologize for blurting out a question.

That’s okay.

When you had said some of them were in their beds at the time, usually when there’s an indirect fire attack, there’s something called the Voice of God that yells incoming, incoming, incoming, take cover. I’m wondering why these soldiers weren’t in the IBF shelter, why they were still in bed.

Yeah. It was, I believe, early in the morning. This is something that Central Command is looking into in terms of how the one-way attack was able to get through. I don’t have more details to provide at this time, and when we do, we certainly will let you know. Okay, thanks, everyone. Sorry, we’ve got to wrap.